Israeli illegal excavation

[Average Bohra]

Humsafar,

Appreciate the advice but in my book (no pun intended) gullibility involves forming opinions based on any media source, while ignoring fact and reality. I do not wish to debate this "my source is better than your source" spiral which gets us no where. I asked you for specifics.

[Humsafar]

I'm not suggesting that "my source is better than yours". But if you dig up sources other than those who serve up regular dogma, you will find surprising nuggets of truths. Now, if I must educate you, here is some reading material. This is the best I can do:

http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... -2002Sep14

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html

[Average Bohra]

Humsafar,

Citing articles that rely on BBC News, The Washington Post or the Weekly Standard for its analysis hardly qualifies as alternates to CNN or Fox News or a source for intellectual stimulation ! I suggest you expand your reading horizon if you are really looking to go beyond the “regular dogma”. Scanning your sources of conspiracy theories serves up nothing new; you can swing a dead cat and hit a source who believes in this stuff. I have my own opinion as to why we invaded Iraq, but I am unable to back it up.

It is an economic fact that stable oil supplies are needed by all developed and emerging economies. Saddam was on the take and could have easily been bought out (or continued to) by the US (just like they did the monarchy in Saudi Arabia) to ensure stable oil supplies. It is a far stretch to go from that to invasion or “oil stealing”, considering the amount being spent on the war and the fact that the US does not get its oil free of charge.

[Humsafar]

I purposely quoted “popular” media because that’s the only thing you are able to swallow, besides the idea was to stimulate your curiosity or scepticism, not intellect.
But I should have known better. Your belief in Western/American/Capitalist infallibility is unshakable. You, anajmi and the bohra orthos live by faith and fanaticism. The only difference is that you all worship different gods.

Of course, it would be pointless to tell you that governments, especially imperial powers, operate by subterfuge and manipulation. They say something and do something else. They buy out regimes where they can use force where they cannot. If you’re expecting a clear-cut policy statement from the White House about their intentions in Iraq you might have to wait for 30-40 years before the National Security papers are de-classified. In the absence of such clear statements, what should smart people do? They look at the history (of US interventions), at the current evidence and clues such as they are, look at the character of leaders at the helm and analyse who benefits from this war (or all wars) and draw informed conclusions. And the conclusion in this case is that the US is in Iraq primarily to control oil resources in Iraq and Middle East.

Now when you chime in about how the oil is not free as the US is spending so much on the war, you show your political naivete. It is elementary AB, the money spent on war comes from the public (tax payers) but the profits go to private coffers (of arms, oil and other corporations). Of course, the war is not free. But as long as big business profits from it, the public and the Iraqis (or whoever happens to be the current victim) can go to hell.

[porus]

While the powerful countries terrorize weaker countries to grab their wealth, what do the elite in poor countries do? They prey on the weak in their own country to grab what little they have. Imperialism turned inwards.

Interesting insight from Arundhati Roy:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle ... emID=12425

[Humsafar]

Yes, pours, this has always been true. The rich and powerful among and within nations prey upon the weak and poor. That is why democracies despite all their appearances and pretences to the contrary are basically nor more than thinly veiled oligarchies. The elite in every country - rich or poor - have one common cause: rule the roost by keep the masses busy with such myths as democracy, free market, religion and such.

[tahir]

Originally posted by Humsafar:
Yes, pours, this has always been true. The rich and powerful among and within nations prey upon the weak and poor.

The woes of weak and poor doesn't end there. The capitalism apologists go ahead and blame the poor for being poor (and hence a target of exploitation) .

[Average Bohra]

Humsafar,

First and foremost, it is imperative that you lose your elitist attitude as you are no better than the rest of us. Nothing in your writing to date is deserving of such condescension on your part. You are expressing and defending your opinions, as ill-informed as they may sometimes be, like the rest of us.

Speaking of elementary ?

the money spent on war comes from the public (tax payers) but the profits go to private coffers (of arms, oil and other corporations)

Do you have even an inkling of how the market works ? Who do you think owns these “corporations” and “big business profits” ? The same people that pay the taxes ! Halliburton, Exxon, Lockheed Martin, etc. are global publicly traded companies with widely held stock. Chances are your family might own some too, as do teacher’s Unions, College Savings Accounts and Labor Unions. In a democratic system, a corporations is not an institution in and of itself.

rule the roost by keep the masses busy with such myths as democracy, free market, religion and such.

So what is the alternative? Keep everyone poor and say “government knows best”?

Your disdain for democracy, corporations and profits is well documented, and you are entitled to that opinion. Your belief in the communistic system’s infallibility is asinine as it crumbled all around us. You can be a prisoner of that belief as long as you want.

[porus]

Originally posted by Average Bohra:

Do you have even an inkling of how the market works ? Who do you think owns these “corporations” and “big business profits” ?

A good question. It would be instructive to determine who actually are the stock-holders of the very large global corporations. LIke what proportion of the 6 billion people own what proportion of the stock.

It would also be instructive to know something of the history of the corporation. Corporations were initially licensed to create specific services for the community such as building a bridge and so on. They were charged with both civic and morall responsibility, but had no right to own property.

In the USA, 14th amendment to the constitution was about emancipation of slaves. Its aim was to restore to the slaves the rights of property ownership and pursuit of happiness. Some former slaves sued the powers that be because they were not getting the properties they wanted.

That gave lawyers some idea and they convinced the supreme court that the corporation was as much a 'person' as any american and must have property rights. In fact, the number of corporations that sued for 'justice' under 14th amenment was 100 times the numeber of slaves that sued, for which the 14th amenment was devised.

This 'person' was created with 'limited liability' and with no moral restraints on their operations. Corporation operate without conscience for profit, no matter how many lives are destroyed in the process. This 'satan' now rules the world and we are all in its clutches.

In the USA, corporations now own the government. They own all means of production, distribution and media, including the internet.

These corporations are powerful enough to dictate all policies to enrich a few at the expense of people both in the USA and abroad.

[Average Bohra]

It would be instructive to determine who actually are the stock-holders of the very large global corporations. Like what proportion of the 6 billion people own what proportion of the stock.

Those who want to and have the means to own them. Why do you ask? It is not a necessity that one own stock in anything.

These corporations are powerful enough to dictate all policies to enrich a few at the expense of people both in the USA and abroad.

Your lack of basic understanding of free markets begs the question, have you or Humsafar ever participated in one ? People own corporations, buy stock in corporations, and/or work for them. Corporations are not inherently evil, but the primary source of lively hood in democratic countries. The second is government handouts as we have a safety net unlike India, et al.

Corporation operate without conscience for profit, no matter how many lives are destroyed in the process. This 'satan' now rules the world and we are all in its clutches.

That sounds like a page from one of many Arundhati Roy’s rants.; yet another elitist with the luxury of identifying problems, but offering no solutions. I wish I could afford that luxury. Your opinions are based entirely on exceptions, the glass will always be half empty for you.

Corporations were initially licensed to create specific services for the community such as building a bridge and so on. They were charged with both civic and morall responsibility, but had no right to own property.

It was a flawed approach and the entire world would be the “the third world” had it been allowed to continue. Creating an atmosphere where people are employed and earning a living is not a crime ! It is this “charged with” , “government knows best” attitude that has kept dictatorships, communists and socialists in business for so long, and the people have suffered. Just look around you.

In the USA, corporations now own the government. They own all means of production, distribution and media, including the internet.

Thank God for that. I don’t want the damn government controlling anything let alone production, distribution, media or the internet. Why would you prefer that the government own these instead? Are you that insecure in your capability and contribution to society?

Please do not ever let a government dupe you and Humsafar into thinking they can run it better than you can.

[porus]

This is a value judgment.

Government should be accountable to the people it governs. In the USA, Government is accountable to corporations, or better yet, accountable to those who 'own' the corporations. They are not the common people, except a very tiney minority.

'Crime' is a relative term as you already know. In the UK, in its enlightened epoch, large corporations were created which served public interest very well. Some of these were the National Health Service, Telecommunications and Steel Industries, and the BBC. They were not owned by Government but by the people and accountable to public bodies. Americanization of Britain has destroyed the 'moral' high ground in which these companies were held.

The enlightened epoch in Britain lasted from the end of War II to the begining of the Margaret Thatcher's admimistration. I remember Thatcher as Ronald Raegan's whore. She sold Britain to American style corporatists. Blair has continued the process.

[Average Bohra]

http://www.dawoodi-bohras.com/cgi-bin/U ... 128#000001