ErricoMalatesta

Can I say he appears ignorant? If I create a thread and give my thesis on quantum physics actually being a theory of mashmellows and hot chocolate are people not allowed to say I am 'ignorant of quantum physics'? Is unlearned a personal attack? lacking knowledge? are these phrases any less of a "personal attack" or is it simply that "ignorant" is a stronger sounding word?

Yes the hard evidence was in a long time ago and you see it in all countries that enter into “free trade” agreements. A small part of the population win, foreign investors win and the majorities lose. So you're saying that in addition to a massive $200 billion PA trade and a mind boggling trade surplus, Mexico has also attracted foreign investment as a result of trade agreements. Thanks for pointing that out, that's an added bonus! Most contries are desperate for foreign investment because it generates jobs, growth, wealth & economic stability. You have to accept President John F. Kennedy's premise that a rising tide raises all boats and get over your hostility to a few big ships making a lot of money. If someone invests somewhere they expect and deserve a return, but there's enough personal benefit for everyone to make an agreement viable, like jobs vs. unemployment. For foreign investment this is doubly clear since investment brings in money & expertise that would simply go elsewhere. Thankyou for the Chicago school slash neo-liberal bullshit rhetoric but maybe you should investigate the reasons why the majority of the planet are against US "free" trade agreements... but I guess the global population are wrong in this and rich white men are right, whoops my bad, keep on rising tide you are taking us all with you, haha.

To an extent drug laws are a form of state mandated racism, given that the poor are usually minorities, but in theory it is a more a form of state mandated classism.

Calling someone ignorant with regards to a specific subject is not the same as calling them just ignorant or stupid and we can also if we wanted further look into his words as both bigoted and fucking racist if “some people” only understand the sword. He clearly knows nothing about Islam, current world conflicts or the invasion of Afghanistan; he is ignorant of these subjects. I didn’t call him an ignorant or stupid person I said he is ignorant “regarding this subject”.

Thankyou US taxpayers and foreign banks

I've never heard of this (granted I have never studied law). If you are a lawyer I will skeptically take your word on this but if you are not, I wouldn't mind a second opinion. Law makers, policy makers, courts, lawyers, etc etc are all part of institutions of power. I am talking purely from a sociological or ethical standpoint. The burden of proof is always on those that impose power and if they cannot prove that it is a just law or a legitimate action then it simply isn’t. Not trying to sound confrontational but is this legal fact or is it opinion? No I’m defiantly not talking from a legal standpoint, power serves its own self interests, you can’t break laws and claim they are unethical and illegitimate you will get your arse kicked within the institutions of power. That is of course without a mass popular movement doing the same, such as the rights won in the 60s but just because a large portion of the population aren’t taking affirmative action against current laws doesn’t mean they are all legitimate. So take anything, road rules or not murdering other people, strong cases can be made for why those are legitimate laws. Take laws in question however (and any number of others) regarding base jumping in national parks, where you are only endangering yourself, and a strong case could be made for why they are entirely illegitimate laws, especially with regards to punishment.

No you don't. The burden of proof lies with the lawmaker or the law itself, if you analyze a law and find it to be completely illegitimate and you do not have the power to dismantle it, either as an individual or as a collective through direct action or protest, then you simply don't follow the law. Unjust laws aren’t laws, if a power structure places a ban on jumping from a spot in a remote national forest and you are not endangering anyone but yourself when breaking that law then the law is illegitimate and you can ignore it all you like. You will be punished if you are caught breaking it but just because it exists doesn’t make it right.

Would bowing down to the rule of Islamic law be one of those diplomatic avenues? Some people only understand the sword. Thankyou for sharing your blatant ignorance regarding this subject.

This would be a sarcastic joke if not for the lack of sarcasm For every loser there's a winer and you need to look at the balance of trade to get a fair overview. Yes the winners are foreign investors and the losers are the majority of the population. You don't really know much about free trade do you? The U.S. runs a a $64billion trade deficit with Mexico. Now when you can explain how the flow of $64billion P.A. of trade dollars hurts the Mexican economy you'll have something to say. In addition to this there's an overall trade of around $200billion P.A. which generates Mexican jobs. This also ignores straight cash transfers from U.S. resident citizens which could push the deficit to $100 billion. You've really got a nerve saying anyone knows less than you about free trade as you ignore the hard evidence. Yes the hard evidence was in a long time ago and you see it in all countries that enter into “free trade” agreements. A small part of the population win, foreign investors win and the majorities lose.

This was done. The Taliban refused to comply. No it was not and in fact Robert Mueller, head of the FBI, reported eight months later after an intense investigation (and intense bombing of the country) the US believed that the 9-11 plot was hatched in Afghanistan but implemented in the UAE and Germany. Believed, as in 8 months earlier they didn’t know, and therefore couldn’t provide evidence when the Taliban, reasonably, asked for it. Yes any response that involves killing further innocent people except as a last resort after all diplomatic avenues were taken and clear evidence that supported the US claims was established.

BS! Fundamentalists are usually good at reading and taking writing literally; maybe you should apply to international law documents the same with which you apply to the bible. The US wanted all terrorists in Afghanistan including Osama and the Taliban wanted evidence to justify adhering to US demands. The US refused this and the majority of people squarely in the initial crossfire were Afghan civilians. That isn’t close to being justification for invasion. Presenting evidence, working within international law and trying to extradite Osama only to then have the Taliban refuse to comply with US demands would be getting closer to justification. Any response that was lawful and involved reason and logic. Cutting off international food programs to millions of innocent people 5 days later when the NYC skyline still has the smell of smoke isn’t. Making demands and refusing to provide evidence isn’t. Limiting diplomacy to 26 days before carpet bombing a country isn’t. Or as British military historian Michael Howard put it; an international police and international court operation rather than “trying to eradicate cancer cells with a blow torch.” So a reasonable response would have been all diplomatic and lawful channels, if this then resulted in the Taliban still refusing then a case can probably be made to justify Invading the country, although not with the methods that were used. None of this happened however and it is a testament to education and understanding of current events that the Afghanistan invasion is a “just war” and only crazy radicals would say other wise even when there was no diplomacy, more innocent people killed than in 9-11 and no goals achieved; eradication of Al-Qaeda/terrorism and the capture of Osama. The removal of the Taliban was also not a goal and was trumpeted as a victory about a month later and we should ignore the fact no one cared how brutally they repressed the Afghan people prior to 9-11.

If only we could bring democracy to them...

This would be a sarcastic joke if not for the lack of sarcasm You don't really know much about free trade do you? I don't remember being Mexican.

Maybe it wouldn't be so amazing if you looked into it, start with the price of corn or Mexican farmers and go from there. Yes neo-liberal free trade agreements are the responsibility of the US when they force them onto other nations. Clearly there is a direct relationship between economic agreements with Mexico which result in further poverty for a large section of the population and having greater influxes of Mexicans trying to sneak into the US, their wealthier neighbour with better living standards and a large boarder, where while enjoying a similar level of poverty will still have access to these better standards of living.

No it doesn’t you clearly know nothing about this subject. Like Saudi Arabia? One of the most fundamental states in the world that has received tens of millions of dollars in US aid and weapons? Well there is no conflict in Iran and the other three have nothing to do with western aimed jihad. You will have to carpet bomb Tehran and then you will have to cry about train bombings, again. Yes after crimes against humanity they did. Al-Qaeda didn’t govern Afghanistan. You broke international laws, came close to starving millions of innocent people and killed 3 times as many civilians in the first week than what died 9-11. No they weren’t. Afghanistan is also a war of aggression.

American's aren’t eliminating other people's jobs but the US government sure do a good job of eliminating basic levels of living for Mexicans through trade agreements. Well they're Mexicans Which means? No, they don't. If they didn't accept NAFTA and other "free trade" agreements they probably wouldn't be the Mexican government. Says the person who thinks international war is bad for the US economy

I weep for the education system of the United States.... Do they not teach American Government in Jr. High anymore??? If you think the US is a democracy you have a pretty bad concept of democracy... and also you are wrong. Um, yeah...that was the point... I thought about a more snarky answer to the OP like "No shit? When did that happen?" but figured that was a bit over the line. You've obviously not read several of my posts where I have corrected people stating the US is a democracy... I read it to mean the opposite. Yes good work, A+ cynicism

American's aren’t eliminating other people's jobs but the US government sure do a good job of eliminating basic levels of living for Mexicans through trade agreements.

Why would any sane or reasonable person think a person being captured or killed in war is entertaining?? Because he’s a prince Because it would cause indignant world wide uproar and morning Because it would be a nice bit of payback for Iraqis Because all news is based on death and destruction being entertainment

It would have made for some pretty entertaining news/historical event if he was shipped out and got captured and killed by them.

I weep for the education system of the United States.... Do they not teach American Government in Jr. High anymore??? If you think the US is a democracy you have a pretty bad concept of democracy... and also you are wrong.

I have marked the point where your thinking went from reality to a world where nuclear weapons explode in showers of ice-cream and lolly pops. If we were to live in a crazy world where you apply the same rules to Japan circa 1940s that the US currently work by, it would be a justifiable pre-emptive strike.

Yes I can, perhaps you missed the part of the conversation (the only part) that went like this Me - The US bombed 100,000s of innocent people You - I'm glad they did You see how that happened? I didn't say I was glad about either event, unlike you. Yeah and as I cynically pointed out pre-emptive strikes aren’t considered "starting" the war if you are the winner/US

hahahahaha

No I think it is amazing that a country can so feverishly have its youth turn to pro-American pop culture ideals after you fire bombed half the country and then tested out nuclear bombs on them. It's probably their collective guilt over killing 30M Chinese and using Korean women as sex slaves. could be