The News We Kept to Ourselves


sorabji.com: Why did you do it?: The News We Kept to Ourselves
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By spunkyDingo on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 02:05 pm:

    Op Ed In NY Times
    By CNN'S Chief EASON JORDAN.

    Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff.
    For example, in the mid-1990's one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government's ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency's Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk.
    Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers.
    We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein's eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails).
    Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan's monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman's rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed.
    I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us.
    Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad.
    Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family's home.
    I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely.

    Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN.


By patrick on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 02:28 pm:

    oh fer fucksake..fuck off Eason.

    what a dick.


    Cash it in Eason cash it in.


    You know there are some countries in Africa that have horrid leaders in power but nothing more than dirt for natural resources, but will we be "liberating" them soon?

    do me a favor, keep the back patting to yourself. yeah its all rounded out nicely, oh how sweet, Iraqi children giving flowers to US soldiers....never mind the reasons were shotty, inconsistant and half-truths. Nevermind this has established a terribly dangerous precident in US and world history

    Just keep the gloating in your ass where it belongs because anyone with a half brain knows this whole war was never about "liberation", it just pans out this is the perfect outcome and dickheads like Rummy and Rice and cockmasters like the CNN stooge can now pour out the horror stories and proceed to rant about how god damn great America is because we "liberated" a nation from the grips of a demon.




    on a sidenote

    Im listening to Rumsfeld bitchslap the news media for perpetuating the scene of chaos in Iraq with all the looters because of a few images of said looting yet i hear no one bitchslapping him back that because we see some Iraqi's cheering and a some Iraqis kissing pictures of Bush that the country on the whole is totally thrilled with our "liberation".




By kazoo on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 02:33 pm:


By Rowlf on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 04:56 pm:

    So the news is saying that the flag wiped in Saddams face came from the Pentagon when it was hit on 9/11

    for real? I'm having a hard time believing thats true, they just kept it in their tank? and that tank happened to be in Baghdad at that moment? If so, it was obviously kept there for such a scene to take place, which if you ask me kinda puts a damper on the moment... turning something positive (happy Iraqis in the streets) into a negative (propaganda)... geez, they've been waiting so fucking long, let them have their moment.


By wisper on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 06:16 pm:

    man, every time i hear about Pakistan, all i can think of is that scene towards the end of Ghandi where the evil fuckwad comes out of the meeting and tells him that the new free India will be divided into 2- modern India and Pakistan.
    A whole country can be created like a slap in the face to the life's work and dreams of the most kind and godly human to ever live.
    And you go "oh, THAT'S how all this bullshit started."
    And then (if you're me) you cry for 3 days straight.

    Can any country be created without evil intentions?

    Pakistan can go fuck themselves.




    i don't mean that at all.
    frustration.


By spunkydingo on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 07:23 pm:

    My friend Mohammad Khattak is from Pakistan. He moved here 15 years ago and had served as an Airborn Ranger for the US Army. He now holds a higher security clearance then I do, and I cannot know what he does.
    You know what he says is this nations biggest threat to it's national security.
    Freedom.


By trace on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 07:25 pm:

    By the way, he refuses to allow anyone to call him a Pakistani-American.
    He says he is an American from Pakistan.


By Rowlf on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 07:42 pm:

    Thats funny he said that.

    But thats vague.

    Does he mean 'freedom' as in

    "we have too much freedom, so much it makes everyone hate us, jealous, wanting to take us out"

    or

    "if we have more freedom the government loses control of us, we are a threat to them"

    he said:
    "He says he is an American from Pakistan"

    remember when Bush called them all "Pakis" and he had no idea thats a racial slur?


By Antigone on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 07:54 pm:

    "You know what he says is this nations biggest threat to it's national security.
    Freedom."

    Kewl. Do we get to give away our freedom now just because your Pakistani friend says we should? Maybe we should model our government after the wonderful one in Pakistan. Military dictatorship, anyone?

    Wait a sec. Didn't we just overthrow one of those?

    Well, you know what them radical liberals in New Hampshire say: Live free or die.




By spunkydingo on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 08:15 pm:

    What is your definition of freedom?


By patrick on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 00:45 am:

    did he take a bullet or two to become a citizen after he joined the military?

    i love the fact that conservative fuckwits get all uppity about illegals takin jobs but seem awfully quiet when illegals take bullets for their wars.










    ok. that might be a bit sensational, but my angst registers the same.


By Antigone on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 01:56 pm:

    What's his definition of freedom?

    You're the one talking about taking something away. You define first. Thems the rules.


By wisper on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 05:18 pm:

    freedom-shmeedom.
    i can name at least 5 countries that are just as (if not more) free than the USA.
    Somebody should slap a map and a world almanac in front of all the poor starry-eyed immigrants.


    All that "terrorism = jealousy" trip is just crap, which i never understand.
    What's up with that?


By Rowlf on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 06:13 pm:

    i think some Americans (for that matter, North Americans and Europeans) cant understand the idea that some cultures could live happy lives without gadgets or guns.

    I always hated the 'jealousy' thing... did people not think that *ahem* they've been told by THEIR media their whole lives that America is Satan? Thats why they hate, they dont know any better...
    and besides, the "America is Satan" argument isnt exactly baseless... the US is the Las Vegas of the world...


By patrick on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 06:20 pm:

    you know whats up with that lady.

    playing to who you are speaking with.

    present a simple equation of "terrorism stems from jealousy of our free lives" makes it easy to support wars with vague definitions. people are generally stupid wisper, you know this. 2/3 of the American public is too stupid to ask how we went from weapons of mass destruction destroyers to liberators because its all to easy to accept that as the plan all along. hey, we scathed by with a 25 day war, a hundred or so dead. all is well.

    what most americans don't realize, because of their tunnel vision and general idiocy is that by many standards world over, we arent viewed as the "free" society we like to boast, but rather religiously fundamental hedonists with little to no core values.

    a great example is the fact we sit comfortbly in a list of execution-practicing states right next to Iran and China. support for death sentences stems from the fundamental idea of eye for an eye, a concept most idiotic americans support.


By Rowlf on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 06:30 pm:

    "religiously fundamental hedonists with little to no core values. "

    I prefer to think of the US as an entertainment industry with a lot of bombs.

    Or simply: Explosion Land

    So if you want to get a map out and simplify your globe, between "Ice Socialists" and "Taco Villa" put "Explosion Land"

    Dont bother coming up with something for the Middle East. Just draw a treasure chest with a big X and you're done.



By wisper on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 06:38 pm:

    "because of their tunnel vision and general idiocy is that by many standards world over, we arent viewed as the "free" society we like to boast"

    i dunno, the whole thing IMHO just always smacked of the highschool bullshit i went through with the jocks.
    The people who thought we hated them because they were good at hockey and had nice cars, hot girlfriends and were popular.

    HELLO! we hate you because you're an ignorant, illeterate fuck who takes joy in beating anyone different than you and mocking the rest. Who cares about your fuckin batting average, bitch? YOU CANT READ, and daddy pays for your credit card?


By Rowlf on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 06:47 pm:

    You hated jocks? Thats no good.

    Who's gonna pump your gas? Who's gonna buy Matchbox 20 albums? Who will let the dogs out?

    Who? Who? Who?











    Save the jocks. Those trophy wives ain't gonna beat themselves!


By sickspunk on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 08:33 pm:

    I am absolutely sick to my stomach.
    I have never seen so much United States bashing in my life.


By dave. on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 09:29 pm:

    you want a maalox?


By patrick on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 10:10 pm:

    hey dave, this is a free nation. the boy has options. tums, pepcid, that nasty pink shit.

    exercise your freedom spunk, enjoy your choice of tummy meds.


By Rowlf on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 10:30 pm:

    "I have never seen so much United States bashing in my life. "

    wow, confined within this one thread is more United States bashing than you've seen in your LIFE? No exaggerating?

    Wow, go team! Hi five! WOOT! Call Guinness!



By wisper on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 10:39 pm:

    "United States bashing"
    not really. It's more anti-people than anti-american, specifically.

    It also depends on your definition of "America", or what that means to you.
    What is anti-american? is America just the people who live within the borders, right or wrong, no matter what they think as long as they're a citizen?
    Is it just a flag?
    Is it a core set of values that everyone should have?
    Is it the dreams that the country was founded on?


By jack on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 11:09 am:

    "anti-people"?

    smug superiority is anti-people?

    a good portion of this thread is people ascribing attitudes and characteristics to others for the purpose of feeling superior to them.

    yes, that does sound like adolescence, doesn't it?




By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 11:17 am:

    The United States is a collection of nations.
    It is a collection of religions and beliefs.
    It is a federal constitutional republic with a strong tradition of democracy.

    This nation used to believe that the good of the one person came before the good of the collective population.
    This nation at one time understood that putting the rights of any group will reduce the rights of the individual.

    It is also a nation that made the mistake of turning it's head while hitler marched across europe and murdered millions.
    It took a bombing to wake it up.
    Well guess what? We had another bombing.
    We ignored the first WTC Bombing, Lockerbee, TWA 800, the Cole, Kohbar, Beruit, etc etc etc.


    We have watched so many kill each other in the middle east.
    The Taliban
    Ba'ath Party
    Hamas
    Hezbolla
    IDF
    Over What?
    Religion in most cases.
    The fact that islamic fundamentalists hate the United States stems from our culture being imported into their region.
    The culture is the belief that man, not some god or prophet or book or statue chooses our destiny.

    Who is going to stop this?
    The UN? EU? EAU?


By dave. on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 11:36 am:

    oh! oh! me me me me me! me!

    america's going to stop this!!!


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 00:47 am:

    "a good portion of this thread is people ascribing attitudes and characteristics to others for the purpose of feeling superior to them"

    I dont know if I feel superior to the majority of people so much as I simply feel I dislike them

    face it, we're a disease with shoes.


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 00:48 am:

    I won't know for sure if I agree with the preceding statement til tomorrow, as I am hideously intoxicated at the moment.


By wisper on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 00:46 pm:

    i've always found it difficult to know what 'anti-american' or 'US-bashing' really is.
    Because every country is made up of two parts= the government and the people.
    You can bash the government, or at least the elected majority of it, and their actions. I guess this could be taken as bashing the whole country, if you're silly enough to link the actions of a gov to the will of an entire population.
    You could bash the people if you wanted to, although any thinking person will realize that a country is made up of so many different kinds of people with so many different views and ideas that to do so is impossible. Unless you're racist or something.
    So how can anything (especially what spunky's upset about in this thread) ever be construde as 'anti-[any country]'?

    It's.... so vauge.


By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 01:20 pm:

    the problem is that is appears that most of the "US Bashers" appear to believe they represent the will of the entire population.


By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 01:56 pm:

    If anybody had any doubts about the justness of our cause in Iraq, the account of a foreign journalist about his brief imprisonment at the hands of Saddamite thugs should remove any questions about why we are doing what we are doing to that despicable regime.

    When Newsweek reporter Matthew McAllester, photographer Moises Saman, 29, were freed on Tuesday along with Molly Bingham, a free-lance photographer from Louisville, Ky., and a Danish free-lance photographer, Johan Rydeng Spanner, 33, McAllester, 33, they spoke of their experiences in a Baghdad prison.

    ''We could hear screams, especially at night,'' McAllester recounted. ''They were being beaten a few yards from my cell, beaten with some sort of implements ... The prisoner was on the ground, and he was being beaten with something that was not a fist or a boot. A shout and then that slightly resonant sound of flesh and bone giving way to something very hard that was moving fast. And then another shout from the guard, another blow. "

    But that was not the worst any of the journalists recalled. One of them added that he saw one prisoner whose eyes had just been gouged out - get that, the man's eyes had been gouged out. Think about that.

    This shouldn't have surprised me - the Saddam regime has frequently been accused of doing this to prisoners - even to young children. But for some reason it suddenly brought home to me the unspeakable brutality of that atrocious act and the people capable of committing it.

    In a radio broadcast on March 15, President Bush mentioned this grisly practice which has been reported by countless former prisoners and human rights groups.

    "We know from human rights groups that dissidents in Iraq are tortured, imprisoned and sometimes just disappear; their hands, feet and tongues are cut off; their eyes, gouged out; and female relatives are raped in their presence."

    No civilized nation can tolerate having these egregiously inhuman acts perpetrated against any man or woman - and when a nation has the power to stop such practices, it also has the responsibility to act, as we have in Iraq.

    We have assumed a new role in world affairs, and there is no sense shrinking back from that fact. It's there. Deal with it. Henceforth, it will be our responsibility to exercise our power and might with both wisdom and self-restraint. And above all, without seeking anything material in return. That has been our history - we have never sought one inch of foreign ground in recompense for our actions in behalf of others, except as Secretary of State Colin Powell has noted, for that small bit of ground where members of our armed forces who died defending someone else's territory lie buried.

    So where do we go from here. What will be our role in a free Iraq?

    1. To begin with, I hope that President Bush will give the back of his hand to the United Nations and ignore those who want that squabbling forum of malcontents and brigands to be involved in building a new Iraq. I wouldn't allow them anywhere near Iraq - not even to dole out humanitarian aid. After all, most UN foreign assistance efforts seem to have involved handing out condoms or promoting abortion.

    It is an abomination, and we ought to wash our hands of this Sodom on the East River once and for all.

    2. Forget about trying to build a new Iraqi government from the top down. That is nothing less than a prescription for chaos. Keep in mind that this is a very diverse nation - a country artificially put together that is made up of groups with little or nothing in common except for century's old hostility toward one and other.

    Putting them all under the umbrella of a central government that cannot under any circumstances satisfy one group without infuriating another makes no sense at all. What is needed at the outset is a strong dose of subsidiarity - the doctrine that demands that government functions be exercised at the lowest levels of society. You start at the neighborhood levels, move up to the municipal level, and in the case of Iraq, to the provincial level. Only then do you invest the national government with power - and that so limited that it cannot ride roughshod over the citizenry.

    In this way, Kurds will have the most say over the civil affairs of Kurds, Shiites over their civil affairs and Sunnis over their local affairs. Nothing else will work. If we try to build from the top down, we'll simply be replacing one despotic government with another, and then try to disguise that fact by calling the new regime a "democracy."

    3. Iraq is just the beginning. If we are serious about fighting international terrorism and promoting freedom, we are going to have to assert our determination to deal with any regime anywhere in the world in a manner appropriate to both our national interests and the welfare of the people living under that regime. In other words, we must not allow ourselves to become global bullies under the guise of promoters of democracy nor can we play the role of the world's wimps, yearning to be loved by all.

    I am not suggesting that we adopt imperial attitudes, as the bellicose neocons in the administration and the media demand, but simply that we accept the responsibility imposed on us by reason of our God-given power, wealth and might. This is not manifest destiny, but simply an exercise of duty. And nobody in history is better suited for the task by virtue of our manifest goodness and decency.

    Let's take a case on point. Just 90 some odd miles from where I write, is one of the most brutal regimes on the face of the earth. Fidel Castro is a monster. Anybody who doubts that should take a look at the recent State Department report on human rights in Cuba. It's a shocker.

    A lot of useful idiots in Hollywood, Democrats who see Castro as a fellow Socialist, and greed-driven businessmen and woolly minded liberals are constantly demanding that we forge closer relations with Castro. We should invite them to take a walk - preferably to one of Castro's prisons where, if they haven't already done so, Castro's goons will probably take a leaf from Saddam's prisons and start gouging out dissident's eyes.

    We should treat Castro and his regime as the international criminal he is, and inform those nations in Europe and elsewhere that we will retaliate economically against those who insist in bolstering up his dictatorship, thereby perpetuating his cruelties against his people.

    What I'm trying to say, is that we are now the big kids on the block and we should starting acting appropriately without quivering in fear over the idea that some weak sister in the international community will disapprove.

    We are Americans, and although we are one tough bunch of cookies, we are also a good and decent and honorable people, and nobody on the face of the earth has anything to fear from us so long as we have nothing to fear from them.

    Finally, there is this: we are redundantly rich, blessed with incredible resources, both human and natural. We eat better, are housed better and live better than anybody in the world, now or in the distant past. We have surpluses galore in a world where crying need and material deprivation is the lot of huge numbers of our brothers and sisters.

    Common decency and humanity demands that we not allow a single human being to go hungry - ever. But we have to realize that much of the hunger and deprivation in the world are not the result of a lack of resources, but instead because of the actions of tyrannical governments, most of them socialist regimes. In many cases aid we send in our compassion fails to reach the people in need, but ends up in government warehouses or military mess halls.

    In the future, the United States is going to have to put our muscle behind our charity. When we send food and other aid we simply have to see to it that the aid gets to the people who need it. If we do, it will. No tin-horn dictator can be allowed to stand in the way of humanitarian aid for their starving people.

    Go ahead with your No Blood for oil protets, and continue to question America's moralities, but it only brings your moralities into question


By dave. on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 02:24 pm:

    "the problem is that is appears that most of the "US Bashers" appear to believe they represent the will of the entire population."

    that's just your perception, which is tainted by your own bias, which is nurtured by your addiction to right-wing idealogues.

    for you, it's either red, white, and blue or brown and smelly. what a sad, little palette you paint the world with.


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 02:50 pm:

    you presuppose to know me so well?


By dave. on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 03:31 pm:

    you're not that hard to figure out, trace.


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 03:51 pm:

    trace is easy to figure out because he has allowed himself to become a "type"


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 03:56 pm:

    "We eat better, are housed better and live better than anybody in the world"

    define "better"

    replace the word "better" with "more", or even the phrase "to the extreme!"

    ...then after all this gluttony, we get a lesson in morality... its like the South Park episode where Sally Struthers is doing the infomercials to feed Ethiopians...


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 04:36 pm:

    "...why we are doing what we are doing to that despicable regime. "

    so trace, have you too now decided that the US is over there to liberate Iraqis?

    I thought you said in several threads that "we are not there to liberate them", "i dont care what the reason is that we are there", "i want security"

    are you going to make it clear for us now, once and for all?


By wisper on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 05:09 pm:

    "We eat better, are housed better and live better than anybody in the world"

    crap. utter crap.
    it's this kind of outright LIE that really upsets me. How does everyone else in equally developed countries understand it's simply not true?
    How long ago was it true?

    really?

    REALLY?

    do you just feel it in your heart or something? the warm glow of #3 or #6?


    (i couldn't get the actual UN report, which you have to pay for)


    (oh wait! UN reports don't count for shit, right? Well i guess the US is number one then. And the streets are paved with gumdrops.)


By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 06:17 pm:

    To answer the liberation question:
    That is not the advertised reason, originally, that we went into Iraq.
    But can you really argue with the benefit?
    Or do you stick to the fact that if it is not a direct threat (which by the way Iraq was) we should just ignore other countries?

    Sorry, I still think we live in the greatest country on earth. If you choose to disagree, more power to you. I really don't think that bothers me so much.


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 06:37 pm:

    "But can you really argue with the benefit? "

    The argument is with the means, not the ends.

    And the point about the 'advertised reason' is that once again, I don't like being lied to, and I dont like revisionist history for the sake of saving your own ass politically.

    "Sorry, I still think we live in the greatest country on earth"

    Whatever. You can think whatever you want, it doesnt change facts :/ - and its cheesy, its like the folk who tell everyone their kid is the center of the universe. Don't you see how annoying that is?


By patricki on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 06:46 pm:

    god damn spunk, you exhibited everything i despise about Americans right in one long, self-gratifying bullshit post.

    we eat better?

    yeah...we're the fatest nation in the world. is that 'better'?

    this whole "its hammer time to take freedom every" is bullshit. its imperialist bullshit. Bush needs to shut his fucking pie hole about god and freedom because its not taking to well with those of us who don't believe we have a god given right to import our ways on anyone.

    fuck you.

    we arent free.

    you nonsense about castro is just that, most of it anyway. you think all the al qaida POWs that we have captured are offering up info because we're "nice good decent" people? you can damn well bet we've used some of the very same torture tactics Castro and Saddam have used on al qaida prisoners. just because you dont hear about it, doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

    if we're are going to actively police the world, like you say we should do, then we need to start at home. we cant go rounding up international criminals when are practice international criminality ourselves. as the popular saying has gone "regime change begins at home".

    the virus that is america is exactly your attitude that we are better, stronger, and people want we got so we'll bomb them to shit because we just know they want it. we *know* they want our "freedom" supersized.

    Iraq was never the threat they played it up to be. You'll never sell me on that. I think you're a fucking idiot to believe it was.

    and your comment to dave about "you presuppose to know me so well?" like he said, its not that hard to figure it out when you spill your fucking hypocritical, confused nonsense all over these boards week in week out. how can anyone not write the perfect summary of your confused, misguided idealogies. its all right here to read.


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 07:28 pm:

    "its hammer time to take freedom every"

    ?

    "we arent free"

    well noone is really, but its all relative.

    calm down, patty boy. no need to be the other side of the coin.


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 08:45 pm:

    You suck ass patrick.
    Your the one who advocates most of the laws that restrict freedoms


By patrick on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 09:05 pm:

    how can you not get into a foaming lather when you read his absurd shit rowlf?





    advocate most laws that restrict freedoms?

    um. ok buddy.

    is this the part where you equate freedom with being able to buy the biggest, most dangerous vehicle on the road? freedom means being able to buy the biggest, most powerful handgun made?


    and yes, while true i often support restrictions on posessions of such dangers as cars and weapons (because i think most of the public is too stupid to handle the responsibility), i don't define freedom as being able to access such items.... if this was indeed what you are referring to when you made that statement above.

    otherwise you couldn t be further from the truth. Which is just par for the course with your contiunued absurdity.

    Why dont you think about that statement when you vote republican and ask yourself how many republican seek to abolish Roe V Wade, demolish the NEA, support Homeland Security and Patriot Acts, censorship, and the continued demise of 'seperation of church and state'.


By patrick on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 09:08 pm:

    what i mean to say with the "hammer time " reference is the seemingly gung ho attitude of fuckwits like trace and our president who now, because of the "success" of Iraq are ready to start "liberating" other countries.......with valuable natural resources.

    reay to bring them their god-given right to freedom like we're some soldiers of god er crusaders.


By Nate on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:14 pm:

    "because i think most of the public is too stupid to handle the responsibility"

    this is my argument against democracy.

    in a perfect world, i would be omnipotent.

    freedom, free will, it's all code for suffering.

    this is the story of adam and eve. not that they sinned against god. but that god is cruel. it's a fucking set up patty.

    and so long as we're fucked, we might as well enjoy it.

    tits out for the polaroid.


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:15 pm:

    Its a good thing it's not up to your judgement Patrick. Or mine.


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:17 pm:

    Gung Ho attitude? Sorry, but fuck you man.
    I have no such attitude.
    I just have a grasp on reality.


By Nate on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:22 pm:


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:40 pm:

    your not helping


By jack on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:45 pm:

    nate, what in the hell are you doing being coherent at this hour? you are letting down employed people all over sorabji.com, damn you! i certainly hope it's because you just woke up.


By trace on Sunday, April 13, 2003 - 10:59 pm:

    naw, he's just a pro at it


By Rowlf on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 08:43 am:

    "Why dont you think about that statement when you vote republican and ask yourself how many republican seek to abolish Roe V Wade, demolish the NEA, support Homeland Security and Patriot Acts, censorship, and the continued demise of 'seperation of church and state'. "

    wont somebody PLEASE think of the children?


By wisper on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 10:13 am:

    "how can you not get into a foaming lather when you read his absurd shit rowlf?"

    dude!
    because trace doesn't live (or vote) where the Global Sorabji do.
    he can say whatever he wants.
    it's fuckin sweet.

    SUCKAAAA!!!


By dave. on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 10:38 am:

    yeah, patrick, it's just not THAT big of a deal what any one person who's not in a position of power or influence thinks or feels. i mean, y'know, say what you want but don't let it affect your digestive processes or anything.

    besides, your daughter's gonna grow up and marry a guy like trace just to piss you off so you may as well learn to live with it now.


By Antigone on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 11:32 pm:

    "dude!
    because trace doesn't live (or vote) where the Global Sorabji do."

    But the U.S. just voted on the global election...with bombs.


By patrick on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 11:40 pm:

    thank god alcohol.


By Nate on Monday, April 14, 2003 - 05:56 pm:

    so

    i was several miles back into the park. i was standing on a little foot bridge over a creek (the sort where the water throws itself from pool to pool and around boulders and shimmers with a mineral opalescence and is just wide enough that you would stand there for a few minutes and consider whether or not you could clear it with a leap.)

    i was standing on the bridge realizing that it was centered in a circle of giant, old redwoods, the diameter of which was several hundred feet. what kind of massive prehistoric redwood stood where i was standing to mother such a ring?

    a caught a drop, then another. a light rain started and stopped. i decided to start heading back.

    i climb out of the creek's valley, following the path through madrone and oak and fir along the edge of the big basin that gives the park its name. i start to hear this noise, the rain the the trees but sharper. crisper. i look up into the canopy of bright green needles. it isn't raining anymore, but this noise is getting louder and louder.

    then it strikes me that it is hailing. then the hail starts to come furiously. pea sized, large by my standards. beautiful. i hike on and look out over the basin where dark grey clouds are pulled like taffy and the hail is crashing into everything.

    i keep my shirt off for as long as i can bear. the sting of the hail makes me feel alive. electric. i am in the middle of an event that is affecting the world for as far as i can see, experiencing it.

    the air is full of the scents of the agitated forest. the hail is pooling at the bottom of smooth granite, in the crotches of trees. it isn't melting instantly, which is what i generally see of hail. it hangs around.

    eventually the hail turns to a chill rain. i'm dressed for running, light t-shirt, floppy show-my-ass nylon shorts. i'm completely soaked. it is great.

    everywhere, hail lies like snow. the trail has a good inch of hail on it.

    and now, i am back. i've had a shower, i've had two cups of coffee, smoked a bowl.

    now, how could reading absurd shit put me into a foaming lather?




By spunkyDingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:06 pm:

    OK, Here is a follow up on the topic of the thread:
    Source
    The enemy within
    Forget Serbia, forget Iraq.

    "The government we have the toughest time with is the U.S. government," said Eason Jordan, CNN's president for global newsgathering, at the network's annual World Report Conference May 4.

    Because of trade embargoes, the U.S. government is involved in where CNN opens its bureaus, Jordan said. CNN has been trying for a year to open a permanent bureau in Baghdad, Iraq, and now has permission from the Iraqis, he said. "I've [recently] been thrown out of the White House pleading this case."

    CNN has had a reporter in Iraq for most of the past year, "a bureau in all but name," Jordan said, but he is not giving up his fight. After a longer battle, the U.S. government allowed CNN to open a bureau in Havana, Cuba, in 1997.


    Wow. Clinton throwing you out of the White House is worse then being beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters?

    This really puts CNN in perspective.


By Antigone on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:23 pm:

    "Clinton throwing you out of the White House is worse then being beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters?"

    How did you get that out of what Jordan said?

    You're not all that good at twisting people's words, spunk.

    Here, try to twist this statement around: "The sky is blue."

    What did I just say?


By spunkyDingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:30 pm:

    Are you serious?
    In the past 12 years I dare say that CNN has criticized the US's policies far more then Iraq's.


By spunkyDingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:37 pm:

    "The government we have the toughest time with is the U.S. government," said Eason Jordan,

    The government we have the toughest time with is the US Government...

    Does that not mean that it is tougher to get kicked out of the whitehouse then being beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters?

    I dunno, but it looks pretty clear to me.


By jack on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:50 pm:

    that's because your language skills are deficient.


By Rowlf on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 04:51 pm:

    "In the past 12 years I dare say that CNN has criticized the US's policies far more then Iraq's."

    jesus crisis, its a freakin US station, of course it willc criticize more over a span of twelve years because US policy is EVERY DAY and Iraq came up as an issue only once in a while

    I wonder what percentage of that CNN criticism came from James Carville....


By Antigone on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 05:01 pm:

    "I dunno, but it looks pretty clear to me."

    It's not clear at all.

    He was talking about opening up a bureau, not torture. Specifically, he said that the Iraqis allowed him to open the bureau while the US government would not. Nothing more. You're adding your bias into the interpretation.

    Besides, he specifically said in the piece you cut 'n' pasted above that he could NOT talk about the acts of torture. So, what was he going to say in 1999? Obviously, nothing. So, but not saying "some of my reporters were threatened" in 1999, you're claiming he was biased towards the Iraqis?

    Do you read things that contradict your biases, or do you edit them out in your mind?


By spunkyDingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 05:21 pm:

    If you are a reporter, and you can't report the news, why are you there?
    Or do yo think Hussien getting 100% of the vote is news?


By spunkyDingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 05:26 pm:

    PS, I was not tyring to point out bias, I was trying to point out the lack of facts at all.


By Antigone on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 05:33 pm:

    So, by that reasoning, all of the embeds should have reported their exact positions at all times and the activities of the troops around them, without restriction. So what if that would endanger them and the troops? We need all of the facts, all of the time, right? To report otherwise would be biased, right?


By Nate on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 06:02 pm:

    so, by that reasoning embed my cock in your ass.

    pinche gato puta chinga te madre.


By patrick on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 06:52 pm:

    why you got to go an bring the gatos and madres into this you fucking backwoods wino?


By spunkydingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 07:41 pm:

    No. I know you prefer gray. I understand that.
    Sometimes, though, things are black and white.

    "The government we have the toughest time with is the US Government"
    Is that not a direct contradiction of what he said on April 10 about the great lengths they went through to be able to present Iraq's official statements?

    Don't read anything INTO THE STATEMENT, READ THE STATEMENT.

    Jesus Christ on a popcicle stick!


By Antigone on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 07:52 pm:

    At that point, for the purposes of OPENING THE BUREAU, the US Government was his greatest impediment. In the 1999 statement he was talking about ONE SPECIFIC THING.

    Just for completeness, I'll quote:

    "CNN has been trying for a year to open a permanent bureau in Baghdad, Iraq, and now has permission from the Iraqis, he said. 'I've [recently] been thrown out of the White House pleading this case.'"

    Pleading THIS CASE.

    THIS CASE.

    In the 1999 article he's talking about ONE SPECIFIC DIFFICULTY WITH THE US GOVERNMENT. Is that clear?

    It's you who are reading extra meaning into Jordan's statement, like you often read meanings into other people's words.

    You're a lost cause, spunk. I'm done arguing with you.


By spunkydingo on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 08:24 pm:

    CNN has betrayed its viewers, the people of Iraq and its own fundamental reason for existing.
    CNN did not report the crimes. CNN did not leave Baghdad. What price is acceptable for media profit?
    Interviewing Jordan on WNYC last October, Bob Garfield asked if CNN could get access in Iraq without appearing to be a tool for Saddam. Jordan replied, "We work very hard to report forthrightly, to report fairly and to report accurately, and if we ever determine that we cannot do that, then we would not want to be there."
    CNN could have abandoned Baghdad. Not only would they have stopped recycling lies, they could have focused more intently on obtaining the truth about Saddam. They could have diverted resources to Kurdistan and Jordan (the country), where recently arrived Iraqis could speak without fear of death. They could have exploited exile groups with underground contacts.
    If you can't report the truth, why have journalists there in the first place?


    And sorry, but god dammit, which is tougher? dealing with washington or figuring out a way to keep your corosponants alive?

    Why is having an office in Baghdad THAT important?
    Risking lives to repeat the lies you are told to repeat?
    For fucksake, that office was in the Information Ministry building!

    I am lost cause?

    No. Your bending over backwards to excuse cnn is a lost cause.


By wisper on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 09:49 pm:

    fuck CNN.
    across the hallway my room mate's desklight is turning on and off at irregular intervals all by itself.


By jack on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 - 10:58 pm:

    you know what?
    it's not unpatriotic to be able to read and write on greater than a seventh-grade level, although that is approximately the american norm. you can even be conservative and republican with a higher level of learning if you like.

    it's flat-out sad when low levels of literacy hold people back and keep them confused.


By J on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:15 am:

    Somebody feels my pain.


By dave. on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:38 am:

    look, this whole jordan article/cnn sucks thing has been attacked simultaneously by conservative mouthpieces nationwide since the story broke. i want on that listserv, goddammit. pure diabolical genius at work, watching how they can yank out your heart and show it to you as it beats it's last few beats and then zombify and command you to trudge around, parroting their soundbites. amazing.

    look, pull your tongue out of rumsfeld's ass and tell me you could narc on a regime that you KNOW would kill someone you cared about as a direct result of that action. you'd make that sacrifice? because sometimes, sacrifices like that need to be made but YOU, mr spunkstain, are not in that hotseat.


    what silly propaganda will you show everyone tomorrow? something about dirty muslim extremist brainwashing schools? hollywood loudmouths? fuckit man, why not just get back to actually working instead of jacking off on the web all day long at the expense of THA SACRED TAXPAYER.


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 09:08 am:


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 10:32 am:

    Something I haven't heard yet on US news:
    http://www.democracynow.org/brianavery.htm

    Of course, it's a left wing website, so the slant is obvious, but I don't quite doubt this actually happened more or less as it is presented.

    And these our are ALLIES.


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 10:54 am:

    I'm not supporting CNN, you halfwit. I'm pointing out your lack of comprehension.

    But you are blind.


By spunkyDingo on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:31 pm:

    ah forget it.
    All I was trying to do is point out the fact that if they could not report the facts, they should not be endagering lives.
    Whatever


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:36 pm:

    Endangering lives? You mean, like that FoxNews correspondant the Pentagon threw out of Iraq for giving away the position of American troops?

    That correspondant is still reporting from Baghdad, by the way.

    But, FoxNews panders to the military, so you'd never criticize them, would you?


By spunkyDingo on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:40 pm:

    Forget it.


By J on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:52 pm:


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:56 pm:

    Oh, now YOU want to give up. Typical.


By spunky on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 11:59 pm:

    no, i just don't see the point. it's not that important, in the grand scheme of things, wether cnn is ethical or not.


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 00:24 pm:

    Then why are you bringing it up?


By spunkyDingo on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:04 pm:

    I do not know why I bother bringing anything up here.
    You all argue to the point of irrationality, take no pride in anything, and call anyone who might feel the US is right in the things it does robots or "unintelligent".
    You claim to be fans the US, but despise everything it stands for, and applaud anyone who vocalizes any dissent towards the US.
    You don't stop at the President, or at the War, but move on the the people, the heritage, the military, the economic system, the judicial system, the bill of rights and the constitution.
    I ask you all to name something you like, and you name things (pot, alchohol, sex) but no values or heritage, rights or freedoms.


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:11 pm:

    "Your bending over backwards to excuse cnn"


    again, like tiggy said, you salt reading comprehension with your distorted bias before the sentence is complete. its like putting shitsauce on your fries before heading to the cashier to pay and then protesting upon sitting down that you didnt order shitsauce on your fries.

    tiggy is the last person id ever expect to bend over backwards to defend, excuse muchless praise CNN.

    as he says, he was pointing out your idiotic comprehension.

    would you trust the collective, if enough of us, honestly said, there was a shit stain on the ass seat of your pants if enough of us told you so? If it was obvious that we were really trying to say "look spunk, you have a shitstain. Its not a republican, liberal, democrate or conservative shit stain, its just shit, you may want to look after it"

    How many does it take for you to understand you arent understanding whats happening here?

    Was that redundant?

    "If you can't report the truth, why have journalists there in the first place?"

    Whats more telling is your selective assertion of this. You are more than willing to accept the half-truths and lies of your government, in fact, you expect them to lie, but you expect the press, who is so obviously a tool for the government, especially with the recent embed program, to be so forthright and honest.

    What if the press accurately reports the lies of the government, such as the case with CNN more times than not? Is that ok? Should CNN bust the US Gov't balls as much as you had wanted them to bust Saddam's balls?




By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:22 pm:

    "You all argue to the point of irrationality, take no pride in anything"

    I take pride in arguing rationally, if anything. But you should find it telling that you put rationality and pride in the same sentence, on equal footing. Should pride in your country outweigh rationality?

    "You don't stop at the President, or at the War, but move on the the people, the heritage, the military, the economic system, the judicial system, the bill of rights and the constitution."

    And, if we took pride in these things, would we be objective, in your eyes? Does objectivity require your brand of patriotism to be proper?

    And, I've never heard anyone here criticising the constitution. In fact, many people here are worried that recent laws passed are unconstitutional. Please cite anywhere on these boards that anyone has seriously criticized the constitution.


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:23 pm:

    That's utter bullshit spunky. Get your bitter neo-con red white and blue blinders off for once, would you?

    It just amazes me that you are utterly incapable of separating the criticism of one aspect of a system from criticism of the system as a whole.

    In fact, you yourself argue to the point of irrationality, if you don't start there to begin with. You claim to be a true american and love this country, but the moment anyone brings up anything remotely negative about this country, you bring out the "anti-american" and "traitor" brands. Get this, trace: This country has in the past done terrible and horrible things. Ignoring them won't make them go away; discussing them and being aware that they happened may keep similar things from happening again.

    Countless times the left-leaning folks on this board have vocalized what they love about this land, although it's usually paired with dismay at the attacks the right -leaning people in this country apply to what they love about it on a daily basis. Go back through these boards and you will find countless examples of people expressing themselves on what they like about the US.

    You take any critique of the president and the military action as sedition, although nothing has ever stopped you from constantly bashing Clinton, and I'm sure nothing stopped you from doing so 1992-2000.

    In short, you seem to stand for freedom of speech, as long as no one voices any dissent. You can go on believing that people such as myself, Kazoo, patrick, antigone, platypus, dave. and agatha, to name a few, are pot-smoking alcoholic hippies who burn flags on the weekend with our communist buddies and hide terrorists in our unwashed armpits if you like, but it won't do a thing to enrich what is becoming an increasingly dim and impoverished worldview nestled in the paranoia of your fear and hatred of those who are different.


    "Freedom of Speech - Just watch what you say."
    -Ice-T.


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:26 pm:

    spunk, your 1:04 post right there couldnt be filled with more half-truths and inaccuracies, but again, your fucked up reading comprehension prevents you from realizing anything beyond those simplistic, black/white, elementary takes on our opinions voiced here.

    there is nothing of us can do for you. there is no plurality that can be conveyed in our dicussions. you hear about 3 ideas and three ideas only, thats how your mind appears to operate.

    so, it IS pointless but not because "irrationality". if there were tabs on irrationality, you'd be winning by a landslide.

    *i'm sure we all have pride in many things and love many things of our country that we have cited repeatedly for you,

    *i dont know anyone here who applauds dissent just for dissent's sake, they usually have a respectable thought behind it. you on the other hand are hard pressed to have comprehsive respectable thoughts behind your right wing propaganda.


    *heritage, military, economy and such other insitutions are things some us view are distorted and used for the wrong reasons.

    *if there ever has been ardent supporters of our country's framework, including the constitution and bill of rights, its the likes of tiggy, sem, myself, rowlf and others.

    *when you ask us to name things we like, though i never recall saying "i love pot...pot is the greatest thing of this country" or anything anywhere near such a statement, if there was such a statement, i would dare say its called SARCASM because the nature of the inquiry is fucking silly to begin with.


    you read almost entirely different book than that we write spunky, and that all goes back to comprehension, which, indeed, no one can help you at this point.


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:31 pm:

    Hot damn, the cavalry showed up! :)


By spunky on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:45 pm:

    Hey, fuckos!

    my thread, I know what the fuck I meant. stop trying to read my mind.

    it is my opinion, which I am entitled to, that CNN is clearly failing in their duty and obligation to report facts.

    Period.
    Fuck you


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:55 pm:

    what?


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 01:58 pm:

    That has nothing to do with the post I replied to, and you know it.

    You are indeed entitled to your opinions, just as anyone else is. If you make them public, don't be surprised when someone points out the fallacies in them. You ask us to stop reading your mind while making pretty outrageous statements about what WE are thinking.

    For the record, i never said you were wrong about CNN. OF course, I don't believe that any of the major media outlets which are owned by large corporations (five corps, I believe, which own everything except public access, NPR and PBS) present wholly accurate reports. The news has become a product. And what's most important is to produce a product that SELLS.


By jack on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:06 pm:

    trace: you lump people together because your powers of perception are too weak to tell them apart. you've admitted that you get confused and can't tell various posters apart. the idea that everyone, except you, who posts here is part of a collective outlook is absurd. some of these people agree with each other on certain ideas. some of them disagree on other ideas.

    you fail to acknowledge this for some reason. possibly, it is too subtle for you to pick up on, which wouldn't be surprising, seeing as you are frequently confused by simple news stories. some of us don't even discuss politics or news with you. possibly, you just prefer to think of yourself as the outsider fighting the good fight, or something. this would explain why you constantly assume people hold positions that they don't necessarily hold and that people are "against" you or are "arguing."

    "You all argue to the point of irrationality, take no pride in anything, and call anyone who might feel the US is right in the things it does robots or 'unintelligent'."

    this is irrational. people have accused YOU of not thinking for yourself, but that does not logically lead to a conclusion that they would call "anyone who might feel the US is right in the things it does" similar names. a rational person can understand this. also, you have no idea what people take pride in.

    what i, personally, have pointed out is that your language skills are lacking. i point this out because this seems to be causing you some frustration. perhaps if your reading and writing skills were improved, you wouldn't have so many frustrating encounters. you might prefer to continue your pattern of blaming other people, though, instead of taking responsibility for how you interact with the world.

    spelling and grammar skills are not necessarily correlated with intelligence. however, a person who is addicted to news stories and never bothers to learn to spell words that he sees multiple times each day (for instance, "Israel," "Palestine") is either lazy (won't bother to notice) or has some sort of problem. at any rate, someone who can't catch on to something as simple as spelling "Israel" correctly after seeing the word hundreds or thousands of times is probably not someone who can adequately comprehend the subtleties of global politics. which is not to say that you're not entitled to opinions. it's just that they might not be taken seriously by everyone.



By jack on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:10 pm:

    "stop trying to read my mind"

    ha! as if anyone would.

    if you really don't like the attention (which you obviously crave..or you would never have posted things like "AM I BEING IGNORED?" repeatedly), stop pouring out your drivel all over these boards. start your own bbs.


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:15 pm:

    Well, how about you address the execellent points Sem and Antigone and Patrick brought up in their posts?

    You know, like:

    "Should pride in your country outweigh rationality?"

    "And, I've never heard anyone here criticising the constitution. In fact, many people here are worried that recent laws passed are unconstitutional. Please cite anywhere on these boards that anyone has seriously criticized the constitution."

    "This country has in the past done terrible and horrible things. Ignoring them won't make them go away; discussing them and being aware that they happened may keep similar things from happening again."

    "i dont know anyone here who applauds dissent just for dissent's sake, they usually have a respectable thought behind it."



    Here's what I think: "this country" is kind of like "marriage." There is no abstract idea, "marriage" -- what there is is *your* marriage, which is exactly what you make it to be, no more and no less, and it's a fluid thing. Every day, your marriage becomes healthier or unhealthier based on your actions right then at that time.

    So, America isn't this vague but static concept....it's concrete and yet always changing. The image of our country is constantly changing, based on what politicians and citizens are doing, right now, today. When someone high up makes a really bad decision that affects the daily lives of its citizens and its relationship to other countries, that makes the image become ugly. If tomorrow, Bush decides to wipe out the debts of all countries that owe us, that will be a very positive thing for our image.

    So, basically, no one is criticizing America, because you can't....it's too fuzzy an object. People here are criticizing the decisions of its leaders that our changing our laws and exercising our geo-political influence in really scary ways. Detaining "unlawful combatants" in prison indefinitely without charging them with a crime? That's bad. Threatening yet another country who has not raised a hand against us? That's bad.

    Jeez, I don't want to be the first to invoke Godwin's Law, but look at Nazi Germany! That's what you get when people blindly love their country without questioning their leaders. (And like I said, what does love your country mean if your leaders are doing bad things? Do you love the land? Do you love the people in your city? No, you love its laws and its ideals and its structure, and when the laws/ideals/structures start getting messed up, you get angry and want someone to fix them......and here people are getting called Anti-American for that desire to better America. That's really, really stupid.)



By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:16 pm:

    Shoot, I'm slow -- I was responding to Trace's 1:45 post.


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:17 pm:

    Spider, will you "marry" me?


By spunkyDingo on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:20 pm:

    ok


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:27 pm:

    hey is it just me, or does anyone else nearly breakdown into tears upon seeing J.Cash's 'Hurt' video?


    you might recall when i bought this album a couple of months ago, calling it the saddest album ive ever heard and read. now ive seen the video a few times and i god damn motherfucker do i want to cry.


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:30 pm:

    Aw, Antigone, you've made me smile.

    Trace, you have made me grind my teeth -- so, are you going to address the points or not?


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:32 pm:

    Patrick, I've seen that video more than once, and I get sniffly every time.


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 02:51 pm:

    Yes. Johhny Cash is like America's grand-dad, you know what I mean?


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 03:55 pm:

    I spelled excellent wrong!

    I really can't spell -- I think I've just been deluding myself all this time. I can't spell transcendant (transcendent?), I've been spelling desperate wrong for years....I'm hopeless.


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:14 pm:

    to the gallows for you spider


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:17 pm:

    I know -- I need to be flogged.


By Antigone on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:21 pm:

    I'll go get my cat o' nine tails...


By patrick on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:28 pm:

    oh shit spider.....you are letting your dirty side come out as of late.


By Spider on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:36 pm:

    It's Spring!


By semillama on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 04:46 pm:


By Rowlf on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 06:11 pm:

    speaking of sad country music, I am horrified as I watch Willie Nelson whore himself out to Toby Keith's new video.

    Toby Keith is the cheesiest American alive. I want his head.


By The Watcher on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 01:54 pm:

    Spider,

    Don't marry anyone yet.

    You'd take away one of my better fantacies if you did.

    And, I don't have that many good ones left.


By patrick on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 02:02 pm:

    holy shit on a stick that must really creep you out spider.


By The Watcher on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 03:21 pm:

    I'd hate to think of what goes through your mind.

    My fantasies would probably be boring compared to Patrick's.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact