Doctrine Alert

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Lukester thanks for the defense! I am just trying to be objective to this guys claims, I did not start the thread and I will not allow this "oddlots" to post propoganda about a certain people of Bolivia. As you can see my rebuttal of his claims destroyed his accusations. The video was a fake and he said it was true, he didnt do the research!

Now metalman goes and closes the thread because he realizes that I won the argument and his buddy oddlots lost.

I would like an apology but I won't get one. Again I reinterate I did not start this thread, I only uprooted and destroyed his inflammatory post and BS video and website "news" of Bolivia.

STOP THE PROPOGANDA!

[oddlots]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Re. your first link, the mob lynching was of a group alleged to be thieves. Race had nothing to do with it as far as I can tell.

Let me spell it out: I was asking for something to back up your claim that the violence was on "both sides" and specifically instances of Indian or indigenous-led racially charged violence against whites, as you suggested existed. My claim throughout has been that the opposition is the source of this violence with the explanation being that the elected government party - MAS - doesn't need violence, it's winning repeatedly at the polls. I was also suggesting that the preponderance of racially-motivated actions against Indians or Campesinos discredited the opposition and asked for a reference to a more respectable, reasoned expression of the opposition cause which you've failed to provide.

Instead, what do you provide is an example of vigilante justice in a village. Are you saying that "thieves" are a race? No? Are you perhaps jumping to the assumption that the thieves are white? I suspect not. Then why post it? Well... perhaps you should explain.

I am really interested in hearing a well-reasoned argument in justification of the opposition movement within the Media Luna. Have you got one?

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Doctrine Alert

I just posted tons of stuff, read all my posts. YOUR VIDEO WAS A HOAX, stop spreading lies.....

[oddlots]

Re: Doctrine Alert

So Reuters is no good nor is UNASUR? But some web site called topix is?

Bolivia violence was massacre, says regional report
03 Dec 2008 18:21:30 GMT
Source: Reuters

By Eduardo Garcia LA PAZ, Dec 3 (Reuters) - A regional commission investigating the killings of at least 20 Bolivians during anti-government protests in September described the incident as a massacre on Wednesday. The Unasur group of South American nations vowed to probe the killings, which took place in an Amazon province as anti-government protesters attacked natural gas pipelines and stormed public buildings. The unrest flared during a bitter power struggle between leftist President Evo Morales and conservative rivals opposed to his drive to implement a new constitution. Unveiling his findings on behalf of the 12-member panel, commission head Rodolfo Mattarollo said some of the 20 mostly Morales supporters killed in Pando province were murdered. Mattarollo, an Argentine lawyer and Human Rights expert, said that some of the killers worked for Pando's opposition-controlled provincial government. "On Sept. 11 2008, in the village of Porvenir and other places in the Pando province, a massacre occurred," he said, presenting the commission's report in the presidential palace. As the turmoil raged in the sparsely-populated region near the Brazilian border, several South American leaders issued a statement of support for Morales and warned his opponents not to stir unrest in the natural-gas rich Andean nation. Morales, who called the protests an attempt to destabilize his government, welcomed the commission's findings. "It wasn't a clash, it was a massacre ... Conspiring against democracy, against people's lives, using terrorism ... it's not the best way," Morales said. His government declared martial law in Pando and arrested provincial Gov. Leopoldo Fernandez, accusing him of inspiring the violence. It lifted the state of siege late last month. (Editing by Alan Elsner)

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Doctrine Alert

The video was made, it is fake, then the ENTIRE world jumped on it and quickly condemned fernandez. NOW all that is shown to be FALSE and there is no proof whatsoever that he had any part of it. This reminds me of the Duke lacross rape case.

You are so quick to jump on the racism bandwagon, stop being so guillible. Well do whatever you want, just believe in the propoganda. I dont care anymore you obviously dont see it.

Yes there were killings on both sides, in Pando BOTH SIDES Got killed!

[Guest]

Re: Doctrine Alert

ProdigyOfZen8 - I am not taking any side. I know nothing about the details on the ground and don't have an opinion. I am defending your right to post on this topic and make your assertions, and I am defending the rights of the person who wishes to call you a racist if they can back it up with a proof, and your own right to call them anything you like, or pin their ears back and demonstrate them to be wrong, in any way you see fit.

I would like to defend the rights of any and all posters here to post whatever the f**ck they want without a nanny around who arrogates the right to make everyone wear a muzzle at someone elses' potentially arbitrary discretion. Don't like muzzles.

THERE! Now we have all mangled Don's original thread topic good and proper! Yessir! That's the beauty of unregulated arenas. They can grow and flower naturally. And thanks to Don for putting up patiently with all our various agendas.

Lukester thanks for the defense! I am just trying to be objective to this guys claims, I did not start the thread and I will not allow this "oddlots" to post propoganda about a certain people of Bolivia. As you can see my rebuttal of his claims destroyed his accusations. The video was a fake and he said it was true, he didnt do the research!

Now metalman goes and closes the thread because he realizes that I won the argument and his buddy oddlots lost.

I would like an apology but I won't get one. Again I reinterate I did not start this thread, I only uprooted and destroyed his inflammatory post and BS video and website "news" of Bolivia.

STOP THE PROPOGANDA!

[The Bouncer]

Re: Doctrine Alert

ProdigyOfZen8 - I am not taking any side. I know nothing about the details on the ground and don't have an opinion. I am defending your right to post on this topic and make your assertions, and I am defending the rights of the person who wishes to call you a racist if they can back it up with a proof, and your own right to call them anything you like, or pin their ears back and demonstrate them to be wrong, in any way you see fit.

I would like to defend the rights of any and all posters here to post whatever the f**ck they want without a nanny around who arrogates the right to make everyone wear a muzzle at someone elses' potentially arbitrary discretion. Don't like muzzles.

THERE! Now we have all mangled Don's original thread topic good and proper! Yessir! That's the beauty of unregulated arenas. They can grow and flower naturally. And thanks to Don for putting up patiently with all our various agendas.

The iTulip.com mutual respect rule holds here in Rant and Rave. This is a private club. You are a guest here. Behave yourself.

[Guest]

Re: Doctrine Alert

The iTulip.com mutual respect rule holds here in Rant and Rave. This is a private club. You are a guest here. Behave yourself.

Yes. Please point out the misbehavior in this thread insofar as I have contributed to any?

[metalman]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Yes. Please point out the misbehavior in this thread insofar as I have contributed to any?

that's the way... test his authority. see how far you have to push him before he bounces you.

cracking open a beer now... kicking back to watch the show.

[oddlots]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Ok, so what's my contribution to this debacle? And how do we as rational people agree to disagree?

My contribution:

- baiting Prodigy after he suggested that he could go down and "Maybe... try and get a company started to grab some of that land! But of course I would pay the natives a handsome sum for rights to the land."
- baiting Prodigy again after his first attack on me as some sort of anti-white racist with the suggestion that he would run his mine along the lines of Montericco minerals

In My Defense:

- I have consistently asked for a reasoned argument against Morales' policies from the very beginning
- I never made the charge of racism against Prodigy though he assumed I had. (I certainly made the charge - "racist a-holes" - against the people depicted in the news segments documenting racist violence and stick by that characterisation. What other interpretation is possible?)
- I have consistently cited sources.
- I have consistently said that I assume that there is a good argument to be made against Morales' policies that is distinct from and only diminished by the racist violence I cited and asked for this to be expanded upon.

An attempt at reconcilaition:

What set me off was Prodigy's suggestion that he could "grab" some land down there and profit from this. If I've learned anything from investing in this sphere it's that foreign investors are guests in these countries. The only argument, for example, for Canadian listed companies operating in this sphere having any legitimacy is that they have a) better access to capital markets and 2) years of experience in extractive industries. The deposit itself is surely a national resource that must be managed sensibly and pay out to the citizens of that country as well as to the investors. These companies must wait with forebearance on a decision from a democratically elected government on policy just as they would have to in Norway or Canada or anywhere else with a well developed civil society. The idea that someone with no apparent expertise in the industry can somehow assume he has a right to buy up mineral rights just because he has the capital without presenting any credentials to show he can effectively develop them seems crazy to me. I really think that you should look up the term "economic rent" Prodigy.

This is what I should have said to Prodigy off the batt.

But I didn't. The rest is less than history. For my part in it, I apologise to both Prodigy and the rest of the community.

[oddlots]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Re-post of what I put in an earlier thread:

Ok, so what's my contribution to this debacle? And how do we as rational people agree to disagree?

My contribution:

- baiting Prodigy after he suggested that he could go down and "Maybe... try and get a company started to grab some of that land! But of course I would pay the natives a handsome sum for rights to the land."
- baiting Prodigy again after his first attack on me as some sort of anti-white racist with the suggestion that he would run his mine along the lines of Montericco minerals

In My Defense:

- I have consistently asked for a reasoned argument against Morales' policies from the very beginning
- I never made the charge of racism against Prodigy though he assumed I had. (I certainly made the charge - "racist a-holes" - against the people depicted in the news segments documenting racist violence and stick by that characterisation. What other interpretation is possible?)
- I have consistently cited sources.
- I have consistently said that I assume that there is a good argument to be made against Morales' policies that is distinct from and only diminished by the racist violence I cited and asked for this to be expanded upon.

An attempt at reconcilaition:

What set me off was Prodigy's suggestion that he could "grab" some land down there and profit from this. If I've learned anything from investing in this sphere it's that foreign investors are guests in these countries. The only argument, for example, for Canadian listed companies operating in this sphere having any legitimacy is that they have a) better access to capital markets and 2) years of experience in extractive industries. The deposit itself is surely a national resource that must be managed sensibly and pay out to the citizens of that country as well as to the investors. These companies must wait with forebearance on a decision from a democratically elected government on policy just as they would have to in Norway or Canada or anywhere else with a well developed civil society. The idea that someone with no apparent expertise in the industry can somehow assume he has a right to buy up mineral rights just because he has the capital without presenting any credentials to show he can effectively develop them seems crazy to me. I really think that you should look up the term "economic rent" Prodigy.

This is what I should have said to Prodigy off the batt.

But I didn't. The rest is less than history. For my part in it, I apologise to both Prodigy and the rest of the community.

[Guest]

Re: Doctrine Alert

Thought you put up some good posts and ProdigyOfZen did also. Good solid discusion, wandering perilously towards the million volt "third rail". Gets everyone's pulse rate up and makes their synapses fire on critical issues about ethics. I find nothing to fault in the entire discussion. But the Fred character gets antsy when topics wander over towards the third rail because "this is a finance/econ site" and so it got bunted over to the very slummiest portion of rant & rave which is called "Political Abyss" (can't you just see that sleazy red neon light flashing over the disreputable looking basement door?).

If I were you guys, I would not feel that you "did something bad" to have the discussion moved "down" here. It's just a predilection of the editors that if topics wander into live wire issues they tend to shunt them down here for fear that they will get a brush fire on the main pages, which "really wouldn't do", would it? I thought you guys posted some good stuff - but the editorial line considers it crap. That's why it winds up here! God bless their pointy little heads. Oops I'm not supposed to say stuff like that. Now I'm gonna catch hell.

BTW - don't apologize. You guys are "sparring" and many times you can find the person you disagreed most bitterly with will find other views in common with you later. The apology ruins the eventual spontaneous discovery of points in common. ;)

Re-post of what I put in an earlier thread:

Ok, so what's my contribution to this debacle? And how do we as rational people agree to disagree?

My contribution:

- baiting Prodigy after he suggested that he could go down and "Maybe... try and get a company started to grab some of that land! But of course I would pay the natives a handsome sum for rights to the land."
- baiting Prodigy again after his first attack on me as some sort of anti-white racist with the suggestion that he would run his mine along the lines of Montericco minerals

In My Defense:

- I have consistently asked for a reasoned argument against Morales' policies from the very beginning
- I never made the charge of racism against Prodigy though he assumed I had. (I certainly made the charge - "racist a-holes" - against the people depicted in the news segments documenting racist violence and stick by that characterisation. What other interpretation is possible?)
- I have consistently cited sources.
- I have consistently said that I assume that there is a good argument to be made against Morales' policies that is distinct from and only diminished by the racist violence I cited and asked for this to be expanded upon.

An attempt at reconcilaition:

What set me off was Prodigy's suggestion that he could "grab" some land down there and profit from this. If I've learned anything from investing in this sphere it's that foreign investors are guests in these countries. The only argument, for example, for Canadian listed companies operating in this sphere having any legitimacy is that they have a) better access to capital markets and 2) years of experience in extractive industries. The deposit itself is surely a national resource that must be managed sensibly and pay out to the citizens of that country as well as to the investors. These companies must wait with forebearance on a decision from a democratically elected government on policy just as they would have to in Norway or Canada or anywhere else with a well developed civil society. The idea that someone with no apparent expertise in the industry can somehow assume he has a right to buy up mineral rights just because he has the capital without presenting any credentials to show he can effectively develop them seems crazy to me. I really think that you should look up the term "economic rent" Prodigy.

This is what I should have said to Prodigy off the batt.

But I didn't. The rest is less than history. For my part in it, I apologise to both Prodigy and the rest of the community.