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

Re: [rice-for-president] Barry unsubscribed. Re-join us please!

Expand Messages
  • Peter Dow
    Barry, So now you have thrown your toy out of the pram? I mean by quiting Rice for President? Don t be so childish Barry. Please come back to the group - as
    Message 1 of 12 , Jul 17, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      So now you have thrown your toy out of the pram? I mean by quiting Rice for President? Don't be so childish Barry. Please come back to the group - as moderator.
      Condoleezza Rice will be elected President more certainly if she has the best team of advisors - with all the answers - such as, how to win the war on terror.
      Now there is a learning curve for leading Condistas, such as yourself. You asked a question - and I gave you the answer. If I've offended you - that wasn't my intention - but I feel I owe you the truth, as I see it. Should I be so diplomatic that I never tell you how to win the war on terror?
      But if we can't debate what the lessons that need to be learned are - if Condistas go into a sulk - retreat into their own isolated groups - refuse to come together and debate ...
      Well there will be no learning and the advice Condi will be getting will, over all, be no better than what has gone before. And you are then assuming that Condi can do everything on her own - but she can't, she needs the strongest possible team of Condistas backing her up.
      One good leader - with not very many well-educated supporters can only do so much. But if Condistas overall are well educated and capable to withstand the toughest of debates then the whole team Condi is stronger and the campaign to elect Rice as President is stronger.
      Now I've never tried to stop you Barry debating me robustly in the Rice for President Yahoo Group. I've never deleted your posts or threatened to ban you for speaking out - even very critically of me.
      So come on then Barry, if you disagree then have the confidence to debate it. Have the courage to debate without fear or favour.
      Please rejoin the group - either right away or whenever you like. You were a valued member of the group and I'd like to have you back - soonest!
      Yours sincerely,
      Peter Dow,
      Owner, Rice for President Yahoo Group

      Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
      Sorry, that should read "Titanic".
      - Peter


      Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
      And I'm still wondering why you can't follow up the links I've given, or why, if you are following them up, you can't understand what I'm saying there.
      So do I need to spoon feed you like an infant? A wee quote at a time?
      Here are the links (AGAIN, and it must be, oh about the 4th time I've given these links in this thread) -
      Here is the spoon-fed morsel from my own website -
      It is Queen Elizabeth who is the ceremonial head or figurehead of the UK state (Prince Charles expects to take over that role when the Queen dies though) - but a figurehead is an important person who can do an enormous amount of damage to the democracy of a country.

      The power to be a figurehead is a central power.

      A figurehead is not as insignificant a thing as you might think.
      The royalists are insisting that the Queen is to remain the figurehead. A figurehead is a decisive role because the figurehead person serves to approve the status quo - here, rubber-stamping the UK royalist, fascist, police state and implicitly, the death, destruction, disaster and missed-opportunities that it imposes.
      Obviously, the Prime Minister is a key officer in the UK state and the Queen rubber-stamps what the PM does or doesn’t do as well.
      Likewise, the First Minister of Scotland is rubber-stamped, indiscriminately.
      Moving to a republic would afford the people an opportunity to replace a hellish rubber-stamp with the political context to commence sorely needed action to liberate us from the fascists who are making lives hell - fascist police, judges and other assorted UK royalist, fascist state officials.
      Some people advance the theory that the UK Prime Minister is an acting head of state. Does the Prime Minister then have the power to have the fascist police and judiciary urgently replaced en masse and - if they wouldn’t go quietly - shot as required, by calling in the military?
      The UK police and judiciary as presently constituted, form the core of the national enemies within and removing them and reconstituting the forces of the state according to democratic principles will be quite a task.
      I would question that the PM could easily do that, even with the consent of the House of Commons (There is no such consent presently, nor willingness by the PM, sadly. Sort of banning fox-hunting was as much as elected royalists could manage.)
      I mean, it is wishful thinking to think that the PM does now have the power to do the necessary but there is presently no evidence that the PM has that power under the UK’s constitution from hell.
      (If there were compelling evidence such as, for example, the dead body of the Queen then of course one would have to reconsider then the powers of the PM in the new context.
      Thus Oliver Cromwell, leading as evidence the dead body of King Charles I, who had his head chopped off, could fairly claim to have head of state powers.)
      The House of Lords, royalist lawyers, courts and the Queen’s officers themselves would presumably challenge such head of state powers in a Prime Minister.
      Certainly the UK royalist, fascist police state would oppose the First Minister of Scotland presently having similar head of state powers to end royalist fascism in Scotland. (Take a look at the Scotland Act.)
      We need heads of states to act against the UK royalist fascists as soon as possible and arguing for republics for the nations and the overthrow of the monarchy is the context in which those heads of states would emerge.
      Just voting for royalist candidates, from royalist parties - Scottish Nationalist, Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, UK Independence, Green and so on - just electing Members of Parliaments who must give allegiance to the Queen - won’t do.
      And I explained further on the NO PC forum -
      The point is that the will of Parliament - which is usually to trust the royalist, fascist police state - sometimes NEEDS to be circumvented successfully by a head of state but only and alone in order to defend the democratic rights of the people.

      The whole idea of "parliamentary sovereignty" is offensive to democrats who by definition assert the sovereignty of the PEOPLE, not parliament.

      By the way, calling the Windsor realm countries - the UK, Canada and the rest - “Parliamentary democracies” is showing ignorance of what the word “democracy” means which is “government by all the people”.

      The big worry about the House of Windsor is that Queen, Prince and the rest are all quite happy to do no more than rubber-stamp the sovereignty of parliament - and when parliament OKs the royalist, fascist police state to deny peoples’ basic democratic rights - to free speech, the right to protest and so on - the House of Windsor couldn’t care less, so long as their royalist privileges are protected.
      And Barry this is just for you -
      The UK state has the political and military power - and it is a terror state without a good head of state to make sure it isn't a terror state and instead was a democratic state defending the democratic rights of the people.
      But I guess that unless YOU'VE actually been terrorised by a state, you don't have any idea what a terror state is. Imagine the terrorist scum who knocked down the twin towers were in charge of your local police ... Or imagine you are on the Titanic and you know what is going to happen but when you speak out you are ignored by the idiot officers steaming full speed ahead to disaster and if you shout out you will simply be put under arrest, sedated or handcuffed etc. and ignored.
      - Peter Dow,
      Owner, Rice for President Yahoo Group

      Barry Johnson <webavenue@...> wrote:
      I'm still lost. What sort of political and military power does the Royal Family have these days?
      Kind Regards,
      Barry Johnson
      Rochester MI 48307
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Peter Dow
      Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 9:58 AM
      Subject: [rice-for-president] Re: Hey, Condi - 7/7 London bombs were aimed at republicans too!

      Thanks to RfPYG Moderators Barry and Davyd for speaking up in defence of Condi and the purpose of Rice for President Yahoo Group.
      Group members follow this good lead from our moderators and not be shy about speaking up.
      My goodness we've had some pretty harsh critics of Condi posting here - so those like Barry and Davyd - ultimate Condistas of unquestionable credentials and dedication to the cause of a President Rice - must be duly authorised to slap me down, although I'm the group owner, if I seem to dare to step out of line.
      I would say in reply to Davyd that I think that Condi DOES care, sincerely, about the local politics of other countries. She cares about the world's people - as a compassionate person - and she is intelligent enough to know that local politics matter for delivering happy countries of the world free from terror or tyranny. Condi cares - and she does it brilliantly!
      She is though the USA number 1 diplomat and therefore she needs to be on working terms with governments - allies and neutrals - all over the world.
      We Condistas are not diplomats though - therefore we should be freer to speak out where the governments of the world are failing to be properly democratic and competent.
      In reply to Barry, well I cheered on the bombing of Zarqawi - Al Qaeda's number 1 terrorist in Iraq. Therefore I see it as consistent to also wish to cheer on the possible bombing of Queen Elizabeth - the number one terrorist in Britain and, I would argue, the number one terrorist in the world.
      I mean other terrorists WANT a nuclear weapons system, but Queen Elizabeth is the only terrorist in the world, that I know of, with a working independent submarine launched Trident inter-continental ballistic nuclear missle system actually deployed and, in royalist theory, subject to her command as monarch of the UK. Frightening or what?
      A lot of my comments from my previous period of "thrown and broken crockery" so-to-speak at the time of Prince Charles being welcomed to the White House still apply.
      So here's a link to a few good posts about that then I made in one independent forum - NO PC.-
      Also I've summarised all that without all the other people posting on my Scottish National Standard Bearer website -
      Peter Dow,
      Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group

      Barry Johnson <webavenue@...> wrote:
      Agreed - This is quite inappropriate for someone to support a hawk in The War On Terror and then state that would be a happy man if someone bombed the Queen. What's THAT all about, eh?
      Kind Regards,
      Barry Johnson
      Rochester MI 48307
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: C.D.Hoit
      Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:25 PM
      Subject: RE: [rice-for-president] Hey, Condi - 7/7 London bombs were aimed at republicans too!

      At the risk of saying so, I think your comments are out of line, Peter. Condi doesn't really care about your Local politics. I think your comments are counter-productive at the least. Just MHO.

      From: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com [mailto:rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Dow
      Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:00 PM
      To: Rice for President
      Subject: [rice-for-president] Hey, Condi - 7/7 London bombs were aimed at republicans too!

      Anniversary of the July 7 London Bombing

      Secretary Condoleezza Rice
      Washington, DC
      July 8, 2006
      A year ago, fifty-two men and women in the United Kingdom lost their lives in an act of terror. They had started their day like many others with breakfast with their families, and preparations for work and school. While they left their homes like any other day on July 7, they did not return. Fifty-two families suddenly lost a wife, a husband, a parent, a child. On the anniversary of their death we again mourn their loss and extend our condolences to their families.
      The United States shares with the people of the United Kingdom a deep bond of friendship that has stood the test of time. Their loss is our loss, their struggles are our struggles. While we mourn those who were killed last July 7, we will honor their memory by continuing to work together to defeat terrorism and ensure that all those who would do harm to the innocent are brought to justice.
      Peter Dow comments -
      Hey Condi - wake the fuck up.
      The reason that Britain is so vulnerable to terrorists is because it IS a United KINGDOM. Britain is ruled as a KINGDOM and not a REPUBLIC - and that leaves us wide open to terrorism - because of the incompetent ROYALISTS who run the state, the police, etc.
      I appreciate that Condi wasn't considering this - maybe the statement was drafted by an assistant and Condi just approved it - busy on other things - but this sloppy language - along with inviting Prince Charles to the White House is what helps to keep incompetent royalists as 2nd rate incompetent allies of the USA when if there was a republican revolution in Britain - we'd be 1st rate competent allies instead.
      United Kingdom indeed! I'm not united with any royalists and if republicans bomb Queen Elizabeth then I am a happy man!
      If you are a friend of the people of Britain - THEN SAY SO - then you are my friend.
      A friend of the UK is an enemy of mine. I am a republican. What are you?
      - Peter Dow
      Owner, Rice for President Yahoo Group


      The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.

      All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine

      All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine

      Web email has come of age. Don't settle for less than the All New Yahoo! Mail.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.