massive solidarity against the war

Posted by marc garrett | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.

Blankhttp://www.stopwar.org.uk/groups.asp

all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR march today in London.
  • Wally Keeler | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    > Blankhttp://www.stopwar.org.uk/groups.asp
    > all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR march today in London.

    a herd of sheep
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:

    > all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR march today in London.

    Tzzt. 9/11 attack continues long after 9/11:
    sublimation of the West in to a 'mass solidarity' of imbecilic
    mob behavior + debasement of its population into an idiotic herd.

    The East is laughing at you--and not nicely.

    `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Wally Keeler wrote:

    > a herd of sheep

    To which you belong. Baa.

    Not a concept you have understanding of, besides piddly mis-readings
    on the subject matter.

    Sheep are those created to follow. Majority of humans (male + female)
    are created to be sheep. It is not a derogatory term.

    Mob + mass psychosis + mechanical behaviors are only remotely connected
    to people being sheep.
  • Michael Szpakowski | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must be
    schooled in all the arts of rhetoric, Wally.

    --- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    > From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    > > Blankhttp://www.stopwar.org.uk/groups.asp
    > > all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR
    > march today in London.
    >
    > a herd of sheep
    >
    > + AFK, tornado
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
    > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
    > out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at
    http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

    =====
    http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/

    __________________________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
    http://sbc.yahoo.com
  • marc garrett | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    Another right winger Sheesh!

    Even here...why bless my soul boss, i did na wanna speak out about nuffin
    honest boss. I was just exercising my erm right to say something that I
    believed in, but now I know that it is wrong and not my palce to believe in
    wanting peace. I'll just sit my liddl' self down and suddup like a good god
    fearing christain shall I?

    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "marc.garrett" <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>
    >
    >
    > > Herd or not, sometimes people have got to get together to save other
    > lives -
    > > you twat!
    >
    > Yes, better that Saddam kill them instead.
    >
    > > > From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    > > > > Blankhttp://www.stopwar.org.uk/groups.asp
    > > > > all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR march today in
    > London.
    > > >
    > > > a herd of sheep
    >
    >
    >
  • Wally Keeler | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    A simple image that aptly describes useful idiots.
    I don't join in on Save-The-Dictator movements.

    From: "Michael Szpakowski" <szpako@yahoo.com>
    > Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must be
    > schooled in all the arts of rhetoric, Wally.
    >
    > --- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >> From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    >>>
    >>> all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR
    >>> march today in London.
    >>
    >> a herd of sheep
  • marc garrett | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    Wally,

    You are missing the point, there are issues a little more subtle than that
    going on. Do you get info on the net over there or are you blocked by AOL?

    > A simple image that aptly describes useful idiots.
    > I don't join in on Save-The-Dictator movements.
    >
    > From: "Michael Szpakowski" <szpako@yahoo.com>
    > > Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must be
    > > schooled in all the arts of rhetoric, Wally.
    > >
    > > --- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    > >> From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    > >>>
    > >>> all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR
    > >>> march today in London.
    > >>
    > >> a herd of sheep
    >
    >
    >
  • Wally Keeler | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    And why not here? I encourage you to speak out all you want. Go ahead.
    Well Saddam does kill them. He kills the neighbours -- Iran, Kuwait. He
    kills his own with chemical weapons. Gets his rocks off with snuff videos.
    Do you, my dear petite leftie, have a single solution to Saddamism?
    Or perhaps them civilian Arabs don't matter to you when other boss Arabs
    kill them. Where you speaking up then, Leftie?
    Or were you working hard to become a great artistista?

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    To: "Wally Keeler" <poetburo@sympatico.ca>
    > Another right winger Sheesh!
    >
    > Even here...why bless my soul boss, i did na wanna speak out about nuffin
    > honest boss. I was just exercising my erm right to say something that I
    > believed in, but now I know that it is wrong and not my palce to believe
    in
    > wanting peace. I'll just sit my liddl' self down and suddup like a good
    god
    > fearing christain shall I?
    >
    > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > From: "marc.garrett" <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>
    > > > Herd or not, sometimes people have got to get together to save other
    > > lives -
    > > > you twat!
    > >
    > > Yes, better that Saddam kill them instead.
  • Wally Keeler | Sat Sep 28th 2002 1 a.m.
    I say you missed a lot of points.
    I get info as fully as you get info.
    The demonstrators held placards which reflected their own particular
    jingoism - and that is what it is.
    Does the Bush admin indulge in jingoism -- yep.
    Your brief little postings were nothing more than jingoism.
    I replied the same.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    To: "Wally Keeler" <poetburo@sympatico.ca>; "Michael Szpakowski"
    <szpako@yahoo.com>; <list@rhizome.org>
    Cc: <syndicate@anart.no>
    Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 8:23 PM
    Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: massive solidarity against the war

    > Wally,
    >
    > You are missing the point, there are issues a little more subtle than that
    > going on. Do you get info on the net over there or are you blocked by AOL?
    >
    >
    >
    > > A simple image that aptly describes useful idiots.
    > > I don't join in on Save-The-Dictator movements.
    > >
    > > From: "Michael Szpakowski" <szpako@yahoo.com>
    > > > Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must be
    > > > schooled in all the arts of rhetoric, Wally.
    > > >
    > > > --- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    > > >> From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    > > >>>
    > > >>> all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR
    > > >>> march today in London.
    > > >>
    > > >> a herd of sheep
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    >
  • Eryk Salvaggio | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    Hi Wally. A couple of questions and comments for you.

    Firstly, we have numerous experts saying that a war with Iraq would be
    over in several days to two weeks. Assuming this is true- or even
    hypothesized- does this justify Iraq as a a threat to world security?
    The Gulf War was over almost as soon as it started- and some American
    Soldiers came home with unrecognizeable syndromes that the Government
    won't accept at face value, or do anything about. Since then, the Iraqi
    military is only a fraction of that size then- with rumors that even
    larger mass defections are likely if there is a war. Does this sound
    like a nation that can threaten world security? If not, then what
    justification do we have?

    Second- there are no ties linking Al Qaieda to Iraq. The "War On
    Terrorism" is one thing- to disperse of a vague, unidentifiable and ever
    changing enemy. But look at the Axis of Evil: Iraq, Iran, and North
    Korea. Please remember that Al Qaieda are militant muslims. After 9/11 I
    remember hearing a slew of reports about the unlikely concept of Saddam
    and Bin Laden operating in cahoots with one another, and about Bin
    Ladens disliking of Hussein. Not to mention that Bin Laden fled Saudi
    Arabia- if he wanted to work with Hussein, it's a lot closer to Iraq
    than to Afghanistan. Don't you find it suspicious that we had no
    evidence, and the government even admitted that there was no evidence,
    until they needed to drum up support in the UN and Congress, and then,
    suddenly, there are "ties" that cannot be disclosed because of national
    security matters- and even Donald Rumsfield said there was not any
    direct fingers pointing to Iraq, but lots of general waving in its
    direction. When you want to find circumstantial evidence, you will be
    able to. It's a basic rule of human psychology- and the people who run
    the American War Machine are human beings.

    Third- "What if Iraq got hold of Nuclear Weapons and gave them to Al
    Qaieda?" Why would he? His country would be annihilated if there was
    ever any direct evidence pointing to him. I mean look at what is
    happening now without any evidence whatsoever. Psychologically, the man
    is a narcissist, who throws nation-wide birthday parties for himself and
    renames the television network "Birthday Television". Seriously. Does
    any megalomaniacal, self-loving despot want to be annihilated? I don't
    think so.

    Fourth. If this war occurs [which it will] then what is the next step?
    We as Americans have opened a can of shit by not voting George Bush into
    office. The man who holds grudges. More than likely there will suddenly
    be evidence linking Iran to Al Qaieda. After that there will be evidence
    linking North Korea to Al Qaieda. And probably Germany now that the
    Chancellor is on Bushes shit list. It is not a conspiracy theory- it's
    just that we gave an idiot power, and he is insulated against outside
    opinion, and he will do as he pleases- we already abandoned several
    agreements and treaties because Bush didn't like them, have told the
    world they are with us or against us, and now we are, as far as I am
    concerned, in a state of political anarchy. We have a leader who was not
    elected, deciding to destroy the last 8 years of American Policy and
    return to the policies that his father put into effect, and on top of
    that, we are going to bomb the people we don't like- especially the guy
    who tried to kill our leader's Dad.

    In the first Gulf War, did you know we bombed out Iraq's water
    distribution system? It's right there in the cia docs if you want to
    take a look. We knocked out water treatment facilities in a region that
    is- you know, a desert- leaving people with brackish water, which we
    knew would lead to Malaria and other diseases- not to mention thirst.
    There's thousands of children who have died from this; and you can say
    "well, Iraq is a rich, oil producing country, they could restore it" but
    part of our sanctions against Iraq [and part of the reason we are going
    to war, don't forget, is also that Iraq has been attempting to violate
    these sanctions] are against- guess what? Water treatment equipment, and
    Chlorine- a necessary part of desalinization. Apparently, it can also be
    used to build chemical weapons. One has to wonder if we have sanctions
    against Iraq buying aluminum or nails?

    So you say "What for Saddam to Kill them first" but we're already
    killing the families of Iraqi soldiers who were gracious enough to
    surrender in Gulf War One, and swallowing horse and carriage every "evil
    man" that the Bush family says needs to be stopped seems short of a good
    reason to send people to war. Also- it just confounds me when people who
    are not in the army say what a great idea it is to "simply" go to war,
    to "simply" have hundreds of thousands of american lives put on the
    line. If it was your life, do you think you would feel as resolute that
    this war was necessary? I don't know your history with the armed forces
    or outside of the armed forces, and don't take this as
    overly-confrontational, but it doesn't seem to me that you are enrolled
    in any branches of the military. I don't think many people in the
    military would choose to go to war if they had a choice, and they speak
    when it's necessary to- people signed up for the military after 9/11,
    wanting to go to Afghanistan. This war is not to simple and clear cut
    and not so necessary.

    Fifth. Clinton did not seem to find Hussein a threat to the world for
    over 8 years, as far as I can tell. It's Bush, and the Bush people- the
    cabinet now, consisting of numerous people who were hands on for the
    Bush vs Hussein fight the first time around. So why do we hear nothing
    from these people on the idea of "coercive inspection?" Why not have
    surprise-visiting inspectors backed up by tanks that would only work to
    barge their way into blocked locations? "Because the weapons are being
    made in secret?" We have satellite imagery of every square inch of Iraq,
    and anything resembling a "plant" could be inspected.

    Six. I think it was Cheney who suggested "the nuclear option" against
    Saddam Hussein in Gulf War One. Are you willing to let this guy do
    "whatever is necessary" in Iraq? Do you want a nuclear bomb dropped on
    Iraqi civilians to protect against a nuclear bomb being dropped on
    Israeli civilians? Because in both cases, people are going to die. And
    the second option might not happen. But a war with Iraq will- and that
    means people are going to die, with absolute certainty. So we're going
    to kill people who might kill people, to assure that people do not get
    killed? We can't go around arresting people before they are proven
    guilty. It's not "American", it's like the most un-american thing. I
    don't have problems with all "unamerican" things, either- I download
    music, for example, and I have no problem with people smoking pot, even
    though they are supposedly "aiding terrorists" and all, but I happen to
    like the "innocent until proven guilty" idea.

    I mean, in the most simplistic form, if we don't kill a bunch of people
    to prevent the killing of a bunch of people, a bunch of people won't
    die. People are not their governments. I wonder why Saddam dropping
    chemical gas onto Israel and killing Israelis is worse than us
    destroying the water system and killing Iraqis, or out bombs blowing up
    civilians; which happens pretty much all the time, as well. The worse
    case scenario if we don't kill people is that other people will be
    killed. So who gets killed? Is that what this war is about? People get
    killed. If they happen to be born in the area that is now considered
    within Israeli Borders, or if they happen to have been born within a
    section of land now considered Iraq or Iran, or if they happen to be
    born in Sioux Falls, Minnesota or Ottawa Canada or Paris, why is death
    any different? If you were born in Palestinian Territory or , like,
    North Korea for example; do north koreans deserve to die because their-
    your- government was Communist? Because if they did, then everyone in
    the World Trade Center did too, everyone who is a person becomes just a
    national symbol and nothing more- no emotional complexity, no lives, no
    treasured anything, just walking flags, born into one geographical
    region and stamped with that flag, so that whenever the 6% of the
    population with that flag on their foreheads makes a decision for the
    rest of you, you are a "rational target" to be killed if you are in the
    way. Or at a wedding, or at the afghan red cross, or going to work in a
    skyscraper, or going to skate in the Olympics.

    To me, this notion is absurd, and so is the idea of pre-emptive strikes.
    I don't want anyone to die. Let's just first and foremost not get people
    killed anymore, hows that for a priority? Because we are sacrificing the
    people of Iraq to a vague suspicions in the mind of the boy whose daddy
    was almost killed by this despot, a boy who holds grudges and never went
    to war, who sees the ordering of thousands of kids to go shoot rifles at
    each other as an extension of his fist.

    That's why I don't agree to the war. That's why I won't participate, and
    that is why I will support any voice in public that speaks out against
    it, and if enough of us do it, then we can just get Bush out of elected
    office and back in the baseball stadiums for 2004. Because I think
    running the Texas Rangers is a perfect place for Bush to be. I have no
    problem, at all, with him leading the Texas Rangers.

    Best,
    -e.

    Wally Keeler wrote:

    >A simple image that aptly describes useful idiots.
    >I don't join in on Save-The-Dictator movements.
    >
    >From: "Michael Szpakowski" <szpako@yahoo.com>
    >
    >>Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must be
    >>schooled in all the arts of rhetoric, Wally.
    >>
    >>--- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >>
    >>>From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    >>>
    >>>>all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WAR
    >>>>march today in London.
    >>>>
    >>>a herd of sheep
    >>>
    >
    >
    >+ AFK, tornado
    >-> post: list@rhizome.org
    >-> questions: info@rhizome.org
    >-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    >-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    >+
    >Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    >Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >
  • Wally Keeler | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    From: Eryk Salvaggio
    | Hi Wally. A couple of questions and comments for you.
    |
    | Firstly, we have numerous experts saying that a war
    | with Iraq would be over in several days to two weeks.
    | Assuming this is true- or even hypothesized- does this
    | justify Iraq as a a threat to world security?

    No. And I don't believe it will be over so soon.

    | The Gulf War was over almost as soon as it started-
    | and some American Soldiers came home with
    | unrecognizeable syndromes that the Government
    | won't accept at face value, or do anything about.

    I don't acept it at face value either. I'm not convinced yet that
    "unrecognizable syndromes" can be laid at anyone's door.

    | Since then, the Iraqi military is only a fraction of
    | that size then- with rumors that even larger mass
    | defections are likely if there is a war.

    Rumours, eh? Rumours. Foreign policy should be directed on the basis of
    rumours?

    | Does this sound like a nation that can threaten
    | world security? If not, then what justification do we have?

    I do not believe Saddam's regime can threaten "world security". It doesn't
    have to threaten "world security" before a trip wire initiates war. It is
    sufficient if it threatens regional security, or local security, or the
    security of a single nation.

    | Second- there are no ties linking Al Qaieda to Iraq.

    I don't believe that assertion. There are "rumours" that there are
    connections, but excuse me if those are not the rumours you are in favour of
    because they do not support your particular bias. For my part, I see no
    reason why Saddam's gang or Osama's gang would avoid each other. They may
    have differences, but they also share a common bitterness towards the West,
    particularly the USA.

    | The "War On Terrorism" is one thing- to disperse of a vague,
    | unidentifiable and ever changing enemy.

    Yes, that is one thing.

    | But look at the Axis of Evil: Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.
    | Please remember that Al Qaieda are militant muslims.
    | After 9/11 I remember hearing a slew of reports about
    | the unlikely concept of Saddam and Bin Laden operating
    | in cahoots with one another, and about Bin Ladens disliking
    | of Hussein. Not to mention that Bin Laden fled Saudi Arabia
    | - if he wanted to work with Hussein, it's a lot closer to
    | Iraq than to Afghanistan.

    Of course there is the USA in bed with one of the 20th century"s most
    murderous dictators, Stalin, during World War II. The enemy of my enemy is
    my friend. Who is the enemy? The USA of course.

    | Don't you find it suspicious that we had no evidence,
    | and the government even admitted that there was no
    | evidence, until they needed to drum up support in the
    | UN and Congress, and then, suddenly, there are "ties"
    | that cannot be disclosed because of national security
    | matters- and even Donald Rumsfield said there was
    | not any direct fingers pointing to Iraq, but lots of general
    | waving in its direction. When you want to find circumstantial
    | evidence, you will be able to. It's a basic rule of human
    | psychology- and the people who run the American
    | War Machine are human beings.

    Well you seem to rely on "rumours." Tell me how much more reliable those are
    than the sources of the government. Well, of course, the US Admin is gonna
    reveal its evidence in the media, provide specifics to the public for
    Saddam's gang to read and snuff out the sources or leaks, and we know that
    Saddam's gang is not very specific when it comes to murder -- more often
    than not Saddam could care less about his own collateral damage and the
    leftwing of the The West could care less about Saddam's collateral damage..

    | Third- "What if Iraq got hold of Nuclear Weapons
    | and gave them to Al Qaieda?" Why would he?

    Saddam is not a peace activist. He desires to continue living. People
    willing to die for the sake of mass murder of USAmericans are inside Osama's
    gang. In any event -- I don't believe there is any imminent threat in this
    nuclear regard.

    | His country would be annihilated if there was
    | ever any direct evidence pointing to him. I mean
    | look at what is happening now without any
    | evidence whatsoever.

    Very doubtful that "his country would be annihilated". His regime would
    certainly be vigoroursly and violently pursued.

    | Psychologically, the man is a narcissist, who
    | throws nation-wide birthday parties for himself
    | and renames the television network "Birthday
    | Television". Seriously. Does any megalomaniacal,
    | self-loving despot want to be annihilated? I don't think so.

    I don't think so either. I am sure he considers himself quite secure.
    However I think he is much much more than a narcissist.

    | Fourth. If this war occurs [which it will]
    | then what is the next step?

    Good question. Lots of speculation on that score. Some say it will spread
    instablity in the Middle East. Well, hell, how stable is it anyway? Who is
    worried about instablity? The dictators in the region are concerned about
    it -- and rightly so.

    | We as Americans have opened a can of shit by not
    | voting George Bush into office. The man who holds
    | grudges.

    As I understand it, Saddam is also one to hold grudges, deadly grudges, if
    we believe the reports that he has organized an assassination hit on Bush
    Sr.

    | More than likely there will suddenly be evidence
    | linking Iran to Al Qaieda. After that there will be
    | evidence linking North Korea to Al Qaieda.

    So you believe in the domino thoery.

    | And probably Germany now that the Chancellor is
    | on Bushes shit list. It is not a conspiracy theory-

    It's not a theory, it's fantasy. I really question your credibility when you
    inject this ludicrousmess into your arguements.

    | it's just that we gave an idiot power, and he is
    | insulated against outside opinion, and he will do as
    | he pleases- we already abandoned several
    | agreements and treaties because Bush didn't like
    | them, have told the world they are with us or against
    | us, and now we are, as far as I am concerned,
    | in a state of political anarchy.

    Oh what a crock of shit that is. I've heard that sort of stuff for decades
    from your ilk. Political anarchy? Examine the 1960's if you want to see
    politics in turbulence.

    | We have a leader who was not elected,

    There was an election. Gore Bush Gore Bush Gore Bush. Tweedle dee Tweedle
    dum. He was elected.

    | deciding to destroy the last 8 years of American
    | Policy and return to the policies that his father
    | put into effect,

    Bullshit. His father didn't finish the job.

    | and on top of that, we are going to bomb the
    | people we don't like- especially the guy who
    | tried to kill our leader's Dad.

    It also happens to be the leader of a great democracy, and the killer is a
    dictator.

    | In the first Gulf War, did you know we bombed
    | out Iraq's water distribution system? It's right there
    | in the cia docs if you want to take a look. We
    | knocked out water treatment facilities in a region
    | that is- you know, a desert- leaving people with
    | brackish water, which we knew would lead to
    | Malaria

    Malaria? In the desert?

    | and other diseases- not to mention thirst.

    There's Pepsi.

    | There's thousands of children who have died from this;
    | and you can say "well, Iraq is a rich, oil producing
    | country, they could restore it" but part of our
    | sanctions against Iraq [and part of the reason we are
    | going to war, don't forget, is also that Iraq has been
    | attempting to violate these sanctions] are against- guess
    | what? Water treatment equipment, and Chlorine- a
    | necessary part of desalinization. Apparently, it can also
    | be used to build chemical weapons. One has to wonder
    | if we have sanctions against Iraq buying aluminum or nails?

    So what is the problem? Saddam's regime has managed quite well to circumvent
    the sanctions. Why isn't he taking care of his people?

    | So you say "What for Saddam to Kill them first" but
    | we're already killing the families of Iraqi soldiers who
    | were gracious enough to surrender in Gulf War One,

    Graciousness had nothing to do with it.

    | and swallowing horse and carriage every "evil man"
    | that the Bush family says needs to be stopped seems
    | short of a good reason to send people to war.

    If that were the case, I agree with you.

    | Also- it just confounds me when people who are not
    | in the army say what a great idea it is to "simply" go to war,

    I did time in the Canadian army back in the 1960's. A Mickey Mouse affair to
    be sure -- Canada would be hard-pressed to repel a flock of butterflies
    nowadays. Be that as it may, I have had some experience. I might add also,
    that my father went to Europe during World War II to fight against the
    nazis. When he came back, he suffered from war dreams and it contributed, I
    believe, to his suicide when I was 13. So let me tell you something, I don't
    regard war as a "great idea" nor is it simple.

    | to "simply" have hundreds of thousands of american
    | lives put on the line. If it was your life, do you think
    | you would feel as resolute that this war was necessary?

    At this very moment, I am in neither camp, peace camp or war camp. I take it
    seriously and I scrutinize the words of the state as much as I scrutinize
    the words of peace activists.

    | I don't know your history with the armed forces
    | or outside of the armed forces, and don't take this
    | as overly-confrontational, but it doesn't seem to me
    | that you are enrolled in any branches of the military.

    Throughout the 1980's I often went in and out of the east European countries
    on various smuggling operations. I did this freelance, deliberately avoiding
    any contact with the state. (In fact, during the 1970's I was the focus of a
    lot of news in Canada involving my busting of the RCMP Security Service for
    intercepting my mail art, so on and so forth, involving the Peoples Republic
    of Poetry) I smuggled literature, music, art, currency, gold, printing press
    parts, and other like stuff in and out of the communist bloc and between
    bloc countries. I don't do any of this stuff any more because I am no longer
    physically competent to perform such stuff.

    | I don't think many people in the military would
    | choose to go to war if they had a choice,

    People in the military are volunteers. They made their choice. A free choice
    at that.

    | and they speak when it's necessary to- people
    | signed up for the military after 9/11, wanting to
    | go to Afghanistan. This war is not to simple and
    | clear cut and not so necessary.

    Agreed in general.

    | Fifth. Clinton did not seem to find Hussein a
    | threat to the world for over 8 years, as far as
    | I can tell.

    He was more into getting blow-jobs at his desk, and squandering a
    multi-million dollar cruise missile to blow up an empty tent in Afghanistan.
    Clinton seemed blissfully ignorant or indifferent to the signs and signals
    of development happening in the Middle East.

    | It's Bush, and the Bush people- the cabinet now,
    | consisting of numerous people who were hands
    | on for the Bush vs Hussein fight the first time
    | around. So why do we hear nothing from these
    | people on the idea of "coercive inspection?"

    I like the idea.

    | Why not have surprise-visiting inspectors backed
    | up by tanks that would only work to barge their
    | way into blocked locations?

    I like that.

    | "Because the weapons are being made in secret?"
    | We have satellite imagery of every square inch of
    | Iraq, and anything resembling a "plant" could be inspected.

    Things can be hidden from satellite view.

    | Six. I think it was Cheney who suggested "the nuclear
    | option" against Saddam Hussein in Gulf War One.
    | Are you willing to let this guy do "whatever is necessary"
    | in Iraq? Do you want a nuclear bomb dropped on Iraqi
    | civilians to protect against a nuclear bomb being
    | dropped on Israeli civilians?

    No I don't. It hasn't been proposed.

    | Because in both cases, people are going to die.

    Yes, people will die in the instances of coercive inspections. There will be
    resistance by forces under Saddam's control. I have no problem having them
    wasted.

    | And the second option might not happen. But a war
    | with Iraq will- and that means people are going to
    | die, with absolute certainty.

    Of course. It is to be expected.

    | So we're going to kill people who might kill people,
    | to assure that people do not get killed?

    Perhaps it is better to wait until those people actually do kill people
    before we kill them. Actually, they already have a proven record of killing
    people. They killed hundreds of thousands of people when they attacked Iran.
    (lots of collateral damage in that one). Oh, and then there is the killing
    of people (civilians) with chemical weapons, and those civilians were of a
    different expendable race than Saddams's people. And then there was the
    terror killings of the Shiite's in southern Iraq who dared to rise up
    against the racist Saddam, and so came the no-fly zone, which also protected
    the Kurds in the north from Saddam's killings. Of course, none of that
    killing seems very important to you.

    | We can't go around arresting people before
    | they are proven guilty. It's not "American",
    | it's like the most un-american thing. I don't
    | have problems with all "unamerican" things,
    | either- I download music, for example, and
    | I have no problem with people smoking pot,
    | even though they are supposedly "aiding terrorists"
    | and all, but I happen to like the "innocent until
    | proven guilty" idea.

    Hitler had never been proven guilty either, but the USA joined in the war
    against him. Tsk Tsk.

    | I mean, in the most simplistic form, if we don't
    | kill a bunch of people to prevent the killing of a
    | bunch of people, a bunch of people won't die.
    | People are not their governments.

    Focussed violence -- target the uniforms, target the gang.

    | I wonder why Saddam dropping chemical gas
    | onto Israel and killing Israelis is worse than us
    | destroying the water system and killing Iraqis,

    Israel is a democracy.

    | or out bombs blowing up civilians; which happens
    | pretty much all the time, as well.

    But not as badly as when other countries do it. No one seems to be getting
    their nose out of joint at what Russia is doing in Chechnya. Where are the
    leftie demonstrations about that? The violence going on there far exceeds
    what the USA is currently doing. The violence there is almost all collatoral
    damage. No one seems to be upset about this. No one marches to demonstrate
    outside the Russian embassy. Why is that? Really? Can you explain it?

    | The worse case scenario if we don't kill people
    | is that other people will be killed. So who gets
    | killed? Is that what this war is about? People get killed.
    | If they happen to be born in the area that is now
    | considered within Israeli Borders, or if they happen
    | to have been born within a section of land now
    | considered Iraq or Iran, or if they happen to be
    | born in Sioux Falls, Minnesota or Ottawa Canada
    | or Paris, why is death any different? If you were born
    | in Palestinian Territory or , like, North Korea for
    | example; do north koreans deserve to die because
    | their- your- government was Communist? Because
    | if they did, then everyone in the World Trade Center
    | did too, everyone who is a person becomes just a
    | national symbol and nothing more- no emotional
    | complexity, no lives, no treasured anything, just walking
    | flags, born into one geographical region and stamped
    | with that flag, so that whenever the 6% of the population
    | with that flag on their foreheads makes a decision for the
    | rest of you, you are a "rational target" to be killed if you
    | are in the way. Or at a wedding, or at the afghan red
    | cross, or going to work in a skyscraper, or going to
    | skate in the Olympics.

    How wonderfully simplictic it all is.

    | To me, this notion is absurd, and so is the idea of
    | pre-emptive strikes.

    Murder must not be prevented. There should be no pre-emptive action taken by
    the authorities until the man actually murders his wife. Then there will be
    reason for action.

    | I don't want anyone to die.

    Yes, you do. Your acts of omission permit ten of thousands of people to die.
    You are letting them die in Chechnya while you and your artistic ilk sit on
    your ass and avoid protesting outside the Russian embassy. No one is
    innocent today, not me, not you. So if consider yourself so pious, I suggest
    you put your mouth where you feet are and start walking to the Russian
    embassy with a placard.

    | Let's just first and foremost not get people killed
    | anymore, hows that for a priority?

    My highest priority is democracy. Democracy in this world must not only
    survive, it must prevail. Generations of people over the centuries shed
    their blood and shed the blood of others, so that democracy would develop
    and find its place as a method of governing on this planet. While it is not
    perfect, it is far better than dictatorshit, absolute monarchy, sultanates,
    etc. I will not betray those generations by surrendering a single inch to a
    dictatorshit.

    | Because we are sacrificing the people of Iraq to a
    | vague suspicions in the mind of the boy whose
    | daddy was almost killed by this despot, a boy who
    | holds grudges and never went to war, who sees the
    | ordering of thousands of kids to go shoot rifles at
    | each other as an extension of his fist.

    Jingoism

    | That's why I don't agree to the war. That's why I
    | won't participate, and that is why I will support
    | any voice in public that speaks out against it, and
    | if enough of us do it, then we can just get Bush out
    | of elected office and back in the baseball stadiums
    | for 2004. Because I think running the Texas Rangers
    | is a perfect place for Bush to be. I have no problem,
    | at all, with him leading the Texas Rangers.

    That's the democratic way. So how can we get Saddam to lead the Muslim
    Trockaderos

    Wally Keeler wrote:
    A simple image that aptly describes useful idiots.I don't join in on
    Save-The-Dictator movements.From: "Michael Szpakowski" <szpako@yahoo.com>
    Well!- that's a decisive argument- you must beschooled in all the arts of
    rhetoric, Wally.--- Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    From: "furtherfield" <info@furtherfield.org>
    all the groups & more who are at the STOP THE WARmarch today in London.
    a herd of sheep
    + AFK, tornado-> post: list@rhizome.org-> questions: info@rhizome.org->
    subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz-> give:
    http://rhizome.org/support+Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms
    set out in theMembership Agreement available online at
    http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:

    > You are missing the point, there are issues a little more subtle than that
    > going on.

    Yeah. Extremely subtle. The highest order of consciousness is involved.

    > Do you get info on the net over there or are you blocked by AOL?

    All North America is owned by AOL and it's brainwashing the population.
    Really.
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:

    > Another right winger Sheesh!

    Right winger? Where was the FIRST right winger?
    Or do you ascribe political involvement to apolitical people?
    That's mighty nice of you, marc. So unfascist.
    So l-i-b-er-al. You're either with us or against us.

    Cut out the idiotic knee-jerk attempts to shove people
    about.

    Idiotic ape.
  • marc garrett | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    I'M NO LONGER TALKING TO NN CLONES - SORRY...

    > On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:
    >
    > > Another right winger Sheesh!
    >
    > Right winger? Where was the FIRST right winger?
    > Or do you ascribe political involvement to apolitical people?
    > That's mighty nice of you, marc. So unfascist.
    > So l-i-b-er-al. You're either with us or against us.
    >
    > Cut out the idiotic knee-jerk attempts to shove people
    > about.
    >
    > Idiotic ape.
    >
    >
    >
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Wally Keeler wrote:

    > | The "War On Terrorism" is one thing- to disperse of a vague,
    > | unidentifiable and ever changing enemy.
    >
    > Yes, that is one thing.

    Like that ever-chasing chimera of 'evil'.

    > | But look at the Axis of Evil: Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.

    Personally possessed by Satan they are. Justified murder.
    The hungry wants its steak.

    > Saddam is not a peace activist. He desires to continue living. People
    > willing to die for the sake of mass murder of USAmericans are inside Osama's
    > gang.

    Not so. People willing to die for the murder of 'non-muslims'
    are quite more than those in some gangs. Secondly, a fairly large
    number of easterners are raised to do the 'kamikaze' against the west.

    This happens in art galleries as well.

    > | Psychologically, the man is a narcissist,

    Like you have personal unmediated, direct experience
    with the 'man' and you'd be able to tale fog from your hand
    even if you did.

    > | who
    > | throws nation-wide birthday parties for himself

    So do rock-stars at rock concerts. Wait till the tour starts.

    > | and renames the television network "Birthday
    > | Television".

    It want my MTV. The psychic murders humans commit daily
    are far more numerous than any wars. But it's just nice to
    get all righteously-worked up over 'evil axis'-es.
    Keeps ya busy from confronting your 'self'.

    > Seriously. Does any megalomaniacal,
    > | self-loving despot want to be annihilated? I don't think so.

    Yes, they do. It's called being a martyr.
    It makes ya a saint.

    > | We have a leader who was not elected,
    >
    > There was an election. Gore Bush Gore Bush Gore Bush. Tweedle dee Tweedle
    > dum. He was elected.

    Elections are a bunch of schlock. A parade of imbecillic behavior
    from muppets who have no capacity to make choices anyhow.

    > It also happens to be the leader of a great democracy,

    Great democracy?! Laughable.

    > and the killer is a dictator.

    Love that justified righteous murder, mm-mm-mm.
    It's what Saddam is peddling aussi.

    > | I don't think many people in the military would
    > | choose to go to war if they had a choice,
    >
    > People in the military are volunteers. They made their choice. A free choice
    > at that.

    Hardly free choice at all. But that's 'democracy' for you--
    you're 'born free'. Sure. And I'm the Duke of Wellington.

    > Yes, people will die in the instances of coercive inspections. There will be
    > resistance by forces under Saddam's control. I have no problem having them
    > wasted.

    Ah yes.. Mm-mm. Justified murder.

    > Hitler had never been proven guilty either, but the USA joined in the war
    > against him. Tsk Tsk.

    Yeah, Hitler was a smashing guy. What a nice logical non-emotional
    non-propagandist knee-jerk.

    > Focussed violence -- target the uniforms, target the gang.

    Meaningless slogan.

    > | I wonder why Saddam dropping chemical gas
    > | onto Israel and killing Israelis is worse than us
    > | destroying the water system and killing Iraqis,
    >
    > Israel is a democracy.

    No, it isn't. Isreal labels itself as such.
    Nor is 'democracy' 'superior' to other political systems.
    Your 'democracy' is beginning to look like victorian collonialism.

    > But not as badly as when other countries do it. No one seems to be getting
    > their nose out of joint at what Russia is doing in Chechnya. Where are the
    > leftie demonstrations about that? The violence going on there far exceeds
    > what the USA is currently doing. The violence there is almost all collatoral
    > damage. No one seems to be upset about this. No one marches to demonstrate
    > outside the Russian embassy. Why is that? Really? Can you explain it?

    And where are they when Russian artist leech on the West while
    purposefully selling art-crap because the 'West owes them money'--
    meanwhile spreading the West sucks, Russia rules propaganda.
    But wait, the West don't care for 'memetic terrorism'--and the East
    has been doing that for centuries.

    So look, now the USA will bomb, but they will be bad guys, and in the
    east's eyes the 9/11 kamikazes will be heroes.

    > | The worse case scenario if we don't kill people
    > | is that other people will be killed. So who gets
    > | killed? Is that what this war is about? People get killed.

    ALL wars are about people getting killed, Eryk. There is no 'righteous
    war'.

    > | If they happen to be born in the area that is now
    > | considered within Israeli Borders, or if they happen
    > | to have been born within a section of land now
    > | considered Iraq or Iran, or if they happen to be
    > | born in Sioux Falls, Minnesota or Ottawa Canada
    > | or Paris, why is death any different?

    And why is physical murder unacceptable, but spiritual destruction
    a-OK by you?

    > Murder must not be prevented. There should be no pre-emptive action taken by
    > the authorities until the man actually murders his wife. Then there will be
    > reason for action.

    That's right. We should let murder happen, so that we have justified
    reason to murder ourselves. Then our hands will be 'clean' and we can
    all go home feeling righte-ous, baby.

    Why prevent murder? Let it happen, and when the asshole's on the ground,
    or locked in the spotlight as justified victim, let the hunt begin.

    Howl, I love humans.

    > | Let's just first and foremost not get people killed
    > | anymore, hows that for a priority?
    >
    > My highest priority is democracy. Democracy in this world must not only
    > survive, it must prevail.

    Your highest priority is a fraudulent dellusory political system,
    which you will ENFORCE on all countries. You're FREE, as long as you're
    JUST LIKE ME.

    > Generations of people over the centuries shed
    > their blood and shed the blood of others, so that democracy would develop
    > and find its place as a method of governing on this planet.

    What a bunch of scjlockery and ignorant twittism. Democracy existed
    as a form of government in greek polisies without any 'generations
    of bloodshed' and babaa sob routines.

    > While it is not perfect, it is far better than dictatorshit,

    Yes.

    > absolute monarchy,

    No.

    > sultanates,
    > etc.

    No.

    And your facile equating of the tree is a bunch of idiotic, pathetic
    schlock.

    > I will not betray those generations by surrendering a single inch to a
    > dictatorshit.

    Her von Messiah here. Einz-zwei. maybe you should start by stamping out
    yer own inner dictatorshit. OOo.. but that wouldnt be comfy.
  • D42 Kandinskij | Sun Sep 29th 2002 1 a.m.
    On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:

    > I'M NO LONGER TALKING TO NN CLONES - SORRY...

    Sorry. I am not a *NN* clone.
    If the difference--which is vast-escapes you,
    we are not surprised. Your delusional brain-cutouts
    are inapplicable.

    But does NN give you nightmares?

    > > On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, furtherfield wrote:
    > >
    > > > Another right winger Sheesh!
    > >
    > > Right winger? Where was the FIRST right winger?
    > > Or do you ascribe political involvement to apolitical people?
    > > That's mighty nice of you, marc. So unfascist.
    > > So l-i-b-er-al. You're either with us or against us.
    > >
    > > Cut out the idiotic knee-jerk attempts to shove people
    > > about.
    > >
    > > Idiotic ape.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    >

    o
    [ + ]

    + + +

    | '|' |
    _________________________________________
    `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
  • Jon Bedworth | Mon Sep 30th 2002 1 a.m.
    In a message dated 29/09/2002 08:42:33 GMT Daylight Time,
    poetburo@sympatico.ca writes:

    >> and other diseases- not to mention thirst
    >
    > There's Pepsi

    In a message dated 29/09/2002 08:42:33 GMT Daylight Time,
    poetburo@sympatico.ca writes:

    > I really question your credibility when you
    > inject this ludicrousmess into your arguements.

    If you wish to judge others so harshly for being flippant, please be
    consistent.
Your Reply