Job Discussion Forums

[tjpnz2000]

Dear Richard,

It is I

I was deliberately staying out of this thread because it is a very heated one and I sure as hell don't have any answers.

However, I have just finished reading George Orwell`s wonderful, if unbelievably depressing, 1984. I hope the American people don't give in to:

Doublethink; there are no WMD in Iraq, and we all know it, but there are WMD in Iraq because if there aren't then Bush and Co lied and this is unacceptable, or

Newspeak; Illegal combatants (Prisoners of War, POW for short, in the war on terror), Collateral damage (the accidental killing of civilians), Iraqi fighers (soldiers), whatever the currently acceptable terms for `forces of armed occupation`, `Military rule`, `invasion` and so forth are.


I can't vote in US elections as I am not from the US, therefore in this case at least I am niether responsible nor to blame. However, I know enough decent, reasonable, thinking americans to have hope.

T

[M.]

2pents worth,

Well this thread has no end. So I will jump in a bit. First, John, sorry to heave pushed those buttons. Second, you are the first Vet that I have me that has similiar views to me , Third, My father and Step-father were in Nam, and one of them claims that we never lost that war, Plus my hugely, "liberal" family, believes all the bull coming from the Bush Admin.

I liked your assessment on Afgan. Should have finished it and stopped there. I am afraid the Bush admin will push this "terrorist issue/WMD to the brink. In five years we will attack Iceland because of the Icelandic Liberation Army!

As far as CNN goes it is as warped as every news I read on the web/radio....etc....I witnessed that first hand in Russia, during the Kosovo crisis. First I would see CNN/ BBC, and then the Russian News...like RTR...and it looked like I was watching news from two different wars.

I think some of us, me included, are a bit too critical of the US government at times and suffer from the Expat hate syndrome. But I think the Bush Admin, has definitely overdone it this time. As for Ashcroft and Rumsfeld........yet more to criticize..........

P.s. where is everyone living these days anyways? Berlin Here.....

M.......

P.P.S...... Tom waits has a following in Russia, too bad most of them cant get the lyrics...........

[johnslat]

Dear M,
No problem about the " button-pushing " - I guess we all have buttons of some kind, and what else are they for but to be pushed? I may be the first vet to have view similar to yours, but I assure you I'm not the only one. I belong to VVAW ( Vietnam Vets Against the War ), and most of us are pretty, well the nice word would be skeptical, about the government and its policies, especially as regards foreign conflicts ( once burned, twice shy ). But I know a few guys who also have that " we never lost " notion - what they usually mean is: if they'd just let us do what needed to be done, " unleashed us ", so to speak, we could have been in Hanoi in about 2 weeks. Well, maybe so - but, as seems to be happening in Iraq, we also might STILL be in Vietnam then, losing another few guys every day or so. But I just can't understand how/why so many people in the States are swallowing all this junk that Bush and Co. are putting out. I'm afraid the answer is probably - yes, they really are that gullible and/or indifferent. And that, to me, is both sad and scary.
Regards,
John

[Irish]

johnslat wrote:

[johnslat]

Dear Irish,
The " rude " word would be " cynical " - but it would also be inappropriate, because cynicism usually implies jeering from the sidelines but refusing to get involved. After all, if you're cynical, you don't believe in anything, even in the possibility of your actions making any kind of difference. But cynicism is attractive to some because it makes them appear ever so worldly-wise and experienced. " Ha, you fools - trying to change the world; you're such stupid idealists. Nothing you can say or do will make the slightest difference ". A nice, smug attitude, and an excuse for inaction. It may indeed be a " losing battle ", but by God, I'd much rather go down fighting than stand idly by and watch greed and stupidity triumph.

" In order for evil to prevail, all that need happen is for good people to do nothing. '
Edmund Burke

" The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing."
Albert Einstein

And I like the company I keep.
Regards,
John

[richard ame]

Hi its me
Since I last posted the brits have taken a bashing and six soldiers were killed in attack that apparently was a revenge attack .Apparently our boys used sniffer dogs in house searchs and this caused enough hysteria among the local populace to go out mob handed and blow up a police station,did I get that right courtsey of cnn btw .

[kimo]

Interesting thread here. The problem, IMHO, with American politics is that there is no one dumb enough to step to the fore and try to be a real leader. American politicians are led around on leashes like little puppy dogs. (Can you lead sharks around on leashes?) Polls or cash! Whoever said it on the China forum was right! It's all about money and a few votes too I might add. Remember how Ronald Reagan supposedly bankrupted the country? Of course he did it all by himself with a Democratic House and Senate. They got to spend all the money they wanted on their little pork barrel projects then blame the great actor for their own votes and wanton spending. What a coalition? The Democratic Party today is happy with Bush or it would offer the American public something (read that as a real leader) better.

Sorry, I have just been released from the hospital after six weeks with SARnS (Serious Attitude Readjustment (needed) Syndrome).

[svrart]

[johnslat]

Dear svrart,
" I consider myself a world citizen . . "
Believe it or not - I mean the following to be taken as " constructive criticism ":
Do you have any idea how smug, pompous and fatuous you sound? You might want to use that " mirror " you are shoving in our faces to take a good, long look at yourself.
Regards,
John

[Ted]

DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction, honey.

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.

Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.

Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.

Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons
when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they chose to die by the thousands rather than
defend themselves.

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons to fight us back with?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to
invade another country.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in
sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.

Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.

Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and
tortured.

Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960's, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any
business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans
become capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.

Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.

Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he's not
really a legitimate leader anyway.

Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the
United States.

Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.

Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.

Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an
illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.

Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, 19 men, 15 of them Saudi Arabians hijacked 4 airplanes and flew 3 of them into buildings, killing over
3,000 Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.

Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban $43 million back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and
hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off
people's hands for stealing bread.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas
whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.

Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body
except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's
body except for her eyes and fingers.

Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped he and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980's.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like
us. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets, I mean, the Russians, are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to
support our invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us
invade Iraq either.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to re-name French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.

Q: Do we always re-name foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.

Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.

Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.

Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all
the better.

Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who
opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.

Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good
night.

[Roger]

Ted,
an excellent piecd, ideal to use in Literatjure class except that I am teaching in nominally-communist China... but it would make Reading classes in an European country so much fun AND instructive!

[tjpnz2000]

If you haven't already, go to Google type `Weapons of Mass Destruction` into the search field and hit the `I'm feeling lucky` buttom.

You will not be dissappointed.

T

[johnslat]

Dear tjpnz2000,
From my Yahoo malbox, received this morning:

" Go to www.google.com and search for "Weapons of Mass Destruction",
click the
"I'm Feeling Lucky" button. "

Good golly - are we on the same mailing list?

Regards,
John

[tjpnz2000]

John,

Maybe, I got told by a friend of mine by email this morning. It was a personal email because it came through my phone.

My theory is that things like this hit a critical mass on the net and EVERYBODY knows at once. I just saw it on a tech news site I keep and eye on.

PM for more information.

T

[veiledsentiments]

I got this one yesterday from a friend. They get around fast.

BTW, don't forget to click on the links. They too are worth the visit. Also click on the author at the bottom. It will lead you to another little masterpiece of the same sort on the NYTimes.

Enjoy

VS