Bush's speech
Arthur Levesque
immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
/\ Arthur M Levesque 2A4W <*> b...@boog.orgy =/\= http://boog.org __
\B\ack King of the Potato People <fnord> "Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!" (oO)
\S\lash Member of a vast right-wing conspiracy (-O-) Urban Spaceman /||\
\/ I was a lesbian before it was fashionable "I hate rainbows!"-EC
Robin Johnson
news:3b9eb1be....@news.cis.dfn.de...
> He said the most important thing in his speech. I smiled
> immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
> before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
> terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
I heard "those that harbor them."
I definitely didn't hear the word 'countries'.
*Now* I'm worried.
--
Robin Johnson
rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk
http://www.nondescript.org
"A cup of coffee with a fork, please."
Stephen Nelson
Anyone who can be PROVED to have ANY connection to this, no matter who
or where they are, should pay the same penalty as the ones on the plane.
Anyone who endorses the action or celebrates the result is well
deserving of contempt.
Anyone, like Mr. Arafat, who is sitting there mouthing pious platitudes
with a track record showing just the opposite should be told that
actions speak louder than words.
UNTIL they fall into one of those three categories, they are entitled to
the presumption of innocence.
Copper Squirrel
<rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk> wrote:
>"Arthur Levesque" <meist...@boog.org> wrote in message
>news:3b9eb1be....@news.cis.dfn.de...
>> He said the most important thing in his speech. I smiled
>> immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
>> before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
>> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
>> terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
>
>I heard "those that harbor them."
>
>I definitely didn't hear the word 'countries'.
>
>*Now* I'm worried.
The actual statement is "We will make no distinction between the
terrorists who committed these acts, and those who harbor them."
according to cnn.com. Countries was not used. And even before his
speech the various arab countries were lining up to denounce the
attack. Most of the governments know better than to irritate somebody
who can pound them into rubble on a days notice. Although a more
appropriate metaphor would be letting the djin out of the bottle(1001
Arabian Nights, I believe) .
Now if only we had a president that didn't look so much like an
inferior Mortimer Snerd. Not to mention Mortimer sounded more
intelligent and aware.
.............
\\|||||//
\\\\\|/////
\\\\\|/////
\\\\|////
\\|//
# ` "Lord, make me an instrument of your peace"
# )) St. Francis of Assissi
# (( (:B) copper_...@yahoo.com
# )) )(@ ~*
# (((((@)& The Copper Squirrel in his virtual tree
Stephen Nelson
cigar store wooden Indian. I'm perfectly comfortable with who we have,
thanks very much.
Chris Croughton
<snels...@home.com> wrote:
>I heard countries..... but I wouldn't have worried too much if I hadn't.
>Anyone who can be PROVED to have ANY connection to this, no matter who
>or where they are, should pay the same penalty as the ones on the plane.
Many of us have said the same about those who supported the IRA with
money and guns. Strange how when it's their home turf attitudes
change...
>Anyone who endorses the action or celebrates the result is well
>deserving of contempt.
Agreed. But it was only a few actually doing that (and some in Sweden as
well, I'm told, there are anti-capitalists everywhere). Hitting a
country just because they have a few sickos (as there seem to be several
people advocating in the media) just compounds the crime.
Chris C
Stephen Nelson
Chris Croughton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:18:08 GMT, Stephen Nelson
> <snels...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >I heard countries..... but I wouldn't have worried too much if I hadn't.
> >Anyone who can be PROVED to have ANY connection to this, no matter who
> >or where they are, should pay the same penalty as the ones on the plane.
>
> Many of us have said the same about those who supported the IRA with
> money and guns. Strange how when it's their home turf attitudes
> change...
Not mine. One of the Catholic Church's principal failings in that situation
is in not pronouncing an Interdict against all of Ireland until the insanity
of bombing stopped. I don't know if the Anglican Church has a similar
concept, but likewise, the "Reverend" Ian Paisley and all others like him in
the Anglican Church should at least be stripped of the title.
>
>
> >Anyone who endorses the action or celebrates the result is well
> >deserving of contempt.
>
> Agreed. But it was only a few actually doing that (and some in Sweden as
> well, I'm told, there are anti-capitalists everywhere). Hitting a
> country just because they have a few sickos (as there seem to be several
> people advocating in the media) just compounds the crime.
Displaying contempt and dropping bombs are two very different things.
>
>
> Chris C
Robin Johnson
news:dgguptg7vjlh8ve66...@4ax.com...
> Most of the governments know better than to irritate somebody
> who can pound them into rubble on a days notice.
Except George Bush's government, as we've now seen.
Sean Cleary
This war will accomplish all the terrorists goals: It will alienate
the middle east from the US, and highten tensions around the world.
Sean
Larry Kirby
Levesque) writes:
> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
>terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
Hear, hear, as our British friends would say.
Larry
SF fen are like rabbits
Everything in the world wants to kill them and eat them
But put a group of them together and they'll fight amongst themselves
J. Spencer Love
> I heard countries..... but I wouldn't have worried too much if I hadn't.
> Anyone who can be PROVED to have ANY connection to this, no matter who
> or where they are, should pay the same penalty as the ones on the plane.
I understood countries. It was not necessary to say it.
I have a problem with the word "ANY". I suspect that we essentially
agree on this, but English lacks mathematical precision. For example,
the *victims* have a connection to the crime. We shouldn't execute the
surviving victims!
If we all got just what we deserved, we would all be in trouble. Save
me from anyone who gets to my age and has a completely clear conscience.
I'd contend that such a person simply lacks a conscience at all.
A contributor should pay the penalty in some proportion to their
culpability. We have well-developed theories of culpability, which
should guide us.
Western theories of culpability have some problems. By tradition, we do
not shoot philosophers whose ideas were adopted by criminals; most
philosophers are past caring and living ones could argue that their
ideas were distorted or misunderstood. So the teachers of the criminals
will probably escape paying for the natural consequences of their
actions.
Hiding behind the cloak of religion will likely spare many criminals
lucky enough not to have been in the chain of command for this crime.
We mutilate that cloak at our peril; unless we develop and perfect new
theories of culpability, that way lies lawlessness.
> Anyone who endorses the action or celebrates the result is well
> deserving of contempt.
Exactly. Contempt != retaliation. Contempt can also be redeemed, or
refer to the attitude rather than to the person, or none of us would
have living children. Deadly retaliation is rather more permanent.
> Anyone, like Mr. Arafat, who is sitting there mouthing pious platitudes
> with a track record showing just the opposite should be told that
> actions speak louder than words.
No, that's just more words. Arafat's actions should be met with
actions. He should be SHOWN that actions speak louder. But who bells
that cat? The Palestinians have won too many skirmishes of the PR war.
If his hand can be connected to this act of war, we should toast him.
> UNTIL they fall into one of those three categories, they are entitled to
> the presumption of innocence.
People who fall into the second category, contemptible sentiment, are
nevertheless entitled to the presumption of innocence from the actual
commission of the crimes. There are plenty of Americans today who are
guilty of comptemptible sentiment, and who among us would cast the first
stone? Even religions that hold a mere sentiment as a sin consider the
translation of that sentiment into action as a greater sin. The
injunction not to covet is a warning -- sentiment can lead to action,
especially brooding sentiment.
Our legal system, for the most part, punishes only action, or very
specific kinds of inaction, but even then it takes intent into account.
Accidental, inadvertent action is subject to another test: that of
foreseeability. If you could have been reasonably expected to predict
that your actions were likely to have terrible consequences, then you
were reckless. Ignorance of the law may not be an excuse, but ignorance
of plausible consequences can be a mitigating factor.
The main exceptions to the requirement of action, lately conspiracy law,
earlier treason, and unfortunately NOT just earlier, apostasy (OK, not
recent western law), speak to the perceived seriousness of the crimes
and the difficulty of proving action. Such laws are evil, IMNSHO, but
they may be the only way to bring the criminals to book. Lesser evils,
perhaps.
So back to the main thread of this reply -- we should go to war against
the criminals, and in identifying the criminals, we should apply the
usual tests of action, intent, and complicity. Someone who unknowingly
helped would be subject to the test for recklessness.
A government who knowingly harbored persons known to be terrorists is at
least reckless if not complicit, in the sense of being responsible for
acts of war committed by the terrorists. Often, we have bowed to the
difficulty of proof, especially of intent. For example, the U.S. would
prefer not to have to infringe on the rights of its citizens sufficient
to stop the I.R.A., even though the English are morally correct to hold
U.S. citizens who send money responsible for the actions of the I.R.A.
that they paid for. Some did not understand what they were paying for,
and are thus somewhat less complicit than those who simply didn't care.
Many who understood took sides in a war -- and are beyond the hand of
English law, which was trying not to acknowledge that they were at war.
The problem is tied up in the difference between war and the courts. I
am not a lawyer, but it comes from the problams of jurisdiction and
incompatible legal theories. If Afghanistan serves up bin Laden's head
on a platter in response to some reasonable demonstration of guilt, or
even just turns him and his associates over for trial, which could
amount to the same thing, they will probably avoid war and thus terrible
consequences.
I would like to see this resolved in the courts. I don't expect it,
though.
If legal measures must be abandoned, there will be collateral damage.
The warning could be restated thus: if you do not cooperate, we will
not worry so much about the suffering of the "innocent" as we have
lately. If a people allows a criminal government to stay in power,
notwithstanding our usual sympathy about the difficulty of throwing the
bums out, then they also may have to pay a price when we bring the
criminals to book.
When you go to a surgeon to cut out a cancer, you accept necessary
damage to healthy tissue to get the cancer before it gets you. Even
then, success is not assured, but fast and drastic action is your best
hope. I don't want to belabor this metaphor, but what we need is a
competent surgeon who will give us the best chance of recovery. We'll
get second opinions and try to avoid butchery or expensive, painful and
unnecessary surgery. Wouldn't you?
As HMOs go, we may be beyond any remedies the United Nations has on
staff, but if we want our coverage to continue, we'll at least involve
them in the decision.
Whether we go farther and demand reparations from complicit but
cooperative governments will probably be up to the HMO's lawyers.
Reparations don't bring back the dead. In the aftermath of the slavery
conference, they raise other issues. And we are so much richer than the
other governments; who can decide what would be fair, and then sell that
decision?
There are lots of opportunities for teaching songs here.
-- Spencer
keith lim
> Robin Johnson wrote:
> > "Arthur Levesque" <meist...@boog.org> wrote
> > > He said the most important thing in his speech. ...
> > > We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
> > > terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
> >
> > I heard "those that harbor them."
> > I definitely didn't hear the word 'countries'.
> > *Now* I'm worried.
>
> I heard countries.....
"Countries" was never in the speech. I'm worried about people who choose
to hear what they want to hear, rather than what was actually said, to
the extent of inserting their own words into those of other people.
--
keith lim keit...@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~keithlim/
Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
Mary Creasey
> <rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk> wrote:
>
> >"Arthur Levesque" <meist...@boog.org> wrote in message
> >news:3b9eb1be....@news.cis.dfn.de...
> >> He said the most important thing in his speech. I smiled
> >> immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
> >> before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
> >> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
> >> terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
> >
> >I heard "those that harbor them."
> >
> >I definitely didn't hear the word 'countries'.
> >
> >*Now* I'm worried.
>
> The actual statement is "We will make no distinction between the
> terrorists who committed these acts, and those who harbor them."
> according to cnn.com. Countries was not used. And even before his
> speech the various arab countries were lining up to denounce the
> attack. Most of the governments know better than to irritate somebody
> who can pound them into rubble on a days notice. Although a more
> appropriate metaphor would be letting the djin out of the bottle(1001
> Arabian Nights, I believe) .
>
> Now if only we had a president that didn't look so much like an
> inferior Mortimer Snerd. Not to mention Mortimer sounded more
> intelligent and aware.
Maybe so--but he IS surrounded by some capable and intelligent
advisors. This crisis will give us a fair idea of how much he pays
attention to them.
Mary
James A. Wolf
>
>Anyone, like Mr. Arafat, who is sitting there mouthing pious platitudes
>with a track record showing just the opposite should be told that
>actions speak louder than words.
Have you seen Yassir... His sorry Egyptian (deliberate choice of words
here...) carcass was trembling... and it ain't all Parkinsons. This
is not the time to remind the world he pionerred this stuff.
And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
--
<*> James A. Wolf - jaw...@mediaone.net - people.ne.mediaone.net/jawolf <*>
"The jawbone of an ass| "I want to| "The American People are slow| "Kill' em.
is just as dangerous | see the | to wrath, but when their | Kill 'em
a weapon today as in | cinders | is once kindled it burns like| all."
Samson's time." | dance." | a consuming flame." | Stonewall
Richard M. Nixon | Gen. LeMay| Theodore Roosevelt | Jackson
Copper Squirrel
It will indeed. Personally, I'd like the top three in Washington to
step down, the president, the vice-president and the Speaker of the
House so we could have Colin Powell in charge.
Margaret Middleton
>advisors. This crisis will give us a fair idea of how much he pays
>attention to them.
Howabout send a synopsis of the reactions here to "president(at)whitehouse.gov"
?
MSMinLR(at)aol.com (Margaret Middleton)
Shameless Plug for our local con: http://www.rockon.org
Help make a Quilted Artifact to sell for Interfilk:
http://members.aol.com/msminlr/ifquilt.htm
Stephen Nelson
of the Senate. Not sure who that is right now.
And Bush has done a good job, IMHO.
Lee Gold
>
> Except that after the Speaker of the house comes, IIRC, the president pro tem
> of the Senate. Not sure who that is right now.
The oldest Democratic Senator, Robert C. Byrd of WV.
Up until June 6th it was the oldest Republican Senator, Strom Thurmond.
--Lee
Gunther Anderson
"James A. Wolf" wrote:
>
> Have you seen Yassir... His sorry Egyptian (deliberate choice of words
> here...) carcass was trembling... and it ain't all Parkinsons. This
> is not the time to remind the world he pionerred this stuff.
Um, who exactly was it who trained and funded Bin Laden originally?
Look closer to home. Arafat no more pioneered terrorism than Moishe
Dyan. Remember that he has gone no further to defend his home than any
Israeli would. And besides, this isn't directly about Israel. Bin
Laden is Saudi. This is, more than anything, about the conflict between
fundamentalism and secularism, about the differences between the Law of
Man and the Law of God (insert your favorite God here).
> And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
Answering hatred with hatred is empty and useless. You will win no
peace by demonizing your enemy. And assassination is never justice.
Gunther Anderson
James A. Wolf
>> And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
>
>Answering hatred with hatred is empty and useless. You will win no
>peace by demonizing your enemy.
It's not hatred. It's politics. Yassir & Co have been using similar
tactics against Israel. And when Israel blows up an empty building
Colin Powel condemned it. And across campuses anti-Zionist groups
were gathering steam.
Now the Pals currently dancing in the street will get nothing more
than faux crocidile tears when Israel next acts decisively.
As for your false analogy- remember the 70s? Yassir used terror as a
PR tool. He used it for media purposes- not for tactical reasons.
>And assassination is never justice.
1) It can be justice. If we cant try the bastard kill him.
2) I'm not interested in nebulous legalistic 'justice.' I'm
interested in breaking them. Bin Laden dead will cripple his
movement.
Maureen O'Brien
<Maureen looks down, trying to control her temper>
I despised Clinton. I loathed Clinton. I hated him with the fiery
heat of a thousand suns, and if forced to shake his hand I'd have to
wash it off immediately. But I never -- never, not once -- suggested
that he ought to 'step down' or 'get out' in the face of a national
emergency.
This is right up there with all those dedicated space supporters who
hated Newt Gingrich so much that they couldn't bring themselves to
take the help he wanted to give. Sure, we had a fan in one of the most
powerful positions in the country. But he wasn't the _right_ fan.
<Maureen rolls eyes>
OTOH, I'd also like to tonguelash all the idiots who keep talking big
about turning various parts of the world into glass. Um, civilians?
Children? If we have to wreak havoc, we're not supposed to be gleeful
about it. Real warriors are professionals, not bloodlusting jerks.
<Maureen sighs>
I know we all have to let off some steam, but...sheesh.
Maureen
Gunther Anderson
>
> >And assassination is never justice.
>
> 1) It can be justice. If we cant try the bastard kill him.
> 2) I'm not interested in nebulous legalistic 'justice.' I'm
> interested in breaking them. Bin Laden dead will cripple his
> movement.
Only in your dreams. You must ask yourself two questions, and if you
can't be honest with us about the answer, be honest with yourself.
Would it work against you? And if it wouldn't work against you, why
should it work against anyone else? Or are you just so much better than
they are than you can "break" them the way they could never break you?
The third question is rhetorical.
Trying to win a war using tactics that you declare would never work
against you is foolish. Your error is impatience. You see to think
that sufficient use of force can win this by next week. Or maybe next
year. It cannot ever win. The _only_ way to keep people from killing
you is changing their minds. If you kill them, their friends and
children will follow. If you kill their friends and children just to
keep them from following, then you are no better than they are, and we
might as well kill you. Then _your_ friends and children will follow.
Do you begin to see a never-ending cycle here?
It takes time to change hearts. Killing lots of random people only
hardens hearts. Find the perpetrators, and _bring_them_to_justice_.
Sure, that can be hard. It can take years. But never be lazy in
pursuit of justice. Vengeance is for the lazy, vengeance is for the
imptient. When you put a terrorist on a public, real trial, you
diminish them. When you kill them in the streets, you martyr them.
Don't throw away the very ideals you would pretend to be defending. Or
is it only about blood? Is this whole concept of freedom and laws
immaterial against vengeance for blood?
ObMusic:
"Give blood / But you will find that blood is not enough".
- Pete Townshend
Gunther Anderson
Joe Ellis
<gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
<<More tripe that I've already responded to in another thread snipped>>
<heavy sarcasm mode>
Thank you for your comments, Neville Chamberlain.
</heavy sarcasm mode>
Gerry Tyra
In the real world, James makes an excellent point.
Effective leadership is a -very- rare commodity. And it dies with the
leader. Sure, there may be someone right behind him/her who is -almost-
as good, but how many layers of good leadership have you ever seen in
any organization?
Historically, mass attacks against a civilian population are pointless.
They just stiffen the resolve of the survivors. You are seeing a form
of that right now.
But the issue is that effective leadership is essential to directing
that resolve into effective action. The resolve without a leader
results in something like kicking a fire ant hill. The ants swarm out,
searching for what caused the disturbance and attacking anything that
looks like a possible target. But if you just take a step back, they
lose you completely and start to repair the damage.
Without organization you are back to individuals attacking with the
materials at hand. Bad things still happen to good people, but not on
the scale that we have just seen.
WRT changing hearts, good idea, but nearly impossible to implement.
There is always a fringe element in every society that will consider
violence as a solution to their perceived problem. When it is one
person, s/he is thought of as crazy. When it is a group, they are
terrorists. When enough of the population agrees, it is a revolution.
In various parts of the world there are what can best be thought of as
blood feuds that have gone on for nearly a thousand years. It may well
take a thousand years of work to resolve them. But in the meantime, you
still have to deal with the violent fringe. And with this group,
thinking nice thoughts doesn't do much good.
BTW, I've known a few people who have worked counter-terrorist. And a
recurring theme has been a terrorist in jail will get another 12 people
dead in retaliation for holding the one. The counter terrorist crowd
tends to burn out when this really sinks in and the reaction simply
becomes that the captured terrorist was, "Shot and killed while
resisting arrest."
Gerry
Rob Wynne
>I despised Clinton. I loathed Clinton. I hated him with the fiery
>heat of a thousand suns, and if forced to shake his hand I'd have to
>wash it off immediately. But I never -- never, not once -- suggested
>that he ought to 'step down' or 'get out' in the face of a national
>emergency.
For what it's worth, I fealt the same way about GWB -- until 48 hours
ago. I have no doubt I'll feel that way about him in the future. But
for this moment, that man is my President, and the Commander in Chief of
my countries military forces, and I am prepared to stand behind him and
help in any way I am personally able to see that right is done.
This is no time for partisanship. There will be time for that again,
when this is all nothing but a painful memory.
Rob
--
Rob Wynne / The Autographed Cat / d...@america.net
The best original science-fiction and fantasy on the web:
Aphelion Webzine: http://www.aphelion-webzine.com/
Gafilk 2002: Jan 11-13, 2002, Atlanta, GA -- http://www.gafilk.org/
Leslie Fish
> immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
> before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
> terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
>
and assist them. This does mean war, you realize.
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Leslie Fish
"Stephen Nelson" <snels...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B9F5CD6...@home.com...
> Yeah, we could have one who looks like Huck Finn (without his pants), or a
> cigar store wooden Indian. I'm perfectly comfortable with who we have,
> thanks very much.
>
smart enough to let his generals conduct the war.
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Leslie Fish
"Robin Johnson" <rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk> wrote in message
news:9nnpa6$1cdl$1...@rook.le.ac.uk...
> "Copper Squirrel" <copper_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:dgguptg7vjlh8ve66...@4ax.com...
>
> > Most of the governments know better than to irritate somebody
> > who can pound them into rubble on a days notice.
>
> Except George Bush's government, as we've now seen.
>
or take the time to find out exactly who (and where) the guilty parties are?
Do you want it good, or Thursday?
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Leslie Fish
>
> Personally, I'd like the top three in Washington to
> step down, the president, the vice-president and the Speaker of the
> House so we could have Colin Powell in charge.
> .............
a politically and militarily brilliant move.
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Leslie Fish
> Chris,
>
> Chris Croughton wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:18:08 GMT, Stephen Nelson
> > <snels...@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Many of us have said the same about those who supported the IRA with
> > money and guns. Strange how when it's their home turf attitudes
> > change...
I wish Ozzie were alive to explain this; he'd been there. Quite
simply, there IS NO I.R.A. -- anymore than there's still a Grand Army of the
Republic. The IRA was the Irish rebel band who won freedom for most of
Ireland in...1920. How many people capable of even lifting a gun in 1920
are still alive today?
The IRA closed its membership once the Partition was over, but the
political arm of the movement -- the Sinn Fein (never could spell that
right) -- continued to keep its membership open. One faction of the IRA
split off to continue fighting in Northern Ireland, but it didn't use the
name IRA, and soon split into several smaller factions whose power dwindled
with age.
The bunch that came up in the '60s, after most of the old IRA were dead,
came from neither of these. The Sinn Fein denounced them, and the few
survivors of the old IRA factions swore 'twere none o' theirs. This bunch
called itself the Provisional IRA (much to the outrage of the few old
survivors) -- or "Provos" for short.
That name may have been more prophetic than people realized at first,
since "provo" is also short for "provocateur". And the Provos have acted
precisely like provocateurs ever since: trawling for young hotheads they can
use as kamikazes, almost deliberately attracting sociopaths, attacking
harmless and innocent targets, clashing with the Sinn Fein over every
attempt at peaceful settlement, and generally playing straight into the
hands of Ian Paisley and his kind. Exactly all they've done in the past 35+
years has been to guarantee the continued presence of the British Specials
in Northern Ireland.
Call me paranoid, but I've seen CoInTelPro jobs pulled before, and this
has all the look of one. I've done my share of raising funds and doing work
for the Sinn Fein, but I wouldn't touch these guys with a dip-stick.
>
> >
> > Agreed. But it was only a few actually doing that
Uhmm, if it had been only a few, I daresay the Israeli police would have
moved in and escorted them away.
(and some in Sweden as
> > well, I'm told, there are anti-capitalists everywhere).
Sweden?! What on earth for?? Since when did anybody in Sweden have
reason for fury against the World Trade Center, of all things? Oh, these
had to be visiting Arabs, or else it was a put-up job.
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Leslie Fish
"Sean Cleary" <sean_...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:4b4608cd.01091...@posting.google.com...
known for years to harbor the terrorists -- include Libya, Syria, Iraq (not
Iran any longer; they just put in a new government) and Somalia. You can
bet that their neighbors who aren't on that list (like Egypt and Saudi
Arabia) would just love to jump in on the side of the US and lay claim to
the lands laid waste by the coming war. One notable fact apparent to anyone
who studies MidEast history is that the one thing an Arab hates more than a
Jew is his neighboring Arab.
--
--Leslie <;)))><
Larry Kirby
<gun...@guntheranderson.com> writes:
> And assassination is never justice.
>
Have to disagree with that one, ol' buddy. If Bin Ladin ordered the
attack on us, then scragging his sorry ass with be very fine justice.
Steve Brinich
>> And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
>
> Answering hatred with hatred is empty and useless.
It's not hatred; it's simply recognition of reality. Israel has just been
handed a pile of political Get Out Of Jail Free cards the size of the
Pokemon CCG print run.
--
Steve Brinich <sbri...@bigfoot.com> If the government wants us
http://www.bigfoot.com/~sbrinich to respect the law
41BFB2CAA6083A641079871798366DC7 it should set a better example
Contata Three: http://www.rishathra.com/contata
Aaron Davies
> > > well, I'm told, there are anti-capitalists everywhere).
>
> Sweden?! What on earth for?? Since when did anybody in Sweden have
> reason for fury against the World Trade Center, of all things? Oh, these
> had to be visiting Arabs, or else it was a put-up job.
Think Seattle nihilists. Scandanavia's full of them.
--
__ __
/ ) / )
/--/ __. __ ______ / / __. , __o _ _
/ (_(_/|_/ (_(_) / <_ /__/_(_/|_\/ <__</_/_)_
Filksinger
wrote:
>Stephen Nelson <snels...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>Anyone, like Mr. Arafat, who is sitting there mouthing pious platitudes
>>with a track record showing just the opposite should be told that
>>actions speak louder than words.
>
>Have you seen Yassir... His sorry Egyptian (deliberate choice of words
>here...) carcass was trembling... and it ain't all Parkinsons. This
>is not the time to remind the world he pionerred this stuff.
>
>And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
Yassir Arafat is, and has been for some time, in a very bad position.
He has a goal (the creation of Palestine and ensuring access to the
Islamic holy places in Israel), which is heavily opposed by the most
powerful government figures in Israel. He has followers, who are an
angry people, prone to violence, and who will abandon him if he takes
too soft a line. He publically supported a position he now renounces;
as a result, he is both held up as a terrorist by his enemies _and_
denounced for _not_ being a terrorist by his former friends. The
closest thing he had to an ally on the Israeli side was assassinated
and replaced by a man who has publically and repeatedly opposed the
entire peace process, who routinely blames him whenever things go
wrong, while consistently failing to follow up on the promises made in
the peace accords. US newspapers routinely fail to report violence
_against_ Palestinians, even when reported in the news of other
countries, while routinely reporting both Palestinian violence and
quoting the people who blame him frequently, far more often than he
himself is quoted.
To top it all off, he is blamed by many people for an attrocious act
which he would _never_ be stupid enough to have tried, probably
commited by former friends turned enemies who turned on him _because_
he refused to continue the violence, and, because of this attrocious
act, everything he has fought for his entire life is ruined with
little hope of ever recovering.
Does he still secretly support violence and terrorism? Maybe, but
there is more than a little reason to doubt. But he certainly wouldn't
have supported what happened here Tuesday.
Filksinger
AKA David Nasset, Sr.
Geek Prophet to the Technologically Declined
Dr Pepper
Arthur Levesque spoke in the bardic circle concerning "Bush's speech" on Tue
11 Sep 2001 17:52.
AL> He said the most important thing in his speech. I smiled
AL> immediately when he said it; the first smile to hit my face since
AL> before this all began. I was waiting to hear it.
AL> We will make no distinction between those who carry out these
AL> terrorist acts and those countries that harbor and assist them.
Problem is that there are those who say that to *us*. And they just said it
again.
| 10 2 vjunc
| DR PEPPER @
| 4 ev1.net
Steve Wheeler
"Leslie Fish" <lesli...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:WF8o7.5424$lE3.5...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
I recall an SF short story where the US lost a war against a much
smaller country. The story had it that the foreign head of state said
only, "My generals, win me this war." It also said that there was
insufficient room to list what Congress, N.O.W., the EEOC, OSHA, and
many others told the American generals. :-)
- wheels
Steve Wheeler
"Gunther Anderson" <gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote in message
news:3BA0EB48...@guntheranderson.com...
> "James A. Wolf" wrote:
> >
> > >And assassination is never justice.
> >
> > 1) It can be justice. If we cant try the bastard kill him.
> > 2) I'm not interested in nebulous legalistic 'justice.' I'm
> > interested in breaking them. Bin Laden dead will cripple his
> > movement.
>
> Only in your dreams. You must ask yourself two questions, and if you
> can't be honest with us about the answer, be honest with yourself.
> Would it work against you? And if it wouldn't work against you, why
> should it work against anyone else? Or are you just so much better
than
> they are than you can "break" them the way they could never break you?
> The third question is rhetorical.
Hey, if somebody kills me, I can guarantee _I_ won't be doing much the
next day. :-)
Now, do you believe that Bin Laden does nothing except act as a
figurehead? If not, why wouldn't assassinating him affect his
organization (whether or not it's a crippling effect)?
- wheels
Copper Squirrel
That would put him one up on "Grafuss"("Greatest Field Commander of
All Time" AKA Adolf Hitler who did a very good job of proving he
wasn't)
Copper Squirrel
Considering the man encouraged China to build long-range missiles
to build support for his missile defense plan.....
keith lim
> Gunther Anderson <gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
>
> <<More tripe that I've already responded to in another thread snipped>>
No, no. The standard term 'round these parts for contemptuously
dismissing a person not supporting massive violent retaliation is
"whining hippy".
--
keith lim keit...@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~keithlim/
The crossposting will continue until the signal-to-noise ratio improves.
Joe Ellis
(keith lim) wrote:
>Joe Ellis <fil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Gunther Anderson <gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
>>
>> <<More tripe that I've already responded to in another thread snipped>>
>> Thank you for your comments, Neville Chamberlain.
>
>No, no. The standard term 'round these parts for contemptuously
>dismissing a person not supporting massive violent retaliation is
>"whining hippy".
>
Some of us know enough history to be more literate...
... and remember enough to have learned from it.
--
Joe Ellis
Gunther Anderson
>
> Hey, if somebody kills me, I can guarantee _I_ won't be doing much the
> next day. :-)
>
> Now, do you believe that Bin Laden does nothing except act as a
> figurehead? If not, why wouldn't assassinating him affect his
> organization (whether or not it's a crippling effect)?
Patient, kind and tolerant Joe has put me off continuing to discuss this
- I don't like dealing with zealots of any movement - but I do agree
that removing Bin Laden will considerably diminish his value as a
manager, cheerleader and, perhaps most importantly, a fund-raiser. But
I take the long view that killing him is insufficient and won't kill the
movement he represents. It's certainly necessary, though honest men can
differ on the details. But killing is insufficient in and of itself.
Someone eventually will rise to the occasion, and fill the space he left
behind. It may not be in a year, but we will be buying only time. Bin
Laden is a symptom, not the disease.
Anyway, have a happy day. I'm sorry I created so much unpleasantness.
If I'd known Ellis was so much fun to debate rationally...
Gunther Anderson
D.J.
Gunther Anderson <gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
[]that removing Bin Laden will considerably diminish his value as a
[]manager, cheerleader and, perhaps most importantly, a fund-raiser. But
He probably doesn't need to raise funds as Bin Laden is a
billionaire. He just writes a check or uses a credit card. Oil
wealth.
JimP.
--
djim55 at tyhe datasync dot com. Disclaimer: Standard.
Updated: September 2, 2001
http://www.crosswinds.net/~drivein/ Drive-In Movie Theatres
Registered Linux user#185746
Joe Ellis
In article <3BA17C47...@guntheranderson.com>, Gunther Anderson
<gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
>Steve Wheeler wrote:
>>
>> Hey, if somebody kills me, I can guarantee _I_ won't be doing much the
>> next day. :-)
>>
>> Now, do you believe that Bin Laden does nothing except act as a
>> figurehead? If not, why wouldn't assassinating him affect his
>> organization (whether or not it's a crippling effect)?
>
>Patient, kind and tolerant Joe has put me off continuing to discuss this
>- I don't like dealing with zealots of any movement -
You know, I actually laughed at that. "Zealot", indeed! You really are out
of touch, aren't you? The _real_ zealots are wanting to turn Afghanistan
into a Cherenkov-blue glass-paved parking lot, and that's NOT hyperbole.
>but I do agree
>that removing Bin Laden will considerably diminish his value as a
>manager, cheerleader and, perhaps most importantly, a fund-raiser.
This simplistic and minimalist view of bin Laden's role in his
organization is so sanitized and PC it's disgusting. He is an extremely
intelligent individual, quite wealthy, and a charismatic leader. He is
also de-facto Secretary of War for the Taliban. He has chosen to declare
war on the United States because he seems to think we defiled Medina and
Mecca in the Gulf War, cities we never entered. The _fact_ is, the US
government announced tonight that they have direct evidence linking him to
the planning, financial backing, and execution of the WTC tragedy. I will
no longer hesitate to specify him and his organization as the necessary
target.
>But
>I take the long view that killing him is insufficient and won't kill the
>movement he represents. It's certainly necessary, though honest men can
>differ on the details. But killing is insufficient in and of itself.
>Someone eventually will rise to the occasion, and fill the space he left
>behind. It may not be in a year, but we will be buying only time. Bin
>Laden is a symptom, not the disease.
Killing bin Laden certainly is insufficient. The entire organization must
be destroyed. Let no new group profit from their experience, training, and
resources. Crush them completely. Their reign of terror ends _now_.
Buying time is a good first step. What we do in the interval afterwards is
up to the people that surrounded him.
You failed to construct your metaphor accurately. Osama bin Laden
certainly _is_ the disease. The symptom was the WTC attack. The insular
and xenophobic fringe culture that spawned him was the Petrie dish and
Agar medium. I might agree that he is not the _only_ disease, but he
certainly is the anthrax of the current crop. This is exactly why
immediate sterilization is necessary.
>
>Anyway, have a happy day. I'm sorry I created so much unpleasantness.
>If I'd known Ellis was so much fun to debate rationally...
>
>Gunther Anderson
heh heh heh... b'bye! Don't drop your carrier on the way out.
<<amateurs... sheesh... >>
--
Joe Ellis € The Synthetic Filker TesserAct Studios
Please Note: ALL email from hotmail.com is deleted UNREAD
| W W | W W W | W W | W W W | W W | W W W | W W | W W W |
| W W | W W W | W W | W W W | W W | W W W | W W | W W W |
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Filk € Fly Fishing € Model Railroading € Digital Photography
Rilla Heslin
Absolutely correct!
Rilla
Chris Croughton
<lesli...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I wish Ozzie were alive to explain this; he'd been there. Quite
>simply, there IS NO I.R.A. -- anymore than there's still a Grand Army of the
>Republic. The IRA was the Irish rebel band who won freedom for most of
>Ireland in...1920. How many people capable of even lifting a gun in 1920
>are still alive today?
It talks like the IRA, it calls itself the IRA, it kills people like the
IRA -- it's the IRA. And more to the point, a number of people outside
Ireland think that it is still the IRA (fewer of them than there were 20
years ago, perhaps, but they are still there).
> The IRA closed its membership once the Partition was over, but the
>political arm of the movement -- the Sinn Fein (never could spell that
>right) -- continued to keep its membership open. One faction of the IRA
>split off to continue fighting in Northern Ireland, but it didn't use the
>name IRA, and soon split into several smaller factions whose power dwindled
>with age.
> The bunch that came up in the '60s, after most of the old IRA were dead,
>came from neither of these. The Sinn Fein denounced them, and the few
>survivors of the old IRA factions swore 'twere none o' theirs. This bunch
>called itself the Provisional IRA (much to the outrage of the few old
>survivors) -- or "Provos" for short.
And then there's the "Real IRA". But they all might as well be lumped
together, they are all terrorists acting against their compatriots as
well as other countries.
> That name may have been more prophetic than people realized at first,
>since "provo" is also short for "provocateur". And the Provos have acted
>precisely like provocateurs ever since: trawling for young hotheads they can
>use as kamikazes, almost deliberately attracting sociopaths, attacking
>harmless and innocent targets, clashing with the Sinn Fein over every
>attempt at peaceful settlement, and generally playing straight into the
>hands of Ian Paisley and his kind. Exactly all they've done in the past 35+
>years has been to guarantee the continued presence of the British Specials
>in Northern Ireland.
Of course. If they actually achieved their stated aims then they
wouldn't have an excuse to keep fighting, so they can't afford to allow
a peace settlement. Just like many other terrorist groups (how many
times have Israeli and Palestinian leaders been close to a settlement
and then someone throws a bomb or whatever and it breaks up?), they work
by keeping up the tension.
>> > Agreed. But it was only a few actually doing that
>
> Uhmm, if it had been only a few, I daresay the Israeli police would have
>moved in and escorted them away.
In Palestine? Apparently the local police did move in, but not before
reporters had snapped the images. And as pointed out in the media here,
who knows what those people celebrating had been told? For all we know,
they didn't know anything about the death count, they may even have been
told that this was the end of war.
>> > well, I'm told, there are anti-capitalists everywhere).
>
> Sweden?! What on earth for?? Since when did anybody in Sweden have
>reason for fury against the World Trade Center, of all things? Oh, these
>had to be visiting Arabs, or else it was a put-up job.
Apparently not according to Swedish news, according to a Swede on a
mailing list I take. He was disgusted as well. It wouldn't surprise me
at all if there were people all over the world who were pleased. I know
many (some in America as well) who think that "America had it coming",
they seem to be keeping their heads down at the moment (they probably
know what the rest of us would do to them!). Unfortunately there are
some Americans who seem to promote that attitude (talk of a "Pax
Americana" and "we'll nuke anyone who gets in our way", for instance).
And anti-capitalists, who saw the WTC as a symbol of everything they
hated. Sweden, like most of Europe, is socialist...
Chris C
Chris Croughton
<ge...@sa-tech.com> wrote:
>Effective leadership is a -very- rare commodity. And it dies with the
>leader. Sure, there may be someone right behind him/her who is -almost-
>as good, but how many layers of good leadership have you ever seen in
>any organization?
Particularly since such organisations tend to be build on hierarchy,
such that having an underling who is too good is a danger to the leader.
Or they split when someone wants the leadership position.
>Historically, mass attacks against a civilian population are pointless.
>They just stiffen the resolve of the survivors. You are seeing a form
>of that right now.
No argument there.
>But the issue is that effective leadership is essential to directing
>that resolve into effective action. The resolve without a leader
>results in something like kicking a fire ant hill. The ants swarm out,
>searching for what caused the disturbance and attacking anything that
>looks like a possible target. But if you just take a step back, they
>lose you completely and start to repair the damage.
Hmm, I'm not certain that's an analogy I like. Fine if you can 'lose'
them in that way, but if they know where you are then several thousand
fire ants will ruin your day...
>Without organization you are back to individuals attacking with the
>materials at hand. Bad things still happen to good people, but not on
>the scale that we have just seen.
You hope. The trouble is that it doesn't need a large group any more to
do this sort of thng (unless you are going to mount AA defenses round
every possible target and shoot down anything without the correct ID).
It only needs a few people.
>WRT changing hearts, good idea, but nearly impossible to implement.
>There is always a fringe element in every society that will consider
>violence as a solution to their perceived problem. When it is one
>person, s/he is thought of as crazy. When it is a group, they are
>terrorists. When enough of the population agrees, it is a revolution.
"And if three people do it..."
>In various parts of the world there are what can best be thought of as
>blood feuds that have gone on for nearly a thousand years. It may well
>take a thousand years of work to resolve them. But in the meantime, you
>still have to deal with the violent fringe. And with this group,
>thinking nice thoughts doesn't do much good.
Agreed. There are many groups round the world who still remember things
done to their remote ancestors (heck, the French still haven't forgiven
the Brits for Agincourt!).
>BTW, I've known a few people who have worked counter-terrorist. And a
>recurring theme has been a terrorist in jail will get another 12 people
>dead in retaliation for holding the one. The counter terrorist crowd
>tends to burn out when this really sinks in and the reaction simply
>becomes that the captured terrorist was, "Shot and killed while
>resisting arrest."
How many hostage situations have been (nominally) to "free political
prisoners"? You're right, holding them is an incitement to further
violence.
Chris C
Chris Croughton
<VRULWI...@spammotel.com> wrote:
>US newspapers routinely fail to report violence
>_against_ Palestinians, even when reported in the news of other
>countries, while routinely reporting both Palestinian violence and
>quoting the people who blame him frequently, far more often than he
>himself is quoted.
I didn't realise y'all still had that kind of censorship. I know that
here we hear of attacks against Palestinians just as frequently as those
against Israel, and I'd assumed that this was general knowledge.
This explains some of the anti-Palestinian garbage I've been seeing from
some Americans...
>To top it all off, he is blamed by many people for an attrocious act
>which he would _never_ be stupid enough to have tried, probably
>commited by former friends turned enemies who turned on him _because_
>he refused to continue the violence, and, because of this attrocious
>act, everything he has fought for his entire life is ruined with
>little hope of ever recovering.
Yes, I agree with the poster who said (paraphrase) that Arafat knows
that Palestine is dead. Whichever way it goes, I can't see peace talks
being taken seriously in that area for a long time...
>Does he still secretly support violence and terrorism? Maybe, but
>there is more than a little reason to doubt. But he certainly wouldn't
>have supported what happened here Tuesday.
I do think that he personally would not have supported it. He would
know what the likely backlash would be. Terrorists, on the other hand,
don't care as long as they get to kill someone and cause chaos...
Chris C
Gerry Tyra
Chris Croughton wrote:
> >Does he still secretly support violence and terrorism? Maybe, but
> >there is more than a little reason to doubt. But he certainly wouldn't
> >have supported what happened here Tuesday.
>
> I do think that he personally would not have supported it. He would
> know what the likely backlash would be. Terrorists, on the other hand,
> don't care as long as they get to kill someone and cause chaos...
Agreed.
Just to play a game with semantics, consider the difference between one
who uses terror as a weapon and a terrorist. A significant portion of
law enforcement, military operations and the tax collector is "you can
run, but you can't hide." The idea is to undermine the opponents will
to resist. This is a form of terror. But the organization just
mentioned have a vested interest in the status quo. You can present
your case to a judge, there is normally a sense of honor on both sides
in a military engagement, you can talk to the tax collector.
But, a terrorist has no stake in the status quo. Quite the contrary, a
terrorist is dedicated to disrupting the status quo. Therefore, any
discussion based on a shared common ground is difficult, if not
impossible.
Now, consider the plight of Arafat. He started out disenfranchised, he
was a terrorist. But along the way, he became part of the
establishment, and hence a target for other terrorist.
At least, IMHO.
Gerry
Margaret Middleton
>This is no time for partisanship. There will be time for that again,
>when this is all nothing but a painful memory.
It is, however, a time for emailing/writing/phoning your local congresscritters
counseling patience: let the cops make the case against BinLaden or whoever
turns out to be at the top of the command chain.
MSMinLR(at)aol.com (Margaret Middleton)
Shameless Plug for our local con: http://www.rockon.org
Help make a Quilted Artifact to sell for Interfilk:
http://members.aol.com/msminlr/ifquilt.htm
Margaret Middleton
It isn't official; more within the mindset of the reporters covering the
situation. A case of trying to ignore contradictory evidence.
Dave Weingart
>I didn't realise y'all still had that kind of censorship. I know that
>here we hear of attacks against Palestinians just as frequently as those
>against Israel, and I'd assumed that this was general knowledge.
What's more amazing is that we don't. We hear frequently and loudly of
violence on both sides, of children killed on both sides, of mortars
and missles and suicide bombs and and hardliners.
Anyone who says otherwise is either blind or deliberately distorting
the truth.
obFilk (and one of my own) "There is magic strong in darkness, and
stronger still in good."
--
Dave Weingart Ceci n'est pas un .signature
phyd...@andor.altrion.org
http://www.liii.com/~phydeaux/
Tim Rowledge
"Leslie Fish" <lesli...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The bunch that came up in the '60s, after most of the old IRA were dead,
> came from neither of these. The Sinn Fein denounced them, and the few
> survivors of the old IRA factions swore 'twere none o' theirs. This bunch
> called itself the Provisional IRA (much to the outrage of the few old
> survivors) -- or "Provos" for short.
I don't care much what they called themselves; terminology doesn't make
much difference when you're twice next to a bomb. I survived both, plus
Bulgarian assasination kerfuffles, plus having an Iranian embassy at the
bottom of the garden. Whatever their name, they were terrorists trying
to destroy a nation, killing hundreds in the process of their 'fight for
freedom'.
The arguments for massive retaliation on every country involved are most
excellent. So excellent I think Britain should adopt them immediately.
since much of the financing for the provos came from Boston, I take it
nobody will object if the RN Trident submarines immediately launch a
large scale attack?
Excuse my damaged sense of sarcasm right now. Being bombed twice does
that to you sometimes.
And no, I'm not particularly picking on Leslie, it was just a convenient
message to reply to.
--
Tim Rowledge, t...@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Strange OpCodes: CRN: Compare to Random Number
Aaron Davies
I don't care what he is or isn't doing now, we should still have him
killed for past actions.
Gerry Tyra
WARNING: I am knowingly responding to sarcasm (which had been used
knowingly to make a point). As such, part of the following could hit
raw nerves.
I take your point, but I believe that it is misstated.
Terrorists know other terrorists. Terrorists have sympathizers.
Sympathizers who actively support a terrorist are an accomplice and
therefore subject to prosecution.
But are you under the impression that the government of the City of
Boston, the State of Massachusetts, or the United States are actively
supporting the Provos? I doubt that anyone rational does. So, your
response, stated in sarcasm, would be over the top.
But, just for the sake of argument, let's say that a series of passenger
jets had just crashed in Parliament, Buckingham Palace, No. 10 Downing,
and a target of choice. Let us further suppose that the Governor of
Massachusetts had been actively rallying support for the "IRA". And
there were provable IRA/Provo training camps in the state. And all of
this was going on with the permission of the US Federal Government.
Now, given this scenario, the terrorist group is the immediate problem,
and needs to be stopped. But the supporting government will remain a
threat to the security of the UK until it is dissuaded from supporting
future terrorists. How much persuasion does that take? It varies.
Would the UK be justified in taking out, in addition to the terrorists
camps, a large chunk of the government facilities in Massachusetts and
Washington? I wouldn't have too much trouble with that. Hey, the Brits
have burned Washington once, why not again? But does this justify
turning the eastern seaboard of the US into a series of craters? Not in
my mind. And as I said earlier, that response only makes matters
worse. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians have never been shown to be
useful politically or militarily.
Now, let's change the scenario, just a little. The camps are still in
Massachusetts. The local government is collaborating with them. The
state and federal governments are aware of this, but they are not
assisting. If no laws have been violated, all they can do is sit and
watch. Oh, and pass information on to British intelligence. If an act
of terrorism then takes place, the British governments response to the
US would be tempered by how helpful we had been to the British
intelligence community in the past, and how actively we supported the
investigation and apprehension of the suspects after the fact.
Now, switch the players around to bring it into line with recent
events. Who has been helping whom?
Gerry
Filksinger
<t...@sumeru.stanford.edu> wrote:
<snip>
>The arguments for massive retaliation on every country involved are most
>excellent. So excellent I think Britain should adopt them immediately.
>since much of the financing for the provos came from Boston, I take it
>nobody will object if the RN Trident submarines immediately launch a
>large scale attack?
Only if you can prove that the US government routinely hid wanted IRA
terrorists, gave them resources, and helped train them to continue the
attack.
I don't want to attack everyone. But I do think it is time that this
is called war, not criminal activity. The governments who deliberately
hide, protect, train and finance these terrorists for the purpose of
allowing them to commit more crimes are responsible for the crimes,
too. The US government did not hide, protect, train, and finance the
Provos with the deliberate intention of allowing them to continue to
attack the British.
Kay Shapero
cre...@worldnet.att.net says...> news:dgguptg7vjlh8ve66...@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:40:13 +0100, "Robin Johnson"
> > <rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Now if only we had a president that didn't look so much like an
> > inferior Mortimer Snerd. Not to mention Mortimer sounded more
> > intelligent and aware.
>
> Maybe so--but he IS surrounded by some capable and intelligent
> advisors. This crisis will give us a fair idea of how much he pays
> attention to them.
>
>
I'd say the current crisis is actually straightforward enough that as
long as he doesn't try to ad lib his speeches, Bush can probably manage
pretty well. The most important things he has to do is not go off half-
cocked, and wait for positive identification of those responsible. That
and look convincing enough that any country inhabiting them will give
them up for trial rather than tempt fate.
I just hope Afghanistan (or more specifically the Taliban) has the sense
to turn loose of Osama Bin-Laden IF he turns out to be the culpret. That
and tones down the sabre-rattling; even if it earns them points at home
this is a very poor time for it.
--
Kay Shapero
kaysh...@nospamearthlink.net
Remove the obvious spamblock to reply
http://home.earthlink.net/~kayshapero/index.htm
Kay Shapero
keit...@pobox.com says...
> Joe Ellis <fil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Gunther Anderson <gun...@guntheranderson.com> wrote:
> >
> > <<More tripe that I've already responded to in another thread snipped>>
> > Thank you for your comments, Neville Chamberlain.
>
> No, no. The standard term 'round these parts for contemptuously
> dismissing a person not supporting massive violent retaliation is
> "whining hippy".
>
>
Be it noted that there are those who say Chamberlain got a bum rap. The
net effect of his actions, after all, regardless of what he himself may
have intended was to buy much needed time for England to build up its
defenses before the war DID start.
J. Spencer Love
> Chris Croughton wrote:
> > I didn't realise y'all still had that kind of censorship. I know that
> > here we hear of attacks against Palestinians just as frequently as those
> > against Israel, and I'd assumed that this was general knowledge.
>
> What's more amazing is that we don't. We hear frequently and loudly of
> violence on both sides, of children killed on both sides, of mortars
> and missles and suicide bombs and and hardliners.
>
> Anyone who says otherwise is either blind or deliberately distorting
> the truth.
Misinformed. Or uninformed. Ignorant. Stone clueless. Many but
definitely not all.
Where I live, near Boston, and where Dave lives, near NYC, we routinely
have access to National Public Radio, which runs BBC reports as part of
its programming, and to real newspapers, with real journalists, such as
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, or even the Boston Globe.
We could hardly avoid hearing about both the excesses of Israel and the
Palestinians on a nearly daily basis, though even these publications are
rather light on international news. For much of that, you need certain
magazines or foreign publications.
I have four times now driven across the U.S.A. from the East Coast to
the West Coast and back again, by various routes, and the radio stations
in between, with a few conspicuous exceptions, are another thing
entirely. Those trips covered 7,000 to 9,000 miles each. Many hours,
the only radio station I could find with the scanner built into the
car's radio was the local Christian network station. The only national
newspaper was U.S.A. Today. There was a definite information vacuum,
which was filled in by The National Enquirer and its friends. It's not
like being in Afghanistan, I'm sure, but it sure is different.
I didn't find this problem so much on the coasts (but then again there
is South Carolina), or in college towns, like Ann Arbor or Albuquerque,
or in big cities like St. Louis or Chicago (some belong in both
categories). A large fraction of our population, however, is not
exactly immersed in high-quality, accurate world news. Americans are an
insular lot, and ever so much more so in the boonies. There are boonies
everywhere in the U.S.; we tend to cluster up in cities so much that
even in the most crowded places you don't have to go more than 10 to 30
miles (depending from where -- maybe in L.A. you'd have to drive
farther) in some direction to pretty much escape civilization.
I lived for nine months in Colorado Springs, technically a college town
since the Air Force Academy is there and there is at least one other
campus in town, but I would have to describe it as almost a cultural
desert. I saw Cats there on tour; there was a theater, but it was a
small oasis. Denver was a lot bigger and somewhat better. Boulder is a
real intellectual college town. Most of Colorado is just plain empty,
at least by East Coast standards. On the other hand, England feels like
living in a submarine by comparison to the U.S. East Coast, even the
parts the British think of as empty.
You can overcome this deficit to some degree if armed with a web browser
and a cable modem, but lots of places network connectivity sucks and
anyway the porn sites are way more popular than the news. The news is
so depressing, you know. Even for news junkies, CNN is only available
where there is cable, or maybe you spring for a satellite dish (they are
quite popular, rurally).
Unless you make an effort, you don't hear or read much in the way of
balanced reporting. Opinions are more likely to be formed by major
events, like the energy crisis (1973) or the Gulf War and sort of coast
(as in Newton's laws, not a land/water boundary) in between. I can't
say that this would result in a consistent bias anywhere; I think that
would depend more on the biases of your favorite entertainers. Think
Rush Limbaugh, whom I'm assured is relatively mild and mainstream for
that kind of audience. They certainly have a reputation for bias.
So I am less inclined to personal scorn and more inclined to regional
chauvinism. I don't think of it as censorship as such, but rather as a
matter of demographics. The U.S. is enormous and hardly monolithic.
When you consider how little teachers are paid here, most places, you
realize that higher education is not generally in the top ten cultural
values in this country. Literacy is widespread, but only to a certain
point. "Don't buy that for Joey's birthday; he already has a book." Or
"If it's in a book, it must be true." I'm a fan, an intellectual snob,
own (and have read) thousands of books, and I live near a coast; apply
salt to my tale to taste.
-- Spencer
James A. Wolf
>Gunther Anderson wrote:
>
>>> And he probably knows the Palestinian state died yesterday.
>>
>> Answering hatred with hatred is empty and useless.
>
> It's not hatred; it's simply recognition of reality. Israel has just been
>handed a pile of political Get Out Of Jail Free cards the size of the
>Pokemon CCG print run.
And all the gains fdrom the Nuremberg Rally in Durban have just gone
straight down the crapper. Yassir's probably trying to find out if
his old villa is Tunis is still available.
--
<*> James A. Wolf - jaw...@mediaone.net - people.ne.mediaone.net/jawolf <*>
"The jawbone of an ass| "I want to| "The American People are slow| "Kill' em.
is just as dangerous | see the | to wrath, but when their | Kill 'em
a weapon today as in | cinders | is once kindled it burns like| all."
Samson's time." | dance." | a consuming flame." | Stonewall
Richard M. Nixon | Gen. LeMay| Theodore Roosevelt | Jackson
Maureen O'Brien
Um, Spencer, I don't mean to impugn your observations, but a lack of
radio stations that you can receive for long distances (low power is
perfectly sufficient if everyone lives nearby) and national newspapers
does not a news vacuum make. You don't need the NY Times if you have a
local newspaper with the AP wire, and besides, if you want the NY Times
you just get it mailed to you, or you have the drugstore owner order
only as many copies as there are customers for said paper.
Every small rural town I've ever been in has had a perfectly adequate
newspaper that covers world, national and local news in perfect
sufficiency. Small town newspapers are the salt of the earth, and
frankly I'm saddened that my own Beavercreek News is now a limb of the
dorky shopping newspapers out of Fairborn. The Xenia Gazette is still a
full service newspaper, however, and IIRC has won at least one
Pulitzer in its time.
Now, you may not agree with people's _interpretations_ of those
pieces of news in the editorial section, and the cartoons are likely
to be slanted very much in the direction of the editor's and owner's
biases -- but when is that not true?
The Coasts, now, that's insular. I _never_ see important Ohio news
there, and it's so hard to get a good Ohio wine out in California....
<g>
If anything, the US in general needs better sources for world news.
Deutsche Welle and BBC World News does a better job than CNN, as did
the Japanese news in English when it was still being broadcast in
syndication here in Dayton. (I miss my sumo coverage....)
Maureen
James A. Wolf
>
>BTW, I've known a few people who have worked counter-terrorist. And a
>recurring theme has been a terrorist in jail will get another 12 people
>dead in retaliation for holding the one. The counter terrorist crowd
>tends to burn out when this really sinks in and the reaction simply
>becomes that the captured terrorist was, "Shot and killed while
>resisting arrest."
Why do you think Israel has been using missile to whack these SOBs?
James A. Wolf
>Patient, kind and tolerant Joe has put me off continuing to discuss this
>- I don't like dealing with zealots of any movement - but I do agree
>that removing Bin Laden will considerably diminish his value as a
>manager, cheerleader and, perhaps most importantly, a fund-raiser. But
>I take the long view that killing him is insufficient and won't kill the
>movement he represents.
Then that's that the rest of the airstrikes, missile lauches and
commando raids are for.
J. Spencer Love
> Um, Spencer, I don't mean to impugn your observations, but a lack of
> radio stations that you can receive for long distances (low power is
> perfectly sufficient if everyone lives nearby) and national newspapers
> does not a news vacuum make.
I was trying to keep my post short. Shall I wax lyrical about the many
towns I passed with signs that said Pop. 17, Elevation a much larger
number? Towns that size don't HAVE radio stations. Often they can't
afford satellite dishes. You think they have DSL or cable or cellular
towers, either?
Fewer people live in individual such towns, but there are a lot of towns
that size. And they are just at small end of a scale. How big does a
town have to be to afford a radio station, an AP wire, a decent daily
paper, a meeting hall that is not only a church, and so on?
The vacuum pressure varies a lot. The problem is, when you are in a
town with 23 people, you know you are in the boonies. When you are in a
town of 2,300 people, you might have other ideas. A town of 23,000, and
your sure that you are in the city, but chances are good that you're
wrong. 230,000 people IS a city, but there is no guarantee that you
have the quality infrastructure that we are talking about.
> You don't need the NY Times if you have a local newspaper with the AP
> wire, and besides, if you want the NY Times you just get it mailed to
> you, or you have the drugstore owner order only as many copies as
> there are customers for said paper.
This is theorically true.
Practice is often a bit different.
I am not saying that the New York Times is perfect. Far from it. It
has a bias. I don't subscribe, in part, because they are too snooty to
have a comics page. Draw your own conclusions; I like to be
entertained, too. I am from Connecticut, and live in Massachusetts, and
made my own parochial observations. I could just have easily cited the
Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times. I was talking about papers
which take their journalism very seriously, and also which are in
markets large enough to have competition. Nothing like competition to
keep you on your toes! The Boston Globe almost doesn't qualify; they
seem to have split the market along demographic lines with the Herald,
and each plays too much to their respective target audience.
The NY times is full of irrelevant stuff if you live in Ohio. Getting
it in a timely manner is a problem, even if you subscribe or have a
local news vendor that will get it for you. How about getting the
London Times? It has been my observation that most people don't care
that much.
> Every small rural town I've ever been in has had a perfectly adequate
> newspaper that covers world, national and local news in perfect
> sufficiency.
You and I might disagree about how much is a perfect sufficiency, but
even if we agree, how big a sample is that? How many small rural towns
have you gotten to know well? Are there interconnecting factors that
might bias your sample, such as nearby colleges, military bases, big
cities, etc.?
> Small town newspapers are the salt of the earth,
CAN BE the salt of the earth. Mileage varies a lot. They depend on the
individuals involved, and that covers a lot of possibility. It also
depends on what the readership demands. A lot of those towns with only
a Christian radio station have that because the residents are completely
happy with that.
> and frankly I'm saddened that my own Beavercreek News is now a limb
> of the dorky shopping newspapers out of Fairborn.
I agree, a chain buying up a newspaper market is unlikely to be as
concerned by or as involved in the local scene as a local paper. There
is a definite loss to a community when that happens. However, that
doesn't say much either way about how well they cover world news. THAT
depends on the paper.
> The Xenia Gazette is still a full service newspaper, however, and
> IIRC has won at least one Pulitzer in its time.
Those awards are spot checks for excellence. Are the writer and editor
still there? Are their interests and expertise relevant to all the
fields about which you might need to be informed? I am not specifically
criticising YOUR paper. Not all of them win Pulitzers. That there may
be occasional beacons in the darkness does not imply that everywhere is
as well illuminated as the cities with their gigawatts of overkill that
pollutes the night sky and is visible from orbit.
> Now, you may not agree with people's _interpretations_ of those
> pieces of news in the editorial section, and the cartoons are likely
> to be slanted very much in the direction of the editor's and owner's
> biases -- but when is that not true?
There is a Republican paper in my town, which feels slightly odd
sometimes, given that the Democrats are such an overwhelming majority in
Massachusetts. Not that I am complaining. There are not two daily
papers in town, and the Sunday paper is mostly a regional one with only
a single local section.
When is it not true? When there is competition, you get a chance to see
the biases playing off against each other, and there is more pressure to
keep the opinions on the pages where they belong and out of the news
pages.
Editorial choice matters for much more than the editorial page. What
stories do you see from the AP wire. Unlikely you see all of them.
> The Coasts, now, that's insular. I _never_ see important Ohio news
> there, and it's so hard to get a good Ohio wine out in California....
True enough. On the other hand, I've never seen an Ohio wine even in
Ohio. And how much Ohio news is important at the national level? I
would not expect to see local New York or Los Angeles news in Ohio.
> If anything, the US in general needs better sources for world news.
> Deutsche Welle and BBC World News does a better job than CNN, as did
> the Japanese news in English when it was still being broadcast in
> syndication here in Dayton. (I miss my sumo coverage....)
Sounds like we're agreeing, except for the Sumo coverage. Not a fan of
that, myself. There is always the issue of what is "local" news in
England that would be tiresome unless you were doing a special feature
on what it was like to live there -- and what is news of international
significance. In the U.S., we put the international significance bar
too high, but I am not arguing that it shouldn't exist at all.
-- Spencer
Tim Rowledge
Gerry Tyra <ge...@sa-tech.com> wrote:
> Tim,
>
> WARNING: I am knowingly responding to sarcasm (which had been used
> knowingly to make a point). As such, part of the following could hit
> raw nerves.
Not mine - I agree almost entirely with your points. As I stated, I was
being sarcastic (always dangerous in email) and it may very likely be a
little more twisted than normal - being next to two IRA bombs seems to
do that. Note that despite those experiences (and the Iranian embassy
siege and a Bulgarian assasination attempt) I never attacked any Irish
people, Iranians or Bulgarians. Hell, I'm married to an Irish/French
girl.
I understand that people as individuals or in groups are rarely the same
as a Nation/Government. Just because the American govt. has suported
some truly awful terrorist groups as part of a stunningly awful foriegn
policy (and I'm not suggesting other national govts haven't done the
same) that doesn't mean that the people of America are supporters of
terrorism. I suppose it even counts the other way round - just because
some group of people in a country support terrorism doesn't neccessarily
mean the govt does.
> But are you under the impression that the government of the City of
> Boston, the State of Massachusetts, or the United States are actively
> supporting the Provos? I doubt that anyone rational does. So, your
> response, stated in sarcasm, would be over the top.
My memory is faint on this, but I seem to remember having the impression
that on some occasion(s) the mayor was at events raising money at which
guns were auctioned, with notches in the butts claimed to represent the
number of brits it had been used to kill. Perhaps that was merely
propaganda from the UK govt? Perhaps it was true.
>
> [snip lots] And as I said earlier, that response only makes matters
> worse. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians have never been shown to be
> useful politically or militarily.
Indeed. Couldn't agree more. In the current situation attacking the
populace of Afghanistan would be doubly senseless - the soviets and the
taliban hava _already_ destroyed the country. They have nothing left to
destroy, even if you truly thought it was the right thing to do!
>
I do actually have a suggtion that might possibly _help_ (what a
concept, eh?) to make things better.
Salman Rushdie was made subject to a fatwah smply for having a
_character in a book_ utter an insult to Allah. Since there appears to
have been a chorus of condemnation from most major leaders of Islam, it
seems to me that these terrorists must be considered to have mortally
insulted Allah. It may even be proper to consider them apostate. I
suggest the leaders of the Islamic world declare that terrorism makes
you subject to a fatwah and apostate; you do not go to paradise, you are
not a martyr, good moslems are expected to help stop you. This should
surely reduce support for terrorists at least to some degree. It
should surely help to convince the rest of the world that Islam really
does condemn terrorism.
Wouldn't be a bad idea for the assorted christian churches to make
similar proclamations, considering the number of terrorists claiming to
the doing it for that particular god.
I also wonder how seriously the US govt is going to take this war on all
terrorism. Are they going to go after the Robertson/Falwell gangs? After
all, they want to violate various provisions of the constitution, to
overthrow the govt and install a theocracy etc. That makes them a
subversive organisation; they also support volient activities against
gays, attacks on womens health clinics. That makes them a terrorist
organisation. Go get'em.
--
Tim Rowledge, t...@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
How do I set my laser printer on stun?
Aaron Davies
Gerry Tyra
You appear to be suffering from an acute case of Flyover Syndrome. The
syndrome is very common among people living in both the Boston-DC
corridor and in the LA basin. It is most commonly evidenced buy the
attitude that nothing happens between those two regions and that the
denizens of those parts are uninformed Neanderthals.
I have relatives in the greater NYC area, and Sandy has relatives in
Southern California who also have signs of the condition.
Here are a couple examples that stand out in my mind from pop culture:
In an episode of "Lois & Clark", they are in Smallville and Lois says
that she wishes that she had access to a fax machine. Ma Kent starts
rooting around in the kitchen, and Lois feels the need to explain what a
fax is. Ma informs her that she knows what a fax is, and as she moves
some stuff aside revealing a fax machine, she states that she just
wasn't sure if there was any paper in it.
From a sitcom that didn't last long, and I can't remember the title, the
premise was that housing costs were so high on Manhattan that white
couples were renting apartments from the black owners of a brownstones.
In the sitcom, young newlyweds were renting the top apartment. One day,
"daddy" comes to visit from the farm in Indiana. They had fun playing
him as the hick. They missed the correct stereotype by a mile (Sandy
grew up in rural Indiana, we know the type). They stated, but missed
the implications, that this hick, had 2000 acres in corn, plus
livestock. At a couple grand an acre, do the math. When a piece of
farm equipment costs between $100,000 and $1,000,000, this is a major
business. But he is from Indiana, what could he know?
If you are familiar with the movie "Bon Fire of the Vanities", possibly
one of the worst movies ever made, you should really read the book "The
Devil's Candy", by Julie Solomon. It is an excellent study on how
movies are made and what can go wrong, even if all the pieces are
right. The story is very New York centric. When the studio wanted to
see how it would play in flyover country, they decided that test
screening it in San Diego was close enough.
Closer to home:
When Sandy was growing up in Indiana, her uncle, a doctor in the San
Diego area, brought his family back to where he and his sister had grown
up. Sandy's cousins actually asked if they had radio yet in Indiana
(BTW, RCA's Consumer Electronics Division is located in Indianapolis, so
there was a good chance that the TVs and radios that these cousins used
had been designed in Indiana).
While visiting my cousins in Yonkers, it became evident that they had no
idea where Indiana was. And when I made a few references, it was
obvious that they thought Notre Dame was located somewhere in
Pennsylvania, but no further west than that.
When I was transferred from Detroit to San Diego, a real estate agent
was taking me around. While passing a local strip mall, she felt that
she had to explain to me what frozen yogurt was. I already knew, thank
you.
Having said that, a few facts of life in fly over country:
Satellite dishes do exist. They are a lot more common out there than
they are in your neck of the woods. And with the coming of K-band
satellites, they became a lot more common.
Okay, not much broad band outside the metropolitan areas, but dial up
worked for most people for a long time.
My mother-in-law lives in the sticks. But she gets TV and radio
stations from Chicago, Indianapolis and Lafayette. She has daily access
to papers from those three cities (I'm not sure which ones she is taking
currently).
The great papers the you reference have their own political biases. One
of the things that Sandy still complains about is that when we moved
here, San Diego had two papers, The Union and The Tribune. One left of
center, the other right of center. When they merged, we lost that
balancing of perspective.
It's different out there, not inferior. My experience is the country
boy can adapt a lot better to city conditions than the city kid can
handle the wide open spaces.
Gerry
D_Jim
Gerry wrote:
>It's different out there, not inferior. My experience is the country
>boy can adapt a lot better to city conditions than the city kid can
>handle the wide open spaces.
Its the lack of continuous traffic noises, gets them everytme.
Back in the 1950s I was asked by relatives my folks and
I were visting in Philadelphia, if we still had to worry
about Indians scalping people, and how many oil wells did
we have in our backyards. They were serious. We thought they
were joking. We managed to explain to them they had
some misconceptions.
JimP.
--
djim55 atty datasync dotty com Disclaimer: Standard
http://www.crosswinds.net/~drivein/ drive-in movie theaters update Sep 11,2001
http://www.datasync.com/~djim55/index.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~djim51/index.html also 'Linux Gazette' mirror
Stephen Nelson
1. German war plans, from their own documents, predicated a
war opening in 1943. Otherwise, for example, they wouldn't
have gone to war with only 57 U-boats. Samuel Eliot
Morrison, et.al. However, when Hitler saw what a patsy
Chamberlain was at Munich, he essentially made the same
conclusion Saddam did with Bush Sr: there's no risk in
bumping up the timetable, because these people won't fight.
2. If Chamberlain had had the guts for that kind of game, he
and the French could have gotten rid of Hitler in '36 when
he took back the Rhineland. There is a fairly good body of
evidence that if the French had started heading for Berlin
they would have found Adolf and crew gift-wrapped by the
Generalstab, who knew they weren't in ANY shape to fight
then.
D_Jim
j...@lovesong.com wrote:
>I was trying to keep my post short. Shall I wax lyrical about the many
>towns I passed with signs that said Pop. 17, Elevation a much larger
>number? Towns that size don't HAVE radio stations. Often they can't
>afford satellite dishes. You think they have DSL or cable or cellular
>towers, either?
I don't think radio signals stop at city limits.
My great uncle and great aunt, who lived in a small west
Texas town, of about 290 people, didn't have a radio
station. They were out beyond Abilene, Texas, but before Amarillo.
I forget the name of the town, probably not even on the map.
But they did listen to the radio stations in Fort Worth and Dallas,
along with other cities.
Dish Network. 50 dollars a month. Gets you 150 tv stations.
CNN, BBC America, etc. Buy it during sales periods, and
don't pay for the install. Direct TV has more, like ITN.
I'll agree with you about some small town newspapers. They
make better toilet paper than reading material.
But the small town I grew up in, less than 9,000 people,
county seat, had a news stand. Many out of town newspapers.
While I don't think they carried the London Times, they did
carry one or two east coast newspapers. And yes, people
did go in there and buy those newspapers from out of town.
Usually Austin, Dallas, and Houston newspapers. If that
news stand didn't have it, the next closest town, 25,000
people, had 3 news stands.
I was checking last week, and the county I grew up
in has 3 internet providors. Email, web pages,
DSL, etc. There are several cell phone companies
advertising on one of the ISP's pages.
Rich Brown
> You appear to be suffering from an acute case of Flyover Syndrome.
Ace Lightning
>>It's different out there, not inferior. My experience is the country
>>boy can adapt a lot better to city conditions than the city kid can
>>handle the wide open spaces.
>Its the lack of continuous traffic noises, gets them everytme.
>Back in the 1950s I was asked by relatives my folks and
>I were visting in Philadelphia, if we still had to worry
>about Indians scalping people, and how many oil wells did
>we have in our backyards. They were serious. We thought they
>were joking. We managed to explain to them they had
>some misconceptions.
It works the other way too. People from "flyover country"
are afraid to visit New York, afraid to ride the subway -
they think people get mugged and raped at a rate of about
one per minute. Young black males with oddly fitting
clothing and loud CD players make these visitors faint
dead away in fear. The're overwhelmed by the noise and
the rapid pace of things, and by the sheer diversity of
the city (Thai food, Chinese movies, Spanish radio,
Pakistani and Russian taxi drivers, kosher vegetarian
pizza!). If city people have misconceptions about the
"heartland", so too do people from quieter parts of the
country have misconceptions about the cities.
Steve Wheeler
"Tim Rowledge" <t...@sumeru.stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:97b986ba4...@goldskin.stcla1.sfba.home.com...
> In message <3BA24FB6...@sa-tech.com>
> Gerry Tyra <ge...@sa-tech.com> wrote:
> > But are you under the impression that the government of the City of
> > Boston, the State of Massachusetts, or the United States are
actively
> > supporting the Provos? I doubt that anyone rational does. So, your
> > response, stated in sarcasm, would be over the top.
> My memory is faint on this, but I seem to remember having the
impression
> that on some occasion(s) the mayor was at events raising money at
which
> guns were auctioned, with notches in the butts claimed to represent
the
> number of brits it had been used to kill. Perhaps that was merely
> propaganda from the UK govt? Perhaps it was true.
It may have been. I recall a 60 Minutes story from I-forget-how-many
years ago which covered Boston support for the IRA (that may not have
been the whole story, but it's what I remember). The one piece which has
stuck in my mind for years was a city councilwoman with tears in her
eyes, screaming something on the order of "God Damn you, England! We'll
get you all!" at a public meeting.
> Salman Rushdie was made subject to a fatwah smply for having a
> _character in a book_ utter an insult to Allah. Since there appears to
> have been a chorus of condemnation from most major leaders of Islam,
it
> seems to me that these terrorists must be considered to have mortally
> insulted Allah. It may even be proper to consider them apostate. I
> suggest the leaders of the Islamic world declare that terrorism makes
> you subject to a fatwah and apostate; you do not go to paradise, you
are
> not a martyr, good moslems are expected to help stop you. This should
> surely reduce support for terrorists at least to some degree. It
> should surely help to convince the rest of the world that Islam really
> does condemn terrorism.
Interesting idea.
> Wouldn't be a bad idea for the assorted christian churches to make
> similar proclamations, considering the number of terrorists claiming
to
> the doing it for that particular god.
>
> I also wonder how seriously the US govt is going to take this war on
all
> terrorism. Are they going to go after the Robertson/Falwell gangs?
After
> all, they want to violate various provisions of the constitution, to
> overthrow the govt and install a theocracy etc. That makes them a
> subversive organisation; they also support volient activities against
> gays, attacks on womens health clinics. That makes them a terrorist
> organisation. Go get'em.
Much more interesting idea.
> --
> Tim Rowledge, t...@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
> How do I set my laser printer on stun?
Hold above opponent's head; release.
- wheels
James A. Wolf
>
>Hey, if somebody kills me, I can guarantee _I_ won't be doing much the
>next day. :-)
"Sorry, I've just been whacked. Cancel the meeting with Steve and
penci in rigor mortis at 11:00. Decompostion at 5:00... And do get me
the McReady faxes as well..."
D_Jim
Ace wrote:
>It works the other way too. People from "flyover country"
>are afraid to visit New York, afraid to ride the subway -
>they think people get mugged and raped at a rate of about
>one per minute. Young black males with oddly fitting
>clothing and loud CD players make these visitors faint
>dead away in fear. The're overwhelmed by the noise and
>the rapid pace of things, and by the sheer diversity of
>the city (Thai food, Chinese movies, Spanish radio,
>Pakistani and Russian taxi drivers, kosher vegetarian
>pizza!). If city people have misconceptions about the
>"heartland", so too do people from quieter parts of the
>country have misconceptions about the cities.
Yup. But there are Thai restaurants in Biloxi. Lets
see, peruse the phone book. French, Cajun, Japanese,
Southern Catfish, Lebanese, various barbeque places,
about 20 Chinese restaurant variations, etc. Oh,
lots of touristy places, with touristy prices.
Po-boys. Buffets.
And I hate the 'continuous traffic noises' of
a large populous area as well. I know I can get
used to it. I just lose sleep while doing so.
I can be a vegetarian in Biloxi area, but its hard.
Most of the 'pants 6 inches longer than their legs' is
more worn by white high school kids than anyone
else I've noticed dressed like that. Along with knit
caps in the summer heat.
New Orleans, Nawlins, areas have muggers. Shrug. I've
heard of people being robbed in small towns.
The small Texas town I grew up in had mostly
the old 'blue plate special' cafes. With a Dairy
Queen and a few mon and pop burger places. The next
town over had 2-3 Chinese restaurants, Mexican food
restaurants, and none of them chain stores.
But finding anything like say Chinese tea, you had
to go to Austin or Dallas. or go to one
of the restaurants. Nobody else had it. That
would be back in the 1950s.
J. Spencer Love
> You appear to be suffering from an acute case of Flyover Syndrome.
Nope.
Drive-by syndrome. It involves getting out and talking to people on
occasion, as well; I can only drive a certain number of miles before
stopping for fuel, toilet, food and/or sleep. I've LIVED some of these
places that I am criticizing; it's not a matter of looking down at them
from 35,000 feet.
To remind you of where I am coming from, David Nasset, Sr., aka
Filksinger, remarked that the news coverage he saw was NOT balanced.
Chris Chroughton then expressed the opinion that it was censorship.
That was when Dave Weingart denied any censorship and instead attacked
the intelligence or morals of anyone who wasn't aware of balanced
coverage. He may have meant *in*his*area*, but didn't say so. I was
just pointing out that you don't need any of those things (censorship,
mental defects or moral turpitude) to explain the different observations
by different people.
The replies are from people who really aren't getting what I am trying
to say. (I am getting really angry about the tone of the replies, at
least as I read them; I tried very hard, if apparently unsuccessfully,
not to be condescending myself.) So, I will try again.
There are smart people everywhere. Almost half the people have IQs over
100 (more than half if you say 100 or more), and a fraction of them are
way out to the right of the bell curve. A certain subset of those show
a slight brain-drain or clustering to places with names like Silicon
<geographic-feature-of-choice>, but hardly all. Although the IQ tests
have their flaws, there does seem to be something like a normal
distribution of smarts. Since there seem to be several different and
maybe even orthogonal common kinds of smartness, the hypothesis that
there is a single measurable smartness scalar number is probably wrong
at least in detail, but it's still a useful metaphor.
There are educated and well-informed people all over. Check out the
librarians. (I wish I could say the same for all teachers.) All
citizens (what, 97% or more have TV) have the opportunity to participate
in most aspects of our culture. It's really hard not to know what a fax
machine is, and they're cheap! I already noted that satellite dishes
are common away from cable, but they used to cost more and there are
still plenty of rural people who haven't scraped up $200 yet to buy one
from their closest Radio Shack. All the step-by-step telephone
exchanges have been replaced, and panel exchanges too. There may be
some crossbar exchanges left, but call-waiting is available nearly
everywhere. Rural electrification is a success story, and there are
paved roads and airfields most places across the entire 48 contiguous
states so that getting as many as 15 miles from either is difficult.
What is not universally available is as much *immersion* in the
information which is provided in the big cities to varying degrees. For
example, I can drive around listening to NPR, National Public Radio.
Lots of places you can't do that. You may have noticed that many
Americans spend a lot of time driving. Away from the big radio markets,
they're doing something else with their brains in that time. The news
coverage away from NPR mostly has much less international news, and much
of the radio coverage is quite biased.
While it is fun to take advantage of preconceptions about people from
the sticks, the people who feel as Dave Weingart feels about
international news are thinner on the ground as you move away from the
cities that have more immigrants and more sources of international news.
It remains possible to get access to the information elsewhere, but it
is harder and requires more work. So fewer people bother.
Even in the big city, there are plenty of people who do not pay
attention to things that are not under their noses. All of us have
limited attention which we have to decide how to allocate. People make
different choices, and that is necessary and good, even if some of us
don't like some of the choices others make.
In Greenwich, CT, where I grew up, a place like Beverley Hills in terms
of personal incomes, where there were an awful lot of smart
over-achievers, but the streak of anti-intellectualism in the town and
suprisingly in the "best" private schools was miles wide. Go to a SF
con and ask who was beat up in school because they were smart,
different, and so on; most of the hands (but not all) will go up. I've
done this dozens of times; always I get the same result.
It's worse in the sticks; in the cities there are still programs for
gifted and talented, magnet schools and so forth; in the 'burbs where I
live now they have completely dismantled them in the public schools to
pay for special education to bring up the bottom of the bell curve.
Unless your parents have the bread for private school or you are in the
occasional enlightened school district (and I never said they didn't
exist), you're S.O.L. if you're particularly bright. You risk getting
diagnosed as ADD because you aren't challenged, i.e., bored stiff, not
to deny that there are some who seem to benefit from that treatment.
Let me put this a different way. If you grew up in the boonies, you may
be one of the people whose life was saved by MENSA or fandom (many of us
discovered fandom late; I never discovered MENSA, just talked to people
about it). Otherwise, many people who felt like changelings in their
own families would never have had anyone to have an intelligent
conversation with.
In Cambridge, MA, however, the prevailing attitude that I met was that
people joined MENSA because they were insecure and needed other people
to tell them how smart they were. There were plenty of smart,
well-informed people around and finding someone to talk to was dead
easy.
I found this dichotomy in attitudes curious. I have concluded that it
derived from the relative scarcity of intellectuals, which varies.
Being an intellectual is not just intelligence but attitude toward it
and how it should be used.
The people reading this needn't feel defensive. You've already selected
yourself out of the group I am complaining about. My point is that you
don't need a conspiracy of censorship, criminal irresponsibility or
actual brain-damage to not be aware of or able to find the balanced
international news that Dave Weingart takes for granted.
Also, when I make the crack about a kid already having a book, I wasn't
joking. We are called readers. We're a minority! A demographer's
curiosity. Radio and TV are very important to non-readers. If they
don't have a dish, or don't use it to watch CNN or CSPAN, they're at the
mercy of the network news.
Broadcast network news is not awful, but it's very superficial, and it's
quite biased toward the sound bite, which makes it very susceptible to
manipulation by the media-savvy. The Christian networks are EXTREMELY
biased, IMAO, and I say that knowing that I'll offend people. I've
never found a Jewish or Moslem network or even station; they must exist
somewhere. Printed media are much less relevant for this segment of the
population.
-- Spencer
Ace Lightning
>>It works the other way too. People from "flyover country"
>>are afraid to visit New York, afraid to ride the subway -
>>they think people get mugged and raped at a rate of about
>>one per minute. Young black males with oddly fitting
>>clothing and loud CD players make these visitors faint
>>dead away in fear. The're overwhelmed by the noise and
>>the rapid pace of things, and by the sheer diversity of
>>the city (Thai food, Chinese movies, Spanish radio,
>>Pakistani and Russian taxi drivers, kosher vegetarian
>>pizza!). If city people have misconceptions about the
>>"heartland", so too do people from quieter parts of the
>>country have misconceptions about the cities.
>Yup. But there are Thai restaurants in Biloxi. Lets
>see, peruse the phone book. French, Cajun, Japanese,
>Southern Catfish, Lebanese, various barbeque places,
>about 20 Chinese restaurant variations, etc. Oh,
>lots of touristy places, with touristy prices.
>Po-boys. Buffets.
Biloxi is a *city*, although not on the same scale as
New York. (There are only a handful of cities that
approach the scale of New York.) But what about the
availability of movies in Hindi, or even sushi, in
<*consulting MapQuest*>
...oh, say, halfway between Big Level and Whites
Crossing?
>And I hate the 'continuous traffic noises' of
>a large populous area as well. I know I can get
>used to it. I just lose sleep while doing so.
Having spent time in environments from New York
City, to suburbs, to deep woods, I just sort of
adjust without thinking about it much.
>I can be a vegetarian in Biloxi area, but its hard.
At least it's a port, so if you want to avoid
"meat", you can get plenty of fresh seafood.
Probably pretty damn good seafood.
>Most of the 'pants 6 inches longer than their legs' is
>more worn by white high school kids than anyone
>else I've noticed dressed like that. Along with knit
>caps in the summer heat.
Wannabes. I even saw them in Australia.
>New Orleans, Nawlins, areas have muggers. Shrug. I've
>heard of people being robbed in small towns.
And I had my wallet stolen in Melbourne, AU. Of
course, 25 years ago I had my wallet stolen in
the Bronx...
>The small Texas town I grew up in had mostly
>the old 'blue plate special' cafes. With a Dairy
>Queen and a few mon and pop burger places. The next
>town over had 2-3 Chinese restaurants, Mexican food
>restaurants, and none of them chain stores.
>But finding anything like say Chinese tea, you had
>to go to Austin or Dallas. or go to one
>of the restaurants. Nobody else had it. That
>would be back in the 1950s.
There's still a lot of that flavor in places,
although they're certainly *aware* of the larger
world. But there are still plenty of places in
the US where you can't even get a fresh bagel,
let alone dim sum...
Sandy Tyra
> "Copper Squirrel" <copper_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:dgguptg7vjlh8ve66...@4ax.com...
>
> > Most of the governments know better than to irritate somebody
> > who can pound them into rubble on a days notice.
>
> Except George Bush's government, as we've now seen.
>
> --
> Robin Johnson
> rd...@le.ac.NO-SPAM-PLEASE.uk
> http://www.nondescript.org
> "A cup of coffee with a fork, please."
Robin, this assault had to have been planned for more than TWO years.
Which was well before Bush ever ran for president. This had NOTHING
whatsoever to do with Bush. It was aimed at America, regardless of who
was in office. Ir would have happened on Gore'sd watch - if he had had
one.
Sandy
D_Jim
j...@lovesong.com wrote:
>still plenty of rural people who haven't scraped up $200 yet to buy one
>from their closest Radio Shack. All the step-by-step telephone
I have Dish Network, cost me 50 dollars to get it and the install.
150 channels. I rather like it, over the inflated prices the local
cable company charges for fewer channels.
I can remember that back in the 1950s there was Bell Telephone, and several
smaller towns had their own telephone systems.
>Even in the big city, there are plenty of people who do not pay
>attention to things that are not under their noses. All of us have
>limited attention which we have to decide how to allocate. People make
Definately.
>Let me put this a different way. If you grew up in the boonies, you may
>be one of the people whose life was saved by MENSA or fandom (many of us
>discovered fandom late; I never discovered MENSA, just talked to people
>about it). Otherwise, many people who felt like changelings in their
>own families would never have had anyone to have an intelligent
>conversation with.
No fandom where and when I grew up. I did see, in Analog, that
a convention for sf was being held in Austin, Texas. No money
and no transport for me to get there. My parents would not have
allowed me to go by bus by myself, even if we could have afforded it.
I was one of the few people to mention I read books, publically,
not assigned in class, in that small town. Most folks,
including some of my relatives, felt I was wasting my
time. Shrug. I'm a computer guy now. Most of them died younger
than me or died from cigarettes or bad eating habits.
Fried food in lard. What else is there to say ?
But I do understand. Being able to understand, or know about,
the world around us was not common where and when I grew up.
>Also, when I make the crack about a kid already having a book, I wasn't
>joking. We are called readers. We're a minority! A demographer's
>curiosity. Radio and TV are very important to non-readers. If they
>don't have a dish, or don't use it to watch CNN or CSPAN, they're at the
>mercy of the network news.
I read over 100 books before first grade, some of it RAH and Ray
Bradbury. For first grade we got 'See Spot Run. Watch Spot Run.
See Dick and jAne watch Spot run'. yetch.
Sandy Tyra
to say. (I am getting really angry about the tone of the replies, at
least as I read them; I tried very hard, if apparently unsuccessfully,
not to be condescending myself.) So, I will try again.>>
You failed. When you used the terms "real newspapers" and "real
journalists" as applying to only the big city newspapers/reporters you
insulted every one of us who come from "fly over country." And G-d, it
sounded condescending! Indiana reporters aren't "real journalists"
because they choose to live in Indiana? If you didn't mean to be
condescending why did you use such condescending language? I ranted
around the house for hours just about those two phrases!!! It was
EXTREMELY condescending.
Oh and btw: The New York Times in infamous for its biases. Haven't
you noticed them? And speaking of biases:
You cited Rush Limbaugh as being biased - but do you know why he made
such a big splash when he did? We conservatives had been of the opinion
that no conservative ideas/ideals were allowed on the airways by the
unwritten laws of the liberal press and the entertainment industry. For
instance, can you name a single conservative TV talk show host? I can
name a dozen liberal ones. If you wanted to cite bias - why not Dan
Rather? He is as liberal as Rush Limbaugh is conservative and it
shows! And Rather is a newsman - Limbaugh is simply a political
commentator. Are you only capable of noticing conservative bias? Or is
it that only conservative bias is bad?
One last thing: "fly over country" refers to your attitude - not how
you got across the country. It is L.A.'s and New York's
(specifically the entertainment industry's) term for all of the U.S.
that lies between CA and NY. In this mentality, Chicago, St. Louis, and
Denver are indistinguishable from Petticoat Junction. And your post
reeked of the attitude.
Sandy
Gerry Tyra
You have raised some interesting points, but they may not show what you
think.
You make comments about the quality of schools and the tendency to
read. I will grant you, in the town where Sandy grew up, the school was
small. Given a high school graduating class of about 60 people, Sandy
was one of the few readers. In my graduating class (893), I wasn't
alone even though I also grew up in flyover country. But does that prove
anything? Just because there aren't that many people, as a percentage,
living in rural areas, that read for recreation, does that imply that a
higher percentage does in the city? Maybe they do, but you have no
basis for that assumption without solid statistical data to back it up.
Rather, it just comes across as more condescension.
Sandy came out of a small school, so there is an assumption that you can
find a better school in New York. In all of Greater New York, I can
almost guarantee that is true. But the average? Come on, a lot of New
York schools have reputations, generated by the press out of New York,
such that you wouldn't want to send your children to them.
Or let me put it another way. Sandy tells the story that when she and
her older sister were in high school, they took to cutting, a lot. The
Principal saw my father-in-law in a local store, came over and told that
his girls were getting into trouble over this. It stopped. When your
teacher lives next door, or around the corner, and had known your
parents for all their lives, very little gets missed. And Sandy got an
education that she is happy with. Are you going to tell me that schools
that are being used as warehousing for kids are better just because
they're in the "big city"?
Gerry
D.J.
Ace Lightning wrote:
[]Biloxi is a *city*, although not on the same scale as
Chuckle. Depends on whom you ask.
I can find cows, live ones, less than 2 miles from Biloxi.
That doesn't mean 'city' to me.
[]New York. (There are only a handful of cities that
[]approach the scale of New York.) But what about the
[]availability of movies in Hindi, or even sushi, in
I believe there are 2 sushi places in the area.
I don't know if Hindi food is available here or not, I know it is in
New Orleans.
[]<*consulting MapQuest*>
[]...oh, say, halfway between Big Level and Whites
[]Crossing?
Whom ? Where ?
[]>I can be a vegetarian in Biloxi area, but its hard.
[]
[]At least it's a port, so if you want to avoid
[]"meat", you can get plenty of fresh seafood.
[]Probably pretty damn good seafood.
But ya gotta avoid the trourist traps.
They sell popcorn shrimp as shrimp. Thats bait !
[]There's still a lot of that flavor in places,
[]although they're certainly *aware* of the larger
[]world. But there are still plenty of places in
[]the US where you can't even get a fresh bagel,
[]let alone dim sum...
True.
JimP.
--
djim55 at tyhe datasync dot com. Disclaimer: Standard.
Updated: September 2, 2001
http://www.crosswinds.net/~drivein/ Drive-In Movie Theatres
Registered Linux user#185746
Bill Roper
>
>Um, Spencer, I don't mean to impugn your observations, but a lack of
>radio stations that you can receive for long distances (low power is
>perfectly sufficient if everyone lives nearby) and national newspapers
>does not a news vacuum make. You don't need the NY Times if you have a
>local newspaper with the AP wire, and besides, if you want the NY Times
>you just get it mailed to you, or you have the drugstore owner order
>only as many copies as there are customers for said paper.
Also, if you're living in Boston, there are a lot of radio stations on
the air and a ton of electrical interference that makes distant radio
reception difficult. When you're *out* of the big city, there are still
a number of 50,000 watt clear-channel AM radio stations that can be
heard across a *large* number of states after sunset.
KMOX (1120 on your AM dial) in St. Louis is one of them. Unless the
skip is being really bad, I can easily pick them up in the evening in
Chicago, despite the amount of electrical noise here.
(Former SW DXer with a box full of QSL cards in the garage.)
--
Bill Roper, ro...@xnet.com
Bill Roper
>news:97b986ba4...@goldskin.stcla1.sfba.home.com...
>>
>all
>> terrorism. Are they going to go after the Robertson/Falwell gangs?
>After
>> all, they want to violate various provisions of the constitution, to
>> overthrow the govt and install a theocracy etc. That makes them a
>> subversive organisation; they also support volient activities against
>> gays, attacks on womens health clinics. That makes them a terrorist
>> organisation. Go get'em.
Falwell and Robertson have just succeeded in thoroughly marginalizing
themselves by blaming the success of the WTC attack on the U.S.'s failure
to be godly enough, causing God to withdraw his protection from the
country.
I recognize that there's some small number of people who might buy that
particular line of bull, but I suspect that it's substantially smaller
than the number who were listening to them before they opened their
mouths most recently.
--
Bill Roper, ro...@xnet.com
Steve Brinich
> Falwell and Robertson have just succeeded in thoroughly marginalizing
> themselves by blaming the success of the WTC attack on the U.S.'s failure
> to be godly enough, causing God to withdraw his protection from the
> country.
I rather like the response to this bit of cynical agenda-pushing posted at
http://web.tampabay.rr.com/planetsam/arc/2001-09.htm#14.
--
Steve Brinich <sbri...@bigfoot.com> If the government wants us
http://www.bigfoot.com/~sbrinich to respect the law
41BFB2CAA6083A641079871798366DC7 it should set a better example
Contata Three: http://www.rishathra.com/contata
Bill Roper
Sandy Tyra <sa...@sa-tech.com> wrote:
>
>You cited Rush Limbaugh as being biased - but do you know why he made
>such a big splash when he did? We conservatives had been of the opinion
>that no conservative ideas/ideals were allowed on the airways by the
>unwritten laws of the liberal press and the entertainment industry. For
>instance, can you name a single conservative TV talk show host? I can
>name a dozen liberal ones. If you wanted to cite bias - why not Dan
>Rather? He is as liberal as Rush Limbaugh is conservative and it
>shows! And Rather is a newsman - Limbaugh is simply a political
>commentator. Are you only capable of noticing conservative bias? Or is
>it that only conservative bias is bad?
Digressing:
I've thought that of the big three TV networks, CBS tends to be the most
liberal, NBC the most conservative, and ABC somewhere in the middle.
(Fox has now moved in to the right of NBC.)
I was channel surfing the other night while talking to Clif Flynt (we
were reading the crawls on the various networks and discussing a wide
variety of things). I flipped over to CBS and caught an interview with
a Palestinian terrorist. I watched about two minutes of it, as he
described how he had smuggled plastic explosives out of Gaza into Tel
Aviv, passing many security checkpoints that he'd gotten past because
God was with him...
And I thought to myself, if *CBS* is broadcasting this interview in
this climate, the Palestinians are toast.
--
Bill Roper, ro...@xnet.com
Karen Rodgers
wrote:
>Or let me put it another way. Sandy tells the story that when she and
>her older sister were in high school, they took to cutting, a lot. The
>Principal saw my father-in-law in a local store, came over and told that
>his girls were getting into trouble over this. It stopped. When your
>teacher lives next door, or around the corner, and had known your
>parents for all their lives, very little gets missed. And Sandy got an
>education that she is happy with. Are you going to tell me that schools
>that are being used as warehousing for kids are better just because
>they're in the "big city"?
Sandy got a better formal education than I did, and I grew up in a
fairly large city, and the county around it. To be blunt. my formal
sucked rocks, they managed to teach me to read, and I'm grateful for
that, but the rest, well, there were very few that could teach well.
(I had two great school choral directors.)
The bulk of the *best* education I've had has come from either my
parents (my Dad is from rural Indiana, and my Mom, rural
Pennsylvania), my friends in fandom, and the library.
Most of my teachers were just this side of worthless. When I can sit
in a room full of my peers, and find out that they are quoting from
memory poems and stories, classics, that I'd never heard of, let alone
read, that's just plain sad. I can pick up that knowledge, but I
shouldn't have been cheated of it in the first place.
Karen Rodgers
**********
Windbourne, folk singers of the future
http://www.windbourne.com/
please remove "rice_" to contact me
**********
J. Spencer Love
> When you used the terms "real newspapers" and "real
> journalists" as applying to only the big city newspapers/reporters you
> insulted every one of us who come from "fly over country."
When I said "real newspaper", I meant ones with international
reputations for good journalism. That was bombastic of me. I was
thinking of other things, so that got by the internal censor. Persis,
cleverly, was asleep while I wrote that.
Pre-Internet, I saw this kind of mention for The New York Times; The
Wall Street Journal; The Washington Post; The Los Angeles Times; The
London Times; and Le Monde, in Paris. That's IT. Oh, Pravda and The
National Enquirer for really bad journalism of two different kinds. I'm
not really sure what to make of the International Herald-Tribune, and
there are more papers in the next tier down, but I don't want to go
there, lest I get killed in the crossfire. I'm talking dailies here, so
I am ignoring for the moment a host of less-frequent periodicals. If I
lived in a different region, I'd likely have another to add that was
closer, but I'm not at all convinced that I'd remove these.
This is like the reputations of schools like MIT, CalTech, Stanford
and CMU. That's biased toward engineering; I'm an engineer. I could
add Harvard, Princeton, Berkeley (UCB) and University of Chicago for
other fields. This is hardly an exhaustive list -- but there are
definitely tiers to reputations.
I am NOT saying you can't get a better education at some other school.
Depending on how you evaluate what you get from the school, it may even
be more likely. I am talking about reputation. I may be selective
about which ones I care about, but I do not invent these rankings.
Post-Internet, the San Jose Mercury News has risen to greater
prominence. I can't say whether this is just because of their proximity
to Silicon Valley. I am not trying to promote them to the level of the
papers listed above, but I have noticed they are cited a lot. I know of
more news sources than I did pre-Internet, but I can't say that many of
the specialty web sites I visit have reputations of any kind outside
their very narrow fields.
Many but not all of the coastal newspapers have a definite left wing
bias. I've read complaints about that from the conservatives, and they
have considerable justice, but dammit, they could improve the standards
and behavior of their flagship papers.
Where I live, there are four major regional Sunday and weekly papers:
The Boston Globe, The Boston Herald, The Worcester Telegram and Gazette,
the Providence Journal, and The Middlesex News. None of these make the
cut for "real newspaper" but the Boston Globe probably comes closest.
It used to be independent. There also used to be more local papers, but
now my local town's paper does a combined Sunday edition with the
Middlesex News, which I'm not so sure about the daily edition of.
Several of the local papers were subsumed by The Tab. There are other
local Boston papers like The Boston Phoenix, which don't get out to the
burbs where I am so well. The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,
and USA Today have good penetration into this market.
The omission of USA Today from the short list above was deliberate.
This is about reputation, the second-hand kind. I have never in my life
read Le Monde or Pravda. I can't read or speak Russian, and my reading
French is feeble (my spoken French is nearly nonexistent).
> And G-d, it sounded condescending!
Point taken.
> Indiana reporters aren't "real journalists" because they choose to
> live in Indiana?
This is trickier. Real journalists have international reputations,
which is more common for columnists in the print industry, not
reporters, or work for organizations that have international reputations
to protect. I shouldn't have said this, because it requires too much of
a leap without explanation and it's more loaded. Please note that big
news organizations commonly employ reporters living or visiting far
outside their local areas. Editorial standards are very important for
far more than the editorial page.
By the way, in the week following the WTC/Pentagon attacks, standards of
reportage have gone directly to hell by the express elevator, in the
rush to get the garbage out first. We can hope they will recover.
Rumor reported as news should be labelled as such!
As Maureen pointed out, Pulitzers (and other recognition) are given out
to far more than the short list of papers I gave above. Brilliant work
done consistently and with editorial backing will shine out better than
occasional brilliance. Bigger markets mean bigger budgets and thus
larger staffs, which increases the likelihood of having someone on that
staff do brilliant work.
> If you didn't mean to be condescending why did you use such
> condescending language?
A blind spot on my part. My efforts were focussed elsewhere. It
could have been worse.
> I ranted around the house for hours just about those two phrases!!!
> It was EXTREMELY condescending.
I'm sorry about that.
> Oh and btw: The New York Times in infamous for its biases. Haven't
> you noticed them?
Absolutely. It's frustrating being described as being "to the right
of Ghengis Khan" because I live in a region which is a hotbed of
liberal democrats. I do not align at all closely with either of the
major parties, though each of them have platforms that I can support
wholeheartedly and others that leave me screaming in rage.
If I had Barry Goldwater to vote for today, I'd vote Republican. Call
me a throwback. Instead I have the religious right, which is not a
choice at all. And in the first post-impeachment national election,
after the Republicans behaved so badly, abandoning the business of
government to reduce themselves to the level of The National Enquirer
(not a defense of Bill Clinton, by the way) for months or years, there
was NO WAY they would get the votes they otherwise often get from me.
Nevertheless, I think the component of the daily press cited above,
notwithstanding some visibly left-wing bias, has earned its reputation
for good reportage. Part of this discussion was about the bar being too
high for international news, and we agree they have other flaws, but the
reputations are not invented by the journalists but instead bestowed by
the readers. They are sure promoted by the journalists, but that would
ring a lot more hollow if the right wing ones in that part of the
industry were less reactionary and hidebound.
> And speaking of biases:
>
> You cited Rush Limbaugh as being biased - but do you know why he made
> such a big splash when he did?
Because he had a large natural audience. Commentators are much more
about entertainment and analysis than reportage.
> We conservatives had been of the opinion that no conservative
> ideas/ideals were allowed on the airways by the unwritten laws of
> the liberal press and the entertainment industry.
Now you're coming across as both condescending and defensive, a very odd
combination.
> For instance, can you name a single conservative TV talk show host?
> I can name a dozen liberal ones.
Good for you. I can't name TV personalities of either bent, because I
watch very, very little television. Almost none. Our single TV set
spent half the summer in the attached two-car storage unit (no cars,
they wouldn't fit but that gives the size) as a disciplinary measure for
Talis. She had to make do with her books and toys, no movies. And she
did quite well; it was a good thing for a variety of reasons. What I
know about TV I pick up through the popular culture, quite unavoidably
but very limited.
> If you wanted to cite bias - why not Dan Rather? He is as liberal as
> Rush Limbaugh is conservative and it shows! And Rather is a newsman -
> Limbaugh is simply a political commentator.
Yeah, and the Speaker of the House is just a legislator. Some are more
influential than others.
> Are you only capable of noticing conservative bias? Or is it that
> only conservative bias is bad?
I am, but while I am certainly a filter for what I find around me, I
observe and to some degree choose rather than create what I find around
me.
Tell me, do you consider The Wall Street Journal to be another bastion
of flaming liberalism? The flaming liberals around here sure don't.
If conservative bias is bad, it's because of contamination from the
religious right. Otherwise it's a good thing in my book. I'd rather
have acknowledged bias and an effort to minimize it where appropriate
than be in denial about it. Oh dear, does having read a lot of pop
psych (it helped me get through my divorce) irreversibly contaminate me?
I do not have anything against most individuals who affiliate with the
religious right. Religions are just fine as long as people keep them to
themselves. OK, that's a little strong; I'm overreacting to the holy
roller types. I am not asking people to keep their religions a secret,
but I am asking that they
1) not try to convert me, just be open the possibility when/if I ASK
for information;
2) don't pull a real attitude, telling me I'm damned to hell because I'm
not just like them; and
3) don't come after me with torches and pitchforks.
Genuinely religious people often hold themselves to a higher moral
standard than is common these days, and that's good. Holding their
representatives feet to the fire over their voting records is also a
plus, except when it becomes single-issue politics. My problem is the
ones who are determined to destroy the separation of church and state.
I was raised Catholic, call myself an agnostic, and am about as friendly
to the secular humanists as to any of the political parties.
> One last thing: "fly over country" refers to your attitude - not how
> you got across the country. It is L.A.'s and New York's
> (specifically the entertainment industry's) term for all of the U.S.
> that lies between CA and NY.
Yes, like I live near Boston, you live near Hollywood. Cheap shot; with
TV, all of us live near Hollywood, but I was focussed on reportage, not
the editorial pages and not the entertainment industries. Prying them
apart can be a gooey mess, but I'm trying.
> In this mentality, Chicago, St. Louis, and Denver are
> indistinguishable from Petticoat Junction. And your post reeked of
> the attitude.
The reeking with that attitude was unnoticed contamination from the junk
available for me to read. Just because I am a reader doesn't mean that
everything available or interesting or relevant to current events is of
the same quality. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
My intention was definitely to *distinguish* Chicago, St. Louis, Denver,
Kansas City, Albuquerque, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Seattle, Atlanta and so
on from Petticoat Junction. You are projecting.
There are a lot more square miles of Petticoat Junction than there are
of cities. There are a lot of people in those emptier square miles.
Contrary to the Nevada population distribution (too many people in Las
Vegas), in most places those rural votes matter, and even where they
don't, migrations in and out of the cities mean they affect attitudes.
-- Spencer
J. Spencer Love
> You have raised some interesting points, but they may not show what you
> think.
That depends on the reader, too. That's why it's good this is a
dialogue.
> You make comments about the quality of schools and the tendency to
> read. I will grant you, in the town where Sandy grew up, the school was
> small. Given a high school graduating class of about 60 people, Sandy
> was one of the few readers. In my graduating class (893), I wasn't
> alone even though I also grew up in flyover country. But does that prove
> anything? Just because there aren't that many people, as a percentage,
> living in rural areas, that read for recreation, does that imply that a
> higher percentage does in the city?
I made no such contention or assumption. My point was that the
non-readers don't get as much input outside the cities, especially
radio. If I had to make a guess then, I'd guess more readers in the
country than the city. But it would only be a guess, and it's not
relevant to my point, as long as readers are in the minority in lots of
places, both in the country and in cities.
I observe that many schools suck. I have personal experience of schools
sucking outside the city, even expensive "elite" ones. There is plenty
of documentation of public schools being really bad in inner cities. I
don't blame the schools for the lack of readers, though. Parents have
much more to do with that in the studies I've seen. It's a cultural
problem.
Some people can do something else while the TV is on; I never developed
those antibodies since I watch so little TV. I can listen to the radio
while driving, working at a computer (music better than talk radio in
that case), and a variety of other tasks. A farmer can listen while
driving a tractor, for that matter. I could listen to books on tape,
instead, but they cost more (public libraries, where available, are
helping there). Anyway, I'd suggest arresting someone who watched TV
while also driving a vehicle, although it would be OK if passengers
watched.
I personally feel that having only the Christian stations to listen to
is a LOT like living in Afghanistan (different religion, same monopoly)
but I tried to avoid going that far in my posting. There are more
differences than similarities, as far as I know.
> Maybe they do, but you have no
> basis for that assumption without solid statistical data to back it up.
> Rather, it just comes across as more condescension.
Since I didn't make any such assumption, and it was irrelevant to what I
was trying to say, I am concluding that the condescension was projected
onto me by your assumptions. Not to say that my tone couldn't have been
better, but I don't recognize the specifics coming back at me as having
to do with what I said, so not knowing my audience was probably more
important.
> Sandy came out of a small school, so there is an assumption that you can
> find a better school in New York. In all of Greater New York, I can
> almost guarantee that is true. But the average? Come on, a lot of New
> York schools have reputations, generated by the press out of New York,
> such that you wouldn't want to send your children to them.
Too true. In a small town, you don't have to go to private school for
individual attention. Most people can't afford private schools and in a
city most don't get that level of attention and interaction from the
public schools. This is also not what I was talking about.
> Or let me put it another way. Sandy tells the story that when she and
> her older sister were in high school, they took to cutting, a lot. The
> Principal saw my father-in-law in a local store, came over and told that
> his girls were getting into trouble over this. It stopped. When your
> teacher lives next door, or around the corner, and had known your
> parents for all their lives, very little gets missed. And Sandy got an
> education that she is happy with.
I think we have reason to be happy with the education that Sandy got.
BTW, Sandy gets a good bit of the blame for that. I am not so sure we
should be happy with the system she extracted it from, but I am not
complaining about your example, which was a good aspect of that system.
> Are you going to tell me that schools
> that are being used as warehousing for kids are better just because
> they're in the "big city"?
I said no such thing.
Schools get used as warehouses in the larger suburbs, too. That's about
population density and bad priorities -- different problems than the one
I'm talking about, if related. I don't mean to belittle them, but we
can't tackle everything wrong with the country in one thread.
You're misreading my chauvinism. ;-)
In the big city, there are more opportunities for people with a good
education. And because there are lots more people, there are more
people with a good education. I don't claim that these two related
numbers scale linearly. I don't know. I have not attempted to analyze
the factors that seem to be heating under your collar. I think of them
as second-order effects, and I'm trying to keep this simple.
It was easier to find a self-selected member of the intelligensia in
Cambridge, MA, because of larger *raw* numbers. People are very good at
sorting themselves out, given propinquity.
Here's a factoid that I barely remember: in 1980, half of all marriages
in the U.S. were between people who lived some small distance apart when
they met. I forget whether it was 5, 7 or 12 city blocks, but less than
a mile. It would be interesting to form this statistic for fans; I
think the results might be different. Heck, it might be different for
the general population 20 years later.
-- Spencer
J. Spencer Love
> Also, if you're living in Boston, there are a lot of radio stations on
> the air and a ton of electrical interference that makes distant radio
> reception difficult. When you're *out* of the big city, there are still
> a number of 50,000 watt clear-channel AM radio stations that can be
> heard across a *large* number of states after sunset.
Good point. Most fixed receivers are better than the ones in cars.
While I think I can stand by my observations regarding radio listening
on the move, radio listening at work could easily be better. Radio
listening at night better still, but I'm a bit less impressed; since the
invention of TV, radio remains much stronger only in situations where
you can do something else while you are listening.
Remember that my radio observations were in the process of collecting
29,000 highway miles driving around the U.S.
-- Spencer
Rilla Heslin
I got a better formal education than you did and we grew up in the same city. I don't think that it had anything to do with the *place* but in fact what the educational system at the time decided what and how they thought they wanted to teach kids!
After all, I was very familiar
with the poems, stories etc. that Sandy and Lee were talking about, even
if I can't quote them from memory. History both ancient and modern were
WELL covered, civics, math, english, and most of the basics.
Rilla
Margaret Middleton
>Bradbury. For first grade we got 'See Spot Run. Watch Spot Run.
>See Dick and jAne watch Spot run'. yetch.
That sounds familiar. I also went to school in Texas in the 1950's. My brother,
who was born the September I started first grade, had the same edition of 3rd
grade reading book that I had had. References to closing the swimming pools for
polio season.
I was in Baytown; I gather you were rather farther west, but I betcha I'll
recognize it.
MSMinLR(at)aol.com (Margaret Middleton)
Shameless Plug for our local con: http://www.rockon.org
Help make a Quilted Artifact to sell for Interfilk:
http://members.aol.com/msminlr/ifquilt.htm
Margaret Middleton
>reception difficult. When you're *out* of the big city, there are still
>a number of 50,000 watt clear-channel AM radio stations that can be
>heard across a *large* number of states after sunset.
<reminiscence>
Yeah, when the conditions were particularly good, I could even pick up WGN in
Baytown, 'way down on the Texas Gulf Coast.
</reminiscence>
Steve Brinich
> [something I can't read]
Could you turn off the HTML in your newsreader? Your text is coming
across as black blocks.
Margaret Middleton
>In the big city, there are more opportunities for people with a good
>education.
This brings to my mind a quote from one of Sharyn McCrumb's characters. He was
a lawyer in a very small county-seat town in the TN/NC borderlands: "The only
way for an educated man to make a living in a place like this is to be
self-employed. And I hadn't the stomach for medicine."
D_Jim
msm...@aol.comstatic wrote:
>That sounds familiar. I also went to school in Texas in the 1950's. My brother,
>who was born the September I started first grade, had the same edition of 3rd
>grade reading book that I had had. References to closing the swimming pools for
>polio season.
I took Salk Polio Vaccine on sugar cubes in elementary school.
Still tasted awful. Had to take a year of Texas history in high school.
One of the most biased classes I've ever taken. And me proud to be
a Texan.
>I was in Baytown; I gather you were rather farther west, but I betcha I'll
>recognize it.
Up near Killeen and Waco, the town is mostly gone now. Too small,
and they stifled growth. When Pizza Hut came in, around mid-1960s,
the town had a fit when they figured out Pizza Hut served draft beer.
Closed them down before they opened. last time I was there, most
of the old stores were still there. Stone false fronts on some
buildings. Bank looks like its right out of Dodge City, but
stone instead of wood. My folks went there not long ago
for my mother's high school class reunion. Many stores I
went to as a kid are all boarded up. Shrug. There was a lot
of hate in that town, for anyone they condsidered different.
I guess thats come home to roost. karma ran over their dogma.
D_Jim
Spencer j...@lovesong.com wrote:
>Remember that my radio observations were in the process of collecting
>29,000 highway miles driving around the U.S.
Ah, then you got to listen to lots of morning farm reports.
Here a hog report,
there about corn,
but don't let them hogs eat that corn,
do dah do dah.
D_Jim
Spencer j...@lovesong.com wrote:
>Here's a factoid that I barely remember: in 1980, half of all marriages
>in the U.S. were between people who lived some small distance apart when
>they met. I forget whether it was 5, 7 or 12 city blocks, but less than
>a mile. It would be interesting to form this statistic for fans; I
>think the results might be different. Heck, it might be different for
>the general population 20 years later.
Isn't that 1890 ?
I know my parents would not have met, except cars came into
lots of use right after WW 2. Drive-up eat places, with car hops,
came into being about 1946. Passenger trains made a major
difference in the period before WW 2.
Rich Brown
runs rings around my local options, the Minneapolis Tribune and the St
Paul Pioneer Press.