BS: This is democracy?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 08:48 AM

Democracy seems to be creeping forward in Iraq, if not in the wider Arab world (from the Guardian)

...one of several recent signs that US-driven attempts to cultivate democracy in Iraq may be approaching a fork in the road, if not quite a turning point.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 08:35 AM

The Hundredth Post !!!

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 08:35 AM

I hate moving political threads up the page , but I cant resist . . .

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 01:17 AM

Mary Garvey: it would appear so.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: mg
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 01:02 AM

You don't see that terrorism creates starvation? But war does?

Terrorism unchecked ...is a war with only one side. At least in a war someone is trying to stop them.

How can food be grown where there is terrorism? As in parts of Africa?

How can it be transported? The roads will be blown up etc.

The terrorists will implant themselves in orphanages and dare you to strike them.

The water will be poisoned. They throw bodies down wells etc.

The populace is too shellshocked to do daily activities like cooking, watching their children etc. sometimes. All sorts of pathologies ensue..drug and alcohol use, domestic violence..

Holy Heart of Mary...are we blatently apologizing for the terrorists these days? mg

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Once Famous
Date: 12 Apr 05 - 02:46 PM

You didn't hit a nerve, dianavan. As doug R said, good riddance.

Occassionally you find a nut case who leaves the U.S. Everyday, there are many more who kiss the ground here when they arrive.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Apr 05 - 11:00 AM

Now This Is Democracy... http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0316-08.htm

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 12 Apr 05 - 04:44 AM

Well, America's loss is Canada's gain. Send more, SVP.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 12 Apr 05 - 01:47 AM

Well, Martin, I hope that she is happy in the country of her choice. I don't wish to be unkind, but my feeling is if she fled this country because of dissatisfaction with the government, Democrat or Republican, I say good riddance.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Apr 05 - 10:56 PM

Actually, being an American is my birthright, Martin. I am being a good American by exposing tyranny.

I would like to see some evidence that the insurgents are "specifically targetting" convoys of food. I have seen no evidence of this. Please provide a reputable source.

I must have hit a nerve if it takes all three of you to try to intimidate me.

Doug - The U.S. should be donating as much or more than other countries because they are one of the richest countries in the world. Are you talking about private donations or govt. donations? I'd like to see that list.

Does it include govt. provision of food and transport to the starving children of Iraq? Since they are the invading force over there, don't you think they have some responsibility for providing food to the innocent civilians?

Just for the record - People who condone the actions of the present U.S. administration are the ones engaging in unamerican activities. An American cherishes the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as the cornerstones of democracy. An American wants to see fair and open elections. An American makes sure that there is equal opportunity for all of its citizens. An American believes in separation of church and state. An American has the right to worship as they say fit. An American doesn't have to live in America.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Once Famous
Date: 11 Apr 05 - 03:59 PM

Your right, Doug.

She absolutely hates this country, is a complete ex-patriot, and looks for ways everyday to vent her anger at it here and probably other places, also.

I'm glad that she quit being an American.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 11:34 PM

Dianavan: your last post about the U. S. willingness to feed starving children only proves to me what I suspected. You are so anti-American that you have no idea what you are raving about. Check out any major disaster in modern history and see who are the major contributors to those in need. I think you will find the U. S. close to the top in support. You might want to begin with U. S. support of Tsumani victims.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 10:00 PM

children

Parties to a conflict must respect children, provide them with any care or aid they require, and protect them from any form of indecent assault (Protocol I, Art. 77, Sec. 1).

Children under 15 must not participate in hostilities and must not be recruited into the armed forces. (Protocol I, Art. 77, Sec. 2; Protocol II, Art. 4, Sec. 3C)

Those children who do participate in hostilities do not lose their protections under the Geneva Conventions, including the right to an education. (Protocol II, Art. 4, Sec. 3d)

Children who have committed an offense related to the armed conflict before their 18th birthday cannot be subject to the death penalty. (Protocol I, Art. 77, Sec. 5)

If arrested, detained or interned, children must be held in separate quarters from adults, unless they are with their families. (Protocol I, Art. 77, Sec. 4)

Warring parties must try to make local agreements to allow the removal of children from besieged or encircled areas. (Convention IV, Art. 17)

Warring parties must allow the free passage of medicine, food and clothing intended for children under 15. (Convention IV, Art. 23)

Warring parties must ensure that orphans or lost children are not left alone, and that they are taken care of and allowed to practice their religion and pursue their education in their cultural tradition if possible. (Convention IV, Art. 24)

Mothers with dependent infants should not be, if at all possible, sentenced to the death penalty for an offense related to the armed conflict, and such sentences must not be carried out. (Protocol I, Art. 76, Sec. 3)

http://www.genevaconventions.org/

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 09:54 PM

oh, btw- the terrorist actions in targeting the relief supplies for civlians is in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions.... In case you care.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 09:44 PM

dianavan,

You seem to be missing some news. The US troops that are bring food into the various parts of Iraq are the ones whom the terrorists are specifically targeting. This has been the state of affairs for over a year now. Care to criticise the terrorists, now?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 09:05 PM

DougR - I see no evidence that terrorism creates starvation. I do see that war creates starvation among children.

I don't like terrorism any more than you do but I would like to think that while the U.S. is waging war, they are also transporting food to hungry children. I have seen no evidence of this. In fact the starvation rate has increased.

While you and I have very little to say about terrorist activities, we do have something to say about the conduct of elected governments. Seems to me that it is the responsibility of the U.S. government to insure that innocent children (not terrorists) are fed.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 05:33 PM

No, she quit and is out jamming a hot dog in her face, sideways.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 05:11 PM

Hello, dianavan, are you still among us?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 12:32 AM

Dianavan: your reply?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 08:34 PM

OK. Thanks, Doug.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 08:07 PM

Dianavan hasn't addressed my question yet brucie, but according to the figures she supplied, there are more now. Personally, I don't know.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 05:40 PM

Doug,

What I said is that people who eat regularly don't have as much to revolt about as people who don't. Dianavan's question to you is a good one. I will ask the same. Were there more starving kids in Iraq before or after the US invasion?

Bruce

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Noddy
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 05:27 PM

So vapid, so predictable, so lame.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,gheh
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 05:12 PM

Take any group of people who live in mutual awareness of each other, sharing a common space, and see that things are set up so a few eat well, a few more eat not too well, and a good many others starve. Watch what happens...

Violence, that's what.

Yes, to put it very simply, if everyone in the world had enough food and the other basic necessities of life, you would not have terrorism...UNLESS it was launched by someone powerful who wanted to get things back to the barbaric way they used to be in the "good old days" (our days) when a lot of people starved. He would want to do that so that he could divide and conquer, and have way MORE than anyone could ever need. Some people are like that. They call it "being a winner". They are psychologically very ill...like Al Capone was, for example. Or Hitler.

World poverty, however, is not the sole responsibility of the USA to fix. It's everyone's responsibility to some extent.

What the USA is at fault for in Iraq is launching a needless and unprovoked war for its own material gain.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 03:30 AM

I have a question for you DougR - Were there more starving children in Iraq, before or after the war on terrorism?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 01:37 AM

So, brucie, we set up a chow line in Iraq, and our troubles, and the troubles of the Iraqi people are over? All we have to do is feed the terrorists, and all the children in Iraq, and it's all over? The troops can come home? Piece of cake!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 10:08 PM

LOL

I can just imagine you as a student in high school.

LOLOL

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 07:11 PM

Pardon me for butting in: It's not hard to get hungry people to do things if you feed 'em. Well-fed people seldom rebel.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 06:53 PM

Dinavan: a question for you. Do you think that if the U. S. and other countries able and willing were to solve the hungry children problem that terrorism would go away and bother us no more?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:32 PM

Our BILL OF RIGHTS preserves of Democracy

However there have been some slight changes recently...


For easy reference, I include the original wording of each amendment in parentheses, following each proposed new amendment.

Amendment I

Congress shall subjugate all forms of religious expression to the will of the State, particularly Christianity, and draw an absolute wall between personal religious beliefs and any and all public expressions thereof. All manner of speech is to be carefully monitored, filtered and censored to ensure that nothing offensive to the ruling class is communicated to or from any individual or form of media. The people will be allowed to assemble only when and where the State directs. Government at all levels will be immune to petitions and lawsuits of any sort brought by citizens.

(Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.)

Amendment II

Citizen militias are forbidden. The carrying of small arms, when permitted, will be closely regulated by the State, with licensing and registration of all firearms required. At no time shall any weapon of military significance be possessed by citizens except when citizens are pressed into the service of America's standing armed forces.

(A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.)

Amendment III

By Executive Order, Code Red, a declaration of martial law or any other enforcement of emminent domain, any toxin, poison , virus or hazardous biological agent including vaccines may be dispersed in around or below the home of Americans. Compensation for loss of life or property will be limited to $250,000.

(No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.)

Amendment IV

Citizens may be stopped at any time and any place and be required to produce identification and a justification for their presence. Citizens and their possessions, including vehicles and houses, may be searched at any time and in any manner, including secretly, with or without justification and without warrants. A right to privacy is retained exclusively to the State and its agents and in no case possessed by any private citizen.

(The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.)

Amendment V

Citizens may be held indefinitely, with or without charges being made, upon the direction of government officials. Citizens may be tried repeatedly for the same offense, both by differing jurisdictions and by way of differing charges, both simultaneously and at different times and places. Citizens may be required to testify against themselves, save only in specified circumstances and during actual public trials. The property of any citizen may be seized upon the direction of government officials, with no review by any tribunal and with or without compensation.

(No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.)

Amendment VI

At no time shall any citizen accused of a criminal offense be entitled to a hearing or a trial, either public or private, except when government officials shall so determine. At trial, no citizen shall be entitled to a jury, except when allowed by the judge presiding. Citizens may be held indefinitely without charges and without being informed of the nature and charge, if any, of accusations against themselves. Citizens shall have no right to confront witnesses against themselves or to compel the attendance of witnesses in their favor. When allowed by government officials to retain counsel, citizens may hire only certain preapproved attorneys and, when allowed by the presiding judge, be appointed only attorneys beholden to the State.

(In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.)

Amendment VII

In no suits at common law, civil or otherwise, shall any party be entitled to a jury, except as allowed by the judge presiding. When allowed, juries may determine only those facts allowed them by the judge, who, in every case, shall be the sole arbiter of applicable law. All facts determined by juries may be rejected or affirmed, either by the judge presiding or upon appeal.

(In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.)

Amendment VIII

Bail of any amount may be prescribed and may be denied altogether. Fines may be imposed and punishments inflicted at the direction of government officials, legislatures and judges presiding over trials. No fine or punishment so imposed shall be deemed excessive, cruel or unusual. Certain citizens, designated by government officials and legislatures, may summarily be executed without formal proceeding, by way of either abortion or euthanasia. Citizens placed in prisons and jails may not be protected from other inmates.

(Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.)

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the government.

(The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.)

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the states by the Constitution, nor granted to citizens, are reserved to the Federal government.

(The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.)















Or, perhaps this would be a good time for you to reread that excerpt from the Declaration of Independence provided at the outset of this article. In fact, this would be a good time to reread all of the Declaration, not to mention the entirety of the U.S. Constitution.

New America. An idea whose time is now.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 12:55 PM

Which strikes you as more likely? That the U.N. report cincerning world hunger is mistaken in this case or that the report of USAID is a tissue of easily exposable lies?

Remember that at least one of Ziegler's acknowledged sources says that the data "lacks precision" and that the U.S./U.K.-led coalition has every reason to feed as many Iraqis as possible, as well as the means to do it.

Under those circumstances, why on earth would we stand by and let people starve while spending billions to secure their goodwill?

The election of a Kurdish interim President in Iraq is a hopeful sign. Limited, but still hopeful.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 12:34 PM

website address says it all really    "www.usaid.gov".

More impartial than the UN? I think not.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 10:23 AM

It is, Bruce- you want to serve it with a nice Barolo.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 11:07 PM

I don't think you can call the U.N. report sources unknown, Guy, but for the record, here's the latest from BBC:

"US and UK officials have denied reports that increasing numbers of children in Iraq are facing chronic food shortages and malnourishment.
A UN report last week said malnutrition in under-fives had almost doubled since the US-led invasion of 2003."

Of course the US and Uk would deny this scathing report. They have to justify their invasion, don't they? So far, none of their claims have been truthful. Why should we believe them now?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 08:13 PM

Where'd you get the idea that USAID made the claim that Iraq had WMDs?

Allow me to suggest that those who assert a basic equivalence between Bush and Hussein, or between USAID and the Baath Party, or that the pronunciation of the word "nuclear" is a key to character, make unpersuasive judges of either tyranny or democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 07:00 PM

primo inter pares

That sounds like a delicate yet robust pasta sauce.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 06:45 PM

So you think Bush's propaganda agency - the Bush of WMD's,of Nook-yew-ler capability, of the Swift Boat Liars, of the Social Security "Crisis" etc. etc. etc, is more truthful than the Baathist propaganda machine...... Jesus, that's a tough call ...... more of a primo inter pares kinda thing.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 02:55 PM

You might start your quest for a different point of view here,

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/health.html

Probably the level of accomplishment is somewhat exaggerated, but I'd still prefer USAID over sources unknown and/or the former Baathist information ministry.

And if everything we read is just propaganda anyway, we may as well close this thread now.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 02:53 AM

Great link brucie. Definitely food for thought.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 02:23 AM

Democracy--some great thoughts.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 01:58 AM

Thanks, LH - That says it all.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 01:36 AM

Blind idiots vent their ideas in dictatorships too, Old Guy. :-) Just listen to the government announcements on a regular basis in any dictatorship...or for that matter, most democracies too.

What you seem to be complaining about is when the idiocy in question is a different kind of idiocy from your favorite variety of idiocy.

If I may quote Bob Dylan, "We're idiots, babe! It's a wonder we can even feed ourselves." You could say that about most people in most societies and be at least half right half the time, in my opinion. I look back at the stuff my and my young friends used to say when I was in my teens or twenties. Much of it was idiocy. We thought the older people were idiots. They thought we were idiots. The scary part is, we were probably ALL at least half right about that! Maybe more so.

Be more tolerant of other idiots. They may have far more in common with you than you realize.

Besides, without idiots to propose ideas different from the idiotic ideas of the people on the opposite side of any given dispute, we wouldn't be able to decide who to vote for at election time, because everyone would be getting along too well.

Can't have that!!!! It would destroy the whole political system. Be thankful that there are other idiots willing to oppose your chosen brand of idiocy, and thereby give it meaning in a ruthlessly competitive system.

Idiocy is the hallmark of partisanship! Do not reject it out of hand, lest you destroy the very foundation on which you stand.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:41 PM

I'm pretty sure that "limited precision" is largely due to the fact that the original figures were compiled while Saddam (not a very good statistician) was in power and the present figures were derived during the occupation. My guess is that the U.N. report on hunger is probably the best estimate that we have. Does anyone have any other figures about starvation rates amongst Iraqi children?

DougR - You said, "If the insurgents were not trying to prevent democratization, which plays hell with the infrastructure in that country, there would be no starving children." Are you sure?

If there was no U.S. military there would be no insurgency.

Larry K - You said, "Prior to the election (58% of the population were willing to risk their lives for democracy)..." Where did you get that figure? You also said, "In polls over 70% of people in Iraq are optimistic about the future." What polls?

Guest, Guy - Please tell me how the coalition is assisting the starving children of Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:28 PM

ONE point might be that the U.S. (and Douggie, too!) has one hell of a nerve pontificating about "democratization" and the price that other peoples should be willing to pay for it.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 06:38 PM

I wasn't aware that Saddam Hussein was still in charge.

Any news about him, BTW?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 06:29 PM

Your point being?

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 03:17 PM

"...countries governed by tyrants like Saddam."

Or like Musharaf (U.S. Ally)

Or like the Saudi Royal Family (U.S. Ally)

Or like Pinochet (former U.S. Ally)

Or like Marcos, the Shah of Iran, Pol Pot, the Nicaraguan Contras ...... (former U.S. Allies)

Or like ____________ (fill in any one of dozens of tyrannical regimes the U.S. presently supports)

Or even like Saddam himself! (former U.S. Ally)

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: DougR
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 03:00 PM

Dianavan: do I value the effort to democratize above the needs of starving children? As in any war, innocent people suffer. Before the war in Iraq is over, there will be many more. If the insurgents were not trying to prevent democratization, which plays hell with the infrastructure in that country, there would be no starving children.

IMO there is no way to place a price on what democratization in Iraq, and the rest of that region, will mean to the whole world. The trouble spots in the world are not democracies, they are countries governed by tyrants like Saddam.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:32 PM

I also agree with Gurney's post. The original assertion that 4% of Iraqi children were starving (as a result of US actions in particular) seems to be of unknown origin, unless it came from the Hussein government itself.

If either is the case, the asserted figure will have credibility only for those who are ready to believe it regardless.

Subject: RE: BS: This is democracy?
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:52 AM

As Wolfgang observes, when professional researchers go out of their way to warn that "the data is of limited precision," they certainly don't mean to imply "like everything else." They mean they don't have much confidence in it themselves. This is especially true wen they talk about "limited precision" without giving an actual statistical "margin of error," which is usually only a few percentage points. (If a real "margin of error" was reported, the above accounts make no mention of it.)

Yers, I am still skeptical of the reported findings. The news accounts are at least at third hand (original source to named researchers to Ziegler to UN site or Washington Post to us). We do not yet know the the basis of the information (which could simply be unanalyzed or unsourced press reports from, say, Algerian TV), and it is still not clear why the reported phenomenon, even if true, should be occurring at all.

I see no adequate basis, therefore, for the bland statement that the Coalition presence in Iraq is causing children to starve.

By the way, it would be equally insupportable, on the basis of the little we know, to say that starvation in Iraq would be far worse without the availability of Coalition assistance.

But that *could* be the truth, for all we know.