 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
RH
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 3
|
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 2:09 pm Post subject: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
'Make Poverty History': People Power Gets to G7
by Sanjay Suri
LONDON - Nelson Mandela, 86, needed no support when he walked up to
address thousands at Trafalgar Square in London Thursday. He had the
support of a cheering crowd, and of one of the most powerful movements
ever to gather against world poverty.
Mandela spoke at Trafalgar Square -- London's traditional venue for
people to make a political statement -- on the eve of the meeting
Friday and Saturday of finance ministers from the G7 countries (the
United States, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan). He
was carrying a message for that meeting, and succeeded before it began.
Steps to counter poverty are already set to dominate the G7 meeting.
Traditionally G7 finance ministers are more given to talk of exchange
rates and macro multinational issues...
....civil society, backed by all major trade unions and the Church of
England, has managed at least in substantial measure to set the agenda
for a G7 finance ministers' meeting.
''As you know, I recently formally announced my retirement from public
life and should really not be here,'' Mandela said. ''However, as long
as poverty, injustice and gross inequality persist in our world, none
of us can truly rest.''
....''The Global Campaign for Action Against Poverty can take its place
as a public movement alongside the movement to abolish slavery and the
international solidarity against apartheid,'' he said.
Mandela told the... crowd: ''I can never thank the people of Britain
enough for their support through those days of the struggle against
apartheid. . . . Through your will and passion, you assisted in
consigning that evil system forever to history. But in this new
century, millions of people in the world's poorest countries remain
imprisoned, enslaved, and in chains. They are trapped in the prison of
poverty. It is time to set them free.''
....''The steps that are needed from the developed nations are clear,''
he said. ''The first is ensuring trade justice. The second is an end to
the debt crisis for the poorest countries. The third is to deliver much
more aid and make sure it is of the highest quality.''
Mandela said finally: ''I say to all those (G7) leaders: do not look
the other way; do not hesitate. Recognize that the world is hungry for
action, not words. Act with courage and vision.'' Mandela was due to
take his message directly to the ministers..
The task will not be easy, Mandela said. ''But not to do this would be
a crime against humanity, against which I ask all humanity now to rise
up.''...
Members of the Make Poverty History campaign point out that 2.8 billion
people around the world live in poverty, and that 30,000 die from
poverty- related causes every day....
[while tons of food rots in warehouses around the world]
This excerpt was:
Published on Friday, February 4, 2005 by the Inter Press Service
the entire article can be found here:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0204-01.htm==================...
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to
Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/31/1546207
Watch/Listen to an hourlong interview with John Perkins, a former
respected member of the international banking community. In his book
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man he describes how as a highly paid
professional, he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe
out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could
possibly repay and then taking over their economies. John Perkins
describes himself as a former economic hit man - a highly paid
professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of
dollars.
20 years ago Perkins began writing a book with the working title,
"Conscience of an Economic Hit Men."
Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two
countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of
as kindred spirits - Jaime Roldós, president of Ecuador, and Omar
Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes.
Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they
opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads
whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring
Roldós and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the
CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in.
Watch and/or listen to the interview
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/31/1546207
read excerpt:
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/188
=========================
"A world of glaring inequality is never going to be a fully safe
world. For millions of people, the threat of terrorism, or of weapons
of mass destruction, is remote compared to the daily threat of
poverty, hunger, unsafe water, environmental degradation and disease.
We have come to a decisive moment in history." Kofi Annan
=========================
"The developed nations of the world cannot remain secure islands of
prosperity in a seething sea of poverty. The storm is rising against
the privileged minority of the earth, from which there is no shelter
in isolation and armament. The storm will not abate until a just
distribution of the fruits of the earth enables men everywhere to live
in dignity and human decency."
Martin Luther King, Jr
=========================
"The day that hunger is eradicated from the earth there will be the
greatest
spiritual explosion the world has ever known. Humanity cannot imagine
the
joy that will burst into the world on the day of that great
revolution."
Federico
Garcia Lorca
We cannot move on if we are entrapped in structures of economic or
cultural privilege. Sharing, especially in a world where most live at
or below the edge of misery, is as important and relevant as
disarmament; in fact, sharing the resources of the earth is inseparable
from the renunciation of war and violence. On such... ground, the
architecture of a new world order based on human unity will be easy to
conceive and enact." (Richard Falk, Milbank Professor of International
Law and Practice at Princeton)
"Without sharing there can be no justice;
without justice there can be no peace;
without peace there can be no future."
The World Teacher
http://www.share-international.org
"...mankind [will advance] into a civilization and a state of
consciousness in which right human relations and worldwide
cooperation for the good of all will be the universal keynote."
Djwhal Khul
Archived from group: alt>teachers |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
know_buddee
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 3:40 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
selfishly fight against this will fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beach Runner
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:51 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
> This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
> from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
> selfishly fight against this will fail.
>
Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great if
it were true, but I see no indications of such. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
letoured
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:14 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
In , on 02/07/2005
at 04:51 PM, Beach Runner said:
>know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
>> This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
>> from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
>> selfishly fight against this will fail.
>>
>Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
>destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great if
>it were true, but I see no indications of such.
How ironic; A troll without a clue in an education group. Did we fail
you, or was it your drug use that caused your mental problem? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beach Runner
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:50 am Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> In , on 02/07/2005
> at 04:51 PM, Beach Runner said:
>
>
>
>
>>know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
>>>from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
>>>selfishly fight against this will fail.
>>>
>
>
>>Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
>>destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great if
>>it were true, but I see no indications of such.
>
>
>
> How ironic; A troll without a clue in an education group. Did we fail
> you, or was it your drug use that caused your mental problem?
Hardly. I was a teacher for many years, and then worked in the computer
field for many years. I still do. I also teach. I'm no troll.
But I'm watching the outsourcing of much of America's technology. Many
great people have lost their jobs, replaced with people in India making
$5K a year. I used to teach in NY, and even South Dakota. In fact, I
taught in the poorest county of the US. Naturally, since I did a good
job and had techie skills they pulled me out of the classroom to do
techie work, write grants, and such.
I've never lost my enthusiasm and interest in education. I think most of
education is horrible, boring, and anti-thinking. I'm one of those
radicals that think that when you tell a young child not to talk, you
are telling them not to think.
I think education should emphasize music, the arts, creativity, as
opposed to this absurd trend of standardized testing. Check out some
research on MRIs on the brains of young music students. But instead
they spend their money on standardized tests.
Yes, parents are a tremendous factor. If a parent reads to a child, I
think that alone is critical.
I'm sure because of events I will teach again. That was why I started
following this group. A troll? Hardly. My point is quite valid.
This nation went from being the most productive nation in the world to
what? Try buying anything made in America. Now you're watching a brain
drain. GE has Patent Lawyers in India doing their patent law and
getting reviewed in the US. MRI's are being emailed to India to be
analyzed.
Meanwhile teachers live close to the poverty level, good ones working
incredibly hard. With little respect.
The day I left teaching and went to work in college people treated what
I had to say with far greater importance. That is very sad.
That's your troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beach Runner
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:20 am Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Oh yes, even while not a full time teacher, I've been teaching private
music lessons for fun and profit.
Beach Runner wrote:
>
>
> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>
>> In , on 02/07/2005
>> at 04:51 PM, Beach Runner said:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
>>>> from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
>>>> selfishly fight against this will fail.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>> Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
>>> destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great
>>> if it were true, but I see no indications of such.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> How ironic; A troll without a clue in an education group. Did we fail
>> you, or was it your drug use that caused your mental problem?
>
> Hardly. I was a teacher for many years, and then worked in the computer
> field for many years. I still do. I also teach. I'm no troll.
>
> But I'm watching the outsourcing of much of America's technology. Many
> great people have lost their jobs, replaced with people in India making
> $5K a year. I used to teach in NY, and even South Dakota. In fact, I
> taught in the poorest county of the US. Naturally, since I did a good
> job and had techie skills they pulled me out of the classroom to do
> techie work, write grants, and such.
>
> I've never lost my enthusiasm and interest in education. I think most of
> education is horrible, boring, and anti-thinking. I'm one of those
> radicals that think that when you tell a young child not to talk, you
> are telling them not to think.
>
> I think education should emphasize music, the arts, creativity, as
> opposed to this absurd trend of standardized testing. Check out some
> research on MRIs on the brains of young music students. But instead
> they spend their money on standardized tests.
>
> Yes, parents are a tremendous factor. If a parent reads to a child, I
> think that alone is critical.
>
> I'm sure because of events I will teach again. That was why I started
> following this group. A troll? Hardly. My point is quite valid.
>
> This nation went from being the most productive nation in the world to
> what? Try buying anything made in America. Now you're watching a brain
> drain. GE has Patent Lawyers in India doing their patent law and
> getting reviewed in the US. MRI's are being emailed to India to be
> analyzed.
>
> Meanwhile teachers live close to the poverty level, good ones working
> incredibly hard. With little respect.
>
> The day I left teaching and went to work in college people treated what
> I had to say with far greater importance. That is very sad.
>
> That's your troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
letoured
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:06 am Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
My mistake. I mis-read who was saying what in your post. I agree with
you that the bush administration and neo-cons are out to destroy the
middle class.
Here is another article on the subject:
Middle class hurt by Bush's values
By Howard Dean
Ever since the purveyors of conventional wisdom pronounced that the last
election was about moral values, the beltway pundits have been endlessly
engaged in trying to divine What It All Means. After all, President Bush
presented himself as the embodiment of compassion and American values, and
has told us that the election was his accountability moment - proof
positive that the American people support his policy priorities.
The simple truth is, however, that it did not take an election to convince
us that the American people are a deeply moral people. When we see
children pool their pennies to help tsunami victims, or a community unite
to pay for a neighbor's transplant operation - that is all the evidence of
compassion we need.
With the State of the Union address and the annual budget submission,
President Bush will have his opportunity to unveil the most tangible
statements of his priorities and values. These two documents are a
distillation of hundreds of choices made and priorities ordered. It will
be interesting to see what he chooses.
Because in the course of making thousands of decisions that impact the
real lives of Americans, one decision that the president made has impacted
virtually all others, and that was the decision to completely change the
structure of our economy by dramatically shifting the tax burden from
corporate interests and wealthiest individuals squarely onto the middle
class. That decision has put our nation in a financial straightjacket for
generations to come.
And now the president suggests that the deficits created by his policies
must be reduced by cutting the domestic budget, while his tax policies
remain off limits. But make no mistake - it is the middle class that will
feel the impact of George Bush's economic restructuring the most. While
corporations have historically been responsible for over 20 percent of the
tax burden, today they are paying just over 7 percent. Combined with tax
breaks for the wealthy, we are left with an economy in which the middle
class is shouldering a staggering load of the burden.
Ironically, rather than funding the services most of us rely on, taxes
paid by the middle class are going directly into the pockets of the
wealthy in the form of tax breaks. And most working families have much
more to contend with than taxes. Many employers can no longer provide
health insurance; our parents can no longer depend on nutritious meals
delivered to their homes; Head Start cannot accommodate enough deserving
children; and students know that the president's much-touted $100 increase
per year in Pell Grants will not put college within their reach.
The president has made his choices, and no matter how drastic the change
in circumstance - be it war or recession or his proclaimed "crisis" in
Social Security - he refuses to revisit those decisions. Yet - as need
permeates the middle class and not just the destitute - it is hard to
believe that the American people favor more corporate handouts and endless
tax cuts. And whether they live in red states or blue states, whether they
worship in churches or temples or not at all, Americans do not want to see
their neighbors bankrupted by emergency medical care or watch military
families barely scrape by on meager salaries augmented by food stamps.
Fairness, after all, is a cornerstone American value.
So over the coming days, all Americans should be watching what the
president does, not just what he says. Will we have more of the same -
eloquent words masking a distorted economic system - or will the president
at long last put his money where his mouth is? The stakes couldn't be
higher.
In , on 02/08/2005
at 11:50 PM, Beach Runner said:
>letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>> In , on 02/07/2005
>> at 04:51 PM, Beach Runner said:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
>>>>from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
>>>>selfishly fight against this will fail.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
>>>destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great if
>>>it were true, but I see no indications of such.
>>
>>
>>
>> How ironic; A troll without a clue in an education group. Did we fail
>> you, or was it your drug use that caused your mental problem?
>Hardly. I was a teacher for many years, and then worked in the computer
>field for many years. I still do. I also teach. I'm no troll.
>But I'm watching the outsourcing of much of America's technology. Many
>great people have lost their jobs, replaced with people in India making
>$5K a year. I used to teach in NY, and even South Dakota. In fact, I
>taught in the poorest county of the US. Naturally, since I did a good
>job and had techie skills they pulled me out of the classroom to do
>techie work, write grants, and such.
>I've never lost my enthusiasm and interest in education. I think most of
>education is horrible, boring, and anti-thinking. I'm one of those
>radicals that think that when you tell a young child not to talk, you
>are telling them not to think.
>I think education should emphasize music, the arts, creativity, as
>opposed to this absurd trend of standardized testing. Check out some
>research on MRIs on the brains of young music students. But instead
>they spend their money on standardized tests.
>Yes, parents are a tremendous factor. If a parent reads to a child, I
>think that alone is critical.
>I'm sure because of events I will teach again. That was why I started
>following this group. A troll? Hardly. My point is quite valid.
>This nation went from being the most productive nation in the world to
>what? Try buying anything made in America. Now you're watching a brain
>drain. GE has Patent Lawyers in India doing their patent law and
>getting reviewed in the US. MRI's are being emailed to India to be
>analyzed.
>Meanwhile teachers live close to the poverty level, good ones working
>incredibly hard. With little respect.
>The day I left teaching and went to work in college people treated what
>I had to say with far greater importance. That is very sad.
>That's your troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kerri
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:29 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Beach Runner wrote:
>
>
> know_buddee@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> This generation will be the one that wipes the ugly face of poverty
>> from the face of the earth. Those who help will be blessed. Those who
>> selfishly fight against this will fail.
>>
>
> Do you believe this? In this nation alone the middle class is being
> destroyed with outsourcing to third world nations. It would be great if
> it were true, but I see no indications of such.
I do not believe this statement. However, I do think it would be
wonderful if this generation could help those in poverty. We are a
wealthy nation that measures success with money. Unfortunately, there
are many people in need and the wealth that we do possess is not enough
to wipe poverty from this earth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beach Runner
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:09 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Lee wrote:
> letoured@nospam.net said:
>
>>In , on 02/10/2005
>> at 10:34 PM, Julnar said:
>
>
>>>I don't think it-- I know it. They voted this man in, twice. The people
>>>want him. If they aren't smart enough to know that they are not voting
>>>in their own interests, they deserve what they get. If this country
>>>sinks itself, it is 100% the fault of "the people".
>
>
>>A 51% plurality is not "the people."
>
>
> That's a majority, though, not just a plurality. And it's not really relevant
> when discussing Presidential elections, since they're selected by the States,
> not the people.
There's enough controversy on the fact that the touch screens were
heavily in Bush's favor with no records, to question the numbers.
Secondly, there are numerous voter irregularities to question the results.
>
> Another consideration is that we had little effective choice for President.
> Once again, we were left to choose the one who seemed likely to do the least
> damage to the nation.
>
I agree Kerry should have been much much more aggressive in his
campaign,
he should have shoved Bush's mistakes down his throat. We were SURE to
find weapons of mass destruction, and that the war was OVER. Now we are
suspending privacy laws and environmental regulations.
And if one teacher thinks TESTING is the answer to America's educational
problems, than they should lean to read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Erich
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 28
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:52 am Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
In article , Lee
wrote:
> Beach Runner said:
>
> >That's a great point. I at first supported Bush going to Iraq. They
> >were about to make nuclear weapons. I know I was lied to. So I realize
> >that I made a mistake supporting the war in Iraq.
>
> If you believed that Iraq was about to make nuclear weapons, it
> wasn't because you were lied to, it was because you don't know
> how to read a newspaper.
>
> Both you and Kerry had access to enough information to know that
> the reason for the war was because otherwise Iraq would have WMD
> within a few years, after the sanctions had completely deteriorated,
> and after we had lost our bases in the region, not because of what
> they had at that time or were just about to have.
Then why did we hear all these scary words from the Bush administration
in the run up to the Iraq war?
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, August 26 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world."
- Ari Fleischer, December 2 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."
- Ari Fleischer, January 9 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass
destruction, is determined to make more."
- Colin Powell, February 5 2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes."
- Ari Fleischer, March 21 2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons
of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be
identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who
guard them."
- Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22 2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad."
- Donald Rumsfeld, March 30 2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials,
a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass
destruction will be found."
- Ari Fleischer, April 10 2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need . .
.. so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that
country."
- Donald Rumsfeld, April 25 2003
"I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had
weapons of mass destruction."
- Colin Powell, May 4 2003
... Erich |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob LeChevalier
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 6131
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Lee wrote:
>Erich said:
>>
>>In article ,
>> Lee wrote:
>
>>> Certainly they should. Just not whenever popular opinion changes.
>>
>>How about giving us an example to back up your claim?
>
>During the campaign I could have provided several, I'm not going to
>go back and research it again. A few examples off the top of my
>head are voting for fuel cell vehicle program, then criticizing it
>as a waste of money,
Congressmen often are put in the position of voting for bills that
they may find flaws. This is not an example of changing his opinion
based on popular opinion, unless you can show that popular opinion
changed from being pro-fuel-cell to anti (most of the public doesn't
give a damn).
>telling some audiences that the only problem
>with NCLB is that it doesn't go far enough and telling another that
>it goes too far.
That is also true. It doesn't go far enough in some aspects, and it
goes too far in others.
>Then there's the fact that he supported the war, and then opposed it,
Until it was realized that Bush was lying about WMD, many people
supported the war. Changing ones mind on this is not a bad thing.
>told some audiences that he would bring the
>troops home and told others that they would stay the course for as
>long as it takes.
Also true. Bush says the same thing. He will stay the course as long
as it takes, but eventually he thinks all the troops will come home.
I don't think Kerry ever asserted support for an immediate pullout.
>If Kerry's early support for the war was only based on believing
>the President when he said that there were WMD, then that's just
>another reason to question his qualifications to lead. He should
>have been looking at the available evidence, not going along with
>the mob.
Unfortunately, the President had control over the evidence.
>In the same vein of telling lies the people want to hear, we
>could go on to promises that Kerry made that sounded good, but
>were, in fact, obviously beyond the power of the Presidency, such
>as stopping jobs from going overseas and turning the economy back
>to the 1990's.
Worthy goals, and less unrealistic than Bush's.
I don't claim that Kerry was God's gift to the country, but the
arguments against him were at least as good used against Bush.
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Erich
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 28
|
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:19 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
In article ,
Lee wrote:
> Erich said:
> >
> >In article , Lee
> >wrote:
>
> >> Both you and Kerry had access to enough information to know that
> >> the reason for the war was because otherwise Iraq would have WMD
> >> within a few years, after the sanctions had completely deteriorated,
> >> and after we had lost our bases in the region, not because of what
> >> they had at that time or were just about to have.
> >
> >Then why did we hear all these scary words from the Bush administration
> >in the run up to the Iraq war?
> >...
>
> You should have read the rest of the post before responding:
>
> One of Bush's many faults is his apparent inability to admit to
> mistakes. One such mistake was to explain the war in terms of
> existing WMD. He seemed to believe that the real reasons were
> too complex for the public to grasp (which may well be true).
In other words, you are in favor of lying when the truth is too
complicated to explain to the common man?
... Erich |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beach Runner
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:00 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Lee wrote:
> Erich said:
>
>>In article ,
>>Lee wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Erich said:
>>>
>>>>In article , Lee
>>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Both you and Kerry had access to enough information to know that
>>>>>the reason for the war was because otherwise Iraq would have WMD
>>>>>within a few years, after the sanctions had completely deteriorated,
>>>>>and after we had lost our bases in the region, not because of what
>>>>>they had at that time or were just about to have.
>>>>
>>>>Then why did we hear all these scary words from the Bush administration
>>>>in the run up to the Iraq war?
>>>>...
>>>
>>>You should have read the rest of the post before responding:
>>>
>>> One of Bush's many faults is his apparent inability to admit to
>>> mistakes. One such mistake was to explain the war in terms of
>>> existing WMD. He seemed to believe that the real reasons were
>>> too complex for the public to grasp (which may well be true).
>>
>>In other words, you are in favor of lying when the truth is too
>>complicated to explain to the common man?
>
>
> Do you not understand the meaning of "One such mistake"? or is it
> simply that, because we disagree on some points, you assume that I support
> everything that you oppose.
One mistake. He said the war was over, yet we are in a crag mire. He has
INCREASED hatred of Americans and made us less safe.
That aside from the fact that he has rolled back environmental
regulations, is losing jobs to foreign nations at a devastating rate,
and regardless of what people say. The IRS says people are making much
less money. The middle class is shrinking. Civil rights are being lost.
His was in Iraq was based on a lie, and now has done nothing but harm
the people of the US. It has further destabilized the region. It has
given Bin Laden (wanted, dead or alive) tremendous recruiting power.
The US is failing. Does anyone think testing will improve our schools?
>
> That's rather mindless, isn't it?
> |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob LeChevalier
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 6131
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:31 pm Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Lee wrote:
>Bob LeChevalier said:
>>>>In article ,
>>>> Lee wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Certainly they should. Just not whenever popular opinion changes.
>>>>
>>>>How about giving us an example to back up your claim?
>>>
>>>During the campaign I could have provided several, I'm not going to
>>>go back and research it again. A few examples off the top of my
>>>head are voting for fuel cell vehicle program, then criticizing it
>>>as a waste of money,
>>
>>Congressmen often are put in the position of voting for bills that
>>they may find flaws. This is not an example of changing his opinion
>>based on popular opinion, unless you can show that popular opinion
>>changed from being pro-fuel-cell to anti (most of the public doesn't
>>give a damn).
>
>This particular case was one in which he voted for the bill as a popular
>environmental issue, but later criticized it as a waste of federal budget.
>He managed to play both sides of it without any change in popular opinion.
Therefore it is not evidence for your claim that he changed his mind
whenever public opinion changes.
>>>telling some audiences that the only problem
>>>with NCLB is that it doesn't go far enough and telling another that
>>>it goes too far.
>>
>>That is also true. It doesn't go far enough in some aspects, and it
>>goes too far in others.
>
>That would be fine if he presented it that way.
So you fault his presentation of what he often called "nuanced"
issues, and what any sane person calls "seeing shades of gray where
others think that issues are black and white".
>What he did was to give two
>different audiences two completely different impressions of his own view.
That sounds like skillful politicking. But the issue is not what
audiences thought, but whether his views were consistent or changed
for sound reasons.
>>>Then there's the fact that he supported the war, and then opposed it,
>>
>>Until it was realized that Bush was lying about WMD, many people
>>supported the war. Changing ones mind on this is not a bad thing.
>
>As a responsible Congressman, he certainly knew what the real issues were.
Really? What about being elected to Congress makes one omniscient?
How many in Congress knew about the Nixon tapes before they came out,
for example - and that one wasn't even classified information, whereas
most of the intelligence stuff is hidden under layers of
classification.
>WMD
>was just an out that Bush presented to allow the weaker members of Congress to
>support the issue and be able to later claim that they were deceived when the
>war inevitably became unpopular.
It was also the reason he presented to the international community.
>Bad luck that Kerry was one of the weak.
If believing that presidents should tell the truth about issues of
national security is "weakness", we need more of it.
>>>told some audiences that he would bring the
>>>troops home and told others that they would stay the course for as
>>>long as it takes.
>>
>>Also true. Bush says the same thing. He will stay the course as long
>>as it takes, but eventually he thinks all the troops will come home.
>>I don't think Kerry ever asserted support for an immediate pullout.
>
>Again, he gave the impression that this was his intent, without stating it,
In other words, no one can in fact point to anything he said that
asserted this, and you've bought into the lies of his opponents as a
lot of Americans did.
>In the weeks before the election, the single biggest reason that I
>heard for supporting Kerry, both personally and in the media, was that the
>troops should come home immediately.
The biggest reason I heard was that Bush was a liar who would say
anything to get his way politically.
>>>If Kerry's early support for the war was only based on believing
>>>the President when he said that there were WMD, then that's just
>>>another reason to question his qualifications to lead. He should
>>>have been looking at the available evidence, not going along with
>>>the mob.
>>
>>Unfortunately, the President had control over the evidence.
>
>With all of the resources of a long-term Senator,
which are (especially an opposition party Senator)?
>he based his decision entirely
>on the fact that the President said that he had secret evidence?
When the chips are down, that really is the only choice. The
President controlled the evidence.
>While I don't have a lot of respect for Kerry, I am at least willing to believe
>that he based his decision on all of the available information.
There was no available information, and indeed there still isn't much
available information.
>Even
>discounting whatever evidence the administration claimed to have, there was
>compelling evidence that Saddam had retained some of his known stockpiles of
>chemical weapons.
There was in fact no evidence at all. Saddam was just an effective
politician that was skilled at making himself look more successful
than he was, just as Bush is. For Saddam, his prestige in the Arab
world depended on making himself look like he pulling something on the
Americans, and he succeeded, aided by the Iranians, whose goals
required that we build up our fear of Saddam to the point that we
would fight and win the war for them that they lost in the 80s.
>>>In the same vein of telling lies the people want to hear, we
>>>could go on to promises that Kerry made that sounded good, but
>>>were, in fact, obviously beyond the power of the Presidency, such
>>>as stopping jobs from going overseas and turning the economy back
>>>to the 1990's.
>>
>>Worthy goals, and less unrealistic than Bush's.
>
>Being "worthy" means nothing, since they are completely unrealistic. Miss
>America espouses worthy goals. I expect more from a Presidential candidate.
Bush supports NCLB, wherein all children will be above average in 10
years (or else).
>And, to his shame, he certainly knew that these goals were unattainable.
>If he really had a plan to "stop the flow of jobs overseas", why haven't we
>heard it from the floor of the Senate?
Because he is a minority party Senator, and there is no point in the
minority party doing anything that will benefit the majority party,
including providing ideas and solutions.
>Is he spiteful, and unwilling to share his plan with an electorate that rejected him?
No. He is a smart politician and unwilling to share his ideas with
the party that defeated him, knowing that they will either defeat his
proposals, or steal enough of them for their own proposals and claim
the solution for themselves.
You must be incredibly naive to think that the Democrats are going to
do ANYTHING to aid the majority party for the next two years.
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob LeChevalier
Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 6131
|
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2005 1:02 am Post subject: Re: 'Make Poverty History' @ G7 + Nelson Mandela |
|
|
Lee wrote:
>>>>>Then there's the fact that he supported the war, and then opposed it,
>>>>
>>>>Until it was realized that Bush was lying about WMD, many people
>>>>supported the war. Changing ones mind on this is not a bad thing.
>>>
>>>As a responsible Congressman, he certainly knew what the real issues were.
>>
>>Really? What about being elected to Congress makes one omniscient?
>
>That's rather silly. You didn't need to be omniscient in the pre-war
>months to know what was going on. Are you really supporting the idea
>that Congress should use the President as their sole source of information?
I merely respect the idea that the only REAL source of information as
to what was going on was the American intelligence community, which is
under the control of the President.
>>>>Also true. Bush says the same thing. He will stay the course as long
>>>>as it takes, but eventually he thinks all the troops will come home.
>>>>I don't think Kerry ever asserted support for an immediate pullout.
>>>
>>>Again, he gave the impression that this was his intent, without stating it,
>>
>>In other words, no one can in fact point to anything he said that
>>asserted this, and you've bought into the lies of his opponents as a
>>lot of Americans did.
>
>No, I didn't buy into any such thing. I'm stating the fact that many
>American voters bought into the impression that Kerry wanted to bring
>the troops home.
Mostly because the Bush people had really skillful manipulators who
twisted everything Kerry said in ways that suited their agenda.
>>The biggest reason I heard was that Bush was a liar who would say
>>anything to get his way politically.
>
>The fact that they based their vote on hating Bush, rather than about
>anything positive about Kerry, shows how badly the system is broken.
Perhaps.
>>>>Unfortunately, the President had control over the evidence.
>>>
>>>With all of the resources of a long-term Senator,
>>
>>which are (especially an opposition party Senator)?
>
>Staff of researchers.
Who have access to what relevant data?
Remember that we are talking about a claim that our intelligence
agencies had proof that Saddam had WMD. NO ONE except the
intelligence agencies and their presumably secret sources would have
knowledge of whether that proof was valid. There are NO OTHER
SOURCES.
>Access to classified reports.
Produced by the agencies directed by the President.
>All he really had to do was read the news summaries.
Which said what, precisely, that could have indicated that Bush had no
evidence of WMD, much less proof?
>>>he based his decision entirely
>>>on the fact that the President said that he had secret evidence?
>>
>>When the chips are down, that really is the only choice. The
>>President controlled the evidence.
>
>No, he only controlled *some* of the evidence.
What other evidence exists as to whether our intelligence agencies had
proof that Saddam had WMD or not?
>>>While I don't have a lot of respect for Kerry, I am at least willing to believe
>>>that he based his decision on all of the available information.
>>
>>There was no available information, and indeed there still isn't much
>>available information.
>
>There was, and continues to be lots of information. You're confusing
>"information" with "proven facts".
Facts are the only sort of information that should matter.
>>>Even
>>>discounting whatever evidence the administration claimed to have, there was
>>>compelling evidence that Saddam had retained some of his known stockpiles of
>>>chemical weapons.
>>
>>There was in fact no evidence at all. Saddam was just an effective
>>politician that was skilled at making himself look more successful
>>than he was, just as Bush is. For Saddam, his prestige in the Arab
>>world depended on making himself look like he pulling something on the
>>Americans, and he succeeded, aided by the Iranians, whose goals
>>required that we build up our fear of Saddam to the point that we
>>would fight and win the war for them that they lost in the 80s.
>
>Even if what you say is true, his act of "making himself look more
>successful.." was evidence. False evidence, but evidence, nonetheless.
"False evidence" is not evidence. It is lies.
>Other evidence included the fact that it was known with certainty that
>he had had stockpiles,
At this point, I'm not sure I even believe that.
>and that there was no evidence that he had destroyed
>them. Far from conclusive, but evidence. Then there was the fact that he
>repeatedly barred UN inspectors from access to sites until he had had time to
>move truckloads of *something* out of them. Again, far from conclusive, but
>certainly evidence. Then there were reports from people who were in a position
>to know. False reports as it turns out, but again, the fact that we can look
>back now and see that the evidence was false does *not* mean that it wasn't
>legitimately considered to be evidence at the time.
Well, you pointed out a lot of so-called "evidence" that Kerry might
use as an excuse for believing Bush, but where is the evidence that
can be used for Kerry to disbelieve Bush. If the only "evidence"
Kerry had is the same propaganda that Bush fed the American people,
then he did not in fact have any basis to make an independent
judgement contrary to Bush. Indeed, my contention is that the ONLY
way one could make a judgement contrary to Bush would have been to
have independent access to the intelligence community that KNEW that
they were lacking evidence.
>>>>Worthy goals, and less unrealistic than Bush's.
>>>
>>>Being "worthy" means nothing, since they are completely unrealistic. Miss
>>>America espouses worthy goals. I expect more from a Presidential candidate.
>>
>>Bush supports NCLB, wherein all children will be above average in 10
>>years (or else).
>
>I don't think it says that. Perhaps you bought into a lie?
The law requires that each year an increasing percentage of kids in
each category measured has to meet state standards, with 100% of all
kids meeting those standards in 10 years, or be reconstituted, or the
state loses federal education funding. The standards are such that in
most states fewer than half the students met the standards when NCLB
started, so therefore the law is requiring all students, including
special ed students and mentally retarded students to be above the
average of the time.
>>Because he is a minority party Senator, and there is no point in the
>>minority party doing anything that will benefit the majority party,
>>including providing ideas and solutions.
>
>If he's more concerned with the welfare of his Party than the welfare of the
>American worker, he doesn't belong in Congress, let alone the Presidency.
Then probably most people who have served in office were unfit. I
don't expect ANY minority party member to cooperate in the slightest
with the Bushies after the last election. They've proven that nothing
is beneath them in the interest of promoting the Republican agenda.
And maintaining the strength of their party right now is probably the
most important long term goal for their concept of how to help the
"American worker", since Bush has only 4 more years and then someone
else has a chance, and the Democrats probably correctly believe that
any aid they give the Republicans will be used to gain even firmer
control and thus do long term damage to the "American worker".
I am an independent, and believe that party should not matter myself.
But when one party gets aggressive in the pursuit of party interests,
then the other party has to do so as well, or get crushed and lose any
hope at all that they might have for their concept of what the country
needs.
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
| Related Topics: | RE lesson help - cut out and make model of a church I am a Geography teacher, teaching Humanities. I have seen a cut out, colour and make model of a church used by RE teachers at a couple of my past schools. Does anybody have a book that they could scan a template sheet of this from pl
Interesting Web Site: Math - Things you can make with your k
Journalists make history exposing Nazis Tom Brokaw, anchor and managing editor of the top-rated "NBC Nightly News," and Rex Curry, lawyer and libertarian commentator, are the first journalists honored for exposing the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" to the public in Google News' sear
What ought we to learn from history? History was never a subject I learned well. I could benefit from everyone's help. What ought we to learn from history, (along with the facts, of course)? In science class, we learn the scientific method: discovery through observation and
Resource: Apple II History Good Morning! Welcome to the Apple II History! The core of information presented here was originally a series of articles printed in the early 1990's in the Metro Apple Computer Hobbyists (MACH) User Group Newsletter in Omaha, Ne |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|