From: edeads (edeads@prodigy.net)
Date: Tue Dec 30 2003 - 05:32:11 GMT
Jon's 12/14/03 post "The concept of freedom, the IDEA of freedom reached
unprecedented heights with the American Revolution, before such words like
"capitalism" or "communism" existed"
Let's also give credit where credit is due. P48 Lila 'The idea that "all men
are created equal" is a gift to the world from the American Indian.
Europeans who settled here only transmitted it as a doctrine that they
sometimes followed and sometimes did not. The real source was someone for
whom social equality was no mere doctrine, who had equality built into his
bones. To him it was inconceivable that the world could be any other way.
For him there was no other way of life. That's what Ten Bears was trying to
tell them.'
Platt's 12/15/03 post "I'm amazed that anyone interested in philosophy,
especially the MOQ with its major premise of freedom being the highest good,
would come to the defense of the likes of Mao, Stalin, Hitler and Saddam."
I didn't see any of the posts suggest a defense of Saddam Hussein. Critical
of the war yes, but defending Hussein no. Not true. One should keep the
distinction.
Andy and Platt and Steve
Andy >> We went there because we were told of a connection between Iraq and
9/11,
which was proved a lie.
Platt> Not true.
Steve> Sort of true. This certainly was billed as part of the war on
terrorism and
connections between Saddam and Osama were suggested but unproved. I don't
think we can pin the Bush admin down on any lies even on WMDs (they were
wrong, but we may not have been deliberately misled. I sure hope not,
anyway).
Ed - True. Propoganda was sufficient to make nearly half of Americans
believe that Hussein was involved in the 9-11 attacks and that the hijackers
included Iraqis. There was no evidence at that time of the first notion and
the second notion is false. Perception is what counts - we may not have been
"told" that a connection existed but the perceptions that became manifest in
the population certainly did not come out of thin air. They were
orchestrated by the Bush administration.
Platt's 12/16/03 post> The liberal media has been complicit in spreading the
lie that Bush justified the war on the basis that the U.S. was in imminent
danger of attack from Iraq. Technically, the war was a continuation of the
last one and was fully supported by umpteen U.N. resolutions, including a
15-0 Security Council vote to force Saddam to comply.
But that's not quite the whole story, and the complicity is in the camp of
the administration for orchestrating the notion of an imminent threat from
Iraq with links to 9-11, and in forcing the war with Iraq despite likely UN
resistance. In a review of Resolution 1441 - "While certain aspects of UN
Security Council Resolution 1441 are remarkably vague, two things are clear.
First, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein must accomplish a sequence of tasks over
the next few months or almost certainly face serious consequences, most
likely a US-led invasion. Second, in the event of non-compliance the United
States is not automatically authorized to take unilateral military action to
effect regime change in Iraq, certainly not before another meeting of the
Security Council." The United States knew that they would lose a vote on a
subsequent resolution being posited that would have explicitly authorized
force against Iraq, and hence that resolution never came to a vote. The US,
in my view, had pre-decided to go to war and any resolution from the UN was
meaningless. The US side-stepped the UN, and I believe this is contra to the
MOQ in that the UN is a higher-level body than the US.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 30 2003 - 05:31:25 GMT