nytimes.com— Researchers said that the spying, which infiltrated the offices of the Dalai Lama, was controlled from computers based almost exclusively in China.
Mar 28, 2009View in Crawl 4
Quit financing this dispicable country! Your words are meaningless. If it says "made in china" DO NOT BUY IT!!! Tell the manager of Lowes, Wal-Mart etc. that you want products that are not from China. Almost all of their cheap-ass products are full of lead and other poisons. The only vote left to us is with our dollars. Stand up for your children, yourself and your country(what's left of it).
"They feel by focusing on themselves indirectly they can assist others."Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Kind of like joining the military to pay for college except in reverse right? Hey, how has that particular ideology worked out so far huh? This country began its slide into economic collapse starting with Reagan and the only thing that has slowed it since then was the Democrats.You can at least be honest about being selfish and self-centered and not really giving a s**t about the little guy who does all your dirty jobs for you. At least Bush was honest about that.
Yes, of course we spy, and that's a good thing ... if countries had better spying, maybe we wouldn't get into needless wars looking for weapons that didn't actually exist. So, do both of you actually equate our spying with that of communist China and despotic Russia? Yes, of course you do ... forget I asked..."When confronted with the assertion that the Soviet Union and the United States were moral equivalents, William F. Buckley responded that if one man pushes an old lady into an oncoming bus and another man pushes an old lady out of the way of a bus, we should not denounce them both as men who push old ladies around."
And you can at least be honest and admit that you are completely ignorant on the mechanics of Capitalism. This is the same s**t that they have been brainwashing people with for ages. Capitalists do give a s**t about the little guy. This is the same propaganda I keep hearing repeated through those that are told it and then they quickly rescind it once they actually read a decent history book or understand the concepts better. Socialistic policies are easy to understand. I could explain the system quite well within a days time to a group of students. Capitalism takes at least a week to teach properly. This is the problem.Capitalism has aided many people in the past.In South America it greatly assisted with the economic crisis in several countries during the 90's.Jamestown, one of the first English colonies was revived through a change to a capitalistic mindset, after almost destroying itself via the (admittedly harsh) socialistic policies enacted before that. The problem is not necessarily socialism though. It is that it does not work on a grand scale. It can be quite effective on a smaller scale and this is why there was a failure in that respect.We gained a substantial leap in productivity and trade over Spain when we adopted a great sense of private property and Joint Stock Companies.In 1992 India was on the verge of bankruptcy. The national policy of self sufficiency had reduced theannual growth rate to zero. India had mortgaged its gold deposits and faced ruin in financial markets.The Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh, made the push to liberalize markets, open competition, reduceregulatory burdens and secure private property. The end results speak for themselves. In a shortfourteen years India has transformed itself from a poverty‐stricken backwater to a vibrant societyproviding goods and services worldwide.Deng Xiaoping rightly concluded that if Chinese couldcreate wealth outside China they could create it within China. Deng chose to adopt policies of wealthinstead of policies of poverty and began a slow, methodical process of introducing the institutions ofcapitalism into Chinese society. First came trade with other countries, laws regarding investment wererelaxed, rudimentary private property laws were developed, competition was permitted andentrepreneurs were encouraged to deliver Chinese goods and services to the world. In the short span ofthirty years the standard of living of the average Chinese citizen increased over eightfold and Chinabecame an economic powerhouse. Today the reforms and changes continue apace and capitalism isfinding its natural extensions into personal freedoms and human rights. True China continues to facedifficulties with its transition, just like any other emerging economy, but the lives of the average Chineseare markedly improved and continue to improve.Capitalism helps bring opportunity to the individual. Socialism can create welfare cycles where it is more advantageous for you to stay at the bottom and not get out of the recurring slump or otherwise discincetivize people as has been seen in the United States.Socialistic policies most certainly have their place in society. However so do capitalistic ones. For you to completely knock the ideology is intellectually irresponsible. Just because you cannot see the advantages explicitly as deemed to be the case with more group-centric ideologies does not mean it is not there. An excellent example is Ron Paul's very capitalistic proposal for medical health reform.. Many doctors already practice it and it has benefited both parties with the patients having extremely reduced costs and a more personal connection with their doctor. The benefits are actually substantial in comparison to case studies done on practicing institutions of universal health care in other countries.Once you have a degree in Economics like I do then you can start teaching me the in's and outs how different market systems work. How about that. Both Capitalism and Socialism have failed equally. This is not because they both don't work. The problem is that we just have trouble figuring out which system fits what role better. The problems arise when we place capitalistic systems into taking care of roles that could be better handled by socialistic systems and vice versa. A hybrid or holistic coupling of the two systems is definitely better than just one or the other. Unfortunately the United States has transfered to a hybrid that does not work very well. The welfare systems in our country need substantial reform, but so do our regulations, policies, and monetary system (i.e. fed reserve etc) in our capitalistic areas.
It would seem that through disinformation fed to such a discovered system would create such doubt in most of the information collected this way as well as help to discover who is really behind the effort - I have to ask why is this in the newspaper?
Actually, The Dalai Lama is the head of the elitist religious ruling class that kept Tibet under its thumb for centuries using worse techniques than the Chinese government has ever tried.I wholeheartedly support a free Tibet: one free of China, and likewise, free of the Dalai Lama, too.Some reading for you: <a class="user" href="http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111">http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111</a>&quot;The only people who lost any rights under Chinese rule are Tibet's former ruling class, themselves guilty of cruelty and oppression of a magnitude that not even China can conceive. The vast majority of Tibetans, some 90% of whom were serfs, have enjoyed a relative level of freedom unheard of in their culture. Until 1950 when the Chinese put a stop to it, 90% of Tibetans had no rights at all. They were freely traded and sold. They were subject to the worst type of punishments from their lords, including gouging out of eyes; cutting off hands, feet, tongues, noses, or lips; and a dozen horrible forms of execution. There was no such concept as legal recourse; the landowning monk class was the law. There was no such thing as education, medical care, sanitation, or public utilities. Young boys were frequently and freely taken from families to endure lifelong servitude, including rape, in the monasteries. Amid all the pop-culture cries about Chinese oppression, why is there never any mention of the institutionalized daily oppression levied by the Dalai Lama's class prior to 1959?"/met the Dalai Lama once in a reception line, he was a very nice gentleman
Closed AccountMar 29, 2009
Quit financing this dispicable country! Your words are meaningless. If it says "made in china" DO NOT BUY IT!!! Tell the manager of Lowes, Wal-Mart etc. that you want products that are not from China. Almost all of their cheap-ass products are full of lead and other poisons. The only vote left to us is with our dollars. Stand up for your children, yourself and your country(what's left of it).
rantusMar 29, 2009
"They feel by focusing on themselves indirectly they can assist others."Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Kind of like joining the military to pay for college except in reverse right? Hey, how has that particular ideology worked out so far huh? This country began its slide into economic collapse starting with Reagan and the only thing that has slowed it since then was the Democrats.You can at least be honest about being selfish and self-centered and not really giving a s**t about the little guy who does all your dirty jobs for you. At least Bush was honest about that.
gradient01Mar 29, 2009
Yes, of course we spy, and that's a good thing ... if countries had better spying, maybe we wouldn't get into needless wars looking for weapons that didn't actually exist. So, do both of you actually equate our spying with that of communist China and despotic Russia? Yes, of course you do ... forget I asked..."When confronted with the assertion that the Soviet Union and the United States were moral equivalents, William F. Buckley responded that if one man pushes an old lady into an oncoming bus and another man pushes an old lady out of the way of a bus, we should not denounce them both as men who push old ladies around."
rantusMar 29, 2009
My fault, you're right. I meant that there couldn't be a Silicon Valley in either country, but India is nothing like China in reality.
unreal030Mar 29, 2009
And you can at least be honest and admit that you are completely ignorant on the mechanics of Capitalism. This is the same s**t that they have been brainwashing people with for ages. Capitalists do give a s**t about the little guy. This is the same propaganda I keep hearing repeated through those that are told it and then they quickly rescind it once they actually read a decent history book or understand the concepts better. Socialistic policies are easy to understand. I could explain the system quite well within a days time to a group of students. Capitalism takes at least a week to teach properly. This is the problem.Capitalism has aided many people in the past.In South America it greatly assisted with the economic crisis in several countries during the 90's.Jamestown, one of the first English colonies was revived through a change to a capitalistic mindset, after almost destroying itself via the (admittedly harsh) socialistic policies enacted before that. The problem is not necessarily socialism though. It is that it does not work on a grand scale. It can be quite effective on a smaller scale and this is why there was a failure in that respect.We gained a substantial leap in productivity and trade over Spain when we adopted a great sense of private property and Joint Stock Companies.In 1992 India was on the verge of bankruptcy. The national policy of self sufficiency had reduced theannual growth rate to zero. India had mortgaged its gold deposits and faced ruin in financial markets.The Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh, made the push to liberalize markets, open competition, reduceregulatory burdens and secure private property. The end results speak for themselves. In a shortfourteen years India has transformed itself from a poverty‐stricken backwater to a vibrant societyproviding goods and services worldwide.Deng Xiaoping rightly concluded that if Chinese couldcreate wealth outside China they could create it within China. Deng chose to adopt policies of wealthinstead of policies of poverty and began a slow, methodical process of introducing the institutions ofcapitalism into Chinese society. First came trade with other countries, laws regarding investment wererelaxed, rudimentary private property laws were developed, competition was permitted andentrepreneurs were encouraged to deliver Chinese goods and services to the world. In the short span ofthirty years the standard of living of the average Chinese citizen increased over eightfold and Chinabecame an economic powerhouse. Today the reforms and changes continue apace and capitalism isfinding its natural extensions into personal freedoms and human rights. True China continues to facedifficulties with its transition, just like any other emerging economy, but the lives of the average Chineseare markedly improved and continue to improve.Capitalism helps bring opportunity to the individual. Socialism can create welfare cycles where it is more advantageous for you to stay at the bottom and not get out of the recurring slump or otherwise discincetivize people as has been seen in the United States.Socialistic policies most certainly have their place in society. However so do capitalistic ones. For you to completely knock the ideology is intellectually irresponsible. Just because you cannot see the advantages explicitly as deemed to be the case with more group-centric ideologies does not mean it is not there. An excellent example is Ron Paul's very capitalistic proposal for medical health reform.. Many doctors already practice it and it has benefited both parties with the patients having extremely reduced costs and a more personal connection with their doctor. The benefits are actually substantial in comparison to case studies done on practicing institutions of universal health care in other countries.Once you have a degree in Economics like I do then you can start teaching me the in's and outs how different market systems work. How about that. Both Capitalism and Socialism have failed equally. This is not because they both don't work. The problem is that we just have trouble figuring out which system fits what role better. The problems arise when we place capitalistic systems into taking care of roles that could be better handled by socialistic systems and vice versa. A hybrid or holistic coupling of the two systems is definitely better than just one or the other. Unfortunately the United States has transfered to a hybrid that does not work very well. The welfare systems in our country need substantial reform, but so do our regulations, policies, and monetary system (i.e. fed reserve etc) in our capitalistic areas.
thepowellMar 29, 2009
That's my professor! I had Professor Deibert in First Year Political Science at U of T!
windadctMar 30, 2009
It would seem that through disinformation fed to such a discovered system would create such doubt in most of the information collected this way as well as help to discover who is really behind the effort - I have to ask why is this in the newspaper?
Closed AccountApr 7, 2009
Actually, The Dalai Lama is the head of the elitist religious ruling class that kept Tibet under its thumb for centuries using worse techniques than the Chinese government has ever tried.I wholeheartedly support a free Tibet: one free of China, and likewise, free of the Dalai Lama, too.Some reading for you: <a class="user" href="http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111">http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111</a>&quot;The only people who lost any rights under Chinese rule are Tibet's former ruling class, themselves guilty of cruelty and oppression of a magnitude that not even China can conceive. The vast majority of Tibetans, some 90% of whom were serfs, have enjoyed a relative level of freedom unheard of in their culture. Until 1950 when the Chinese put a stop to it, 90% of Tibetans had no rights at all. They were freely traded and sold. They were subject to the worst type of punishments from their lords, including gouging out of eyes; cutting off hands, feet, tongues, noses, or lips; and a dozen horrible forms of execution. There was no such concept as legal recourse; the landowning monk class was the law. There was no such thing as education, medical care, sanitation, or public utilities. Young boys were frequently and freely taken from families to endure lifelong servitude, including rape, in the monasteries. Amid all the pop-culture cries about Chinese oppression, why is there never any mention of the institutionalized daily oppression levied by the Dalai Lama's class prior to 1959?"/met the Dalai Lama once in a reception line, he was a very nice gentleman
johnnysoftwareDec 2, 2009
Fish, medicine, food additives, children's toys, walls, crane repair welding, iPod, iPhone, Macintosh, PCs, desk phones, clothing, shoes, etc.