free trade at all costs is the cause of disarray on the planet . On Oct 5, 8:47 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If capitalism is the cause of the total disarray on the planet, how is > the capitalist demagogue Obama going to change it, when he is a > ruthless capitalist careerist, owned by Wall St? > > On Oct 5, 11:14 pm, "[ Republican for Obama ]" > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > if by some trick of fate mccain gets elected you may very well be > > correct about that ! > > > On Oct 5, 8:03 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How can you make such a statement as central banks all around the > > > world are propping up their failing financial institutions as the > > > global economy freezes to a halt. The richest 1% of the American > > > population owns more than the bottom 90% while the American political > > > system has more criminals per head that any organization in the world. > > > Over half the worlds population is starving as the world is on the > > > brink of a world war and the environment is teetering on the point of > > > no return. Which part of capitalism is working? > > > > I am not making flippant statements when I say this is the last US > > > election, it is. THE WORLD WON'T SURVIVE ANOTHER ONE. > > > > On Oct 5, 6:14 pm, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]" > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > capitalism works fine complete free trade not so much . > > > > > On Oct 4, 9:50 pm, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > What you perceive as communism does not alter the fact that capitalism > > > > > is is a complete failure and the cause of all war, poverty and the > > > > > destruction of the environment and must be done away with. > > > > > > Capitalism rewards greed. The greedier you are the more you > > > > > accumulate, the more power you have. That is why the most powerful > > > > > people in our society are the most ruthless self interested reprobates > > > > > and their followers amongst the most intellectually handicapped. > > > > > > On Oct 5, 3:00 am, Zebnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I guess no one told you communism has failed, huh commrade? > > > > > > > On Oct 4, 6:31 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > What has to be done, condemn the system that is the cause of all > > > > > > > mIsery and war. CAPITALISM. AND ADVOCATE ITS OVERTHROW > > > > > > > > On Oct 4, 6:46 pm, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]" > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > what would you suggest he do ? > > > > > > > > > On Oct 4, 4:35 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Most people are against US belligerence against Iraq. Who is > > > > > > > > > going to > > > > > > > > > stop the US, not a capitalist apologist like Chomsky? > > > > > > > > > Liberals are > > > > > > > > > good for talking about what should be done, and then do > > > > > > > > > nothing > > > > > > > > > > mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Chomsky: "The Majority of the World Supports Iran" > > > > > > > > > > > In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview, Chomsky > > > > > > > > > > discusses the > > > > > > > > > > global politics of Iran's and India's attempts to become > > > > > > > > > > nuclear > > > > > > > > > > powers. > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday night, in a vote of 86 to 13, the U.S. Senate > > > > > > > > > > passed a > > > > > > > > > > historic nuclear deal with that will allow the United > > > > > > > > > > States to trade > > > > > > > > > > with India in nuclear equipment and technology, and to > > > > > > > > > > supply India > > > > > > > > > > with nuclear fuel for its power reactors. The deal is > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > hugely consequential by its supporters and opponents alike > > > > > > > > > > -- and a > > > > > > > > > > significant victory for the Bush administration. > > > > > > > > > > > Last month, Subrata Ghoshroy, a researcher in the Science, > > > > > > > > > > Technology > > > > > > > > > > and Global Security Working Group at the Massachusetts > > > > > > > > > > Institute of > > > > > > > > > > Technology, met with Noam Chomsky in his office at MIT, > > > > > > > > > > where he is > > > > > > > > > > the institute professor of linguistics. "Before we started > > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > discussion," Ghoshroy writes, "Professor Chomsky asked me > > > > > > > > > > to give him > > > > > > > > > > a little background information. I told him that I was > > > > > > > > > > researching > > > > > > > > > > missile defense, space weapons and the U.S.-India nuclear > > > > > > > > > > deal." > > > > > > > > > > Ghoshroy is a longtime critic of the U.S. missile defense > > > > > > > > > > program and > > > > > > > > > > a former analyst at the Government Accountability Office > > > > > > > > > > who in 2006 > > > > > > > > > > blew the whistle on the failure -- and attempted cover-up > > > > > > > > > > -- of a key > > > > > > > > > > component of the program: a $26 billion weapon system that > > > > > > > > > > was the > > > > > > > > > > "centerpiece" of the Bush administration's antimissile plan. > > > > > > > > > > > Ghoshroy and Chomsky discussed the then-pending nuclear > > > > > > > > > > deal, which > > > > > > > > > > would sanction trade hitherto prohibited by U.S. and > > > > > > > > > > international > > > > > > > > > > laws because of India's refusal to sign the Nuclear > > > > > > > > > > Non-Proliferation > > > > > > > > > > Treaty and the nuclear tests it conducted in 1998. Ghoshroy > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > written several articles criticizing the U.S.-India deal as > > > > > > > > > > a triumph > > > > > > > > > > of the business lobby -- an assessment Chomsky agreed with. > > > > > > > > > > He said > > > > > > > > > > that Condoleezza Rice is actually on record admitting what > > > > > > > > > > is truly > > > > > > > > > > behind this deal, which he characterized as a > > > > > > > > > > "non-proliferation > > > > > > > > > > disaster." > > > > > > > > > > > Ghoshroy's subsequent conversation with Chomsky touched on > > > > > > > > > > a number of > > > > > > > > > > interweaving topics, including: India and the importance of > > > > > > > > > > the non- > > > > > > > > > > aligned movement; the myths of free trade and the so-called > > > > > > > > > > "success" > > > > > > > > > > of neoliberalism; Washington's historic opposition to > > > > > > > > > > promote new > > > > > > > > > > world economic and information orders; Latin America's > > > > > > > > > > growing > > > > > > > > > > independence; the West's hypocrisy over Iran's nuclear > > > > > > > > > > program -- and > > > > > > > > > > MIT's ironic role in it during the shah's regime; and, > > > > > > > > > > finally, U.S. > > > > > > > > > > elections and the prospects for change. > > > > > > > > > > > The result is a two-part interview, the second of which > > > > > > > > > > will run on > > > > > > > > > > AlterNet tomorrow. Part One begins with India, the > > > > > > > > > > Non-Aligned > > > > > > > > > > Movement, and why a "majority of the world supports Iran." > > > > > > > > > > (The Non- > > > > > > > > > > Aligned Movement, which consists of some 115 or more > > > > > > > > > > representatives > > > > > > > > > > of "developing countries," originated at the Asia-Africa > > > > > > > > > > Conference in > > > > > > > > > > Bandung, Indonesia, in 1955, which was convened mainly by > > > > > > > > > > newly > > > > > > > > > > independent former colonies from Africa and Asia to develop > > > > > > > > > > joint > > > > > > > > > > policies in international relations. Jawaharlal Nehru, then > > > > > > > > > > India's > > > > > > > > > > prime minister, led the conference. There, "Third World" > > > > > > > > > > leaders > > > > > > > > > > shared their similar problems of resisting the pressures of > > > > > > > > > > the major > > > > > > > > > > powers, maintaining their independence and opposing > > > > > > > > > > colonialism and > > > > > > > > > > neo-colonialism, especially Western domination. India > > > > > > > > > > continued its > > > > > > > > > > vigorous participation and leadership role in NAM until the > > > > > > > > > > end of the > > > > > > > > > > Cold War. For further reading, visit the NAM Web site.) > > > > > > > > > > > ***- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
