BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST,spectator/citizen/societal member
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 03:22 PM

War is the failure of human reason; my country is in the position of being able to truly put mankind on the road to ending war because of its overwhelming power is all aspects of human culture; instead it promotes it as a legitimate use of power. A truly outstanding act would be for my country to state that war as a human institution will not leave the planet; if war we must, then keep it on earth and no weapons of anykind will be placed outside the atmosphere, including instruments that coordinate and manage weapons on the ground; surveillance and communication for war purposes cannot be stopped, but no weapons outside the atmospher -- period. This act alone would be bold enough to begin the path to real world peace, if not the end of isolated criminal acts by individuals/groups/states.

IMHO. Back to the Arts you practice and perform so well. Love you all.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: DougR
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 06:40 PM

Yep, Amos, his name is John Shaddeg. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: katlaughing
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 07:21 PM

Sure, DougeR, exercise your right to tell them...I'll just see yours and raise ya at least one by all the others I will get to register their opinions!*g*

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 08:09 PM

DougR, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but no one in the news business considers Fox News credible or legitimate.

Or liberal, despite your protests to the contrary. The thought of who and what you have in mind as representing a liberal voice/slant to news on Fox is a bit mind boggling, actually.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 08:29 PM

LH:

Like individuals, nations have their vectors of rationality, dramatization, psychosis, and thir stock of cultural attitudes for and against optimum future well being. The content of these things -- the names of gods or the characters in the myths -- do not weigh much in the scheme of things; what does weigh much is the impact of beliefs on actions and decisions in selecting futures for individuals, coimmunities, nations, species and the world as a whole.

We have pretty well settled on the notion that criminal conduct by an individual sharply impacts their rights as a member of the community -- felons cannot buy guns and rapists are generally shunned by their neighbors.

Nations are not exempt fromt he constraints of fundamental human sanity, which below a certain threshold is not just a cultural idiosyncracy bit a core global value. Those who have demonstrated abuse suffer consequences imposed by the community of nations; Japan has no Army. Iraq has sharp constraints on its economy. This is not just the USA forcing people to see things their way -- it is a natural pattern of development in groups of people. Churches excommunicate, nations imprison or banish, and counties move their offenders across the county line.

Saddam Hussein, by this line of reasoning, does not have the same right to develop weapons of mass destruction as any other nation. He has demonstrated the ability to take unilateral destructive action against other nations on a large scale without provocation.

While I grant you the US has done some really awful and stupid things over the last century or so, including the Indian, Mexican, Spanish, and Vietnam wars and countless smaller-scale manipulations, this doesn't change the merits of the argument as regards Iraq. It makes it less tenable emotionally, sure; but the merits of the case are still pretty plain.

I share your abhorrence at the contemplation of invasion of foreign soil if the truth is that it is unilateral. But there seems to be a strong argument that Hussein actually is not a non-aggressor; that he is raising the capability of mass destruction in his labs (possibly) and that he participated in the aggressions of 9-11-01 -- this generation's 'day of infamy' -- with financial and logistic aid,.

I don't know the facts about these accusations. They are consistent with his history as a maker of war, against Iran, Kuwait, and the U.S.. But that doesn't make them facts.
If they are facts, hwoever, it seems pretty clear the nations of the world have a psychotic renegade on their hands, not just someone exercising their national prerogatives. If this is the case it would be extremely unwise not to deal with it as it is.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 11:12 PM

Hey, GUESTS, Doug R is not a "right wing nut", he's just a conservative, okay? I almost always disagree with him on politics, but I like him as a human being...that's life. Let's not get carried away with the name calling here...

LEJ - When I said that the USA is an "outlaw nation", I was thinking of many, many past aggressions against Native Americans, British North America, Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba, Vietnam, Lybia, and oh, about 20 other countries maybe... I will add that by that definition Russia also fits the label of outlaw nation, as do Great Britain, China, France, Japan, Germany, Argentina, North Korea, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Egypt, Syria, and so on, and so on...

It's really not that unusual.

I was just pointing out that the USA has also violated international law and committed aggression on various occasions (with all kinds of marvelous excuses and justifications, of course)...and it has also defied/ignored rulings by the World Court regarding attacks on Nicarauga.

Therefore, the USA is in no moral position to decide that others are "outlaw nations". It's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. The USA has been engaged in CIA-sponsored assassinations and covert actions in many parts of the world, and continues to do so. Those are illegal, criminal actions, from the point of anyone on the receiving end.

I agree that Iraq has behaved as an outlaw, no problem...but so has the USA, repeatedly.

There exists no effective international means of doing anything about it, at least in the case of the USA, and that is an even bigger problem than Saddam Hussein, since it has more far-ranging effects on the world than he does.

I realize that you never implied the USA would nuke Iraq...it was other people who got on that subject, I responded to their comments, and it caused some thread drift about the various nuclear weapons issues.

Whether Saddam was involved in 911...we'll probably never know for sure. It's too hard separating facts from disinformation and propaganda.

If I were dealing with Saddam, I would make sure that his neighbours are adequately protected (which I believe they are at this point). I would deny him weapons and technical assistance, but I would not deny his population food, medicine, and the normal benefits of peaceful trade. I would talk with him, rather than threatening him, and see if it led somewhere useful. It well might, because Saddam has far more to gain by talking than by fighting. He can only lose if he fights.

If he is indeed mentally unstable, then that throws a wild card in the mix. I don't know if he is, and I'm in no position to know. I guess if I were the President (God forbid...) then I would possibly have some more info about it...or maybe not. Who knows? We all try and figure out what's going on as best we can, but it ain't easy.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: harpgirl
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 11:37 PM

Why don't we to start another ANTI-WAR movement?! I propose another March on Washington!

NO NO NO MORE! WE DON"T WANT IRAQI WAR!

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: katlaughing
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 11:43 PM

I'm with you, harpgirl!!! Sanest thing I've heard in quite a while!

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: harpgirl
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 11:52 PM

...I'm quite serious about this, BTW, kat! I'm surprised it hasn't begun in earnest, however; I believe that a serious anti-war movement would be ruthlessly stifled by the current administration...We need some new anti-war songs to protest the annihilation of the Iraqi people by the Bush administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: harpgirl
Date: 02 Aug 02 - 11:58 PM

...well, evidently the march is scheduled!
,
http://www.internationalanswer.org

I hope it's not too late!

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 10:07 AM

harpgirl, the anti-war movement is alive and well, and has been working diligently ever since 9/11.

You don't seem to be aware of the fact that a long-established peace and justice movement already existed prior to the so-called "war on terrorism".

There has long been a loose coalition of organizations like War Resisters League, Women's International League for Peace & Freedom, etc. But you don't ever hear about them in the mainstream media. Why? Well, here is a link to an old FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) article that demonstrates the dynamic by using one specific case: an analysis of the guests who were on Nightline during the Reagan/Bush administration. You can find the article here:

http://www.fair.org/reports/nightline-guest.html

If you are genuinely interested in doing anti-war work, post here to let me know what city you live in, and I can give you suggestions on how to get plugged in.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: Amos
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 11:26 AM

Here is another report by Norman Solomon concerning the inaccuracyof reportage on the Iran weapons inspection spying issue, of interest.

The article on Nightline's staistical proclivities can be found here

Information on the UK's Anit-war Movement can be found here.

Links to anti-war groups in Japan, England, Minnesota, and Ireland can be found on this page.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: DougR
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 11:50 AM

Hey, L.H., thanks for the defense! I guess I'll have to ease up on poking you (but not for long :>))

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 12:01 PM

His defense of you means nothing to me, DougR. I still say you are a right wing nut. Because someone disagrees with my opinion of you, doesn't mean I'm going to change mine to fit theirs.

Now tell us DougR, have you been a good right wing nut, and attended your latest Promise Keepers convention? I understand the theme this year is "Storm the Gates". I'm sure you'd fit right in with them. Since you are a bit of a fish out of water on the folk scene, you might try them for comradeship, since you ain't gettin' much around here with those views of yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: harpgirl
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 12:09 PM

...it's true Guest, I am not plugged into anti-war groups. I live in Tallahassee. Give me some leads!

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 01:15 PM

Happy to oblige harpgirl!

First place I would start would be the Indymedia Florida website here:

http://www.whoseflorida.com/fl_indy.htm

They do show some activity in Tallahassee. I know Tallahassee is sort of far from the major Fla cities where there is always larger concentrations of activist groups. My guess is the activist community there is fairly small and incestuous (and I don't mean negatively--I mean that the reality of organizing in smaller cities means that we wear many activist hats, ie the peace hat one day, and the anti-racism hat the next).

If you have a strong interest in the war against Iraq, I suggest you get in touch with the folks at the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice, who are listed at the National Network to End the War Against Iraq website:

http://www.endthewar.org/members/florida.htm

Even if there aren't too many activists in your area, they can likely get you connected to people who are already doing great work.

I also have a tremendous amount of respect for the work of Pax Christi, a Catholic social justice organization which is also listed on their page. Here is the national Pax Christi homepage:

http://www.paxchristiusa.org/

It appears that the Fla Coalition I mention above is also an affiliate of War Resisters League. Their website gives the following info:

AFFILIATEGlobal Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space

This WRL affiliate was founded in 1992 by the joint efforts of the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice (FCPJ), Citizens for Peace in Space (in Colorado Springs) and NY-based Journalism professor Karl Grossman. This organization acts as a clearinghouse for space issues and provides workshops, speakers and an online newsletter in addition to participating in demonstrations. With the goal of creating an active and well-informed global constituency dedicated to protecting space and Earth from a space-based arms race and ecological destruction, members oppose the ballistic missile defense system being considered by the United States government. Their most visible and successful effort so far has been the 1997 Cancel Cassini Campaign. The Global Action Network International Day of Protest (October 7, 2000) is the current focus. For more information, contact : Bruce K. Gagnon, secretary/coordinator Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 90083 Gainsville, FL 32607 [phone] [e-mail] www.space4peace.org

The War Resister's League webpage is here:

http://www.warresisters.org/about_wrl.htm

Here is the Women's International League of Peace & Freedom's local branches list for Florida:

http://www.wilpf.org/branches/branches.htm#fl

I love these women! (One of their in-jokes: "I'm also a member of WILPQ--the Women's International League for Peace & Quiet!")

And their homepage is here:

http://www.wilpf.org/

Here is the local affiliates page for Fellowship of Reconciliation:

http://www.forusa.org/About/locals.html#fl

and their "About" homepage:

http://www.forusa.org/About/

Here is the homepage for American Friends Service Committee (Quakers, though many non-Quakers and non-Christians are involved in their work):

http://www.afsc.org/

and here is the website of their regional office in your area:

http://www.afsc.org/afscsehp.htm

You seem to be about half-way between the Miami & Atlanta offices, but there may be active members in your neck of the woods.

Hopefully, this is enough to get you started. You should read, read, read and educate yourself all you can. I genuinely hope you do become active in this movement. Doing social justice work is about the most meaningful and fulfilling work I've ever done (for me, it is right up there with parenting and my artistic work). It is tremendously energizing to be involved with activist communities doing this work, and it gives a depth and texture to my life that didn't exist before I became an activist. In fact, considering the folk propensity to join with like minded people, I'm often surprised nowadays at how few folkies are involved in social justice communities. If you feel a need for a greater sense of community and camaradery (sp?) in your life, social justice activists can give that to you, just like being in a folk community can.

Good luck to you harpgirl--now get on out there and stop the war! :)

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: DougR
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 05:28 PM

GUEST: Sticks and stones, etc.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST,Lintfree
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 03:22 PM

Cnn.................the propaganda arm of the U.S. shadow government. Freedom of the Press should have included into it the right to be told the truth by the Press. "Control what people hear and read you control the people." And here we just are with hat in hand. "Don't mean to be no bother......'scuse the hat."

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: Stewart
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 04:51 PM

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/81143_helen4.shtml

It may not be '1984,' after all -- but what about due process?

Sunday, August 4, 2002

By HELEN THOMAS, HEARST NEWSPAPERS

WASHINGTON -- Thank heavens wiser leaders than President Bush have prevailed, and we are not going to become a nation of official snitches.

In an Orwellian nightmare of a big-brother society, Bush put forth his neat little public-spy plan called Operation TIPS (for Terrorism Information and Prevention System) in his State of the Union address.

It would have deputized millions of people -- including letter carriers, truck drivers, telephone and cable repair workers -- to be snoops for the anti-terrorist campaign. An office in the planned Department of Homeland Security would have overseen these busybody snoop patrols.

The U.S. Postal Service smartly nixed the idea for itself, saying that postal workers have enough to do as it is.

And then the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, headed by Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, shot down the whole onerous proposal for prying into our everyday lives. Fortunately, in this case liberals focusing on protecting civil liberties and conservatives focusing on violations of privacy converged and saved us from the horrors that George Orwell wrote about in "1984."

What could Bush and his team, led by Attorney General John Ashcroft and Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge, have been thinking of? Have they no memory of the totalitarian "isms" of the 20th century -- fascism, Nazism, communism? Those ideologies were all distinguished by spying and tattling, pitting neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend, brother against brother. The system demeaned the spy and the persons spied upon.

One shudders to think that we could have been emulating the East German Stasi, the secret police who kept files on millions of people, or the former Soviet Union's KGB. We would have had a replay of "Darkness at Noon," the 1941 novel that Arthur Koestler wrote in disillusionment with the German communist system of the 1930s.

If Bush's plan had prevailed, the 4th Amendment guarantee of the people's right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" would have been meaningless. We would have become a nation of informers in which suspicion alone could have been proof of wrongdoing. Next would have come massive racial profiling and particularly the targeting of foreigners from nations that we say support terrorism.

All this, of course, would have been done in the name of security.

No one is arguing that we should not have tightened security. But average Americans are surely not prepared to evaluate the activities of their fellow citizens or to judge them.

Imagine if your views don't coincide with those of your neighbor. What then? Do you phone the Department of Homeland Security or the FBI to voice your fears?

The whole process is frightening and calls to mind the "babushkas," the prying grandmothers in the Soviet Union who were suspicious of anything unusual in their limited world and who snitched on their neighbors to the KGB.

It's ironic that many of us under Bush's plan would have been emulating the "good" Europeans in Nazi-dominated countries who were forced to play ball with their oppressors.

Even now, too many of us are remaining silent in the face of Ashcroft's dragnet, which has resulted in the arrests of hundreds of suspects including immigrants who have violated their visa stays. Once imprisoned, countless numbers have been denied access to their families or their lawyers.

Unless there is a public outcry, many Arabs and Muslims will remain in prison indefinitely without even being charged with a crime, let alone convicted.

When he tries to trample on the Constitution in stablishing unprecedented prerogatives for his dministration, Bush is going too far.

Fortunately, the checks and balances on which our government system is based are still operating.

They worked last year when the Defense Department tried to set up an office of strategic information with the stated purpose of disseminating "disinformation" to foreign correspondents.

That dumb idea, which demonstrated an appalling naivete on the part of some Pentagon aides, shocked the media. Once challenged, the officials quickly dropped the plan. In this information age, who could believe that foreign reporters would be so gullible that they could not distinguish between propaganda falsehoods dished out to them and the material given to the U.S. press corps?

The American people undoubtedly are ready to accept some unprecedented restrictions on their freedom and privacy during the war on terrorism. But indiscriminate spying on individuals and deliberate distortions of the truth are never acceptable.

© 1998-2002 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: DougR
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 05:52 PM

I suppose you are breathing easier now, right Stewart? Good for you. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Aug 02 - 09:23 AM

DougR, isn't the above remark pretty damn disparaging for such a nice guy as yourself? -)

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: DougR
Date: 06 Aug 02 - 01:40 PM

No, I don't think so GUEST. Anyway, you have gone to considerable effort to describe me as something other than being a "nice guy," so why did you bother?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Aug 02 - 02:22 PM

Entertainment value.

Subject: RE: BS: Orwellian Newspeak in Amerika - 2002
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 02 - 02:28 PM

Well, I think this thread has gone on quite long enough. All the possibilities of the topic have been exhausted, and it has degenerated into a battle for the last word between DougR and GUEST. This is amusing, but futile.

It's time to kill this thread, and I know of only one sure way to do it.

SHATNER. BILL SHATNER. WILLIAM THE GREAT. JAMES TIBERIUS KIRK!!!

There. See ya.

- LH