Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Frank's boy Bush (was: Tarjei's Boy Chavez)

Expand Messages
  • Tarjei Straume
    You seem to have missed my point on this issue completely, Frank. As you know, I m basically an anarchist preferring absence of governments and certainly
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      You seem to have missed my point on this issue completely, Frank.

      As you know, I'm basically an anarchist preferring absence of
      governments and certainly absence of supreme commanders. Iran has a
      supreme commander, but that does not give the goons in the White
      House and the Pentagon the right to bomb the country, to assassinate
      the leaders, and to repeat what they did in 1953, when they overthrew
      a democratic government there and installed a Quisling regime with the shah.

      By the same token, Rice has no business badmouthing and threatening
      Venezuela, where the government has broad popular support, which is
      why the US failed in their attempted coup in 2002. One may disagree
      ever so strongly with Chavez' domestic politics and sympathize with
      those who emigrate to Florida and chant with disgruntled Cubans. But
      Venezuela is no threat to the United States. It has never been a
      threat to the United States. As a sovereign nation, Venezuela has the
      right to choose its business partners and also to choose who not to
      do business with. If AT&T and Exxon and Coca-Cola and MacDonalds are
      not welcome, so be it. Why not just do business elsewhere?

      In other words, I would have preferred to see an anarchist Venezuela,
      an anarchist Scandinavia, and an anarchist North America with no
      leaders whatsoever. You know that very well from our previous
      discussions, Frank. My point is that the US represents the greatest
      threat to world peace, and it sees fit to intervene and change the
      regimes of any country they choose. Who's next? Switzerland? Norway?

      So what's this "Tarjei's boy" got to do with anything? Why not
      "Tarjei's boy Stoltenberg," Norway's prime minister? I don't agree
      with his politics, but that gives the US no right to assassinate him,
      to arrange a coup, or to bomb us in order to take him out. And the
      Venezuelans have the same right to be left in peace that we have, and
      the right to be left alone by Rice's big bad mouth that seems aimed
      at setting the stage for public acceptance of an invasion so they can
      crush a nation once more to create revenues for their own oil
      companies. Norway is also an oil nation, and the country's oil
      revenues are nationalized, the state owns the majority shares of
      Hydro-Statoil (the new merger of the two leading oil companies). And
      I bet that when the US is through raping Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela
      and emptied their oil wells, they're coming for Norway, leaving us
      poor, broke, sick, uneducated, starving and desperate.

      Tarjei
    • Frank Smith
      ... Actually I confused you with someone else (not on this list) who thinks Chavez is progressive - probably because you recently mentioned a disagreement
      Message 2 of 3 , Mar 4, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- Tarjei Straume <straume@...> wrote:

        > You seem to have missed my point on this issue
        > completely, Frank.

        Actually I confused you with someone else (not on this
        list) who thinks Chavez is "progressive" - probably
        because you recently mentioned a disagreement with me
        about him. So sorry.
        As far as the Bush administration's relations with
        him, they are as stupid or more so than their
        relations with everyone else. Luckily for him, though,
        Bushy has other things on his mind at the moment - and
        he has a lot of oil and the U.S. is his best customer.
        Chavez has broad popular support among the poor, yes,
        because they have been downtrodden since forever and
        he's a populist with dictatorship ambitions a la
        Peron.

        Frank
        >
        > As you know, I'm basically an anarchist preferring
        > absence of
        > governments and certainly absence of supreme
        > commanders. Iran has a
        > supreme commander, but that does not give the goons
        > in the White
        > House and the Pentagon the right to bomb the
        > country, to assassinate
        > the leaders, and to repeat what they did in 1953,
        > when they overthrew
        > a democratic government there and installed a
        > Quisling regime with the shah.
        >
        > By the same token, Rice has no business badmouthing
        > and threatening
        > Venezuela, where the government has broad popular
        > support, which is
        > why the US failed in their attempted coup in 2002.
        > One may disagree
        > ever so strongly with Chavez' domestic politics and
        > sympathize with
        > those who emigrate to Florida and chant with
        > disgruntled Cubans. But
        > Venezuela is no threat to the United States. It has
        > never been a
        > threat to the United States. As a sovereign nation,
        > Venezuela has the
        > right to choose its business partners and also to
        > choose who not to
        > do business with. If AT&T and Exxon and Coca-Cola
        > and MacDonalds are
        > not welcome, so be it. Why not just do business
        > elsewhere?
        >
        > In other words, I would have preferred to see an
        > anarchist Venezuela,
        > an anarchist Scandinavia, and an anarchist North
        > America with no
        > leaders whatsoever. You know that very well from our
        > previous
        > discussions, Frank. My point is that the US
        > represents the greatest
        > threat to world peace, and it sees fit to intervene
        > and change the
        > regimes of any country they choose. Who's next?
        > Switzerland? Norway?
        >
        > So what's this "Tarjei's boy" got to do with
        > anything? Why not
        > "Tarjei's boy Stoltenberg," Norway's prime minister?
        > I don't agree
        > with his politics, but that gives the US no right to
        > assassinate him,
        > to arrange a coup, or to bomb us in order to take
        > him out. And the
        > Venezuelans have the same right to be left in peace
        > that we have, and
        > the right to be left alone by Rice's big bad mouth
        > that seems aimed
        > at setting the stage for public acceptance of an
        > invasion so they can
        > crush a nation once more to create revenues for
        > their own oil
        > companies. Norway is also an oil nation, and the
        > country's oil
        > revenues are nationalized, the state owns the
        > majority shares of
        > Hydro-Statoil (the new merger of the two leading oil
        > companies). And
        > I bet that when the US is through raping Iraq, Iran,
        > and Venezuela
        > and emptied their oil wells, they're coming for
        > Norway, leaving us
        > poor, broke, sick, uneducated, starving and
        > desperate.
        >
        > Tarjei
        >
        >


        Frank Thomas Smith
        http://SouthernCrossReview.org



        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
        with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
        http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.