The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[Auditor's Toad]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

<snip>
Lakey

Pure self important making BS.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

... This system of administration did not start with the communism.

It goes bacdk to even before the Tatar invasion, which too was partly a result of this breakdown.

The Anabaptist Jacques

That is true. It is also the central problem of Russian history and accounts for Russia's historical lagging behind the rest of europe in cultural & economic development despite their incredible access to natural resources. Too much attention has been focused historically on maintaining centralized control and universal conformance to central authority at the expense of social, cultural, and technological development of outlying regions. The fear of loss of control by the central authorities results in an excessively restrictive policy implemented in the hinterlands.

It's like denying the kids advanced education for fear of the way the education would likely cause them to deviate from traditional belief & practice. Education is only for those who can handle it. Just ask Commissar Santorum.

And you are right it is a matter of local culture. Nonetheless, cultural practices aren't innocuous. They can have profoundly deleterious effects, not only on their own societies but on other communities also. Same is true in the microcosm as the macrocosm. It is a contributor to why freedom can never be an absolute.


Mark A. Baker

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

That is true. It is also the central problem of Russian history and accounts for Russia's historical lagging behind the rest of europe in cultural & economic development despite their incredible access to natural resources. Too much attention has been focused historically on maintaining centralized control and universal conformance to central authority at the expense of social, cultural, and technological development of outlying regions. The fear of loss of control by the central authorities results in an excessively restrictive policy implemented in the hinterlands.

It's like denying the kids advanced education for fear of the way the education would likely cause them to deviate from traditional belief & practice. Education is only for those who can handle it. Just ask Commissar Santorum.

And you are right it is a matter of local culture. Nonetheless, cultural practices aren't innocuous. They can have profoundly deleterious effects, not only on their own societies but on other communities also. Same is true in the microcosm as the macrocosm. It is a contributor to why freedom can never be an absolute.


Mark A. Baker

I don't get your comment about Commissar Santorum. I know that he and his wife home school their children and that Commissar is used humorously. Nevertheless, I do not see why home schooling would suggest the use of such a term, even in jest.
Lakey

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

Au contraire, Mick. Unlike yourself I've been following Reagan since the early '60s. I was raised in a politically conservative republican household in So. California and in earlier years was intimately familiar with republican party politics & policies. Although I no longer care about such things to the extent I once did, my personal orientation remains a tendency to be conservative, very conservative. But I also know crazy stupid when I see it. There's a lot of it about now a days especially among those claiming 'conservative' or 'republican' affiliation.

wow - for someone who claims to have followed Reagan since the 60's you managed to miss almighty amounts of what he did. Kind of sad but pretty much what i have come to expect from you.

What works as a matter of public policy is a very different thing than what works for private individuals. The ideal of personal liberty is a great thing but it has to be balanced against the effects of conflicting interests and common practices in a complex environment. There is a great deal more that requires good stewardship than the personal interests of private individuals. Especially as private individuals are notably short sighted in pursuing their own interests and the effects of actions have been greatly extended by reliance on modern technologies.

roflmao you claimed in the paragraph above to be 'conservative" and the next paragraph you are busy denying the very tenets of conservatism. seems you almost missed almost every lesson Smith managed to teach.

Worship whom you want. Reagan's strength lay in his personality, not his insight or intelligence.

I dont 'worship" anyone though it's interesting that you think that term applies. I like Reagan and like what he did - and if you wish to see his grasp of policy TRY READING HIS WORK. Apparently you have not (and for someone who has followed him for all the decades that you have) and what we have is you just parroting pablum perennially.

Mark A. Baker
p.s. Reagan didn't force a thing. He has no responsibility in what transpired in the Soviet Union. What was happening in the soviet union was well known to policy makers there and elsewhere around the world. The difficulty lay in publicly acknowledging the problem and doing something about it. The man who did that was Gorbachev, not Reagan. Reagan was content to propagandize about it with continual yammering for which he has been lionized by 'dittoheads'.

Oh dear - read what margaret Thatcher has to say as well.

the endless drivel of you speaking with your head in the sand and your fingers in your ears... sad.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

.........,snip................................................

What works as a matter of public policy is a very different thing than what works for private individuals. The ideal of personal liberty is a great thing but it has to be balanced against the effects of conflicting interests and common practices in a complex environment. There is a great deal more that requires good stewardship than the personal interests of private individuals. Especially as private individuals are notably short sighted in pursuing their own interests and the effects of actions have been greatly extended by reliance on modern technologies.

Thanks for writing this paragraph! I have noticed how the Progressive Elites have a "know best" attitude. They feel that they are the Elite and are wiser and more evolved than the rest of us, particularly the people who live in the "red" or "fly over" states. They are firm in their conviction that it is their duty to enforce their enlightened agenda on the rest of us simpletons. Anything goes when enforcing their wisdom. Lying, distorting statistics, slander liable, bribes, payola, dead agenting the opposition is all okay when an elite is imposing his wisdom on the unenlightened.

I wondered where this concept came from and Mark's quoted paragraph above is the first time I have seen or heard anything which would explain this attitude.

I'm not criticizing the paragraph. There are many truths in it and I would tend to agree with it all. When it comes to "balancing the conflicts", I don't always like the way the Progressive's do it. What one gives value to in the balancing process is where I part company some of the time with the Progressives.

A central belief of Progressives, as I understand it, is that man is just an animal here on Earth by random chance and has to exercise good stewardship to protect our planet and our environment. I always took the view than mankind was spiritual and the Earth was here for his use. Of course, he should exercise good stewardship and respect the environment but ultimately the needs of mankind, or private individuals if you will, come first. That could be the real divide between Progressives and Conservatives.

Another difference is the imposition of values. Liberals tend to be sure that they have superior knowledge and that it is their duty to impose their wills over the insane and simplistic conservatives. The conservatives, also believe they are right but they don't have the same drive to impose their will over the Progressives. The drive in them to do that is not nearly as strong as it is the other way.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

Another difference is the imposition of values. Liberals tend to be sure that they have superior knowledge and that it is their duty to impose their wills over the insane and simplistic conservatives. The conservatives, also believe they are right but they don't have the same drive to impose their will over the Progressives. The drive in them to do that is not nearly as strong as it is the other way.

ummmm...........

so.............
outlawing abortions

not funding birth control

making corporations capable of buying elections

funding corporate welfare

cutting people's welfare safety net

sending marijuana users to jail

outlawing same sex marriage

closing the government down as a negotiating tactic

railing at the lack of Christianity in schools and government

attacking Iraq in a unilateral unprovoked war based on trumped up lies from the White House (Bush)

firing Democrats from the Justice Department (Bush)

a woman speaking before Congress in favor of contraception is labeled a "slut" and vigorously attacked by Conservatives

Romney saying he would not have bailed out GM, instead he would have let one million (the estimated number of workers, who would have lost their jobs, had GM gone under) Americans lose their jobs


those^^^^^^^ are strong primal drives in my way of thinking

have you heard Paul Ryan lately?

just to disclose my point of view: I'm a libertarian. I'm not in favor of the government running anyone's lives. Still I'm closer, in philosophy and politics to Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley, Jr., and to Ronald Reagan than to any Democrat. These "God fearing" do gooders (Santorum, Perry, etc) are far worse, for my vote, than any other political breed.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

Jacques - I appreciate that you have volunteered to work in the polls and respect you for that and admit that doing so gives you first hand evidence of things which have actually taken place. Your urging others to volunteer for that kind of word is also sound and admirable. I admit that I do not have that experience.

However, I believe that you are overlooking some significant factors in the body of your post. I pointed these factors out yesterday but you made no response to them.

I'm talking about people being bused to the polls after having first been given some money and/orfood. You have to recognize that most of the disenfranchised people and particularly minority groups are much more likely to vote Democrat than Republican. 90% of all Blacks vote the Democratic ticket, for Latinos, the percentage is between 60 to 70%, for young single mothers the percentage is very high. The Republicans are perceived to be "fat cats" and rich while the Democrats are compassionate party, the party of the poor.
T
Also, Republicans want smaller government and more self reliance and are usually against raising the minimum wage whereas Democrat' policy tends toward a larger government with more entitlements. The result is that you are unlikely to see bus loads of disenfranchised Republicans being given some perks and then being driven to the polls in a bus. If you witness such a bus, the odds are about 99.9% that it would contain Democrat voters..

Also in your comments about being registered, you are assuming that the officials at the precinct are honest and unbiased. This might be true for the vast majority of precincts but in certain areas, such as the South side of Chicago, biased precinct officials are likely to be prevalent. In Chicago, the bias would always be pro Democrat. Conversely, there may be other precincts in certain areas, often in the South, where there are dishonest Republican precinct officials.

There is video footage from 2008 of the Acorn Organization in Chicago rounding up idle people on the street, giving them perks and then taking them en masse to register to vote. Of course they register 100% as Democrats.

Probably both parties are equally willing to do these things but since this procedure is most effective with disenfranchised, low income people, most of the cheating will be done by the Democrats.
Lakey

Getting people to register to vote is not cheating.

Preventing people who are registered from voting is cheating.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

ummmm...........

so.............
outlawing abortions

not funding birth control

making corporations capable of buying elections

funding corporate welfare

cutting people's welfare safety net

sending marijuana users to jail

outlawing same sex marriage

closing the government down as a negotiating tactic

railing at the lack of Christianity in schools and government

attacking Iraq in a unilateral unprovoked war based on trumped up lies from the White House (Bush)

firing Democrats from the Justice Department (Bush)

a woman speaking before Congress in favor of contraception is labeled a "slut" and vigorously attacked by Conservatives

Romney saying he would not have bailed out GM, instead he would have let one million (the estimated number of workers, who would have lost their jobs, had GM gone under) Americans lose their jobs


those^^^^^^^ are strong primal drives in my way of thinking

have you heard Paul Ryan lately?

just to disclose my point of view: I'm a libertarian. I'm not in favor of the government running anyone's lives. Still I'm closer, in philosophy and politics to Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley, Jr., and to Ronald Reagan than to any Democrat. These "God fearing" do gooders (Santorum, Perry, etc) are far worse, for my vote, than any other political breed.

My point had little or nothing to do with specific issues.

My point was that the Progressives are more pompous, more pedantic,more prone to promote falsehoods and do whatever it takes to see that their viewpoint prevails.... and when they do these things, they are proud of it and feel they have done their duty. Behind this is the concept that they are the elite and enlightened ones and they alone can see the truth and that all viewpoints are destructive.

Right wingers will also fight hard for their positions but if they lose an election, they will shrug it off, say that the people have spoken and try and pick a better candidate for the next election.

Some of those issues you stated are not accurate - I don't believe anyone is pushing for not funding birth control.

Closing the government down as a negotiating tactic is more of a Democratic tactic. The U.S. Senate tables dozens of bills which made it through the House. If the Senate Leader Harry Reed does not like a bill, he simply doesn't allow it to be put up for a vote in the Senate. One example is refusing to put a house approved budget up for a vote leading us to not having had a budget for the last 3 years!

No one is railing at the lack of Christianity in the schools and government. That's just not an accurate statement.

Some of the other items have some merit and some don't but that was not what my post was about.
Lakey

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

You said a mouthful! Your a card carrying Socialist and think Marx is mostly right about the important things. Very interesting. I don't know much about Marx and don't really want to know about him. Its good that we can still reach common ground on occasion on this forum. Just from a cursory glance, it seems that everywhere his principles have been put into action they have not worked very well. Most of the people are subjugated by the state and end up slaving for it. The people have very little freedom and basically can not leave their country, even for vacations.

Some of the places where the governments are still using a form of Marxism are Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, not to mention Venezuela. Those countries are not good promo for a Marxist system. No freedom of speech, no freedom of the press, no right to free travel freely.

My only experience from the inside was when I went to Germany in 1967 and took the subway, alone, over to East Berlin. Here it was, 1967 and most of the city was still in ruins. The former ritzy avenue, Unter den Linden had a lot of beautiful new buildings built in a neo classic style. These were all various museums, libraries, music halls,government administration buildings. When you looked down the side streets everything else was still in ruins.

My tour guide explained that the Russians were not going to invest in rebuilding East Germany because they had lost 20 million citizens killed by the Germans in WWII. I could see the guys point! Meanwhile, the Berlin Wall was up and thriving at that time. I went back in June, 2009 and it was all totally rebuilt and beautiful. The fashionable Unter den Linden district was fully restored.

Since 1991, East Germany reunited with Germany and is now a showplace and the people are much freer and much happier than when they were under a Marxist regime.

That brings up a point. If Marx had the big things right, When a Marxist stat exists side by side with a non Marxist state, as in the cases of East and West Berlin, East and West Germany, North and South Korea and Cuba and the coast of Florida, why is it that people are trying to flee the Marxist state and come to the non Marxist state? The government has to be ruthless and build fences to keep their own citizens inside their own countries. Do you have an explanation for it?

Other good examples are the ex Soviet Bloc countries in Eastern Europe. Virtually everyone of those regimes wanted desperately to leave their Marxist government behind and live in a more Western type of society. Hungary rebelled in 1956 and had to be held in check by Soviet tanks. As soon as the Iron Curtain fell, Poland, Hungary, Lithunia, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovokia, etc all jettisoned Marism for a Western type of government. If Marxism had anything to offer people you would think that a least a few of those countries would have formed a Communist government but there was no delay, no debate or vote, the people immediately set up Western type governments

It probably sounds simplistic to you but it is pragmatic. People want to get into countries where they have the opportunity to lead good lives. When a Marxist state exists next to a non Marxist state, the people pick up on the difference in the quality of life and want desperately to live under a non Marxist regime. I don' see much value in studying a particular type of governmental system when so much pragmatic evidence has shown over and over that it does not work!
Lakey

The actions of governments that call themselves Marxist and what Marx wrote are two different things.

Karl Marx commenting on the ideas of political groups that called themselves marxist said "I am not a Marxist."

The ideas expressed in the Declaration of Independence are one thing, and the institution of slavery existing for the first 75 years in the United States was another thing.

Communist China, even under Mao, called itself a Republic. Do you really think it was a republic?

Many of Marx's writings were banned in the Soviet Union. His Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 were not allowed to be publish in the Soviet Union until the mid to late 60s.

If you haven't read Marx, then of course you will probably believe what you have been told for the bulk of your lifetime.

I was that way once too.

Then I read Marx. Not what people said about Marx, but what Marx wrote.

And they are two different things.

Both the United States and the Soviet Union had vested interests in misrepresenting Marx.

You may have formed an opinion of me because I said Marx was right on the important things and I am a socialist.

But I guarantee that what you think I think and what I think are two different things.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

That is true. It is also the central problem of Russian history and accounts for Russia's historical lagging behind the rest of europe in cultural & economic development despite their incredible access to natural resources. Too much attention has been focused historically on maintaining centralized control and universal conformance to central authority at the expense of social, cultural, and technological development of outlying regions. The fear of loss of control by the central authorities results in an excessively restrictive policy implemented in the hinterlands.

It's like denying the kids advanced education for fear of the way the education would likely cause them to deviate from traditional belief & practice. Education is only for those who can handle it. Just ask Commissar Santorum.

And you are right it is a matter of local culture. Nonetheless, cultural practices aren't innocuous. They can have profoundly deleterious effects, not only on their own societies but on other communities also. Same is true in the microcosm as the macrocosm. It is a contributor to why freedom can never be an absolute.


Mark A. Baker

Yeah. My point is that what Gorbachev dismanted was what had worked for centuries and was consitent with their respective cultures. (meaning the Russians and the Central Asian republics)

Part of the problem the Soviets had with their Eastern Block countries stemmed from the fact that the administration the Soviets impossed on them was not consistent with their cultures.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

My point had little or nothing to do with specific issues.

My point was that the Progressives are more pompous, more pedantic,more prone to promote falsehoods and do whatever it takes to see that their viewpoint prevails.... and when they do these things, they are proud of it and feel they have done their duty. Behind this is the concept that they are the elite and enlightened ones and they alone can see the truth and that all viewpoints are destructive.

Right wingers will also fight hard for their positions but if they lose an election, they will shrug it off, say that the people have spoken and try and pick a better candidate for the next election.

Some of those issues you stated are not accurate - I don't believe anyone is pushing for not funding birth control.

Closing the government down as a negotiating tactic is more of a Democratic tactic. The U.S. Senate tables dozens of bills which made it through the House. If the Senate Leader Harry Reed does not like a bill, he simply doesn't allow it to be put up for a vote in the Senate. One example is refusing to put a house approved budget up for a vote leading us to not having had a budget for the last 3 years!

No one is railing at the lack of Christianity in the schools and government. That's just not an accurate statement.

Some of the other items have some merit and some don't but that was not what my post was about.
Lakey

I think you are living is an imaginary world. Really.

I respect different political views.

But I don't respect distorting obvious facts and realities.

I think you need to your hands personally involved with how the other half lives.

Then you would have a different view.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I don't get your comment about Commissar Santorum. I know that he and his wife home school their children and that Commissar is used humorously. Nevertheless, I do not see why home schooling would suggest the use of such a term, even in jest.
Lakey

I think he was talking about Santorums comments about not sending kids to college.

Pesonally I think home schooling is the way of the future.

It has its advantages and disadvantages, but the good far outweighs the bad.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

My point had little or nothing to do with specific issues.

My point was that the Progressives are more pompous, more pedantic,more prone to promote falsehoods and do whatever it takes to see that their viewpoint prevails.... and when they do these things, they are proud of it and feel they have done their duty. Behind this is the concept that they are the elite and enlightened ones and they alone can see the truth and that all viewpoints are destructive.

Right wingers will also fight hard for their positions but if they lose an election, they will shrug it off, say that the people have spoken and try and pick a better candidate for the next election.

Some of those issues you stated are not accurate - I don't believe anyone is pushing for not funding birth control.

[video=youtube;ODI-NALkI4c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODI-NALkI4c[/video]

[video=youtube;yJXkOgMW3tY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJXkOgMW3tY[/video]

Closing the government down as a negotiating tactic is more of a Democratic tactic. The U.S. Senate tables dozens of bills which made it through the House. If the Senate Leader Harry Reed does not like a bill, he simply doesn't allow it to be put up for a vote in the Senate. One example is refusing to put a house approved budget up for a vote leading us to not having had a budget for the last 3 years!

[video=youtube;oeu7Iuz-vKY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeu7Iuz-vKY [/video]

No one is railing at the lack of Christianity in the schools and government. That's just not an accurate statement.

[video=youtube;KQQBCLxgBuE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQQBCLxgBuE&feature=related [/video]

Some of the other items have some merit and some don't but that was not what my post was about.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

As Hubbard wrote in the axioms, lies cause something to persist. The most persistent thing would contain the most lies.

Fluke did not testify before Congress. She testified before Democrats.

She was not testifying for herself. She referred to students that she knows of or is aware of.

Rush fell into a trap. He probably won't make that same mistake again.

I wonder if any condom or contraceptive company has contacted Rush to advertise on his show?

 

[RogerB]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Hmmm, on the discussion of what Russia was prior to WW1, I offer these facts below, as taken from my book.

"There's been a lot of nonsense and distortion disseminated in the West about Imperial Russia since the revolution, which has all been designed to mislead and cover up the true reasons and motives behind the revolution and why it was brought about. The Royal Family was actually beloved by the bulk of the Russian people. As the late Professor Charles Sarolea, the profound expert on Russia from Edinburgh University, wrote in the English Review in 1925: 'It is certainly wrong to affirm that the Russian Government (of the Czar) was by nature anti-democratic. On the contrary, the Russian Monarchy was essentially democratic. It was of popular origin, and the Romanov dynasty owed its accession of power to the will of the people. Furthermore,' he stated that, 'the Russian monarchy was probably the European Government most favorable to progress. It led public opinion rather than followed it. Often the Czarist regime was able to accomplish in a few years tasks which had taken several generations in other countries. Serfdom was abolished by a stroke of the pen. The administration of the law was completely reformed. The country was covered with a network of railways, and development of industry was enormous and reached a prodigious scale.'

"Professor Sarolea was right in that," continued George, "Serfdom which had affected about thirty percent of the population was abolished by simple decree in 1861. Compare that to the civil war America had to go through to end slavery, and unlike the American slaves who got nothing and were left as poor as they had been as slaves and at the mercy of employers, in Russia, the liberated peasants were given land at the cost of the larger landowners! And, a special bank was set up to grant credit so the peasants could work their land! In 1914, more than 80% of the arable land in European Russia was in the hands of the former peasant people, and Czar Nicholas himself freely gave 40 million hectares of his own land in Asia, beyond the Urals, to the peasants. Compare that to what happened after Bolshevism took over — everything became state owned!"

And . . .

"You see, prior to the war, Russia was enormously prosperous. It had more than half of all the world's horses, which in those days were very valuable. It had in the twenty years prior to the war just completed building more railroads than all the West combined, it had discovered vast reserves of oil and was indeed the world's number two producer — at the time, of course, America was the premier world producer under the control of the Rockefeller Standard Oil monopoly. Russia, of course, had enormous agricultural wealth, productive private land ownership in the hands of the peasantry — not like today. In 1913 Russian production of principal cereal crops was one third greater than that of the Argentine, Canada and the United States combined! She was by far the world's largest exporter of grain — she was even supplying 50% of the world's imports of eggs, and grew 80% of the world's flax — which provided the oil that was essential to making all the paint at the time. As you may know, what the Europeans call flax, we in Britain call linseed.

“And on top of that, Russia was also the world's fifth largest industrial power and expanding faster than any other. You know, between 1900 and 1913 the value of production per head of population rose from less than 9 rubles to more than 14 rubles even though the population increased by nearly 30% over the same period. Between 1908 and 1914, 10,000 new schools were opened each year, and in 1912, the American President Taft made the statement that the Emperor of Russia had passed workers' legislation which was nearer to perfection than that of any democratic country. Edmond Thery, the distinguished European economist revealed in 1914 that Russia was about to become the dominant economic power when he wrote: 'If the affairs of the great European nations continue between 1912 and 1950 as they have between 1900-1912, then toward the middle of the present century, Russia will dominate Europe both politically, economically and financially'. Russia had trade unions, an elected assembly for government, a stable economy; and she had the largest gold reserves in the world with its issue of paper money more than covered by bullion with excess to boot. They were absolutely self-sufficient, had no dependency on the West at all!"

And . . .

"But the real issue was its banking system and the way it ran its economy — for you see, the threat was that the Russian way of running things would stand in stark contrast to the West's and expose the economic fraud being run in the West by its banks. That is the essence of what was a stake — more than anything else! You know, between 1897 and 1913 State receipts rose from 1.4 billion gold rubles to 3.471 billion, and not only did this revenue cover all government expenditure and provide for the expansion of population and infrastructure, but in 1914 the government had a budget surplus 512 million rubles; and all this with the lowest taxation in the industrial world! Even Russian savings bank deposits increased six fold from 360 to 2,236 millions in that same period."

 

[Ted]

More to the Story...

From the Orlando Sentinel:

Zimmerman’s father, 64-year-old Robert Zimmerman of Lake Mary, delivered a one-page letter to the Sentinel on Thursday, saying that the depiction of his son in the media has been cruel and misleading.

George Zimmerman is Hispanic and grew up in a multiracial family, the statement says.

“He would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever …,” the letter says. “The media portrayal of George as a racist could not be further from the truth.”

Statement of Robert Zimmerman, father of Neighborhood Watch volunteer/Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman:


“The tragic events of February 26 are very sad for all concerned. The Martin family, our family, and the entire community have been forever changed. The portrayal of George Zimmerman in the media, as well as the series of events that led to the tragic shooting are false and extremely misleading. Unfortunately, some individuals and organizations have used this tragedy to further their own causes and agendas.

"George is a Spanish speaking minority with many black family members and friends. He would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever. One black neighbor recently interviewed said she knew everything in the media was untrue and that she would trust George with her life. Another black neighbor said that George was the only one, black or white, who came and welcomed her to the community, offering any assistance he could provide. Recently, I met two black children George invited to a social event. I asked where they met George. They responded that he was their mentor. They said George visited them routinely, took them places, helped them, and taught them things and that they really loved George. The media portrayal of George as a racist could not be further from the truth.

"The events of February 26 reported in the media are also totally inaccurate. Out of respect for the on-going investigation, I will not discuss specifics. However, the media reports of the events are imaginary at best. At no time did George follow or confront Mr. Martin. When the true details of the event become public, and I hope that will be soon, everyone should be outraged by the treatment of George Zimmerman in the media.

"Our entire family is deeply sorry for the loss of Trayvon. We pray for the Martin family daily. We also pray that the community will grieve together and not be divided by more unwarranted hate.

"The Zimmerman family will have no further contact with the media prior to the resolution of the investigation. It would be greatly appreciated if the media would respect our privacy.”

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Hmmm, on the discussion of what Russia was prior to WW1, I offer these facts below, as taken from my book.




And . . .



And . . .

Thanks Roger, this is very interesting!! As good as K-12 education was in the USA in the 40's and 50's, we never studied anything at all about Russia. As a result of your article, I may seek out evening courses in Russian history! The subject is of intense interest to me.

My Father's family all came from Russia. Actually it was the Ukraine which was very much a part of Russia at that time. The trouble was that they were Jewish. I understand that there were pogroms where armed riders would ride into the Jewish districts of certain towns, plunder Jewish stores and murder the Jews and ride out. The Czar was in power during the times when this was taking place. Do you have any comments on what was going on which would have caused that?

I did pick up some Russian history by reading 3 novels by Dosteovsky in my late 20's, "The Brothers Karamozov", Crime and "Punishment" and the "The Idiot". Those incredibly brilliant novels reflected a vibrant and forward thinking society which aligns with the descriptions in your post. Court room trial scenes in those books are among the most interesting fiction which I have ever read!

My Grandma, born in 1883 near Kiev set sail with her brother for America around 1904. Meanwhile my Grandpa who grew up in Odessa set sail with his brother for America at about the same time. They both went through Ellis island and settled with some relatives in Boston. They met at some sort of Jewish social event and married within a matter of weeks. Grandma lived until 1989, 1 month short of 106!

The point is that there seems to have been a large Jewish exodus from Russia to America in the 1880's and 1890's and this was because the incidence and severity of the pogroms was increasing.

After the Czar was overthrown and Russia lost in WWI, we learned just a tiny bit in jr. high and high school about the struggle for power between Trotsky, tending towards democracy, and Lenin, supporting a government based on Marxist philosophy. We are told that Stalin was a high ranking aide of Lenin's and took over at Lenin's death.That's all we get aside from a few Hollywood movies made which are set during this period. It is really a huge gap in K-12 education during those years. Western history was studied a great deal but hardly anything about Russia.

Going into college with a physics and math major, these huge gaps in one's knowledge of Russian history were never addressed and remain a big void to this day.

In summary, I want to thank you again for writing your post and if you could shed some light on why Russian Jews were persecuted so strongly that would also be helpful.
Lakey

 

[RogerB]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Thanks Roger, this is very interesting!! As good as K-12 education was in the USA in the 40's and 50's, we never studied anything at all about Russia. As a result of your article, I may seek out an evening course in Russian history!

My Father's family all came from Russia. Actually it was the Ukraine which was very much a part of Russia at that time. The trouble was that they were Jewish. I understand that there were pogroms where armed riders would ride into the Jewish districts of certain towns, plunder Jewish stores and murder the Jews and ride out. The Czar was in power during the times when this was taking place. Do you have any comments on what was going on which would have caused that?

I did pick up some Russian history by reading 3 novels by Dosteovsky in my late 20's, "The Brothers Karamozov", Crime and "Punishment" and the "The Idiot". Those incredibly brilliant novels reflected a vibrant and forward thinking society which aligns with the descriptions in your post.

My Grandma, born in 1883 near Kiev set sail with her brother for America around 1904. Meanwhile my Grandpa who grew up in Odessa set sail with his brother for America at about the same time. They both went through Ellis island and settled with some relatives in Boston. They met at some sort of Jewish social event and married within a matter of weeks. Grandma lived until 1989, 1 month short of 106!

The point is that there seems to have been a large Jewish exodus from Russia to America in the 1880's and 1890's and this was because the incidence and severity of the pogroms.

After the Czar was overthrown and Russia lost in WWI, we learned just a tiny bit in jr. high and high school about the struggle for power between Trotsky, tending towards democracy, and Lenin, supporting a government based on Marxist philosophy. We are told that Stalin was a high ranking aide of Lenin's and took over at Lenin's death.That's all we get aside from a few Hollywood movies made which are set during this period. It is really a huge gap in K-12 education during those years. Western history was studied a great deal but hardly anything about Russia.

Going into college with a physics and math major, these huge gaps in one's knowledge of Russian history were never addressed and remain to this day.

In summary, I want to thank you again for writing your post and if you could shed some light on why Russian Jews were persecuted so strongly that would also be helpful.
Lakey

Get the book: Struggle for World Power, by George Knupffer . . . . it's available on Amazon.

As to the "Pogroms" . . . all that sort of stuff happened all over Europe . . . but realize, it was the Jewish folks who separated themselves from the rest of society.

In Russia, the place is so vast, which prior to 1900 and the building of the rail lines it could take weeks to get from place to place, and and local behavior was not necessarily that of all over Russia. Example, measure how many 1,000's km it is from Kiev to St. Petersberg.

It is comparable to the American scene in 1900 . . . the Americans were still lynching "niggers" in the south while "America" in the north had a very different relationship with them.

In England they became, largely, part of mainstream society and were treated as equals. Disraeli was the Jewish British Prime Minister.

You'll read in the book I cite that Czar Nicholas II actually funded Jewish schools along with regular schools and treated them as part of mainstream Russian society.

The thing that did cause discord between Jews and Orthodox Russians was that the Jews refused to serve in the military and fight for Russia in the various wars as others did . . . . that did not endear them to their neighbors

Then they bitched and screamed about being conscripted . . . . and did their "how unfairly treated, make guilty trip" on the the society they were a part of.

The truth is, if you want to have good relations with your neighbors, you have to be neighborly.

Rog

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: Clearing Up Some Political Issues

I think you are living is an imaginary world. Really.

I respect different political views.

So do I.

But I don't respect distorting obvious facts and realities.

Neither do I

I think you need to your hands personally involved with how the other half lives.

Then you would have a different view.

The Anabaptist Jacques

We agree on a lot of things. From your above remarks you infer that I distort obvious facts and realities. I never inferred that you did so. I tried to present a few facts about the Eastern Euro countries rejecting Marxist governments the moment they had the opportunity to do so. I believe my statements and facts presented were correct. Maybe you feel they are distored. That's OK with me. People of good will are going to have differences. That's just the way things arre!

I grew up a Jewish Liberal and switched to Conservatism. You started out as a Libertarian Conservative and switch to Socialism and to feeling that Marx got the major things right. You are a good writer and are well spoken. I made no negative comments about you personally. I just wrote that you "said a mouthful" but did not imply any negativity with that comment. I ask for equal treatment by you.

I've seen how several sides live. Being Jewish is not the norm though only twice in my life did I ever feel discriminated against. All my family and friends were Liberals and I was too. Even now, my Son and Daughter are very Progressive.

Our neighborhood went Black when I was 11 but my Dad did not move out until I was 17 so for 6 years I lived in a neighborhood about 75% black, 20% Korean and 5% white. I made friends with everyone, regardless of race and never felt uncomfortable living there.

Next I worked in the Corporate world: North American Rockwell, Douglas and IBM. IBM was a very conservative company. I saw things from that point of view. Next, I spent a year in Houston in 1964-65 working at NASA and several of my fellow workers were strongly bigoted against Blacks and also made fun of Hispanics. I was considered a "Yankee Agitator" by several people at work since I was still a Liberal then.

Then there is Scientology. I was an S.O. member in Portugal and Spain and worked amongst artists and celebrities in L.A. More recently there is ESMB, extremely multi-viewpointed. Many others have experienced more viewpoints than me but I don't believe that I am "viewpoint defficient.
Lakey

 

[JackStraw]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

All these posts, the last few pages, on Reagan, Santorum, Marx, Gorbachev et al, reminds me of some "stable data" (sorry!) form a conservative talk show host:

1: Never fall in love with a politician. They will break your heart, every time."
2: The ONLY way to look at a politician is: Down.

My own: Never examine your heroes too closely. You will only be disappointed.

Jack