"Israeli Raid: Statist Logic to its Deadly Extreme"

[Brant Gaede]

The US government was built on the fraud of the Constitutional Convention. No wonder there was a "Civil War." The first such war was actually The Whiskey Rebellion, still in the 18th C. None of the almost countless wars that followed made any sense save as an expression of state power aggrandisement and the only one I still agree with was the one against the Barbary pirates. The US government is in a state of fulmination. It can no longer even afford itself. War has become the bread and circuses of ancient Rome, but we aren't allowed to enjoy the spectacle since we aren't pagans.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

I don't agree with your interpretation of fraud, but we probably disagree on what a government charter should be. (I imagine you imagine it is a contract, that is if you adhere to the classic Spooner view.)

btw - In looking at my roots, I discovered my ancestors were probably among the Scottish/Irish immigrants--and their progeny--who were behind the Whiskey Rebellion.

Michael

[Barbara Branden]

North Korea torpedoes and sinks a South Korean ship. The world yawns. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. tyrannize, torture and murder their own citizens at will. The world yawns. Israel refuses to allow war materials to enter a country ruled by terrorists that will use them against Israeli cities. Protest erupt around the world in righteous horror and indignation.

Never again? It’s happening now. And many members of Objectivist Living are yawning.

Barbara

"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak up because I was not a Jew..."

[ginny]

Barbara, it's the same with the United States. Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America.

[Brant Gaede]

Brant,

I don't agree with your interpretation of fraud, but we probably disagree on what a government charter should be. (I imagine you imagine it is a contract, that is if you adhere to the classic Spooner view.)

btw - In looking at my roots, I discovered my ancestors were probably among the Scottish/Irish immigrants--and their progeny--who were behind the Whiskey Rebellion.

Michael

The CC did not have a mandate to throw out the Articles of Confederation but only to amend them.

--Brant

[syrakusos]

This is part of my premise for my judgments against the constant selectivity shown by anarchists when they feel like bashing.

You mean "some anarchists." You fall into the fallacy of the unnamed collective. Do you have someone specific in mind. If so, what about that person's theory of society without government demanded whatever non-American, un-American or anti-American sentiment that displeased you, noting, of course, that such definitions hinge on your undefined abstraction of "American."

And bashing what?

I love my country, but I fear my government.

I dunno, Mike, I think that your man crush on Glenn Beck has left you head over heels. Are you eating well?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Israel refuses to allow war materials to enter a country ruled by terrorists that will use them against Israeli cities. Protest erupt around the world in righteous horror and indignation.

Barbara,

It not only erupted around the world, it did so in a highly orchestrated manner.

This thing stinks to high heaven and it is not Israel that is the one stinking.

(Those who know me know I am not an Israel at all costs supporter, although I do support Israel. I try to be fair, witness my treatment of Adonis. In the present case, though, Israel was set up big time.)

Michael

[Barbara Branden]

Barbara, it's the same with the United States. Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America.

Agreed. And we ought never to forget what it is the two countries have in common.

Barbara

[jriggenbach]

As I said, Martin . . . .

BB writes: "North Korea torpedoes and sinks a South Korean ship. The world yawns. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. tyrannize, torture and murder their own citizens at will. The world yawns."

As Bob LeFevre used to point out, Barbara, it's all any man or woman can do to take care of himself or herself and those he or she loves. No one can solve all the problems in the world. If you want to launch a crusade to protect the ships of the criminal gang calling itself the "government" of South Korea, no one will stop you. If you want to launch a crusade to prevent the criminal gangs calling themselves the "governments" of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Syria from "tyranniz[ing], tortur[ing] and murder[ing]" their victims and hostages at will, no one will stop you. But don't assume you or those who share your goals have a right to seize my money to support your projects.

Ginny writes: "Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman [i.e., some young man who willingly took a job as a thug in the pay of the criminal gang calling itself the federal "government" of the United States] get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America."

Actually, they're not at all outraged at the evil that is America, Ginny. They're outraged at the evil that is the criminal gang in Washington calling itself the federal government of the United States. And why shouldn't they be? Rational people realize the limits to their resources; they try not to bite off more than they can chew. (See my reply to Barbara above.) American journalists have no hope of influencing foreign states or public opinion in foreign countries in which what they write will be neither published nor read. They have some hope of influencing state policy or public opinion in this country, where what they write is published and available to be read. Also, since their readers live and work in this country, it is reasonable to conjecture that they'll be more interested in news of what the U.S. "government" is doing than in news about the "government" of Armpitistan.

Perhaps Phil Coates isn't the only member of this list who mistakes his delusions about how people in the major media think for the reality of the situation. What you so deplore (for reasons that are not at all clear to me) in American journalism is caused by much more prosaic reasons that any imagined "hatred" of America.

JR

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

You mean "some anarchists."

Michael,

Of course. I usually qualify that. I missed it this time.

It's like when I mention members of ARI. I never mean all ARIans. Just the fundies.

Anyway, I am going to take the opportunity to mention the following. I sincerely believe that fundy members of ARI and fundy anarchists are both animals of the same species, merely different colors.

Here's my reasoning--and to not be tedious, when I say below "anarchists," I mean the fundy ones, ditto for the ARIans--I do not mean all of either. (I also include here people like the core group of SLOP. Readers familiar with this intellectual territory will know exactly who I am referring to on both sides.)

The anarchists bash and bash and bash the USA and Israel and defend any and all person or county that is an enemy of them, but they talk in terms of "broader principles." When cornered, they say with affected exasperation, "Do I really have to mention [fill int the blank with Iran, Hugo Chaves, etc.]???!!" Then they go back to talking about the rotten bastards, evil scum, murderers, thugs, etc., that they claim constitute the USA government and the Israeli government.

The ARIans bash and bash and bash Muslims and defend Israel at all costs, but they talk in terms of "broader principles." When cornered, they say with affected exasperation, "Do I really have to mention [fill int the blank with Israelis make mistakes, Israel is not a fully capitalist country, etc.]???!!" Then they go back to talking about the twisted Islamic religion that they claim rots the souls of all Muslims, that they are evil scum, suicide murderers or appeasers of the murders, thugs, etc.

I say this whole approach is bullshit.

I call both sides on it.

You judge people by what they say and what they do. I see a strong pattern of bigotry on both sides--not by what they say, but by what they do.

To me, there's nothing worse than a bigot other than a bigot who practices bigotry, but is not up front about it.

Michael

EDIT: To be sure, these vocal minorities are in the minority. And that only pains me more when I see good people parroting their words and attitudes...

[ginny]

Ginny writes: "Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman [i.e., some young man who willingly took a job as a thug in the pay of the criminal gang calling itself the federal "government" of the United States] get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America."

Jeff, don't EVER put words in my mouth. I have never nor will I ever call an American soldier a thug. It was American soldiers who liberated and saved the country I was born in. Our men and women are dying and you call them thugs!! How dare you.

[jriggenbach]

Ginny writes: "Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman [i.e., some young man who willingly took a job as a thug in the pay of the criminal gang calling itself the federal "government" of the United States] get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America."

Jeff, don't EVER put words in my mouth. I have never nor will I ever call an American soldier a thug. It was American soldiers who liberated and saved the country I was born in. Our men and women are dying and you call them thugs!! How dare you.

I'm so distressed to learn that you can't read, Ginny. You'll find it causes particular difficulty when trying to participate on a board like this one. Usually one can count on list members having advanced beyond sixth grade. Those who have done so know that when material in square brackets is inserted in a quotation, the material in the square brackets is written by the person doing the quoting, not the person being quoted. It has nothing to do with paranoid fantasies about having words put in your mouth.

JR

[ginny]

If your only answer is sarcasm, you are to be pitied. I am aware of the function of brakets. Your brakets were meant to define, in your words, my word "serviceman." I will not have you, of all low life, define, my terms.

[Barbara Branden]

Jeff Riggenbach responds to my post defending Israel: "But don't assume you or those who share your goals have a right to seize my money to support your projects."

You are very quick to put me in one of your pigeonholes. But you see, I don't assume it.

Barbara

[jriggenbach]

If your only answer is sarcasm, you are to be pitied. I am aware of the function of brakets. Your brakets were meant to define, in your words, my word "serviceman." I will not have you, of all low life, define, my terms.

I'm afraid there isn't a thing you can do about it, honey - except maybe consider the usefulness of finding out what "American servicemen" are in reality, rather than in your fantasies. But I'm confident you won't give that idea a try.

JR

[Brant Gaede]

Ginny was right about how you used the brackets, Jeff. It was not appropriate and apart from the matter at hand. The unfortunate consequence of the US distancing itself from Israel will probably be even more Middle Eastern war, this one between Israel and Iran with Saudi Arabia as Israel's de facto ally when the war-birds fly--over the Arabian peninsula.

--Brant

[jriggenbach]

Jeff Riggenbach responds to my post defending Israel: "But don't assume you or those who share your goals have a right to seize my money to support your projects."

You are very quick to put me in one of your pigeonholes. But you see, I don't assume it.

Barbara

You don't assume the criminal gang calling itself the "government" of the United States should be financially propping up (and otherwise aiding) the criminal gang calling itself the "government" of Israel?

JR

Edited June 4, 2010 by Jeff Riggenbach

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

... the criminal gang calling itself the "government" of the United States...

Jeff,

Can you quote me a criminal statute defining the crime? And by what means this gang can be apprehended and prosecuted? And who or what will do so?

(I don't defend all the government, but I do some of it,)

Also, do you believe there is a "criminal gang calling itself the 'government' of" Iran? Or of Saudi Arabia? Or of Switzerland, for that matter?

Michael

[sbeaulieu]

Jeff,

Really? Thugs? I'm going to use Michael Morotta's words "You fall into the fallacy of the unnamed collective" on this one. Being a service member, I don't recall a day where I stepped up to collect a cash handout from a criminal gang known as the government. I do take offense. Have you ever served?

~ Shane

[jriggenbach]

... the criminal gang calling itself the "government" of the United States...

Jeff,

Can you quote me a criminal statute defining the crime? And by what means this gang can be apprehended and prosecuted? And who or what will do so?

(I don't defend all the government, but I do some of it,)

Also, do you believe there is a "criminal gang calling itself the 'government' of" Iran? Or of Saudi Arabia? Or of Switzerland, for that matter?

Michael

The crimes are extortion, enslavement, and murder.

I doubt the gang in question can be stopped. But I believe there is some value in calling it by its right name.

Of course there is a criminal gang calling itself the "government" of Iran. There is a similar criminal gang calling itself the "government" of Saudi Arabia. There is another one calling itself the "government" of Switzerland. Were you unaware of this?

JR

[jriggenbach]

Jeff,

Really? Thugs? I'm going to use Michael Morotta's words "You fall into the fallacy of the unnamed collective" on this one. Being a service member, I don't recall a day where I stepped up to collect a cash handout from a criminal gang known as the government. I do take offense. Have you ever served?

~ Shane

I'm glad to hear you "served" free of charge, Shane. I guess you're independently wealthy?

As for me, I've served beer and snacks to my guests. I've served in numerous table tennis games. But I've never taken a job with the criminal gang that calls itself the "government" of the United States. And I'd be especially reluctant to take a job killing civilians who have attacked no one, irrespective of who was signing my paycheck. A person who does that sort of work is known as a "thug." And I'd rather not be thought of as a thug.

JR

[Barbara Branden]

Jeff: "You don't assume the criminal gang calling itself the 'government' of the United States should be financially propping up (and otherwise aiding) the criminal gang calling itself the 'government' of Israel?"

Do you care to put that question in a form that will make it possible for me to answer it?

Barbara

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

The crimes are extortion, enslavement, and murder.

I doubt the gang in question can be stopped. But I believe there is some value in calling it by its right name.

Jeff,

That's not what I asked.

I am interested in what law you want to use to define the crimes. I specifically asked for a criminal statute, not your opinion about what you think is a crime (which may or may not be correct, thus it is not a good standard).

Also, "stopping" someone is way too general for objective action. You can arbitrarily put a bullet in the person's head and you stop him. I don't know how you can resolve that within the context of "crime." So, let's stay within the confines of legality, shall we? Stay within some kind of guidelines other than a free-for-all where the strongest or meanest party always wins, even if it's wrong. I asked "by what means this gang can be apprehended and prosecuted? And who or what will do so?"

It's more than "stopping" them. It's setting a standard to law, using law enforcement agents to capture the alleged criminals, and using a legal system to prosecute them (and punish them if found guilty).

Who or what can or should do that?

That's my question.

Or do you simply prefer the bullet in the head solution?

I can't think of any other manner to "stop" a "criminal gang."

Of course there is a criminal gang calling itself the "government" of Iran. There is a similar criminal gang calling itself the "government" of Saudi Arabia. There is another one calling itself the "government" of Switzerland. Were you unaware of this?

I think I am starting to understand your criteria.

You apparently hold that every country on earth--and every country throughout all of human history--is--and has been--governed by "criminal gangs" that call themselves "government." Is that fair to say?

That raises some interesting issues to think about if a person is interested in why that has happened and continues to happen--original sin, man's innate depravity, the devil loose on the world, something like that. Or maybe social structures are not really made for human beings if the structure is to be non-criminal--at least not for the human beings that have presented themselves in reality to the world up to the present. Or maybe even a utopia--i.e., how people could be if only those little suckers would just act right.

(Oops, there I go...)

And you also hold that I am one of those who has a thick head for not being able to understand something rather simple. Correct?

Michael

[James Heaps-Nelson]

How can this be seen as anything other than a complete disaster for the Israelis? Why deliberately risk their relationship with Turkey over a dubious confrontation in international waters? It's the same stupid hand caught in the cookie jar routine as when Israel is caught spying on the US. I'm all for direct confrontation with Hamas in Gaza, but this was just dumb and there's no other way to describe it. Maybe Turkey should start boarding Israeli ships in international waters.

Jim

Edited June 4, 2010 by James Heaps-Nelson

[anthony]

Barbara, it's the same with the United States. Let Iran or Iraq or Afganistan have a public beheading, it makes news for a day, then is pretty much forgotten. Let some misguided AMERICAN serviceman get maybe overly tough with some prisoner, we have TV specials, newspaper double in size in an effort to bring the news, books are being written and every member of the media is totally and honestly outraged at the evil that is America.

Agreed. And we ought never to forget what it is the two countries have in common.

Barbara

Barbara and ginny,

People are forgetting; even here.

I know everyone recognises a basic Objectivist principle in all of this.

It's the one about condemning the good for being the good.

Alright, to be more truthful, about condemning the 'better,' for being better. About condemning the strong, for being stronger.

(Is this the main global problem? Can it all be reduced to petty envy in the end? I must be over-simplifying, surely. )

And are the America citizens, distraught as many of them are about the status quo there, actually beginning to believe their detractors' propaganda about their Nation? Not their present government, mind, but their Nation? This is what I'm seeing here, as I have also seen with some Israelis.

Meanwhile, we must face it, this is the real world and it's all Statist. Unfortunately, the comparative degree of it has come to matter.

Anyway, I for one am confident that the US can recover its exemplary standard of liberty once again, and this time with more conviction.

Tony