ZOMBIE FORUMS

You're a bit sleepy, eh? If you would edit your post tomorrow to the point of good grammar, I'd appreciate it. On with the reply!



Two things I noticed. One: most of different conditions only make things easier to "isolate and contain." Two: You could benefit from some research about what I was just talking about.

I'm interested in who the leaders the CIA "offed more than effectivly" in the past are.

As for the offing elected officials, it would set a dangerous precedent. I want to point out, though, that Iraq is not much of a democracy at present, that we (US) helped get him into power, and that Bin Laden is not an elected leader.

By us, I was referring to the US at the time. I would not pretend to know enough (as too many already do) about the UK (or a number of other countries) to comment on them.



Ouch. My head hurts.

To my knowledge, the idea of a democratic republic is not vote them in and let them do what they want. More along the lines of vote for someone to represent you. I don't know about the UK (something about a parliament, maybe?), but the US has this thing called "checks and balances" so that the elected officials actually do have to be responsible.

Next: Psychoanalyzation, yay. I'll grant you that could be a reason, but not the only reason. And it ignores the question of the corporations selfishness entirely. For the sake of argument, fine: people hate corporations solely because they are weaker than them. Does this make the corporations good? You say corporations have drive and vision; I say, to what end? Making the average joe's life better? Why do I find that hard to believe? You say people don't have drive and vision, so they're weak. Is Hussein is one of those "weak" people?

Ugh, so many thoughts crammed into so few sentences. You make my brain hurt from your cynical/conservative viewpoint. And no offense, but the grammar/spelling is approaching Fallen_Angel_666 quality. . .

Sorry to have to tell you this bucky, but no U.S. President has lost a reelection bid DURING a war. Remember that LBJ couldn't run for another term because he was president for seven years.

Nader is neck and neck with Bush. WOOHOO!

How about the assassination of The Congo's Patrice Lumumba, the CIA in association with Belgum (the former colonial power) managed that one, deniable presidential order, that sort of thing, and replaced him with Mobutu, who later re-named the place Zaire

or the case of the assassination of President Diem of South Vietnam? the CIA were so heavily implicated in that that it's been linked to the Kennedy assassination (ie he didn't approve of it, so had to be knocked off before it was made public etc)

but that last one's not the sort of thing that's going to be brought to light any time soon.

now, Iraq. prehaps i haven't been watching enough tv lately (too many books to read, how will i ever learn without good tv time eh?) but i thought Iraq was somewhere close to 100% different than the Cold War, so all links in policy/results are pretty pointless? and i'd like to know what's been going on for the last 10 years if it hasn't been a program of containment & isolation. The religious and racial element being one of th biggest differances for a start that often work best under pressure (suicide bombers are rarely happy people)

corporations are in it for themselves, so are 'average joes' i don't think i said anything to oppose that idea did i? a corporation is unified, the general public are not, thus the levels of power

and as for my spelling & grammar, i'm clearly writing in note form, and all the typos i can see are just that, letter transpositions and the like, if i'd have known this was essay corner and not debate club, prehaps i'd polish this stuff up a bit

I never said that all corporations are huge, bloated, evil things. Check my post. You like to put words in my mouth, don't you? I find nothing wrong with small, family owned businesses. (Ones unable to affect the price of a product.) It just so happens that the corporations that are huge, bloated, and evil are the same ones contributing huge sums to politicians. Small businesses lack the revenue to compete with the big boys like Disney, Nike, Monsanto, GM, Exxon, etc. I suggest you visit opensecrets.org and look up the top contributing companies for any major political office. Come back and tell me how many small businesses are on those lists.

And since when did I provide my definition of a corporation? I'm getting really tired of debating with you, because it seems that you don't actually read anything I write. When I say 'corporation, ' I mean a large-scale commercial or industrial enterprise. Not a small business.



Hey, great! I love being insulted! Your maturity astounds me.




You want a one-dimensional view of politics? Politicians are supposed to represent the interests of the people. Their position exists to represent you and I in a fair and equal manner. When a corporation (which is not an individual, though they posses the legal rights of one) donates money to a politician, they are influencing that person, because they know now that official will think of them when it comes time to pass that bill that may affect said corporation's interests. When you get aid and pull some strings to do your buddies a favor, you are no longer doing your job, which is to represent the people, not just the ones that give you money. True, Unions do this to, and I don't think they should necessarily be allowed to do it. But unions are confederations of individuals who pool their resources toward a common goal. Labor unions are there to protect workers from the corporations who would otherwise not take care of them.

I still contest your assertion that unions are as financially competitive as corporations. They evidently didn't control enough votes to sway things in favor of the democrats last election. Do you honestly think unions can compete? For example, in 2002, Nestle of Switzerland was the world's 30th largest company. They had earnings of 96 billion dollars that year. Don't make me go got figures on the top 10.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/co ... 791008.htm

Thank you. I didn't know that Belgium was involved in that. How's Mobutu doing now, by the way?




Somewhere close to 100% different? Wooboy. Simply put, no. And the Food for Oil program and other things have been going on. Maybe this is 100% different part? If not, do you concede your other point?




No, you didn't. That's my point. I said corporations were selfish. Correct me if I'm, wrong, but you seemed to say that people hated corporations not because of any selfishness, but because people are weak.

Hope I'm not misconstruing something from that statement.




Heh. You can just call me Grammatically Anal Abunai. It's just when I can easily find 5 seperate thoughts in one uncapitalized sentence, my soul hurts. I was unaware you could write in "note form," though (or maybe "tho"). I'll have to remember that. In all the (even slightly) formal debates I've been in, they never allowed it before. This weird thing about having to make sure you made sense and all. Bah, who needs to use the English language?