Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Terror suspect met controversial MP George Galloway many times, says sister

Terror suspect met controversial MP George Galloway many times, says sister
Thread Tools
mojo2
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 11:11 AM
 
Suspect 'met Galloway'


Denial ... Galloway not familiar with Zaman

TERROR suspect Waheed Zaman met controversial MP George Galloway many times, his sister said last night.

Safeena, 24, said of her 23-year-old brother: “He saw it as his duty to stand up for his community and that’s what led him to know George Galloway. He has a lot of respect for him and has met him many times.”

A spokesman for MP Galloway, above, said: “Waheed Zaman is not a name that George is familiar with. He is not known to him on a personal level.”

There is no suggestion Galloway is an associate of Zaman.

George Galloway, MP (born 16 August 1954) is a British politician noted for his socialist views and rhetorical style. He is currently the Respect Party Member of Parliament (MP) for Bethnal Green and Bow, and was previously elected as a Labour Party MP for Glasgow Hillhead and Glasgow Kelvin.

Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to overturn economic sanctions against Iraq, and for his visits to Saddam Hussein in 1994 and 2002. In October 2003, he was expelled from the Labour Party when a party body ruled that he had brought the party into disrepute over the 2003 invasion of Iraq, when he called the Labour government "Tony Blair's lie machine" [1], and stated that British soldiers should "refuse to obey illegal orders." [2]

In January 2004, he teamed up with the Socialist Workers Party, leading members of anti-war movements such as Salma Yaqoob, and other figures on the British left such as film-maker Ken Loach and journalist George Monbiot (who later left), to form RESPECT The Unity Coalition (Respect), a new political party to the left of Labour.

He won his seat in the 2005 general election, standing for his new party. In January 2006 he sparked controversy for taking part in the television series Celebrity Big Brother.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 11:37 AM
 
Sounds like an investigation should be started over that claim.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 12:01 PM
 
Socialist Workers Party
Intresting.
All that is missing is Nationalist.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 01:52 PM
 
I trust everyone who's ever met Zaman will be put under the same media scrutiny, or will just the prominent "thorn-in-the-govts-side" anti-war supporters get the special treatment?

I think the newspapers should be careful this time round, and avoid any claims they can't subsantiate. Gallowy's rather fond of extracting money from them in libel cases.
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 01:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Interesting. All that is missing is Nationalist.




No, not so much "interesting" as "stupid".



"The Socialist Workers Party was founded as a split from the Revolutionary Communist Party. Originally called the Socialist Review Group (SRG), the Socialist Workers Party (SWP)was formed Palestinian Jewish emigrant Tony Cliff in 1950. The SRG grew slowly and in 1962 was renamed the “International Socialists (IS).” By working (beginning in 1968) in the Labour Party, the IS was able to gain membership from within Labour’s Young Socialist group. In 1977, Cliff officially reformed his IS its current incarnation — the Socialist Workers Party. The SWP quickly grew to one of the most dedicated parties on the Left, publishing the newspaper Socialist Worker, and forming the International Socialist Tendency (IST) for the purpose of creating SWP mirror groups in other nations (such as the American ISO). However, during most of its history, the SWP/UK continued providing critical support for the Labour Party electorally. This changed in 1998, however. Angered by the continued right-ward flow of Tony Blair’s New Labour, Tony Cliff began efforts to work with other British Marxist organizations in creating an official Socialist Alliance."



Hope this helps with your left/right confusion, Captain.
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 04:15 PM
 
So socialist still means left?
And national socialist and it means right?
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 04:35 PM
 
Nice signature banner Skycaptain.

Simplistic. Inaccurate.

It's you.
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 04:57 PM
 
Not inaacurate.
Keep up the personal ****.
I haven't seen a swipe at Athen's yet by you.
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2006, 06:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
So socialist still means left?
And national socialist and it means right?
No - national socialist is far left. It's been rebranded by the left over the past 50 years to lurk on the far-right, but any in-depth analysis of its roots, goals, and aims put it on the left.
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 06:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by spacefreak
No - national socialist is far left. It's been rebranded by the left over the past 50 years to lurk on the far-right

Rebranded, by... the left?

Wow, Hitler and the rest of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei must be turning in their graves.
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 06:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Not inaacurate.
Keep up the personal ****.
I haven't seen a swipe at Athen's yet by you.

Now that's a better signature Sky. That one I like.
     
Krusty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Always within bluetooth range
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 07:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by mojo2
Suspect 'met Galloway'
I'm just wondering why you copied, verbatim, a story without including a link to the source. You even copied the picture and re-hosted it on imageshack and then put a generic link to Galloway to wikipedia rather than the story you copied.

Could it possibly be that you are trying hide the fact that:

This story was posted in The Sun, a tabloid which has a "Bizzare" section and a page 3 topless pinup girl in addition to "news".

This story has been up for 2 days yet not one single other news source is repeating this claim.

There is no citation in this story. Not even an author willing to put his name to it.

This paper is owned by Rupert Murdoch who also owns Fox News and is known for provacative "shock" news stories and hires people like Geraldo Rivera and Bill O'Reilly as "journalists".


Maybe this story is true .... but it sounds highly suspect at this point. Can you find one other link to different news source other than somebody's blog just citing The Sun ? Until then, this story just looks like FUD an insinuation by a far right rag trying to get a rumor "in play" about a vocal and highly credible opponent to both the Iraq war and Israel's invasion of Lebanon.

Oh, here's the link to the original story that you should always include when copying verbatim.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006370177,00.html.
     
moodymonster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 07:48 AM
 
left and right - it's not line but a circle.
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 07:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by spacefreak
No - national socialist is far left. It's been rebranded by the left over the past 50 years to lurk on the far-right, but any in-depth analysis of its roots, goals, and aims put it on the left.
Absolutely 100% wrong.

The core ideology of NATIONAL socialism hinges on AUTHORITARIANISM and the BRUTE FORCE RULE of the 'strong' over the 'weak'. Also, National Socialism strives for the consolidation of inherited wealth and 'Big Business' (or today, the corporate superstructure).

Also, the aspect of 'nationalism' plays a key role in fascist ideology.

The actual re-brading of the term has been done recently by the 21st century proto-fascists (i.e. neo-conservatives) to shift the focus on issues of 'size of government' and the idea of 'social welfare'

This 're-branding' has since been thoroughly deconstructed and discredetid.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
yakkiebah
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dar al-Harb
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 08:21 AM
 
Both socialism, communism and national socialism are equally authoritarian. They are both against big business and free market capitalism. The main thing that makes them different lies in nationalistic part. Where socialism preaches equality among all, national socialism preaches it only for it's own people.
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 08:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by yakkiebah
They are both against big business and free market capitalism.
Not true. Mussolini himself said that 'big business' was supposed to be fused with inherited wealth to become a cornerstone of fascist ideology.

Originally Posted by yakkiebah
The main thing that makes them different lies in nationalistic part. Where socialism preaches equality among all, national socialism preaches it only for it's own people.
While this is certainly true in terms of the 'ideological status quo', the goal of communism and socialism was to ultimately establish an international!, non-authoritarian and egalitarian society (anarchy), while national socialism is almost wholly dependent on heirarchical, non-egalitarian, social structures.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 08:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kr0nos
While this is certainly true in terms of the 'ideological status quo', the goal of communism and socialism was to ultimately establish an international!, non-authoritarian and egalitarian society (anarchy), while national socialism is almost wholly dependent on heirarchical, non-egalitarian, social structures.
When has communism(=socialism) ever produced a non-authoritarian society?
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
yakkiebah
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dar al-Harb
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 08:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kr0nos
Not true. Mussolini himself said that 'big business' was supposed to be fused with inherited wealth to become a cornerstone of fascist ideology.
You need to learn a bit more about the differences of fascism and national socialism or nazism.

While this is certainly true in terms of the 'ideological status quo', the goal of communism and socialism was to ultimately establish an international!, non-authoritarian and egalitarian society (anarchy), while national socialism is almost wholly dependent on heirarchical, non-egalitarian, social structures.
I'll tell you as soon as there's no authority to keep people equal it'll fall apart. That's why all communist country's turn into huge state controlled dictatorships.

In the end it's capitalism that's destroy's nationalism.
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 10:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by yakkiebah
You need to learn a bit more about the differences of fascism and national socialism or nazism.
I doubt it. Though you're more than welcome to qualify your comment.

Originally Posted by yakkiebah
I'll tell you as soon as there's no authority to keep people equal it'll fall apart.
Not necessarily. There have been small communities which have worked without authoritarian societal control.

Originally Posted by yakkiebah
That's why all communist country's turn into huge state controlled dictatorships.
No. Communist run countries turn into huge state run dictatorships because they usually 'originate' (or traditionally have originated) from monarchies (agrerian societies) or other dictatorial run cultures (interestingly NOT industrialized countrys).

It seems like one generation isn't enough to transform a culture's 'psychology' into something that is condusive to make an egalitarian society work.

And I'll grant you this, Marx was wrong when he thought capitalism would ultimately lead to communism and in the end an anarchic society. I would guess it takes at least 300-600 years to completely and naturally transform a society.

It's never going to happen that way.

Originally Posted by yakkiebah
In the end it's capitalism that's destroy's nationalism.
In the end capitalism is the ultimate 'authoritarian' and essentially fascist superstructure (if you don't believe me, take a trip to Russia and other modern plutocratic countrys).

The difference between the last century where most nationlist and fascist ideologies were 'formulated' is that back then, societal power and authority was centered around govt. and other official institutions. Today, it is mostly based in commercial and corporate entities.

Don't take my word for it, but economic globalization is going to turn into the ultimate plutocratic, authoritarian, control structure.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 10:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
When has communism(=socialism) ever produced a non-authoritarian society?
Never.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
NYCFarmboy
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 10:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Intresting.
All that is missing is Nationalist.
exactly
     
belfast-biker
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 10:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy
exactly

What do you mean?
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 11:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kr0nos
Never.
Communism will never work as long as there are people who have the will to achieve more
than just what the state "offers".

As long as there's the chance, the hope to achieve more, communism and socialism fails.
And communism seeks to destroy that hope.
North Korea prime example.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 05:25 PM
 
Rule 8 violation aberdeenwriter. Post and run and everything too. Wow.

Maybe you've been too long away from the political lounge so you might want to reaqcuaint yourself with the rules here.

I mean, it isn't like you're just stupid dipshit who is only enamored in the opinions found in press-releases or news stories and has nothing to do with his life but to troll on Mac forums..

B

(I have a cold )
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
mojo2  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 07:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo
Rule 8 violation aberdeenwriter. Post and run and everything too. Wow.

Maybe you've been too long away from the political lounge so you might want to reaqcuaint yourself with the rules here.

I mean, it isn't like you're just stupid dipshit who is only enamored in the opinions found in press-releases or news stories and has nothing to do with his life but to troll on Mac forums..

B

(I have a cold )
Maybe you should go see your local WITCH DOCTOR, voodoo.


Brujas dancing at a meeting

Witchcraft in Spain

Ian Frewer explores the weird and wonderful side to a Spain which most of us assume to be a Catholic country.


A mock up picture of a witches coven

The woman had already been put to The Question, and had confessed to practising witchcraft; for this, she was given the mercy of strangulation before burning.

She fainted when she saw the stake and the piled faggots, and was quickly despatched before being burned, with the full approval and sanction of both church and local authority.

Galacia, 1936 – the last legal witch-burning in Spain.

Old habits die hard, in Spain. In this thriving, European democracy, most towns still possess not only a massive degree of home-grown superstition, but, in many cases, even a practising Bruja, a white witch.
http://www.expatica.com/source/site_...craft+in+Spain
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 11:28 PM
 
Oh my. The bullcrap you can produce all the while patting yourself on the back thinking you're teh smartypants.

Oh and there was no witch-burning in Galicia in 1936.

Also you violated rule 8 of this forum. Well, you've done that repeatedly. Fun, is it?

No, I'm on no witch-hunt, I just hate it when people can't follow the simplest rules the rest of us do. The assholes who can't follow the rules of the community ruin it.

As of the old habits-die-hard part. Hehe, more than 1500 people were accused, tried and executed in Britain between 1400 and 1600 for being witches or warlocks. Only 300 in Spain.

V
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
mojo2  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 11:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo
Oh my. The bullcrap you can produce all the while patting yourself on the back thinking you're teh smartypants.

Oh and there was no witch-burning in Galicia in 1936.

Also you violated rule 8 of this forum. Well, you've done that repeatedly. Fun, is it?

No, I'm on no witch-hunt, I just hate it when people can't follow the simplest rules the rest of us do. The assholes who can't follow the rules of the community ruin it.

As of the old habits-die-hard part. Hehe, more than 1500 people were accused, tried and executed in Britain between 1400 and 1600 for being witches or warlocks. Only 300 in Spain.

V
Is that like the cauldron calling the kettle...
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
Kerrigan
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2006, 11:47 PM
 
Right, in Spain they had the Inquisition. So let's talk about religion. Where is Salty? Maybe he wants to chime in with another hillarious story about homosexuality and how we're all going to hell for being straight. Then people will compare him to Bin Laden and the thread will have gone full circle back to terrorism.
     
mojo2  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 12:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kerrigan
Right, in Spain they had the Inquisition. So let's talk about religion. Where is Salty? Maybe he wants to chime in with another hillarious story about how nobody at Bible College likes him and how we're all going to hell for being straight. Then people will compare him to Bin Laden and the thread will have gone full circle back to terrorism.
With all due respect for our newfound amity (at least on the subject of Newt Gingrich) let's not.
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 05:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Communism will never work as long as there are people who have the will to achieve more than just what the state "offers".
Please define 'more' and 'work' in this context.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 09:26 AM
 
Work=truly succeed/saitsfy the needs of 100% of the population.
With the complete abcence of capitalism.
In Russia it failed.
In China it's on it's way out.


More= not living in a state controlled cluster home.
Having a choice where to live.
Being allowed to own a 68 acre wilderness property. With a 3000 sq ft home.(which I do)
Having the ability to choose what kind of automobile I can own.
Having the privilige to own an aircraft. If not two.(which I do)


Communism may "work" for some.
But not for me.
My ambitions seek "more".
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 09:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by mojo2
Is that like the cauldron calling the kettle...
So, how did you come to make yet another thread with a rule 8 violation?

Why were you let back in here if you can't follow the very simple rules of this place?

V
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
mojo2  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 02:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo
So, how did you come to make yet another thread with a rule 8 violation?

Why were you let back in here if you can't follow the very simple rules of this place?

V
How's your cold?
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 06:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by mojo2
How's your cold?
Oh, I suspect it will be gone before you acknowledge rule 8 of the forum.

V
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
mojo2  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2006, 07:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo
Oh, I suspect it will be gone before you acknowledge rule 8 of the forum.

V
I think Rule 8 is a fine rule. I think George Galloway is a man who is intent on...

Wait a minute, When did the cold start? That would help determine whether it would be gone before or after what you might call acknowledgement of rule 8.

Actually, I already have.

Rule 8 is a fine rule. See?

Still have the cold or feeling better?
Give petty people just a little bit of power and watch how they misuse it! You can't silence the self doubt, can you?
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2006, 03:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Work=truly succeed/saitsfy the needs of 100% of the population.
Then capitalism certainly does NOT qualify. Also the word 'need' shouldn't be confused with 'want'. Even under the most stringent communist rule, most of the people's 'needs' (food and shelter) were/are met.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Having a choice where to live.
That's a matter of financial status more than it is of politics, – so capitalism doesn't work (for everybody) here either.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Being allowed to own a 68 acre wilderness property. With a 3000 sq ft home.
Again, a matter of finances.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Having the ability to choose what kind of automobile I can own.
Once more, rather a matter of money (and, at times, availability) than politics.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Having the privilige to own an aircraft. If not two.
Same same.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Communism may "work" for some…
while capitalism may 'work' for others. Both have serious shortcomings and weaknesses. Enough for me to chose neither.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2006, 11:22 AM
 
Matter of finance=me working hard to obtain what I want.
Under communism I can't do that.
Under socialism=taking from me and giving to you.

I choose to make my own way.


Try owning a car in Cuba.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2006, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Matter of finance=me working hard to obtain what I want.


It still doesn't make it a matter of 'politics'. And it certainly isn't a matter of choice, because you don't determine what you get paid for your work (which is either determined by your employer or your customer)

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Under communism I can't do that.
Under communism you would have had to work hard to be become a successful politician to 'obtain what you want' (and probably be at least as corrupt and selfish as your average CEO)

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Under socialism=taking from me and giving to you.
Or me giving to all, because I realize that no man's an island, and people work together to make up a society.

Originally Posted by Sky Captain
I choose to make my own way.
So do I.

Eventhough for me, this will probably mean that I have to fight harder for my freedom, than anybody would have to fight to own a car in Cuba.

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:57 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,