Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

In relation to Ty's statements, and my conscience

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 1:17:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have I
accepted the repercussions of a Bush mandated America.

I wrote William Pitt a couple of times about being the speaker of the dead,
but he only spoke for those who died in Iraq under a false mandate. I speak
for the dead of 9/11 and those that have died since.

One wonders just what would have made another hurl themselves from a 110
story window as if they might, under some special dispensation from God,
survive. Or perhaps it was simply a matter of not desiring to die from
burning to death.

Certainly, if anyone believes in God, then it's easy to see that God must
have been on the side of the terrorists that day because they seemed to be
able to accomplish their dream and we seemed to be taken aback by the
atrocitity of an immoral attack.

Those who died on 9/11 didn't have George W. Bush in mind as they either
plunged to their deaths, or died where they stood as they were filing, or
talking around the water cooler, or getting their morning reports done.
Those who died did so immediately, thank God. But their deaths weren't
because of some terrorist attack. Their deaths were because somehow America
didn't see the possibility of terrorist attacks as being effective. In the
words of Frank Zappa, although for a different reasons "It can't happen
here". In the words of Condilezza Rice "No one could have foreseen that
terrorists would use airplanes as weapons", when, in fact the Hart-Rudman
study on terrorism said just exatly that. Gee, Connie, I suppose you didn't
read the reports.

I watch there images of destruction, of personal loss, of efforts of
humanity to help others, and what do I see? I see destruction, personal
loss and efforts of humatity to help others, and it has nothing to do with
George W. Bush.

The reason that I keep coming back to George W. Bush is that he didn't do
anything but make an appearance. New Yorkers did the job.

I don't think I can continue because this is just too hard to work through.
The worst day America experienced was GW on the firetruck, arm wrapped
around a 67 year old volunteer, saying that the whole world heard and those
responsible would pay.

And so Saddam is in jail.

Any questions?

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 5:40:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> Any questions?

What does this have to do with audio?

Kendall
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 5:40:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hey, why don't you tell me why it doesn't apply to audio or to life as a
business in the first place. Tell me how what I'm talking about doesn't
effect your business, or others.

But then I guess you have only one thought in your mind, that being that
nothing that has to do with events today has anything to do with your
business. You'd much rather find out for free whether a 4050 sounds better
than a KSM 27 or whether 6" off the kick is better tha 5" or 7", all without
simply applying some of the stuff you've heard here in the first place.

What it has to do with audio is that without a society that can do audio,
there will only be Telefunkens on Bush's podium and people will march off to
wherever they march off to. And in case you didn't notice, people are
already marching off to where they march off to.

So that's what it has to do with audio.

"The saddest thing is that I didn't say anything at all."

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Kendall" <kbergheim@sbcglobal123.net> wrote in message
news:q8u_c.15968$8V6.9766@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> > Any questions?
>
> What does this have to do with audio?
>
> Kendall
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 7:49:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Roger W. Norman" <rnorman@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:413a75c4$0$19730$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...

Here, I'll fix where you top-posted to my reply so that the context couldn't
easily be followed-

You said:

> > > Any questions?
> >

To which I replied:

> > What does this have to do with audio?

To which you re-replied:


> Hey, why don't you tell me why it doesn't apply to audio or to life as a
> business in the first place. Tell me how what I'm talking about doesn't
> effect your business, or others.
>
> But then I guess you have only one thought in your mind, that being that
> nothing that has to do with events today has anything to do with your
> business. You'd much rather find out for free whether a 4050 sounds
better
> than a KSM 27 or whether 6" off the kick is better tha 5" or 7", all
without
> simply applying some of the stuff you've heard here in the first place.
>
> What it has to do with audio is that without a society that can do audio,
> there will only be Telefunkens on Bush's podium and people will march off
to
> wherever they march off to. And in case you didn't notice, people are
> already marching off to where they march off to.
>
> So that's what it has to do with audio.
>
> "The saddest thing is that I didn't say anything at all."

Now, that we have all that in context, let me state that I did not read most
of your original post, once I realized it didn't relate to audio. I did,
however catch your final question, and I replied with my question. In your
answer here, I can see that yes, from a certain standpoint you do have some
relevant points. However, that is NOT why I come to this particular forum.
I come here for audio, and audio alone. I suggest that if you wish to carry
on OT posts (some of which aren't even marked as such, such as this one)
that you go start another newsgroup like rec.audio.political.discussions or
some such, and post a link to it here. That way, the people who DO want to
discuss those things can do so, and it will actually be ON TOPIC, unlike it
is here. Then, for those of us who don't wish to read off topic stuff won't
have to wade through the preponderance of OT posts where it is clearly
against the charter (as has been pointed out numerous times), and avoid the
flame-fests which benefit nobody, and turn audio professional against audio
professional. There are a number of people here who I have a lesser respect
for than if I had never heard (metaphorically speaking) them getting into
pointless flame wars over stuff that isn't supposed to be here in the first
place. Yes, I can understand wanting to discuss things like this, but it
does not belong here. Create somepace where it will be more apropos, and the
people who are interested will join you there.

If I knew you were a strict Vegan, and visited a Vegan meeting with you, how
appreciative would the group be if I stood up and began recounting how much
I like beef, and grilling pork? It would be out of place, would it not?
Therefore, I wouldn't do that, out of courtesy to the group at large. Now,
if it were a meeting of Beeflovers International, well those comments would
be appropriate.
This is a group of audio people, and yes, they have definite political
views. But, with certain exceptions, they don't usually discuss them unless
"goaded" into it, or inflamed by someone else's differing viewpoint.

As far as people marching off, yes, I've noticed that some of our members
here have gone away, remarking how it was a pity that this forum had to go
down the toilet as well. If we ALL try, we can change that. It would
require that certain persons refrained from starting OT posts in the first
place. Maybe we could try that for a while?

I repeat; It does not belong here. You have not changed that, or my
opinion about it. It does not belong here.

Kendall





>
> --
>
>
> Roger W. Norman
> SirMusic Studio
>
> "Kendall" <kbergheim@sbcglobal123.net> wrote in message
> news:q8u_c.15968$8V6.9766@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> >
> > Kendall
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 10:50:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

And the band plays on...

--
Steven Sena
XS Sound Recording
www.xssound.com

"Roger W. Norman" <rnorman@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:413a67c2$0$19724$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
>I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
> expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have I
> accepted the repercussions of a Bush mandated America.
>
> I wrote William Pitt a couple of times about being the speaker of the
> dead,
> but he only spoke for those who died in Iraq under a false mandate. I
> speak
> for the dead of 9/11 and those that have died since.
>
> One wonders just what would have made another hurl themselves from a 110
> story window as if they might, under some special dispensation from God,
> survive. Or perhaps it was simply a matter of not desiring to die from
> burning to death.
>
> Certainly, if anyone believes in God, then it's easy to see that God must
> have been on the side of the terrorists that day because they seemed to be
> able to accomplish their dream and we seemed to be taken aback by the
> atrocitity of an immoral attack.
>
> Those who died on 9/11 didn't have George W. Bush in mind as they either
> plunged to their deaths, or died where they stood as they were filing, or
> talking around the water cooler, or getting their morning reports done.
> Those who died did so immediately, thank God. But their deaths weren't
> because of some terrorist attack. Their deaths were because somehow
> America
> didn't see the possibility of terrorist attacks as being effective. In
> the
> words of Frank Zappa, although for a different reasons "It can't happen
> here". In the words of Condilezza Rice "No one could have foreseen that
> terrorists would use airplanes as weapons", when, in fact the Hart-Rudman
> study on terrorism said just exatly that. Gee, Connie, I suppose you
> didn't
> read the reports.
>
> I watch there images of destruction, of personal loss, of efforts of
> humanity to help others, and what do I see? I see destruction, personal
> loss and efforts of humatity to help others, and it has nothing to do with
> George W. Bush.
>
> The reason that I keep coming back to George W. Bush is that he didn't do
> anything but make an appearance. New Yorkers did the job.
>
> I don't think I can continue because this is just too hard to work
> through.
> The worst day America experienced was GW on the firetruck, arm wrapped
> around a 67 year old volunteer, saying that the whole world heard and
> those
> responsible would pay.
>
> And so Saddam is in jail.
>
> Any questions?
>
> --
>
>
> Roger W. Norman
> SirMusic Studio
>
>
September 5, 2004 11:12:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
> I repeat; It does not belong here. You have not changed that, or my
> opinion about it. It does not belong here.
>
> Kendall
>
>
>
>
>
I absolutly belongs here, and in the food newsgroups and in the car
newsgroups, it belongs anywhere one can find anyone to tell it to
America is doing great evil
America is creating terroists with it policy
any only by voicing our concerns can we begin the massive duty of public
awareness that will be needed to effect a change from a warrior
president and staff to a peaceful president and staff
it is essential that we become the sand in the oyster
or a pearl will never be formed
this is bigger than audio
and it needs to be said
here and anywhere else people gather
George
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 12:54:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Kendall" <kbergheim@sbcglobal123.net> wrote in message news:<V0w_c.15980$2U7.14018@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>...
> Now, that we have all that in context, let me state that I did not read most
> of your original post, once I realized it didn't relate to audio. I did,
> however catch your final question, and I replied with my question. In your
> answer here, I can see that yes, from a certain standpoint you do have some
> relevant points. However, that is NOT why I come to this particular forum.
> I come here for audio, and audio alone. I suggest that if you wish to carry
> on OT posts (some of which aren't even marked as such, such as this one)
> that you go start another newsgroup like rec.audio.political.discussions or
> some such, and post a link to it here. That way, the people who DO want to
> discuss those things can do so, and it will actually be ON TOPIC, unlike it
> is here. Then, for those of us who don't wish to read off topic stuff won't
> have to wade through the preponderance of OT posts where it is clearly
> against the charter (as has been pointed out numerous times), and avoid the
> flame-fests which benefit nobody, and turn audio professional against audio
> professional. There are a number of people here who I have a lesser respect
> for than if I had never heard (metaphorically speaking) them getting into
> pointless flame wars over stuff that isn't supposed to be here in the first
> place. Yes, I can understand wanting to discuss things like this, but it
> does not belong here. Create somepace where it will be more apropos, and the
> people who are interested will join you there.
>
> If I knew you were a strict Vegan, and visited a Vegan meeting with you, how
> appreciative would the group be if I stood up and began recounting how much
> I like beef, and grilling pork? It would be out of place, would it not?
> Therefore, I wouldn't do that, out of courtesy to the group at large. Now,
> if it were a meeting of Beeflovers International, well those comments would
> be appropriate.
> This is a group of audio people, and yes, they have definite political
> views. But, with certain exceptions, they don't usually discuss them unless
> "goaded" into it, or inflamed by someone else's differing viewpoint.
>
> As far as people marching off, yes, I've noticed that some of our members
> here have gone away, remarking how it was a pity that this forum had to go
> down the toilet as well. If we ALL try, we can change that. It would
> require that certain persons refrained from starting OT posts in the first
> place. Maybe we could try that for a while?
>
> I repeat; It does not belong here. You have not changed that, or my
> opinion about it. It does not belong here.
>
> Kendall

Kendall,
While I certainly agree with you that some topics do not belong on
this group I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for things to change. At
this point even when people _do_ stick to a strictly audio topic you
can expect someone like Phil Allison to show up and start attacking
people with assinine name calling and childish outbursts. Now I can
hardly tolerate reading the _audio_ threads because they contain
nearly as many bitter, venomous sentiments as the political threads
seem to inspire. There are way too many pissed off people with too
little self-control on this group lately. :-(
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 3:41:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I know. I just get so frustrated and like most people in life, they take it
out on the ones they love. So there you have it.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Steven Sena" <xssound@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2Hy_c.242286$8_6.201836@attbi_s04...
> And the band plays on...
>
> --
> Steven Sena
> XS Sound Recording
> www.xssound.com
>
> "Roger W. Norman" <rnorman@starpower.net> wrote in message
> news:413a67c2$0$19724$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> >I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
> > expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have
I
> > accepted the repercussions of a Bush mandated America.
> >
> > I wrote William Pitt a couple of times about being the speaker of the
> > dead,
> > but he only spoke for those who died in Iraq under a false mandate. I
> > speak
> > for the dead of 9/11 and those that have died since.
> >
> > One wonders just what would have made another hurl themselves from a 110
> > story window as if they might, under some special dispensation from God,
> > survive. Or perhaps it was simply a matter of not desiring to die from
> > burning to death.
> >
> > Certainly, if anyone believes in God, then it's easy to see that God
must
> > have been on the side of the terrorists that day because they seemed to
be
> > able to accomplish their dream and we seemed to be taken aback by the
> > atrocitity of an immoral attack.
> >
> > Those who died on 9/11 didn't have George W. Bush in mind as they either
> > plunged to their deaths, or died where they stood as they were filing,
or
> > talking around the water cooler, or getting their morning reports done.
> > Those who died did so immediately, thank God. But their deaths weren't
> > because of some terrorist attack. Their deaths were because somehow
> > America
> > didn't see the possibility of terrorist attacks as being effective. In
> > the
> > words of Frank Zappa, although for a different reasons "It can't happen
> > here". In the words of Condilezza Rice "No one could have foreseen that
> > terrorists would use airplanes as weapons", when, in fact the
Hart-Rudman
> > study on terrorism said just exatly that. Gee, Connie, I suppose you
> > didn't
> > read the reports.
> >
> > I watch there images of destruction, of personal loss, of efforts of
> > humanity to help others, and what do I see? I see destruction, personal
> > loss and efforts of humatity to help others, and it has nothing to do
with
> > George W. Bush.
> >
> > The reason that I keep coming back to George W. Bush is that he didn't
do
> > anything but make an appearance. New Yorkers did the job.
> >
> > I don't think I can continue because this is just too hard to work
> > through.
> > The worst day America experienced was GW on the firetruck, arm wrapped
> > around a 67 year old volunteer, saying that the whole world heard and
> > those
> > responsible would pay.
> >
> > And so Saddam is in jail.
> >
> > Any questions?
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Roger W. Norman
> > SirMusic Studio
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 4:37:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ThePaulThomas wrote:

> There are way too many pissed off people with too
> little self-control on this group lately. :-(

It ain't just this group. Welcome to Bush's 21st century.
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 6:31:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Dear Roger,

I never asked to to NOT opine, only to put it where it was appropriate.

You're obviously calling me out on this point. The fact that you fail to
recognize boundarys of the group and others in this group is the point.

That's your issue and, at your age, you'll likely die before correcting it.
I'm truly sorry about it, but like you, there's nothing I can do to stop you.
Call it your right if you wish. I'll call it Roger's Unsocialized Tragic
Flaw.

I will, however, continue to call you out on your flagrant abuse of the
charter of this newsgroup.

Very Truly Yours,

Ty Ford






On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:17:38 -0400, Roger W. Norman wrote
(in article <413a67c2$0$19724$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>):

> I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
> expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have I
> accepted the repercussions of a Bush mandated America.
>
> I wrote William Pitt a couple of times about being the speaker of the dead,
> but he only spoke for those who died in Iraq under a false mandate. I speak
> for the dead of 9/11 and those that have died since.
>
> One wonders just what would have made another hurl themselves from a 110
> story window as if they might, under some special dispensation from God,
> survive. Or perhaps it was simply a matter of not desiring to die from
> burning to death.
>
> Certainly, if anyone believes in God, then it's easy to see that God must
> have been on the side of the terrorists that day because they seemed to be
> able to accomplish their dream and we seemed to be taken aback by the
> atrocitity of an immoral attack.
>
> Those who died on 9/11 didn't have George W. Bush in mind as they either
> plunged to their deaths, or died where they stood as they were filing, or
> talking around the water cooler, or getting their morning reports done.
> Those who died did so immediately, thank God. But their deaths weren't
> because of some terrorist attack. Their deaths were because somehow America
> didn't see the possibility of terrorist attacks as being effective. In the
> words of Frank Zappa, although for a different reasons "It can't happen
> here". In the words of Condilezza Rice "No one could have foreseen that
> terrorists would use airplanes as weapons", when, in fact the Hart-Rudman
> study on terrorism said just exatly that. Gee, Connie, I suppose you didn't
> read the reports.
>
> I watch there images of destruction, of personal loss, of efforts of
> humanity to help others, and what do I see? I see destruction, personal
> loss and efforts of humatity to help others, and it has nothing to do with
> George W. Bush.
>
> The reason that I keep coming back to George W. Bush is that he didn't do
> anything but make an appearance. New Yorkers did the job.
>
> I don't think I can continue because this is just too hard to work through.
> The worst day America experienced was GW on the firetruck, arm wrapped
> around a 67 year old volunteer, saying that the whole world heard and those
> responsible would pay.
>
> And so Saddam is in jail.
>
> Any questions?
>
>



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 6:33:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 23:49:09 -0400, Kendall wrote
(in article <V0w_c.15980$2U7.14018@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>):

> As far as people marching off, yes, I've noticed that some of our members
> here have gone away, remarking how it was a pity that this forum had to go
> down the toilet as well. If we ALL try, we can change that. It would
> require that certain persons refrained from starting OT posts in the first
> place. Maybe we could try that for a while?
>
> I repeat; It does not belong here. You have not changed that, or my opinion

> about it. It does not belong here.
>
> Kendall

Kendall, et al,

I couldn't agree more.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 7:42:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>>
>> I repeat; It does not belong here. You have not changed that, or my
>> opinion about it. It does not belong here.
>>
>> Kendall
>>
>>

I support the request to confine our comments to the topic of the newsgroup.

All of you who contribute your knowledge and expertise on audio.pro, I applaude
you and thank you for sharing same.

All of you who have the notion that I or anyone else is the least bit
interested in your political opinions are living in denial. If your ego is so
large that you believe you have something important to say that will change or
impact other people's view, you really do need to mature. If I need or seek
political advice, it certainly would not be on a newgroup designed for audio.

Your opinions aren't any more right or wrong than mine, therefore do not effect
change. Speak from an area of proven expertise and people will listen.

Once you guys get off topic, I cease to read what you submit. It's boring,
redundant, and takes up bandwidth.

Still adding to my killfile, relunctantly.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 8:19:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Roger W. Norman" <rnorman@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:413a67c2$0$19724$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
> expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have I
> accepted the repercussions of a Bush mandated America.
>

OK.

Let me start by saying that your political posts, the ones I've read, tend
to be pretty well-thought-out and eloquent. That differentiates your posts
from certain others, and it's the content of 'evil-abusive-trollish' posts
that I have a problem with, not the off-topic nature of them. The 'evil'
posts happen in on-and-off-topic thread.

I'm one of those people that, the way the situaution is, doesn't care. I
only care inasmuch as my participating in political threads takes away from
;pro-audio' time which has been in short supply lately. If one out of twenty
threads is political, it doesn't bother me, and it's not even that frequent.
If it was above ten percent of the total threads, I'd start to feel
concerned.

I use two newsreaders on many different machines and universally have the
facility to 'sort by thread'. I ignore half the threads anyway, so a few
more to ignore doesn't bug me.

But there are other people's opinions to consider, and some people seem
really taken aback not so much by OT posts, but political OT posts. OTOH, I
agree with you in that these things are incredibly important for people to
discuss, and I feel that there are facts which need to be brought out, about
current events and hsitorical events, that are best reiterated as often as
possible in every possible media.

So there is a balancing act. Apparently Ty Ford is particualrly annoyed by
the political posts, and I think his feelings need to be respected. At the
same time, I think you have the right to post your thoughts about things you
care about, in a place where your friends hang out too. Maybe you guys
should compromise.

I don't think anybody should be tolerated who comes up and is downright
abusive, they need to clean up or get out. That's the problem right now IMO,
and usenet being what it is, it's difficult to control.

jb






> I wrote William Pitt a couple of times about being the speaker of the
dead,
> but he only spoke for those who died in Iraq under a false mandate. I
speak
> for the dead of 9/11 and those that have died since.
>
> One wonders just what would have made another hurl themselves from a 110
> story window as if they might, under some special dispensation from God,
> survive. Or perhaps it was simply a matter of not desiring to die from
> burning to death.
>
> Certainly, if anyone believes in God, then it's easy to see that God must
> have been on the side of the terrorists that day because they seemed to be
> able to accomplish their dream and we seemed to be taken aback by the
> atrocitity of an immoral attack.
>
> Those who died on 9/11 didn't have George W. Bush in mind as they either
> plunged to their deaths, or died where they stood as they were filing, or
> talking around the water cooler, or getting their morning reports done.
> Those who died did so immediately, thank God. But their deaths weren't
> because of some terrorist attack. Their deaths were because somehow
America
> didn't see the possibility of terrorist attacks as being effective. In
the
> words of Frank Zappa, although for a different reasons "It can't happen
> here". In the words of Condilezza Rice "No one could have foreseen that
> terrorists would use airplanes as weapons", when, in fact the Hart-Rudman
> study on terrorism said just exatly that. Gee, Connie, I suppose you
didn't
> read the reports.
>
> I watch there images of destruction, of personal loss, of efforts of
> humanity to help others, and what do I see? I see destruction, personal
> loss and efforts of humatity to help others, and it has nothing to do with
> George W. Bush.
>
> The reason that I keep coming back to George W. Bush is that he didn't do
> anything but make an appearance. New Yorkers did the job.
>
> I don't think I can continue because this is just too hard to work
through.
> The worst day America experienced was GW on the firetruck, arm wrapped
> around a 67 year old volunteer, saying that the whole world heard and
those
> responsible would pay.
>
> And so Saddam is in jail.
>
> Any questions?
>
> --
>
>
> Roger W. Norman
> SirMusic Studio
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 8:34:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< I support the request to confine our comments to the topic of the newsgroup.
All of you who contribute your knowledge and expertise on audio.pro, I applaude
you and thank you for sharing same.>>

Yeah, agreed, but...

<<All of you who have the notion that I or anyone else is the least bit
interested in your political opinions are living in denial. If your ego is so
large that you believe you have something important to say that will change or
impact other people's view, you really do need to mature. >>

I think that's a major misconception of why people post political topics here.
Audio people think about a lot more than just audio & obviously the current
political situation has a lot of people very concerned. That doesn't indicate
ego, it doesn't show immaturity, it doesn't mean anybody is trying to change
your view to theirs. It means they need to talk to somebody, & they feel this
group comprises a set of virtual friends.

<<Your opinions aren't any more right or wrong than mine, therefore do not
effect
change. Speak from an area of proven expertise and people will listen.>>

This here is a bunch of audio folk standing around the cooler. We're supposed
to mainly talk audio but other stuff does come into the conversation. You
needn't take offense at that, it's just what happens during conversation, the
subject wanders. Tune out when you're bored, gently nudge things back to the
topic, but telling people they can't discuss what's on their minds is just
going to fuel unnecessary anger. I'd say skip that which doesn't interest you.

<<Once you guys get off topic, I cease to read what you submit. It's boring,
redundant, and takes up bandwidth. Still adding to my killfile, relunctantly.>>

I probably read only 10 per cent of what's posted anymore. I'd prefer more
audio being discussed but I'm cool with people bringing out whatever's gotten
under their collar also. Just chill & participate in that which interests you,
ignore the rest. Your blood pressure doesn't need to get worked up about any of
this, it's only an internet newsgroup, nothing more.




Scott Fraser
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 8:34:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ScotFraser wrote:


> I think that's a major misconception of why people post political topics here.
> Audio people think about a lot more than just audio & obviously the current
> political situation has a lot of people very concerned. That doesn't indicate
> ego, it doesn't show immaturity, it doesn't mean anybody is trying to change
> your view to theirs. It means they need to talk to somebody, & they feel this
> group comprises a set of virtual friends.

Perfect summary of my interest in discussing these topics
here. I still support the idea of a rec.audio.pro.saloon
but not enough to do all the work I know is involved in
making that happen.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 8:37:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <413a67c2$0$19724$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
rnorman@starpower.net says...
> I have to say that I am no longer going to accept any reasons for not
> expressing my viewpoints. I have never lost the anger of 9/11 nor have I

Jesus, who cares about Your conscience in this AUDIO group.
Is it really so hard to find an audience that you have to use
this! AUDIO group.


--
/ Peter Kaersaa
September 5, 2004 8:39:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>From: George g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net

>I absolutly belongs here, and in the food newsgroups and in the car
>newsgroups, it belongs anywhere one can find anyone to tell it to

What is wrong with you? The people who share your viewpoint don't need
convincing. Those who disagree, well, you're only serving to piss them off.
Does fanatical, belligerant behaviour really accomplish anything? Take a
lesson from your own writings.

-John Vice
www.summertimestudios.com
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 10:15:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 12:39:29 -0400, John wrote
(in article <20040905123929.26483.00000243@mb-m07.aol.com>):

>> From: George g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net
>
>> I absolutly belongs here, and in the food newsgroups and in the car
>> newsgroups, it belongs anywhere one can find anyone to tell it to
>
> What is wrong with you? The people who share your viewpoint don't need
> convincing. Those who disagree, well, you're only serving to piss them off.
> Does fanatical, belligerant behaviour really accomplish anything? Take a
> lesson from your own writings.
>
> -John Vice
> www.summertimestudios.com

And while you're at it George, pitch in with Bob so he stops complaining
about not having what it takes to start your own newsgroup. Then you can talk
about whatever you want.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 11:21:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

John wrote:

> What is wrong with you? The people who share your viewpoint don't need
> convincing. Those who disagree, well, you're only serving to piss them off.

I hope against hope that there is a signifigantly large
third group that is a whole lot less vocal and who are less
convinced in these matters than those of us who choose to
speak out. It is those people that I attempt to reach when
I engage in discussion of the issues or put others so
engaged in a critical light.

There is really a whole lot at stake now and the charter of
a group written in _much_ different times does not negate
the fact that there are now 84 nuclear suitcase bombs
missing from the inventory of the former USSR.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 11:41:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ty Ford wrote:

> And while you're at it George, pitch in with Bob so he stops complaining
> about not having what it takes to start your own newsgroup.

What was that about backhands? That comes real close to
robbing me of the motivation to try and do _anything_ about
a situation you don't like.

It's clear that we just don't like each other and what seems
to make the other tick (which need not be enumerated.) I
doubt it would be the first time for either of is and it's
quite ok. Ya just can't like or be liked by everybody if
you are a real person. I think it would be a really good
idea if we both stopped referring to each other when not
directly addressing the other.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 12:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Roger W. Norman wrote:
> Hey, why don't you tell me why it doesn't apply to audio or to life as a
> business in the first place. Tell me how what I'm talking about doesn't
> effect your business, or others.

I agree, this isn't anything to do with audio. These are world events
which affect the whole world and everyone in the world to some extent.
So are other things - environmentalism would just be one example.

These threads are nearly always American-centric. Tell me, what would
you judge to have been the principle events this year in Norway? Should
rec.audio.pro be used as a forum to discuss them? America is 5% of the
worlds population.

Perhaps you should explicitly state exactly what you think RAP is for.
What is on topic, professional audio and 9/11 orientated politics?
Anything that interests you or anyone else?

Why don't you post these things into one of the politics groups? Why
have an hierarchy in Usenet if any group can be used to post threads on
any topic? I'm sure a lot of people come onto these groups to get away
from world events. I don't think that you could claim that these
political topics are not being raised in other forums and other mediums.

Sorry if I seem to getting at you but people not obeying the Usenet
hierarchy is a pet hate of mine. Maybe you could participate in the
political threads in other channels and place a pointer to the
discussion in this group? Then you could have the opinions of other
audio professionals.

--
***My real address is m/ike at u/nmusic d/ot co dot u/k (removing /s)
np:
http://www.unmusic.co.uk
http://www.unmusic.co.uk/Top_50_Films.html - favorite films
http://www.unmusic.co.uk/amh-s.html - alt.music.home-studio
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 12:38:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

killermike wrote:


> Why don't you post these things into one of the politics groups?

Scott Fraser summarized the reason we do it here in an
earlier post.

Mike, if you are tired of hearing this just tell me to
bugger off, but you, among us, are the only one who knows
the ropes for setting up a new usenet group from the
exellent job you did with the h-s group. You would be a
real hero to a lot of people if you could turn that
expertise toward the establishment of a rec.audio.pro.saloon
group where these discussions could be partitioned but would
likely have the same participants.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 12:38:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:38:30 -0400, killermike wrote
(in article <chfpvq$c9v$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>):

> Roger W. Norman wrote:
>> Hey, why don't you tell me why it doesn't apply to audio or to life as a
>> business in the first place. Tell me how what I'm talking about doesn't
>> effect your business, or others.
>
> I agree, this isn't anything to do with audio. These are world events
> which affect the whole world and everyone in the world to some extent.
> So are other things - environmentalism would just be one example.
>
> These threads are nearly always American-centric. Tell me, what would
> you judge to have been the principle events this year in Norway? Should
> rec.audio.pro be used as a forum to discuss them? America is 5% of the
> worlds population.
>
> Perhaps you should explicitly state exactly what you think RAP is for.
> What is on topic, professional audio and 9/11 orientated politics?
> Anything that interests you or anyone else?
>
> Why don't you post these things into one of the politics groups? Why
> have an hierarchy in Usenet if any group can be used to post threads on
> any topic? I'm sure a lot of people come onto these groups to get away
> from world events. I don't think that you could claim that these
> political topics are not being raised in other forums and other mediums.
>
> Sorry if I seem to getting at you but people not obeying the Usenet
> hierarchy is a pet hate of mine. Maybe you could participate in the
> political threads in other channels and place a pointer to the
> discussion in this group? Then you could have the opinions of other
> audio professionals.

I DARE Roger, Pete and the others to do just that, or start their own
newsgroup. Oddly, even though it's apparent that their comments are not
welcome here, they don't seem to have what it takes.

Ty Ford

-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:27:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>only by voicing our concerns can we begin the massive duty of public
>awareness that will be needed to effect a change from a warrior
>president and staff to a peaceful president and staff

Worked good in England before Churchill.




John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:30:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>What is wrong with you? The people who share your viewpoint don't need
>convincing. Those who disagree, well, you're only serving to piss them off.
>Does fanatical, belligerant behaviour really accomplish anything?

It's like bumper stickers..the only one gaining is the guy selling the
stickers.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:30:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Blind Joni wrote:

> It's like bumper stickers..the only one gaining is the guy selling the
> stickers.

Really? I thought the undecideds kept a running count on the bumper
stickers they saw and voted for the guy with the most.. ;) 
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:30:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pete Dimsman wrote:

> Really? I thought the undecideds kept a running count on the bumper
> stickers they saw and voted for the guy with the most.. ;) 


As Larry David said, there are no undecided voters. These people are
looking for attention.
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:34:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
>I know. I just get so frustrated and like most people in life, they take it
>out on the ones they love. So there you have it.

There must be a way for an intelligent guy like yourself to find a way to stop
this behavior. If these events really are affecting you so personally there may
be something else going on.
John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:34:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Blind Joni wrote:

> There must be a way for an intelligent guy like yourself to find a way to stop
> this behavior. If these events really are affecting you so personally there may
> be something else going on.



Why *wouldn't* these events affect someone so personally? Every knows
the numbers. I don't need to reapeat them.

Perhaps we just got a reminder this past week with the show they put on
in the Garden.

When I was a kid, I saw the Circus in the Garden. All that was missing
this past week was the other two rings.

What is wrong with these people?
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:37:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>But there are other people's opinions to consider, and some people seem
>really taken aback not so much by OT posts, but political OT posts. OTOH, I
>agree with you in that these things are incredibly important for people to
>discuss, and I feel that there are facts which need to be brought out, about
>current events and hsitorical events, that are best reiterated as often as
>possible in every possible media.

It's curious how the OT political threads rile so many to anger and name
calling but
the real concerns of audio seem to have so much less effect.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:37:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Blind Joni" <blindjoni@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040905173705.08240.00000338@mb-m18.aol.com...
> >But there are other people's opinions to consider, and some people seem
> >really taken aback not so much by OT posts, but political OT posts. OTOH,
I
> >agree with you in that these things are incredibly important for people
to
> >discuss, and I feel that there are facts which need to be brought out,
about
> >current events and hsitorical events, that are best reiterated as often
as
> >possible in every possible media.
>
> It's curious how the OT political threads rile so many to anger and name
> calling but
> the real concerns of audio seem to have so much less effect.
>

Well, I don't want to say something that sounds like a hallmark card, but
politics can be divisive, where art can bring people together. Even if you
are arguing about Audio, you know at some point that you're arguing with one
of the few others who cares at all.

jb
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:37:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Blind Joni wrote:

> It's curious how the OT political threads rile so many to anger and name
> calling but
> the real concerns of audio seem to have so much less effect.

Try questioning or trying to quantify Doppler mixing. I was
astonished to find how politicized a technical matter could
be. :-)


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
September 6, 2004 3:38:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Blind Joni wrote:


> There must be a way for an intelligent guy like yourself to find a way to
> stop this behavior. If these events really are affecting you so personally
> there may be something else going on.

Yes , there must be something going on....

Like, maybe, having a concience? Or, (heaven forbid) loving his country &
his fellow man more than some abstract ideology? Roger, you've got to seek
professional help right away before you do something that might possibly
make the world a better place.

You know, if the Romans had an internet, Jesus would have probably been the
biggest OT poster of all time. Of course, they crucified him, so what does
that tell you?
September 6, 2004 4:06:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <20040905123929.26483.00000243@mb-m07.aol.com>,
jsvice@aol.com (John) wrote:

> >From: George g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net
>
> >I absolutly belongs here, and in the food newsgroups and in the car
> >newsgroups, it belongs anywhere one can find anyone to tell it to
>
> What is wrong with you? The people who share your viewpoint don't need
> convincing. Those who disagree, well, you're only serving to piss them off.
> Does fanatical, belligerant behaviour really accomplish anything? Take a
> lesson from your own writings.
>
> -John Vice
> www.summertimestudios.com

I have often reconsidered what i believed as true, and changed my
position. I used to be catholic, now I am not
even years of ignorant head in the sand indoctrination can become
enlightened
It does work
and If GW doesn't scare the jimminies out of you , you just arn't paying
attention
George
September 6, 2004 4:14:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Wayne wrote:

> Still adding to my killfile, relunctantly.

Have at it. That's why they invented killfiles in the first place.
September 6, 2004 4:28:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ScotFraser wrote:


> <<Once you guys get off topic, I cease to read what you submit. It's
> boring, redundant, and takes up bandwidth. Still adding to my killfile,
> relunctantly.>>
>
> I probably read only 10 per cent of what's posted anymore. I'd prefer more
> audio being discussed but I'm cool with people bringing out whatever's
> gotten under their collar also. Just chill & participate in that which
> interests you, ignore the rest. Your blood pressure doesn't need to get
> worked up about any of this, it's only an internet newsgroup, nothing
> more.

Yep. I probably read about 20% of NEW threads, but seldom follow any to
their conclusion any more. But that's mainly because the topic of audio
itself has gotten so broad. I'm more likely to ignore a "What's better:
Pro Tools, Nuendo, or Sonar" thread that an obviously marked OT thread
just because i don't really care very much about computers being uszed as
tape recorders (but that's just me). Hell, if a thread about U87s can end
up being about Stratocasters and nobody bothers to change the subject line
until a week later, it's hard to complain about ANYTHING being off topic.
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 5:43:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sep 4, 2004, Roger W. Norman <rnorman@starpower.net> commented:

> Hey, why don't you tell me why it doesn't apply to audio or to life as a
> business in the first place. Tell me how what I'm talking about doesn't
> effect your business, or others.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

Roger, I agree with a lot of your sentiments, but this is a PRO AUDIO
DISCUSSION GROUP.

It'd be very helpful if you'd precede your non-audio threads with "OT," for
OFF-TOPIC.

Please.


--MFW
[remove the extra M above for email]
September 6, 2004 6:25:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>From: George g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net

>and If GW doesn't scare the jimminies out of you , you just arn't paying
>attention

George, he does. Scares me shitless. But that's not my point. I have friends
in real life that I talk to about these things... The absolute least you could
do, I feel, is to mark your posts with the "OT" preface. I could beg and plead
with you not to keep bringing this group down, but I can see you're not
interested in that. Can we at least compromise here? Although I feel I'm
basically admitting defeat rather than reaching a happy medium.

-John Vice
www.summertimestudios.com
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 7:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Why *wouldn't* these events affect someone so personally? Every knows
>the numbers. I don't need to reapeat them.
>

Well...let's see...something happens ..to none of us personally..no matter how
much we hate it....so we take it out on our families???
Healthy perspective??



>What is wrong with these people?
>

What's wrong is that they don't share your opinion. I know a lot of people
don't share mine on a lot of important things to me..but I don't yell at my
mother because of it.
John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 7:43:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> There must be a way for an intelligent guy like yourself to find a way to
>> stop this behavior. If these events really are affecting you so personally
>> there may be something else going on.
>
>Yes , there must be something going on....
>
>Like, maybe, having a concience? Or, (heaven forbid) loving his country &
>his fellow man more than some abstract ideology?

Roger said he was"taking it out on loved ones"..I don't know what that means.
If we are upset it is always from some kind of problem with our own
integrity..which I'm sure most will try to argue..give it some thought.
And if the terrorists loved their country and fellow man more than some
abstract ideology we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. I just read
some C.S Lewis about 'national repentance'...written about Britain in
WW2..basically saying how many find it easier to forgive an enemy than a
neighbor.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 7:47:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Try questioning or trying to quantify Doppler mixing. I was
>astonished to find how politicized a technical matter could
>be. :-)

I watched that one from the sidelines..didn't have time to keep up. :) 


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 7:59:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< jsvice@aol.com (John) >

<< g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net

>and If GW doesn't scare the jimminies out of you , you just arn't paying
attention >>

<< George, he does. Scares me shitless. >>

Come on John, don't be a "Girlie man"...

<G>


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 12:49:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Blind Joni wrote:


> Roger said he was"taking it out on loved ones"..I don't know what that means.

It means he is sorry that his posting and getting it off his mind upsets
you. Because he luvs ya man!
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 6:52:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George wrote:

> America is doing great evil
> America is creating terroists with it policy

America Didn't create screwed up minds that decided brutally killing people
is a good policy to follow for the whole world. That is a by product of
people operating at the base emotional levels of life unwilling or unable to
advance beyond it.

Terrorist are wrong. They are not freedom fighters, Revolutionary Hero's or
any other euphemism people have dreamed up to excuse the horrific behavior.
Stop defending them.

--
Nathan

"Imagine if there were no Hypothetical Situations"
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 6:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Nathan West wrote:

> America Didn't create screwed up minds that decided brutally killing people
> is a good policy to follow for the whole world. That is a by product of
> people operating at the base emotional levels of life unwilling or unable to
> advance beyond it.

Ture. But Bush has created a climate for them to rally against us. More
than ever.
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 6:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> Terrorists are wrong. They are not freedom fighters, revolutionary
> heros or any other euphemism people have dreamed up to
> excuse the horrific behavior. Stop defending them.

Understanding is not defending.

There is a reason for what they do. It goes back (generally) to the Crusades,
and more recently since around 1800 when Europe started aggressively interfering
in the Middle East. What we're currently seeing is most-likely due to America's
overthrowing the legally elected government of Iran -- fifty years ago.

If you don't understand them, you can't control them. And terrorism is
fundamentally a social/political problem. It's not enough just to round up the
terrorists. You also have to get the countries of the Middle East to work with
you to make sure they can't start their own cells, or move easily from country
to country.

Once that's done, then we can start worrying about "freedom" and "liberty."

The neo-con's belief that bringing democracy (ie, unrestrained capitalism) to
the Middle East will make everything hunky-dorey is hopelessly naive. The world
just doesn't work that way.
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 6:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Correction: America DID create, in your words, some of the "screwed up
minds that decided brutally killing people is a good policy to follow
for the whole world".

Terrorism in your case is just a matter of semantics. If a country has
a military, does that somehow make it's killing of women and children
more legitimate? Arafat is a democratically elected leader, as is
Aslan Mashkadov. Why are their soldiers labeled "terrorists"? Because
they lack a significant financial backing?


Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<413C79C1.2E0286A2@nc.rr.com>...
> George wrote:
>
> > America is doing great evil
> > America is creating terroists with it policy
>
> America Didn't create screwed up minds that decided brutally killing people
> is a good policy to follow for the whole world. That is a by product of
> people operating at the base emotional levels of life unwilling or unable to
> advance beyond it.
>
> Terrorist are wrong. They are not freedom fighters, Revolutionary Hero's or
> any other euphemism people have dreamed up to excuse the horrific behavior.
> Stop defending them.
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 7:47:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ricky W. Hunt wrote:

> At least half the terrorist acts lately were committed against countries
> that directly refused to support the US so I don't think that's the answer.

Or the question.
Anonymous
September 7, 2004 3:33:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< "William Sommerwerck" williams@nwlink.com >>
<< The neo-con's belief that bringing democracy (ie, unrestrained capitalism)
to
the Middle East will make everything hunky-dorey is hopelessly naive. The world
just doesn't work that way. >>

You are confusing apples and oranges William. Democracy is a political
system and capitalism is an economic system, they are far from being the same
thing. Democracies come in many forms, including semi-socialist ones.

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Anonymous
September 7, 2004 3:33:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 06 Sep 2004 23:33:56 GMT, willstg@aol.comnospam (WillStG) wrote:

><< "William Sommerwerck" williams@nwlink.com >>
><< The neo-con's belief that bringing democracy (ie, unrestrained capitalism)
>to
>the Middle East will make everything hunky-dorey is hopelessly naive. The world
>just doesn't work that way. >>
>
> You are confusing apples and oranges William. Democracy is a political
>system and capitalism is an economic system, they are far from being the same
>thing. Democracies come in many forms, including semi-socialist ones.

True democracy + unrestrained, pure Lassez Faire Capitalism can be a
very bad combination. Check out a book called "World On Fire" by Amy
Chua, a Yale professor of economics who had done much research on
this.

We don't have pure democracy here in the US and we also have laws that
limit the harmful effects and harshness of pure capitalism (although
Bush is rolling these laws back as fast as possible).

Yet this administration thinks it's working in Iraq? As we speak,
large portions of the country are not even under our control, there is
no personal security, and a civil war is raging. How much longer are
people going to pretend that this is actually working?
    • 1 / 6
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!