Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

Josh Cryer · 2004-11-12 13:37:27

Hey guys, it seems you really took advantage of the "Presidental Elections" thread, it was over 330 posts long, though, so I had to lock it. Continue talking here, mawh, you guys are crazy...

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-12 13:42:01

mawh, you guys are crazy...

That's what I hear.

DonPanic · 2004-11-12 16:23:37

LO

Contrary to popular misconception, Franco wasn't a fascist.

The fact that Franco and Salazar were both monarchists and especially corporatists made their regimes essentialy fascists ones. Corporatism and fascism are tighly linked.
I you want to argue on European history, I'm your man...got many good volumes on that topic

BWhite · 2004-11-12 19:07:05

Franco & Salazar?

Didn't they play 2nd base and shortstop for the 1937 NY Giants?

Gennaro · 2004-11-13 09:43:36

The fact that Franco and Salazar were both monarchists and especially corporatists made their regimes essentialy fascists ones. Corporatism and fascism are tighly linked.
I you want to argue on European history, I'm your man...got many good volumes on that topic.

Corporatism is Fascistic, Monarchism is not, yet it's an institution that can be accepted by Fascist regimes, exposing the practical-mindedness of their way of ruling. Not being an expert on Spain, I say it was a cross and toss between Fascism and Catholic Conservatism (another essentially different entity).
As for Franco himself, I believe he was essentially a Catholic conservative.

Better examples of Fascists would probably be Peron in Argentina and in the present time Chavez in Venezuela.

Anyway, what was so horrible about Franco? That he regulated the economy so the little people could live in the centre of Madrid?

DonPanic · 2004-11-13 10:35:03

LO

Corporatism is Fascistic, Monarchism is not, yet it's an institution that can be accepted by Fascist regimes, exposing the practical-mindedness of their way of ruling. Not being an expert on Spain, I say it was a cross and toss between Fascism and Catholic Conservatism (another essentially different entity).
As for Franco himself, I believe he was essentially a Catholic conservative.

You're right.
Absolute monarchies may be close to fascism, except for "monarchies éclairées", real parliamentary monarchies are fully democratic.

Better examples of Fascists would probably be Peron in Argentina and in the present time Chavez in Venezuela.

Not quite, as they rely(ed) on trade unions when real fascists want to destroy them. I should say Mugabe's regime.

Anyway, what was so horrible about Franco? That he regulated the economy so the little people could live in the centre of Madrid?

Better not be an opponent . The fact is that unlike Hitler or Mussolini, Franco was no doubt a fine strategist who had good evaluation of balance of power. Knowing that after attack at Russia, Hitler coudn't protect spanish coasts against British Navy, and that democracys would win at the end, he softened his regime by marginalizing Phalanxs, turned at alliance with Opus Dei, and negociated with GB and USA.
He had refused to engage against France saying that spanish monarchy was tighted by perpetual peace treaties and that the King of Spain couldn't parjure what the former kings of Spain had signed on.
Phalanxs had shot among Spain's greatest poets, Federico García Lorca, and opposition to Franco kept repeating that Franco's regime was a regime that killed poets and poetry.

DonPanic · 2004-11-13 11:15:21

Franco & Salazar?
Didn't they play 2nd base and shortstop for the 1937 NY Giants?

Gennaro · 2004-11-13 13:38:41

DonPanic, you're better read on Nationalist Spain than I am. Have never really bothered with it in detail. Lorca, yes, had forgotten all about that. Of course this is typical leftist bias. Highlighting a single or specific political murder while keeping quiet about the thousands of intellectuals or others dealt with in a similar manner by the Bolsheviks (not implying that Fascists always are nice guys either, of course). The Matteotti murder in 1923 is a similar case. It almost brought down Mussolini's government at a time when hundreds of thousands of Russian workers had been shot or put in camps by Lenin simply because they used their (as they thought) right to go on strike.

I don't really agree that Fascists are against trade unions. Rather, as I've understood it, it was "free" leftist dominated trade unions they were against, tied up more or less with the Moscow International and actively or potentially pushing upheaval in order to further world revolution.
Both Mussolini and Hitler formed their own after the red ones had been crushed. At least in the case of Nazi Germany, these weren't only for show either. Gitta Sereny includes a lenghty section on their operation in Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth, interviewing a former leader of the Deutsche Arbeitsfront (DAF). The objective was a total revision of the relations on the labour market built on principles of equal influence between employers and employees, basically the same formula adopted by many Reform Socialists at the time, in Sweden not the least.

Speaking about Franco and the Phalangists, I have been of the impression that his regime was primarily of a reactionary nature, would you agree on that?
In that case it wouldn't be technically or mostly Fascist since Fascism presupposes a revolutionary movement radically transforming society, not merely freezing or reverting it to a former state. However, I'm not aware enough of Phalangist social policy one way or the other. If the Phalangists were committed to Corporativism, I guess it would make them rather Fascist.
Nevertheless, there is actually a word for such reactionary regimes, it's "Paternal Autocrat" rather than Fascist.

Absolute monarchies may be close to fascism, except for "monarchies éclairées", real parliamentary monarchies are fully democratic.

I agree. The decisive element of absolute Monarchism is practically the same as the Fascist "strong man"/leadership principle idea, but for hereditary succession. So in an ideal sense, Fascism is identical to some Monarchism, but far from identical to monarchy in general.

If I recall, Juan Domingo Pèron did attend a Fascist rally in Piazza Venezia in 1940. Listening to one of Mussolini's popular speeches, he was overwhelmed by the message and became determined from that point on to pursue such policies in relation to Argentina.
Chavez, of course, would never dream of labelling himself a Fascist, at least not nowadays, but his specific brand of mixing Latin-American nationalism (Bolivarism) and anti-imperialist Socialist policies while himself being a retired paratrooper who even tried to stage a coup in 1993, kind of defines him in my book.

DonPanic · 2004-11-13 17:05:46

LO

Highlighting a single or specific political murder while keeping quiet about the thousands of intellectuals or others dealt with in a similar manner by the Bolsheviks (not implying that Fascists always are nice guys either, of course). The Matteotti murder in 1923 is a similar case. It almost brought down Mussolini's government at a time when hundreds of thousands of Russian workers had been shot or put in camps by Lenin simply because they used their (as they thought) right to go on strike.

- I'm never quite sure I'm right or wrong
- I never take the crimes of one side to justify the opposite side's ones.
- Lenin was sent to Russia by german secret services with german gold as a succesful attempt to set Russia out of WW1.
- Mussolini was a fully extreme left socialist activist before he elaborated Fascist doctrine.

The objective was a total revision of the relations on the labour market built on principles of equal influence between employers and employees, basically the same formula adopted by many Reform Socialists at the time, in Sweden not the least.

Hitler eliminated both communists and social democrats who where the first victims in concentration camps, even the trade unions leaders which had turned to nazism.

Speaking about Franco and the Phalangists, I have been of the impression that his regime was primarily of a reactionary nature, would you agree on that?

Yes, the country had become a whole mess with quarrels and fights between socialists, anarchosyndicalists and communists.

If the Phalangists were committed to Corporativism, I guess it would make them rather Fascist.
Nevertheless, there is actually a word for such reactionary regimes, it's "Paternal Autocrat" rather than Fascist.

Anyhow you name it, the aim is to have a strong hold over a docile labour class.

If I recall, Juan Domingo Pèron did attend a Fascist rally in Piazza Venezia in 1940. Listening to one of Mussolini's popular speeches, he was overwhelmed by the message and became determined from that point on to pursue such policies in relation to Argentina.

Benito's speeches where coloured with his socialist past, this plus the mass parades that had impressed Hitler who had hurried to organize more impressive mass parades were to please to any populist dictator. Mao Ze Dong and Kim Il Sung taking the lead in that domain.

dickbill · 2004-11-13 17:28:57

Knowing that after attack at Russia, Hitler coudn't protect spanish coasts against British Navy, and that democracys would win at the end, he softened his regime by marginalizing Phalanxs, turned at alliance with Opus Dei, and negociated with GB and USA.
He

Don Panic,

have you some interesting views to share about the freemasons and other occult powerful movments ?
You mention Opus Dei and as you know, many funder fathers of the US were free masons.
Is there a real freemason complot ?
Why people associate the Judeo-masonic complot together ?
why and what do they have to hide ?

what is that story about the templars ? I tought that Philip the bel got rid of of them, but then, I learn that they escaped to england, probably to the US later.

Are George Bush and the US manipulated by some occult templars or freemasons ?

hmmm, then that would explain a lot ....

DonPanic · 2004-11-13 18:07:04

LO
First, gotta remember that freemasonery was the union the top leaders of the Corporations implied in Cathedrals building in all Europe.
Today's ceremonials in freemasonery groups is a copy of ceremonials marking the progress of each Companion in his own Corporation.

In the 13th Century middle ages, corporation leaders of cathedrals builders represented the top of Science and Culture, these men read and spoke latin, necessary to work in all Europe.
They knew mathematics and geometry, clockwork which was in the 13th century as advanced a science as robotic or genetic today. Stained glasses in cathedral windows needed alchemy deep knowledge.
Remember the freemason emblems were and are still the compas and the triangle.
To keep companions'high wages, all techniques were kept secret, treason of secrets was punished by death.

Today, a modern corporation-type association as "Les Compagnons du Tour de France"* who built the Eiffel Tower are never poor fellows, always have lot of work ahead. (Not any enterprise contacted by Eiffel had accepted to build it, "Les Compagnons du Tour de France"* took the challenge)
They invented counterplated wood panels, for instance, allowing to build over 70 yards long wooden arches.
Having a house built by "Les Compagnons du Tour de France"* is a guaranty of zero fault and that this house will last many centuries...
* Nothing to see with "Le Tour de France" bike race

By end of 18th Century, whith the growing power of bourgeoisie they were the leaders, they admitted in the freemasonery members of the gentry and of the clergy who wanted scientific advancement.
Even King of France Louis XVI was a freemason !

Sorry it's late for me, I'll speak of freemasons later on...

Are George Bush and the US manipulated by some occult templars or freemasons ?

I really can't suspect GWB to be a top Science and Culture leader

dickbill · 2004-11-13 22:03:55

Sorry it's late for me, I'll speak of freemasons later on...

Thanks.
Do you have an idea why a masson symbol is on the US dollar bill ?

Palomar · 2004-11-13 23:26:28

By end of 18th Century...
Even King of France Louis XVI was a freemason !

*Not just the end of the 18th Century; Louis XV was also a Freemason (albeit probably half-heartedly, if even that...based on what I've read about him, he'd rather spend his time doting on his children and chasing mistresses), as was http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/deon.htm]this fellow, top spy in the Cabinet Noir (and very close to Louis XV because of that, of course).

So was Frederick the Great...most if not all leaders and men of prominence (even Wolfgang Mozart) at the time were Freemasons.

Benjamin Franklin was present for the initiation of Voltaire into Freemasonry; he practically carried Voltaire during the ceremony because Voltaire was so elderly and sickly at the time.

Sorry...mention the 18th Century and I've got to chime in.

--Cindy

Gennaro · 2004-11-14 07:27:47

I never take the crimes of one side to justify the opposite side's ones.

Me neither, but it's important have a sense of historical proportion, which I don't imply that you lack. The irony of your remark on Lorca wasn't lost on me. Understanding history neither is the same as defending it.

Lenin was sent to Russia by german secret services with german gold as a succesful attempt to set Russia out of WW1.

Indeed he was and Lenin kept his part of the bargain. The reason the democratic left under Kerensky lost its foothold to the rather marginal Bolsheviks naturally had everything to do with the obstinacy not to end the war with the Kaiser.

Hitler eliminated both communists and social democrats who where the first victims in concentration camps, even the trade unions leaders which had turned to nazism.

Yes, it's one of those traits Nazism had in common with Bolshevism. The concentration camps and “protective custody” clausul were of course instrumental in crushing the labour movement as well as serving to silence and stifle any opposition. Many SPD members had a history of concentration camp stays provided they didn’t perish there. Kurt Schumacher, the great post-war Social Democrat leader for example, was imprisoned in 1933-1934 and arrested again in 1944, following the Stauffenberg assassination attempt (although released for lack of evidence). Trade unionalist Hans Böckler served two stays in the camps as did the later DDR Minister of Justice Max Fechner. Ernst Thälmann, the Communist leader of course, was jailed until orderd shot by Hitler in 1944.

Hm, about those who left Communism and Socialism for National Socialism, are you sure they were imprisoned? Or did you mean a few trade union leaders who did so in particular? Never heard of that, so I wonder if you have a reference. In a general sense, there were a lot of those “beef steaks” as they were called (brown on the surface, red on the inside) who either became convinced Nazis or joined the party out of opportunist reasons both before and after the take-over.

dickbill · 2004-11-14 17:07:50

By end of 18th Century...
Even King of France Louis XVI was a freemason !
*Not just the end of the 18th Century; Louis XV was also a Freemason (albeit probably half-heartedly, if even that...based on what I've read about him, he'd rather spend his time doting on his children and chasing mistresses), as was http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/deon.htm]this fellow, top spy in the Cabinet Noir (and very close to Louis XV because of that, of course).
So was Frederick the Great...most if not all leaders and men of prominence (even Wolfgang Mozart) at the time were Freemasons.
Benjamin Franklin was present for the initiation of Voltaire into Freemasonry; he practically carried Voltaire during the ceremony because Voltaire was so elderly and sickly at the time.
Sorry...mention the 18th Century and I've got to chime in.
--Cindy

FreMasonery might have been just a covert for something else. And I still don't understand why the US 1 dollar bill has this obvious freemason symbol, the eye and the pyramid, in addition with this comment "Novus Ordo Seclorum", New Secular order. Followed by "In God we Trust". Quite antithetical statements on the most powerful symbol of a nation, its money.
What does all that mean ?
Is it possible that the people of the most fundamentalist religious christian nation, defined recently by the term "value voters", are actually indirectly manipulayed by obscure atheist secret organizations with secret goals ?

I hope the Mars Organization is not condamned to become such a secretive order.

Palomar · 2004-11-14 18:16:13

dickbill: FreMasonery might have been just a covert for something else. And I still don't understand why the US 1 dollar bill has this obvious freemason symbol, the eye and the pyramid, in addition with this comment "Novus Ordo Seclorum", New Secular order. Followed by "In God we Trust". Quite antithetical statements on the most powerful symbol of a nation, its money.
What does all that mean ?

*There has been a ton of speculation about this, and from rather biased angles. I'm not familiar with Freemasonry myself (no male family members have been Freemasons and of course women aren't allowed to join) and don't remember the fundamentalist Christian viewpoint (my parents' religious sentiments), except ultimately completely damning it of course. The Obelisk, the (much later of course) Pentagon, etc. Certain Christians I've been familiar with definitely believe these symbols are embued with real occult powers (which have enabled this nation to become wealthy, powerful, etc.)...but on the other hand they also fervently believe the wealth and power is a result of God's blessing the U.S.A. :-\ So yes, it seems like a contradication to me as well (they view any sort of occultism as enabled by Satan and therefore evil). ::EDIT:: As for the Founding Fathers themselves, though, most (not all, but most) of them were Deists, and because of that there was no contradiction between Freemasonry and its symbology and God -- because Freemasonry apparently views God as the Master Mason (or Builder), and that coincides neatly with the 18th Century Deists' "Clockmaker God." ::end edit::

I presume some folks here are familiar with the Illuminati? That really gets fundamentalist Christians wound up too; in fact, IIRC they believe the Freemasons are funded and empowered by that tiny, ultra-elite brotherhood of the Illuminati.

dickbill: I hope the Mars Organization is not condamned to become such a secretive order.

*Aw c'mon dickbill, where is your sense of adventure? You'd get to dress up in ceremonial robes, swear to secret oaths, learn funky secret hand gestures (silent communication between brothers), Rule The World...what's wrong with you?? :;): We're not even on Mars yet and already you're being a party-pooper.

--Cindy

P.S.: I just now recalled speculation about THE targets of the 9/11 attack, which some folks tried to put a mystical bent on, i.e. fundie Islam attacking Freemasonry. The "reasoning" behind this theory was something to do with the WTC towers being ram-rod straight and of equal height, and the "mystical" 5-sided star of the Pentagon. But I can't recall details, sorry. Probably is available for reading somewhere on the 'net.

dickbill · 2004-11-14 18:55:58

dickbill: FreMasonery might have been just a covert for something else. And I still don't understand why the US 1 dollar bill has this obvious freemason symbol, the eye and the pyramid, in addition with this comment "Novus Ordo Seclorum", New Secular order. Followed by "In God we Trust". Quite antithetical statements on the most powerful symbol of a nation, its money.
What does all that mean ?
*There has been a ton of speculation about this, and from rather biased angles. I'm not familiar with Freemasonry myself (no male family members have been Freemasons and of course women aren't allowed to join) and don't remember the fundamentalist Christian viewpoint (my parents' religious sentiments. The Obelisk, the (much later of course) Pentagon, etc. Certain Christians I've been familiar with definitely believe these symbols are embued with real occult powers (which have enabled this nation to become wealthy, powerful, etc.)...but on the other hand they also fervently believe the wealth and power is a result of God's blessing the U.S.A. :-\ So yes, it seems like a contradication to me as well (they view any sort of occultism as enabled by Satan and therefore evil).
I presume some folks here are familiar with the Illuminati? That really gets fundamentalist Christians wound up too; in fact, IIRC they believe the Freemasons are funded and empowered by that tiny, ultra-elite brotherhood of the Illuminati.
dickbill: I hope the Mars Organization is not condamned to become such a secretive order.
*Aw c'mon dickbill, where is your sense of adventure? You'd get to dress up in ceremonial robes, swear to secret oaths, learn funky secret hand gestures (silent communication between brothers), Rule The World...what's wrong with you?? :;): We're not even on Mars yet and already you're being a party-pooper.
--Cindy
P.S.: I just now recalled speculation about THE targets of the 9/11 attack, which some folks tried to put a mystical bent on, i.e. fundie Islam attacking Freemasonry. The "reasoning" behind this theory was something to do with the WTC towers being ram-rod straight and of equal height, and the "mystical" 5-sided star of the Pentagon. But I can't recall details, sorry. Probably is available for reading somewhere on the 'net.

About the Pentagon, it may be just a coincidence. But for the money, it takes a certain amount of gut and power to emblazon your society's name on the money.

The Illuminati...well, after I read two of Dan Brown's book (The illluminati are in "Angels and Demons") I rushed on Internet to get some more informations. This guy is pretty good, all his stories are build upon real historical facts.
Yes these organisations existed, but these also have been hunted in the old catholic latin countries.
But nobody knows really what it is all about.

Me a party- pooper ? no Cindy, but I worry because of this :
I think that the whole world is in a dangerous trend. Ecological systems are not going better, they may collapse more quickly than we think. Wars abound everywhere. I learn that now, the US have to invest more in cemeteries, the healthcare system is no great, the US have a huge debt, some say they are close to bankruptcy. So in short Cindy, i don't believe that the US is going to be able to set up FINANCIALLY a manned mission to Mars in the next decades more easily in the future than now. Too much problems at the horizon. Americans won't be richer in 40 years than they are now, you know that. It's now now, or in 80/100 years, maybe later.
That means that the Mars Society will have to survive all this time relying on memory of the imagination of a couple of visionaries, likeZubrin or KSR. You cannot maintain a high level of enthousiasm on such a long period if you take the main-stream way of an open organisation. I think you have to burry the society in secretive to resist the erosion of time, that's what all these secrets societies did. So, it is not impossible, IMO, to have a Mars Society Great Master in 60 years, when the earth is flooded and the oceans are poisonned , and the US space program a dead fossil like the dinosaurs.

Gennaro · 2004-11-14 21:53:29

The Illuminati as far as I know, was an organization created by a certain former Jesuit priest by the name of Adam Weishaupt (+ 1830) that flourished in the late 18th and early 19th century Bavaria.

Yes, it probably was everything you might demand from a covert organization trying to impose Enlightenment and encyclopaedic philosophy upon an unsuspecting world, and it did also connect to the more powerful and moderate Masons of its day.

However, it seems to have been rather locally confined and following (or despite) harsh prohibition by the Bavarian authorities, the order petered out during the first half of the 19th century, obviously without ever recruiting very many prominent members. It was revived in 1880 by Freemasons who settled in Berlin in 1907, and I believe that, at least not so long ago, it still lingered on in a withering and inconsequential state.

I could of course be wrong and deluded, but this is what my rather outspoken, 1920's encyclopedia tells me.

The eyed pyramid on the dollar bill, I'm not even sure actually is a symbol of Freemasonry. It was used as an Enlightenment symbol during the French revolution, of that much I'm certain. I've seen it myself on propaganda posters.

Also, I believe the correct translation would be 'New World Order' ("Novus Ordo Sec{u}lorum"), yet I'll admit my Latin is a little rusty. If it is a general Enlightenment symbol, its use by US founding fathers should surprise no one.

I've encountered these strange theories about obelisks and star patterns before around here somewhere. It seems rather out of context. The obelisk was an important religious symbol in ancient Egypt connected to the worship of the benevolent Sun God.

The Romans, the new sun of the world, over time deemed it appropriate to bring a number of obelisks to Rome as a sign of their importance, splendour and and probably because of their generally sympathethic attitude towards foreign cults. Not that they took religious matters all that seriously. I believe the first one was brought to Rome by Augustus and was intended to be used as a giant solar clock. It now stands in the Piazza del Popolo, by the way.

The Renaissance and latter popes, who shared the caesars' taste for great architecture and were infatuated with everything from Antiquity, revived the tradition of raising obelisks. Although, they needn't go to Egypt to get them like the promoters of this conspiracy theory believe (in fact, they wouldn't have had the resources to do so) but used those that lay around here and there among the the ruins of the city. The one in Piazza San Pietro was taken from the nearby Circus of Hadrian. It's interesting because originally it is said to have carried a globe containing the remains of some famous emperor (currently don't remember which). However, this was removed, most likely because it was considered too pagan to adorn the front of the new St. Peter's. Nowadays it sports a cross. Can't really see how that would indicate some ancient Baal or Moloch cult or whatever is claimed.

In the same vein, the obelisk in Washington and the one in Paris (I believe) simply reflects the continued reverence for Classicism.

Likewise, to suggest that geometrical patterns in city squares etc would have some sinister occult meaning appears to me quite peculiar. Piazza San Pietro should according to these guys be of satanic importance because of its eight spoked wheel configuration. It could just as well imply that the pope is a Buddhist.

There are many conspiracy theories out there. Some more plausible, some less so and a bunch that appear utterly ridiculous. For some reason though, it seems the last type habitually draws the largest crowds. Maybe they exist solely to detract attention from the very real conspiracies of the world, pursued diligently by secretive powers that are.
:;):

DonPanic · 2004-11-14 22:51:42

LO

FreMasonery might have been just a covert for something else. And I still don't understand why the US 1 dollar bill has this obvious freemason symbol, the eye and the pyramid, in addition with this comment "Novus Ordo Seclorum", New Secular order. Followed by "In God we Trust". Quite antithetical statements on the most powerful symbol of a nation, its money.
What does all that mean ?

That 18th Century Freemasonry aims of spreading scientific knowledge and social welfare were in harmony with the ideals of the fathers of american Constitution.
Not so antithetic, after all, freemasons never denied God as being the "Great Architect" of the Universe, and that science as trying to find and share the secrets rules of the "Great Architect" was some act of faith.
Splits in freemason christian rightist and leftist atheistic and anticlerical lodges came mainly from France because of french revolution and its struggle against monarchist clergy.
Today Freemasonry influence and so-called network are largely overestimated, some other links between people like having been studying in the same university or highschool like in France "X Pont", Princeton or Harvard in USA, or Oxford in GB are much more proeminent.

Is it possible that the people of the most fundamentalist religious christian nation, defined recently by the term "value voters", are actually indirectly manipulayed by obscure atheist secret organizations with secret goals ?

I'd rather think there is a billonaires conspiracy to corrupt lawmakers for ever more easy ways to make profits and to escape from any taxe by maintaining world disorder and conflicts and by keeping fiscal paradises out of any international control.

Euler · 2004-11-14 22:56:32

The pyramid and the "Novus Ordo Seclorum" ("new order of the ages") are part of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Seal … ates]Great Seal of the United States, and are not masonic symbols.

Palomar · 2004-11-14 23:25:26

*Hmmmm, not sure I should "go there" and I -don't- wish to offend anyone's religious sentiments, but where do you all suppose the Jesuits (past or present) might fit in to this discussion? Ignatius of Loyola (1491 - 1556), the founder of the Jesuits, etc. (I've read some rather "curious" and negative things about him, but IIRC the material was from rather biased sources). Just wondering.

DonPanic: I'd rather think there is a billonaires conspiracy to corrupt lawmakers for ever more easy ways to make profits and to escape from any taxe by maintaining world disorder and conflicts and by keeping fiscal paradises out of any international control.

*Yeah, probably. Damned bored billionaires won't cough up the funding for the BepiColombo mission to have a lander after all; they only shell out money when their names/corporate logos can be splashed all over the place where everyone can see it and they can rake in an extra dollar. Real science? Ha, they could care less, most of them (:edit: I mean the ones currently *pretending* to be interested in space exploration and related science, when in fact they only care about $ and publicity/self-promotion. :end edit:). Pardon the digression, but it does bother me.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-15 00:26:44

*Yeah, probably. Damned bored billionaires won't cough up the funding for the BepiColombo mission to have a lander after all; they only shell out money when their names/corporate logos can be splashed all over the place where everyone can see it and they can rake in an extra dollar. Real science? Ha, they could care less, most of them (:edit: I mean the ones currently *pretending* to be interested in space exploration and related science, when in fact they only care about $ and publicity/self-promotion. :end edit:). Pardon the digression, but it does bother me.

At the SpaceVision 2004 conference, Tumlinson had this great bit about the

Sagan-auts: Space is BIG, really BIG, Billions and Billions and Billiosn big. Look, everyone look how awesome it is.

Smack! But don't you dare touch anything!

and;

von Braun-ians Ve vill conquer space. Ve vill subdue space and you vill appluad us.

Josh Cryer · 2004-11-15 01:35:58

I dunno. Sagan saw the potential, he's one of the main scientists to spur talk about terraformation. But yeah. I tend to think about these things with regards to practicality. If it's practical to "conquer space" then it will be done. The question is, since space is so freaking empty (you either have really small things or really big things) what truely is there to "conquer"?

Anyway, that's just my opinion. Funnily, my grandfather was a Freemason. I wonder if I can get some perks for being his grandson.

Gennaro · 2004-11-15 02:37:26

The pyramid and the "Novus Ordo Seclorum" ("new order of the ages")...

Why didn't I just google up a dollar bill and look for myself. I feel so embarrassed.

Has anyone ever been asked to joined the Masonic Order? I have. Twice. By different people.

Palomar · 2004-11-15 08:14:04

*Yeah, probably. Damned bored billionaires won't cough up the funding for the BepiColombo mission to have a lander after all; they only shell out money when their names/corporate logos can be splashed all over the place where everyone can see it and they can rake in an extra dollar. Real science? Ha, they could care less, most of them (:edit: I mean the ones currently *pretending* to be interested in space exploration and related science, when in fact they only care about $ and publicity/self-promotion. :end edit:). Pardon the digression, but it does bother me.
At the SpaceVision 2004 conference, Tumlinson had this great bit about the
Sagan-auts: Space is BIG, really BIG, Billions and Billions and Billiosn big. Look, everyone look how awesome it is.
Smack! But don't you dare touch anything!
and;
von Braun-ians Ve vill conquer space. Ve vill subdue space and you vill appluad us.

*Bill: IF you're suggesting I'm a "Sagan-aut" or whatever, you're wrong. But you're just vague enough that I'm unsure if you're directing something my way (personally) or not...(either way, it won't ruin my day...)

My point was that if certain billionaires are *truly* interested in space exploration and "the final frontier," it seems just a bit logical (IMO, anyway) that missions in a bit of distress might get some funding from them. BepiColombo's planned lander has been canceled. Richard Branson can pay hefty money to have his company's logo painted in big bright letters on SpaceFlightOne, Amazon.com's CEO wants to get into the space tourism game...why NOT ask them, or at least question them, as to why they can't shell out a few measley (to them) bucks to advance hard science as well?

Unless, of course, we must consider them as being above criticism (I sure don't). I know you are very much pro-space tourism; enjoy watching folks going round and round in LEO for the remainder of our lives, because I have a feeling that's ALL we're going to be seeing until we both kick the bucket.

I don't care if space tourism commences...*so long as* plans to get to Mars continues and are actively pursued. Heck, even a Lunar colony in the works -- for real and actively -- would be nice (but I'm still in favor of bypassing the Moon in favor of going directly to Mars -- and this is a discussion we've all had a couple of times, so I won't rehash further).

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-11-12 13:37:27

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#2 2004-11-12 13:42:01

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#3 2004-11-12 16:23:37

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#4 2004-11-12 19:07:05

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#5 2004-11-13 09:43:36

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#6 2004-11-13 10:35:03

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#7 2004-11-13 11:15:21

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#8 2004-11-13 13:38:41

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#9 2004-11-13 17:05:46

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#10 2004-11-13 17:28:57

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#11 2004-11-13 18:07:04

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#12 2004-11-13 22:03:55

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#13 2004-11-13 23:26:28

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#14 2004-11-14 07:27:47

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#15 2004-11-14 17:07:50

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#16 2004-11-14 18:16:13

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#17 2004-11-14 18:55:58

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#18 2004-11-14 21:53:29

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#19 2004-11-14 22:51:42

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#20 2004-11-14 22:56:32

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#21 2004-11-14 23:25:26

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#22 2004-11-15 00:26:44

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#23 2004-11-15 01:35:58

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#24 2004-11-15 02:37:26

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#25 2004-11-15 08:14:04

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

Board footer