Lost Data

[MMI]

Well ... what shall we all talk about now?

[denuseri]

Somthing political perhaps?

[DuncanONeil]

Somthing political perhaps?

Has there been a fundamental change in the way the country's business is conducted in Washington?

[JimmyJump]

Has there been a fundamental change in the way the country's business is conducted in Washington?

Okay, so the server is located in the USA and a lot of people on the Library are from the USA, but please, don't refer to the USA as 'the country' because, hey, I'm from Belgium and a lot of other members here are not from 'the country'

And my answer to your question is 'No', for the simple fact that the USA's business is not conducted out of Washington DC. Business is conducted through the Banks who operate from yonder plush seat at the Diner's Club or some such...


JJ

[DuncanONeil]

There was no hubris in saying "the country" as I at the same time referred to the seat of power, ie Washington DC. Therefore there should be no confusion.

As for the NWO, well the old saw about "money talks" does have some weight. Seeing as how people are spending tens of millions of dollars for a four year contract job that pays $400,000. Unless you want to count the pension, $191,300. That increases each time there is a federal wage increase. these costs do not even consider the cost of the body guards and and offices and staff. Life expectancy and no increase means nearly $7 million life time income.

Okay, so the server is located in the USA and a lot of people on the Library are from the USA, but please, don't refer to the USA as 'the country' because, hey, I'm from Belgium and a lot of other members here are not from 'the country'

And my answer to your question is 'No', for the simple fact that the USA's business is not conducted out of Washington DC. Business is conducted through the Banks who operate from yonder plush seat at the Diner's Club or some such...


JJ

[denuseri]

Oh good question Duncan.

I know some would say yes.

Some would say that those in authority aparently no longer care what the "people" think anymore, especially since it seems like so many laws are on the verge of being passed right now despite the public clamore against them.

Others would say its a political ploy becuse just as many laws were passed that were unwanted in the previous administration.

The truth is I believe that there are varying degrees of this kind of thing present throughout all governments histories.

The real "change" to me at least isnt about lack of representation after election so much as the level of media involvment in the polorization proccess between our two main political parties.

[DuncanONeil]

The media used to be called the forth estate. An arm of Government that was to keep the rest honest. It seems that now the media is now a adjunct to the political parties. With the vast majority of them in bed with the radical left!

As for that "fundamental change" in the way Washington conducts business. I have yet to see that happen. In fact the old Washington ploy of putting something unpalatable in as an amendment to something that must pass. With that there is the corollary used against the opposition is that if they defeat the bill they are against that necessary action, usually defense, or if the bill passes they call the opposition hypocrites in railing against that for which they vote. I see this still happening so I can only presume the :fundamental change" is in overall governance ideas for the nation. The President has already said the the national interests of the country are not important if another country disagrees.

Oh good question Duncan.

I know some would say yes.

Some would say that those in authority aparently no longer care what the "people" think anymore, especially since it seems like so many laws are on the verge of being passed right now despite the public clamore against them.

Others would say its a political ploy becuse just as many laws were passed that were unwanted in the previous administration.

The truth is I believe that there are varying degrees of this kind of thing present throughout all governments histories.

The real "change" to me at least isnt about lack of representation after election so much as the level of media involvment in the polorization proccess between our two main political parties.

[fetishdj]

Everyone knows that there is only one country in the world, the one country that rules most of it... the United Kingdom. Ok, we've let some of you rule yourselves for a little while, but everyone knows that is only temporary... We'll welcome you back into the Empire when you are well and truly ready

Seriously, I'm actually pleased to have a break from serious political debate for a short while.

[MMI]

Everyone knows that there is only one country in the world, the one country that rules most of it... the United Kingdom. Ok, we've let some of you rule yourselves for a little while, but everyone knows that is only temporary... We'll welcome you back into the Empire when you are well and truly ready

Seriously, I'm actually pleased to have a break from serious political debate for a short while.

Speaking as a jingoistic Colonel Blimp, you don't know how glad I am that someone else said that and not me!

However, we can only let the British bits back into the Empire - and perhaps the areas we reserved for the Indians. The rest would have to go back to France, Spain, Russia and Holland ... and Hawaii would be on its own.

[DuncanONeil]

It appears the Harry Reid is determined to fill all of our stockings this year!!

It is unfortunate though that he plans on doing that with lumps of coal, Copenhagen not withstanding!

[denuseri]

Speaking of the lack of discussion about non Americian (Primaraly USA) dominated political discussion lets not forget the European, not to mention all other world political organizations.

What are the main party Divisions out there? How and where do they fit into things in general etc etc.

Is the USA the new Rome?

[DuncanONeil]

What is with the fracas involving that Italian Minister?

Speaking of the lack of discussion about non Americian (Primaraly USA) dominated political discussion lets not forget the European, not to mention all other world political organizations.

What are the main party Divisions out there? How and where do they fit into things in general etc etc.

Is the USA the new Rome?

[IAN 2411]

Speaking of the lack of discussion about non Americian (Primaraly USA) dominated political discussion lets not forget the European, not to mention all other world political organizations.

What are the main party Divisions out there? How and where do they fit into things in general etc etc.

Is the USA the new Rome?

denuseri, with all due respect but i am not sure what you mean by [quote= Is the USA the new Rome?
Do you mean spiritually or Empire building, or political?

Well this is my Rant.
[History] The British Empire was bigger than the Roman Empire, but just like the Romans we gave some countries back and lost other countries. We still have however Countries that still have close relations with us and still respect our Queen. Canada, Australia, New Zealand and that is to name but a few, so if that is what you mean, forget it. Empires are dead but Europe is still trying to take any country that it opposes by stealth without using an army, it expects everyone else to fight its battles. I expect the English and Americans to go and bail them out at some stage in the near future, it will probably be after the terrorists they refuse to fight in Afghanistan, rip their countries to bits. Europe is so much in fear of England that they made Berlusconi their King, and told us we can keep Blair and Gordon Brown as our dictator’s, and as a dictator Brown is doing Quite well, I believe he has asked for a transfer to North Korea next year as a replacement for the one they have.
Now spiritually you can forget that one,
The Roman Catholic Church has one billion members including the Christian faith, and that is only one sixth of the world population. They are probably out-numbered by atheists; some god fearing people have moved on and believe in science and evolution. No one country leads the way in politics or by example, they are too busy watching their own backs. The truth of the matter is, the British are living and dying alongside the Americans in the name of freedom. The Europeans are quite happy to see the British and Americans do this as long as Brown lets them keep chipping away at our Sovereign Nation, and the Americans give them a nuclear shield in Europe. I have no time for Europe, and neither have 65% of the United Kingdom, [Fact]. The divisions are not in the countries but between the countries, and the divisions are made by politics.

Rgards Ian

[DuncanONeil]

"(S)ome god fearing people have moved on and believe in science and evolution." Excuse me? One can not believe is science and evolution and be God fearing? Methinks you need to refresh your history of scientific advancement. The majority of which came either from the church, men of faith, or sponsored by the church!

Your data on the numbers of RCs is partly correct. There are one billion RCs, which is over one-half of all christians. Therefore the RCs by themselves are as numerous as the Chinese. Then if one considers adding The Eastern Orthodox, Catholics become 1.3 billion(still about 1/6). At about 17% this dwarfs the worlds number of atheists, who approximate 2.3%

The Roman Catholic Church has one billion members including the Christian faith, and that is only one sixth of the world population. They are probably out-numbered by atheists; some god fearing people have moved on and believe in science and evolution. No one country leads the way in politics or by example, they are too busy watching their own backs. The truth of the matter is, the British are living and dying alongside the Americans in the name of freedom. The Europeans are quite happy to see the British and Americans do this as long as Brown lets them keep chipping away at our Sovereign Nation, and the Americans give them a nuclear shield in Europe. I have no time for Europe, and neither have 65% of the United Kingdom, [Fact]. The divisions are not in the countries but between the countries, and the divisions are made by politics.

Rgards Ian

[IAN 2411]

"(S)ome god fearing people have moved on and believe in science and evolution." Excuse me? One can not believe is science and evolution and be God fearing? Methinks you need to refresh your history of scientific advancement. The majority of which came either from the church, men of faith, or sponsored by the church!

Your data on the numbers of RCs is partly correct. There are one billion RCs, which is over one-half of all christians. Therefore the RCs by themselves are as numerous as the Chinese. Then if one considers adding The Eastern Orthodox, Catholics become 1.3 billion(still about 1/6). At about 17% this dwarfs the worlds number of atheists, who approximate 2.3%

Ok lets get this right If you were god fearing and you have moved on, it means you no longer believe in god but science and evolution, that was the point i was making and while we are about scoring points. My data apart from the atheists is perfectly correct, i failed to mention that atheists are part of the Nontheist group, and they number 11%, meaning still that you are correct that the Catholic church out number them. I am but a mear mortal and lible to make mistakes.

Wicipedia: -

The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church,[note 1] is the world's largest Christian church. With more than a billion members, over half of all Christians[note 2] and more than one-sixth of the world's population, the Catholic Church is a communion of the Western, or (Latin Rite) Church, and 22 autonomous Eastern Catholic Churches (called particular churches), comprising a total of 2,795 dioceses in 2008. The Church's highest earthly authority in matters of faith, morality, and governance is the Pope,[15] currently Pope Benedict XVI, who holds supreme authority in concert with the College of Bishops, of which he is the head.[16][17][18] The Catholic community is made up of an ordained ministry and the laity; members of either group may belong to organized religious communities.[19]

The men of faith are self proclaimed, they do it because it is their firm belief, then they push their philosaphy down our throats. Get real it is just a big club.

Lighten up, you are picking weak holes.

Regards ian

[DuncanONeil]

Not picking weak holes. Your data on the number of Catholics and Christians is backwards. I suggest you read that Wiki section again. The RCs are over one billion and that represents more than half of all Christians. Therefore the total number of Christians is nearer two billion, or one-third of the population!
And as for the "big club" I am of the position that doing so is not christian.

Ok lets get this right If you were god fearing and you have moved on, it means you no longer believe in god but science and evolution, that was the point i was making and while we are about scoring points. My data apart from the atheists is perfectly correct, i failed to mention that atheists are part of the Nontheist group, and they number 11%, meaning still that you are correct that the Catholic church out number them. I am but a mear mortal and lible to make mistakes.

Wicipedia: -

The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church,[note 1] is the world's largest Christian church. With more than a billion members, over half of all Christians[note 2] and more than one-sixth of the world's population, the Catholic Church is a communion of the Western, or (Latin Rite) Church, and 22 autonomous Eastern Catholic Churches (called particular churches), comprising a total of 2,795 dioceses in 2008. The Church's highest earthly authority in matters of faith, morality, and governance is the Pope,[15] currently Pope Benedict XVI, who holds supreme authority in concert with the College of Bishops, of which he is the head.[16][17][18] The Catholic community is made up of an ordained ministry and the laity; members of either group may belong to organized religious communities.[19]

The men of faith are self proclaimed, they do it because it is their firm belief, then they push their philosaphy down our throats. Get real it is just a big club.

Lighten up, you are picking weak holes.

Regards ian

[fetishdj]

Meh, by divine right we still own parts of France... or would if Mary I hadn't been stupid enough to lose Calais

Not sure anyone wants a debate on European poilitics... there is one advantage to a 2 party system and that is it is easy to understand. Most European countries now have many, many parties and the way they interact within Europe is complicated. The parties that have power in their individual countries are not necessarily the ones that have power in Europe. For example, the Green party in Britain rarely stands for general election (they have one or two seats in parliament which they sometimes stand for and I am not aware of them winning anywhere) but in the European elections they often get several seats. Of course, they can do more for the environment in Europe (because Europe has more power over industrial standards) than they could in the UK parliament, even if they actually performed the miracle of getting a majority in parliament and therefore determining the government...

Of course, the main problem is that many of the smaller parties are too small to effectively create a government (and they are mainly single issue parties) so we are, in effect, limited still to the 2 and a half party system we have had for years...

[DuncanONeil]

Since you mention the "Greens". If the Greens got what they truly wanted the world population would likely be, at best, in the millions. Rather than where it is now. Also when the population was in that neighborhood it took three days to get from the east coast of this state to the State Capital, a distance of some 70 miles!

Meh, by divine right we still own parts of France... or would if Mary I hadn't been stupid enough to lose Calais

Not sure anyone wants a debate on European poilitics... there is one advantage to a 2 party system and that is it is easy to understand. Most European countries now have many, many parties and the way they interact within Europe is complicated. The parties that have power in their individual countries are not necessarily the ones that have power in Europe. For example, the Green party in Britain rarely stands for general election (they have one or two seats in parliament which they sometimes stand for and I am not aware of them winning anywhere) but in the European elections they often get several seats. Of course, they can do more for the environment in Europe (because Europe has more power over industrial standards) than they could in the UK parliament, even if they actually performed the miracle of getting a majority in parliament and therefore determining the government...

Of course, the main problem is that many of the smaller parties are too small to effectively create a government (and they are mainly single issue parties) so we are, in effect, limited still to the 2 and a half party system we have had for years...

[fetishdj]

I agree (odd, we agree on something )the greens are in no way suited for higher levels of power. Put them in charge of a country and they would have trouble. This is why they are better off in Brussels deciding things about emissions and so on.

By Italian Minister, I assume you mean Berlisconi (who is actually the president) who got attacked at a rally the other day? Or something else which I missed due to not seeing the news much today?

[DuncanONeil]

Man got hit in the face with a model of some statue or building!

I agree (odd, we agree on something )the greens are in no way suited for higher levels of power. Put them in charge of a country and they would have trouble. This is why they are better off in Brussels deciding things about emissions and so on.

By Italian Minister, I assume you mean Berlisconi (who is actually the president) who got attacked at a rally the other day? Or something else which I missed due to not seeing the news much today?

[denuseri]

Well then since we wish to equate Brittian with Rome, than perhaps the USA is the new Constantinople?

We seem to be the dominant topic of allmost every political discussion on these forums. But that is spurious I am sure since this is primarally an english speaking site.

Spiritually? I fail to see where that came from? Whats Catholisim got to do with it? I thought GB went with its own church anyways....If one thinks, that having freedom of religion inheriently gives liscense to such I suppose so then, but I do believe that religion isnt what I am implying. (at least out side of a religious position as propogators of a Neo-Crusades) At least not yet, The Romans and classical weastern society did have all sorts of religious freedom compared to their counterparts, at least until the adoption of christianity (in that the USA is still very much "republicanized" in the roman sence as opposed to imperial). Though I do suppose if one means the USA acts as the moral compass for religious freedom and tolerance...shurgs idk

Politically however:

We are called upon to be the worlds defender and police force , the world economy is dependent upon our markets in a way, sometimes quite directly, there is no other country in the world that dictates poliecy to us, it is allways the other way around (at least since we took the riegns from Brittan during WW2). Etc etc, the list goes on.... all things Rome and then later Constantinople once did in thier day and age.

All besides the point, I shall restate the question more clearly since there is obvious confussion.

Has the USA become too imperial with the rest of the world?

If we truely wish to be a "New Rome" than do we also not have the same implied nessesity of establishing wise dominion, so as to at least avoid the pitfalls of complancency that lead to Romes fall? (Or any Empire/nation etc)

[DuncanONeil]

I would have to say no. I am sure some disagree but the US has not "imposed" its own way of being as Rome did!

Has the USA become too imperial with the rest of the world?

If we truely wish to be a "New Rome" than do we also not have the same implied nessesity of establishing wise dominion, so as to at least avoid the pitfalls of complancency that lead to Romes fall? (Or any Empire/nation etc)

[MMI]

Deleted by author

[MMI]

Deleted by author

OK, as there seems to be a pause for thought in this thread, I am posting this message as an aside and for information's sake (not as a corrective). In addition to Texas and Hawaii, California, Vermont and New Hampshire have also been independent nations, and it is now inconceivable that any of them would be allowed to leave the Union, not even to join Canada, regardless of what the treaties by which they joined originally said.

[Thorne]

Posted by mistake.

[DuncanONeil]

OK, as there seems to be a pause for thought in this thread, I am posting this message as an aside and for information's sake (not as a corrective). In addition to Texas and Hawaii, California, Vermont and New Hampshire have also been independent nations, and it is now inconceivable that any of them would be allowed to leave the Union, not even to join Canada, regardless of what the treaties by which they joined originally said.

In spite of what many people think Texas never retained the right to leave the Union at its own desire. It can however subdivide into smaller states!

[MMI]

I have no time for Europe, and neither have 65% of the United Kingdom, [Fact].

You could be right, but not for the reasons you suggest, and I think you do not speak for most Brits. In fact, most Brits want their boys out of Afghanistan and wish they'd never gone in there at all ... We of all nations must know how futile it is to try to subdue the Afghans.

But we are there, along with America and our European allies: France, Poland, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Lithuania, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Austria,
Netherlands, Romania, Denmark, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Albania, Georgia, Portugal, Ukraine, Ireland, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Bulgaria, Belgium, Croatia, Slovakia, Azerbaijan, Latvia, Estonia, Greece, and Luxembourg. As well as, of couse, many non-European nations.

We have more people out there than they do? So what? All that proves is that we are more belligerent than they are - something that never needed proving. But isn't it good to see how our rebellious offspring follows in our footsteps so closely?


Constantinople? Very good, den! Although it fell before Rome did, and I believe the adherents of the Western Church sacked that city long before the Turks got there. I'm not sure how the parallels run here, but I'd hate either Europe or USA to turn against the other in the pretence of rescuing it.

As far as I can see, America's imperialism is represented by a commercial empire. Politically, the USA seems to be introverted, xenophobic and wholly self-interested. The contrast is irreconcilable! Politically it has few "overseas territories" (Newspeak for "colonies"), but its business interests reach into every country in the world.

Inevitably, USA will diminish and fall, just like every other imperial power before it, and new ones - China, India, Russia (yes, you read that right) and Brazil, will take over ... for a while. Meanwhile, we would all be grateful for as much benign wisdom as the US is able to show the world, starting with Copenhagen.

[DuncanONeil]

Copenhagen is a joke. As for commercial empires. No country on the planet can survive on its own resources anymore! Therefore a world market is in the interests of the world. As it stands our greatest export is capital goods and greatest import is industrial supplies!

You could be right, but not for the reasons you suggest, and I think you do not speak for most Brits. In fact, most Brits want their boys out of Afghanistan and wish they'd never gone in there at all ... We of all nations must know how futile it is to try to subdue the Afghans.

But we are there, along with America and our European allies: France, Poland, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Lithuania, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Austria,
Netherlands, Romania, Denmark, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Albania, Georgia, Portugal, Ukraine, Ireland, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Bulgaria, Belgium, Croatia, Slovakia, Azerbaijan, Latvia, Estonia, Greece, and Luxembourg. As well as, of couse, many non-European nations.

We have more people out there than they do? So what? All that proves is that we are more belligerent than they are - something that never needed proving. But isn't it good to see how our rebellious offspring follows in our footsteps so closely?


Constantinople? Very good, den! Although it fell before Rome did, and I believe the adherents of the Western Church sacked that city long before the Turks got there. I'm not sure how the parallels run here, but I'd hate either Europe or USA to turn against the other in the pretence of rescuing it.

As far as I can see, America's imperialism is represented by a commercial empire. Politically, the USA seems to be introverted, xenophobic and wholly self-interested. The contrast is irreconcilable! Politically it has few "overseas territories" (Newspeak for "colonies"), but its business interests reach into every country in the world.

Inevitably, USA will diminish and fall, just like every other imperial power before it, and new ones - China, India, Russia (yes, you read that right) and Brazil, will take over ... for a while. Meanwhile, we would all be grateful for as much benign wisdom as the US is able to show the world, starting with Copenhagen.

[IAN 2411]

I don’t know what country you come from MMI, but if it is GB then you had better get up to speed. Of a pole by [you gov] a few months ago there was a 65% of the British population wishing to leave the European community all together. Europeans are greedy and manipulative, they have forced their laws on the British population through back door dealings, and there is not an ounce of decency in the European parliament. As for these other countries that are backing the Brits and The Americans in Afghanistan, where the fuck are they. Spain; I think had a train blown up and they pulled half their troops out for fear of reprisals, now that says it all. The others that you mention are just a token force, there but not seen, probably still in the dug outs. I am not stupid so don’t take me for a fool, the Afghan’s have been invaded by the British Twice, the Russians once, they are a nation of fighters that have been fighting between tribes since time began. And when this force of two real nations UK and USA leave they will still be fighting.

I at no time inferred that the Brits loved the war, and of course they don’t, and neither do they like their loved ones being sent home in body bags. The truth is, until Afghanistan is free of alkida; there will always be BRIT/AMERICAN forces there. As for the troops not wanting to be there or their families saying the same, I would like to point out that I was in the UK special forces, and spent over two years getting shot at, nail bombed and Molotov cocktailed by the very same people we were protecting in Northern Ireland. My family and I and all my comrades never wanted to be there either, so please don’t belly ache to me about useless battles, and how we should not be there.

When it comes to kicking ass the Europeans are never there, the three main words in their dictionary is Capitulate, surrender, and retreat. If you look at my avatar you will see United Kingdom, and it means that I am proud of where I come from.

Regards Ian

[steelish]

Europeans are greedy and manipulative, they have forced their laws on the British population through back door dealings, and there is not an ounce of decency in the European parliament.

Wow, sounds familiar. Methinks it is EXACTLY what we're going through right now with the American government!