Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Samc]

By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride?

Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?

[KB_S1]

Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 05:51

It is a plain fact that different parts of the world have developed at different rates. Is Afghanistan as far along as Sweden? Do they even have a Starbucks?

I don't know if there are any Starbucks serving vendors in Afghanistan but I would expect there to be much better coffee on offer than any Starbucks can provide.

I have seen a little US based coverage of the Wikileaks scenario. At the moment it looks like classic political method of blaming the other guy and ignore the actual problems inherent.

[Paul Cavins]

Quick before I'm more late to work that I am already-

The Starbucks reference was an attempt at humor, which isn't always apparent coming from me-

PC

[mukul]

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 06:50

Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 22:52 Samc wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 16:57 Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 19:11 Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology? Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda. This assumes that there was an influx of western technology into India during colonization... No Sam. No assumption at all. As I said-I have no idea whether or not there was an influx at that time or whether it was of any benefit. I'm going to TRY and answer this, albeit in a very general way because the answer is a little more complicated than a simple yes or no. The aim of colonization (generally speaking) was always very simple, the colonizers used the resources of the colony to enrich themselves.  Any benefit that the colony reaps from this is incidental; modern transportation systems had to be built to take merchandise to the ports for export and hospitals had to be built to maintain a healthy workforce for example but there was no wholesale importation of education and technology into colonies. Education was on a limited need to know basis, which means that a very small percentage of the population get educated, and even then they only get what's necessary to keep the wheel turning.  The British colonization of India did not bring the advanced tools and education necessary to bring India to where it is today...

Sam, you hit the nail on the head about colonization.

Have people wondered why there were such concerted efforts by Europeans to `discover India', from Columbus to Vasco da Gama?  To teach Indians Western Culture?  No, they wanted to trade with a country that was rich in material wealth (also rich in philosophy, culture, mathematics, textiles, agriculture, astronomy and a whole lot more, but that is besides the point).  

Just one British officer (I think it was Robert Clive) was instrumental in sending some 900 ships fully loaded with Gold, silver, jewels and other wealth from India to England in late 19th century.  Now when I travel on the Motorway from Manchester to London, I can't help but thinking that much of this highly developed infrastructure came on the back of wealth purloined from my country.  And our Kohinoor is still proudly on display in British crown jewels.

India and Indians have since moved on.  They are trying to make a mark in this world by sheer hard work and intellect.  They don't hold any grudge against Westerners in general for what they had to go through.  But when some one says that old colonies were themselves to blame for colonization since they were ripe for it, and they should be thankful for a shot of Western culture, it still rankles.

And yes, it is very convenient to call people names when your ignorance and prejudice shows clearly.

[Kris]

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00

By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride? Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?

I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!

[DarinK]

Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 10:16

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00 By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride? Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are? I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!

Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says.

[jonathan jetter]

DarinK wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 14:16

Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says.

almost.

when *business* says "jump," (only certain mega-corporations, though), *government* says "how high?"

what you're seeing now from amazon, visa, paypal, etc., is just the quid pro quo in order to maintain the current situation.

[DarinK]

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 11:20

DarinK wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 14:16 Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says. almost. when *business* says "jump," (only certain mega-corporations, though), *government* says "how high?" what you're seeing now from amazon, visa, paypal, etc., is just the quid pro quo in order to maintain the current situation.

 

I agree it goes both ways.  I don't think either one is in charge any more than the other - they're both in charge, together, and both are hostile to any attempts to change that situation.  Only businesses that are willing to operate that way have any chance of getting & staying really big, and only politicians that operate that way have any chance of becoming powerful.

[Samc]

Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:16

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00 By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride? Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are? I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!

What US law did he break?  Has he been charged with a crime?  How come the NY Times and the Guardian etc aren't also being persecuted?  Why are the people who are calling for him to be murdered aren't being charged with a crime, and more importantly, why are the politicians who are at the root of this not guilty of anything?

[Kris]

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 15:59

What US law did he break?  Has he been charged with a crime?  How come the NY Times and the Guardian etc aren't also being persecuted?  Why are the people who are calling for him to be murdered aren't being charged with a crime, and more importantly, why are the politicians who are at the root of this not guilty of anything?

(a few Google searches later...)

1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges'
2)  Not yet
3)  Probably because they are 'the Press'
4)  Free Speech issues
5)  ?  Name some names and what they are guilty of?

[Paul Cavins]

Sam, I can see where the phrase "behind in the race of human development" could be taken as racist, but amidst all of the other stuff I wrote about it all being about ideas and such, I think one doesn't have to bend over backwards in generosity to conclude it is innocent. My version of "the race of human development" is about culture and technology and such, not about DNA or the evolution of the human species.

As for Assange, I fear a future where we have all of these tech vigilantes running around with their own agendas. With the advance of technology, it will be possible for a small number of people to cause a lot of disruption and damage.

There is no guarantee you are always going to agree with the tech vigilante's point of view.

Again, the idea that governments can do diplomatic and military business without secrets and duplicity is childish and naive.

He has no standing to do what he is doing, compounding Manning's crime by zapping all of this data everywhere.

PC

[Samc]

Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 21:16

1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges'

He was spying in the US?

Quote:

2)  Not yet

You mean he hasn't even been charged with a crime but he's guilty???

Quote:

3)  Probably because they are 'the Press'

What makes the NY Times more 'press' than Wikileaks and what law gives them the exclusive right to publish certain documents?  

Quote:

4)  Free Speech issues

Since when is it a free speech issue to call for the murder of someone...last I checked that is illegal in most countries.

I'll get back to you on number 5...

[jonathan jetter]

Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 16:16

(a few Google searches later...) 1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges' 2)  Not yet 3)  Probably because they are 'the Press' 4)  Free Speech issues 5)  ?  Name some names and what they are guilty of?

1.  the vast majority of the paragraphs in the Espionage Act repeatedly reference "when the United States is at war" or "in a time of war."  last i checked the politicians are playing politics games and not passing any official declarations of war, no matter how many times the phrase "war on terror" is parroted about on Fox News or CNN.

3.  i echo sam's comment.

4.  also echo sam's comment.  it is not legal to call for the murder of someone.

5.  long, long list.  for starters:

George W. Bush - for the illegal invasion of Iraq
Donald Rumsfeld- for allowing the pentagon to have over $2 trillion in transactions that cannot be traced or documented
Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.

[Samc]

Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 23:18

Sam, I can see where the phrase "behind in the race of human development" could be taken as racist, but amidst all of the other stuff I wrote about it all being about ideas and such, I think one doesn't have to bend over backwards in generosity to conclude it is innocent. My version of "the race of human development" is about culture and technology and such, not about DNA or the evolution of the human species.

It's not about their evolution as humans, they are just behind in their cultural development... Dude, I think you should stop.

Quote:

As for Assange, I fear a future where we have all of these tech vigilantes running around with their own agendas. With the advance of technology, it will be possible for a small number of people to cause a lot of disruption and damage.

It's already possible for a small group to cause a lot of damage; the US and it's allies invaded Iraq based on the lies of a small powerful group....

Quote:

He has no standing to do what he is doing, compounding Manning's crime by zapping all of this data everywhere.

What about the NY Times!?!

[Bill_Urick]

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:59

Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.

Huh?
Please elucidate...