To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 19390
19389  |  19391
Subject: 
Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 14 Mar 2003 14:14:16 GMT
Viewed: 
471 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:

<snip for later... so many things for later... there isn;t enuf time in the
day!>

-Mike Petrucelli

P.S. I also think we should lock-up all the idiot politicians (including
Dubbya) whom want to try and outlaw protesting. That is a basic fundamental
right.  Of course the flip-side is, I also think we should lock-up all the
idiot protesters that think they are allowed to blocks streets and buildings,
effectively denying others the right to make their own decisions.

On this we totally agree!  This is another thing I get into with my SO--she
went to that quiet little rally in Quebec against the WTO a while back--

"You know they (the security) put up a 13 foot fence in front of the
building!!  No wonder there was that crowd of protestors pushing it down!"

Her rationale is that if there wasn't a big fence, there wouldn't have been
that 6 foot thick mob of people trying to push it down.

I says, "Pardon?"

K wait a minute--the reason that security has tear gas and big fences and
all that is 'cause the radicals, the idiots in the group, always want to do
'mischief', or worse--if there wasn't a history of idiot protestors doing
damage, then there wouldn't be the 13 foot fence there.

"Oh but the good protestors got hit with tear gas--that's not right!"

Well, if I willingly go to a ball game, there's a chance that a baseball
will hit me in the head--it really does come with the territory.

This is when I go into my 'Dave considered' better way of protesting--

If you have a problem with Nike making shoes 'off shore' and paying their
people 10 cents a day for making these shoes and you don't like it--don't
buy Nike shoes.  Now if you convince both of your friends that not buying
Nike shoes is the right thing to do, and they get all their friends in on
it, and so on... people stop buying Nikes.  Then the company would more than
likely rethink how they do business for they wouldn't be making any money.

Shaking your fist at such-n-such company, standing out front with your signs
is great and shows that you care, but if you go out and buy the product...
well--mixed signals as far as I'm concerned.

Justice is a two way street--if you find that there's an organization that
isn't doing things Justly--i.e. paying their people a pittance, or polluting
the environment, or whatever form of injustice the company(s) may be
committing--the way you go about educating others, and protesting against
said company(s) must be Just.  Tearing down fences, breaking into buildings,
causing mischief or damage, does not, in any way, help your cause.  You then
get labelled "Radical".  The company you have a problem with, and the rest
of us, won't come to the aid of your cause.

Kinda like a hypothetical war situation:  if there is, say, a country that
is committing atrocities to its own people--hypotheitcally of
course--rallying against said country must be done in a Just manner, or we
are just as guilty as those who committed those hypothetical atrocities in
the first place.

And, further following this hypothetical scenario--if we try to justify our
intervention into said country with a bunch of fallicious reasonings, then
we have no Just foundation on which to start the intervention.

I want Justice for all.  And what Dubya ahs built up for his reasoning for
this little war of his, is all based on fallacy and 'what if'.  If he came
right out form the beginning and said only, "Our war in Iraq is to help the
Iraqi citizens", well I'd still be against it for I believe that we can
achieve the same ends--good of Joe Iraqi Citizen, thru peaceful solutions.
But that's not how this confrontation started, and Bruce mentioned earlier
all the many fallacies and lies that Bush set up for this war.

But the biggest that sticks out in my mind is that the US wants this war
with or without UN approval because the country didn't comply with a UN
resolution.  Where is the Justice in that?

The US is just a big bully who wants this war.

Anyway, already wrote too much.

Dave K



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
 
(...) What the heck are you talking about? Unlike World War 2 we (any "Western" country) do not carpet bomb cities anymore. The big Tomahawk cruise missles are accurate to within half a meter, let alone the smaller missles. Civilian casualties would (...) (21 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

64 Messages in This Thread:






















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR