From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: I HEARD ROSS PEROT WILL BE BACK
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 15:34:40 GMT

In article <BvKF4L.L69@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com>,
dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:

|>In article <1992Oct3.002639.12512@dscomsf.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
|>writes:
|>>In article <BvI0x1.C4u@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com>,
|>>dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
|>>
|>>|>In article <1992Oct1.230436.2195@dscomsf.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
|>>|>writes:
|>>|>>In article <38800@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, cote@cs.ucsd.edu (Brad Cote) writes:
|>>
|>>This is the standard sort of language we have come to expect from the church
|>of
|>>the risen Perot. Last time the tactics included editing peoples posts to turn
|>a
|>>condemnation of racism into what appeared to be a racist post. What more do
|>they
|>>have in store?
|>
|>You're referring to me?  I am unaware of any such action I've taken.
|>In fact, the only reference I made in any way to race was whether or
|>not you are an American.  You may consider this a racist remark, I
|>certainly do not.

That was Stratocaster and Pye.

|>> [deleted]
|>>|>
|>>|>Here is this same old, tired lie again.  You only look stupid to anyone 
|>>|>who has read the book, and there are MILLIONS of them, although it
|>>|>certainly seems that the majority of Perot detractors on USENET would
|>>|>prefer to remain ignorant of what UWSA is all about.
|>>
|>>In fact the record proves otherwise. Perot was putting forward that proposal
|>six
|>>months ago. I know that in his book he has reduced the figures to make them
|>look
|>>vaguely credible (ie make them less than the amount the US actualy spends on
|>>maintaining forces abroad). 
|>
|>In other words, Phill, everyone should assume that what anyone had said
|>in the past is what should be forevermore believed?  That regardless of 
|>whether someone says his mind has been changed, or has revised figures
|>or projections based on input from people in the know, we should believe 
|>the first statement on a subject?

No but it means that what I said was not as you described it "this same old
tired lie again". It was the truth.

If the guy changes his mind every six months that means we can expect 8 changes
of mind during an administration.


|>Since regardless of what I might say in the future, you will only 
|>believe what I said in the past, why do you bother to respond?

Because the Perotistas are the worst advertisment for Perot. It is you who
damage his chances not me. I merely ensure that there are plenty of
opportunities for those who read the net to see how narrow minded, deperate and
frightened Perot supporters are.


|>>|>Perhaps Phill, being a lifetime beneficiary of our protection, merely
|>>|>wishes the status quo to continue.  I know he has claimed otherwise,
|>>|>but why does he continue to perpetrate this lie ?
|>[about the alleged "extortion" of $200 billion from Europe/Asia]
|>>
|>>No as a Quaker I am entirely against the stationing of US (or any other)
|>forces
|>>in the UK.
|>
|>Yet the UK accepts payment to station the British Army of the Rhine
|>in Germany.  Perhaps you should work to get your own house in order
|>before you complain too much about ours.

I am as has often been made plain a member of the British Labour Party. I am
thus opposed to much of the policies of the British government.


|>Nevertheless, YOU HAVE benefitted from the military stability on the
|>European continent due in some part to the presence of American troops.
|>Your personal opinion on the matter is not germane to the argument.

I have also suffered from US interference in our domestic affairs such as the
intelligence center at GCHQ.

US foriegn policy , particularly that of the republican right is not popular
abroad. Particularly the invasion of Vietnam and the destabilisation of
democratic governments in South and Central America.

Perhaps you consider that we should attempt to extract payment from the Indians
for the rather nice railway we built over there. Point is that as with the US
stationing troops in europe it was done for self interest, not altruism.

|>>If you care to review the record I have in any case made my position on the
|>US
|>>military establishment clear on many occasions. I consider them to be
|>wasteful,
|>>inefficient and barely competent. 
|>
|>That's fine, Phill.  Bring our troops home, and let you handle it.  I
|>think we've agreed on this is a prior article.  Just don't call for my
|>children to come bail you out, as did my grandfather, if you yet
|>again become embroiled in warfare.

Point of fact, the US did not "bail the British out". The US was attacked by the
Japanese and then Germany declared war on the US. The only reason why the
British got into the war in the first place was that we were bailing Poland out.
Of course both the UK and the US entered the war because they knew that if they
did not Germany would attack them.


|>>|>Why don't you read "United We Stand"? 
|>>
|>>Why don't you read Mein Kampf or Das Kapital?
|>
|>Now, who's accusing whom of hysteria?  This obvious attempt to link
|>Perot with Hitler is characteristic of the Church of the Born-Again
|>Perot Haters.

There are undenyable common elements. The simplistic approach to ecconomics
based on the establishment of a command ecconomy for "a limited period". The use
of patriotic emblems to hide the core philosophy.

|>I've read Mein Kampf, by the way.  I have not read Das Kapital.

I have read United we stand. Strange thing, as with all Perot statements it is
suggestive of supporting all points of the political spectrum whilst actualy
making concrete commitments on no issues of substance whatsoever.


--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc