Godzilla, welcome back.
You will have noted that JTS has pointed out that Mr Blair's own backbench MPs defied a 3 Line Whip in the vote taken last week.
The majority of Mr Blair's non-payroll party members in Parliament, voted against his Government's position over going to war.
It was the Conservative Party MPs who voted in numbers to support Mr Blair.
This is a very interesting point for those who would wish to consider the dynamic of the process.
This point is particularly apposite, when one considers that several members of Mr Blair's Government resigned in the middle of last week. The most significant of those Government Ministers who resigned was Robin Cook, who until recently was Mr Blair's Foreign Secretary. Mr Cook is a man of great parliamentary experience and an intellectually, gifted speaker.
I apologise for replying at length to your posting, but I'm sure you will appreciate that the matters raised in the Forum do tend to cover large areas of discussion.
I note that your response and reply to my suggestion to 'trawl' previous postings, is half a line less then the afore mentioned 3 lines (whip variety).
Do you feel that you have looked closely enough so far, at the various points and matters raised by several contributers?
I'm sure, that given more time, you would be better able to come to a personal viewpoint about those discussions. Perhaps we could revisit points which you are not clear about, or which you find particularly worthy of note?
As others have alluded to in welcoming you to the forum; we look forward to a new contributer's political and military opinions.
By the way, I do not understand your question to me about Mr Bush and the WTC. Could you clarify the issue which you are attempting to raise please?
When you say that it is 'troubling,' do you mean that you are troubled; Mr Bush is troubled; contributers' postings regarding the issue are troubling; or some other aspect which is not clear?
hell bent on war
Linda ~
Speaking for myself, people who disagree with me do not get personally attacked. After personal attacks on me, they may eventually end up being personally attacked by me, however. It is the final response that I continue to try to avoid and that is borne of imperfection. It doesn't stop me from keeping trying, though.
~ Lizzytysh
Speaking for myself, people who disagree with me do not get personally attacked. After personal attacks on me, they may eventually end up being personally attacked by me, however. It is the final response that I continue to try to avoid and that is borne of imperfection. It doesn't stop me from keeping trying, though.
~ Lizzytysh
I am taking this quote at face value, as to its legitimate source [due to the details including in the naming of the source, as well as the details in the quote itself]. An historical photograph of the speaker was also included with it. If anyone cares to research it to prove its wording or source to be incorrect, I welcome your doing so, as well as its invalidation. It appears to me that, despite the old adage that we never seem to learn from history, that some countries have both studied and applied certain theories/principles "well." The parallels are chilling, and I have every reason to believe that this is not a contrived quotation.
"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
~ Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall at the Nuremberg Trials after WWII
-
Andrew McGeever
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 10:02 pm
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
Following the 'chads' is entertaining and I have a true tale to tell which draws an amusing comparison.
When NASA wanted to provide its astronauts with a totally reliable method of keeping notes and comments whilst in orbit, it went to a great deal of trouble and expense in developing a 'high-tech' pen which can write at any angle, meaning straight down, and even upside down. It has a small pump which forces the ink towards the point and never fails to provide the ink for the astronauts to write. A truly amazing piece of technology. It is impressive and I am not being sarcastic.
However, when the USSR faced the same dilemma they approached the problem differently. They used pencils.
Now wouldn't it be interesting, if certain polling booths, in a certain country, had not used new fangled ways of recording votes, but had kept to the old fashioned, tried and trusted method of using a pencil to make a cross on a ballot paper. No 'chads,' no confusion, no problem in my country. We make a cross and everyone knows exactly what we mean.
When NASA wanted to provide its astronauts with a totally reliable method of keeping notes and comments whilst in orbit, it went to a great deal of trouble and expense in developing a 'high-tech' pen which can write at any angle, meaning straight down, and even upside down. It has a small pump which forces the ink towards the point and never fails to provide the ink for the astronauts to write. A truly amazing piece of technology. It is impressive and I am not being sarcastic.
However, when the USSR faced the same dilemma they approached the problem differently. They used pencils.
Now wouldn't it be interesting, if certain polling booths, in a certain country, had not used new fangled ways of recording votes, but had kept to the old fashioned, tried and trusted method of using a pencil to make a cross on a ballot paper. No 'chads,' no confusion, no problem in my country. We make a cross and everyone knows exactly what we mean.
AAAAAARRRRRRUUUUGH
Byron,
I cannot write long posts. I did not know that I had to write more than three lines. Is this the proper procedure? If it is, I will try.
Some have critiziced Prime Minister Blair, but not with harsh words reserved for American President and people. Very mild and bland. No mealy mouths. No crazy man, no ignorant niave British people.
My question on the World Trade Center is this: Do you and vern.silver believe George Bush blew up the Word Trade Center, knew the World Trade Center was going to be blown up? And he hid in Florida. This has been said on this Forum. Do You belive this theory? Yes, No.
Byron,
I cannot write long posts. I did not know that I had to write more than three lines. Is this the proper procedure? If it is, I will try.
Some have critiziced Prime Minister Blair, but not with harsh words reserved for American President and people. Very mild and bland. No mealy mouths. No crazy man, no ignorant niave British people.
My question on the World Trade Center is this: Do you and vern.silver believe George Bush blew up the Word Trade Center, knew the World Trade Center was going to be blown up? And he hid in Florida. This has been said on this Forum. Do You belive this theory? Yes, No.
Lizzytysh, Byron, etc.
Yes, everything is cleared up now. Thanks.
I was interested in your post, Byron, about the NASA pen. Living near a NASA Research Facility and acquainted with many NASA engineers I can tell you that this is a joke that has circulated for 3 decades.. It can be found on many humour web sites. No one knows who the author was originally. Usually the figure given for the cost of the design of the pen is 12 billion dollars. But it is not a true story.
NASA likes research. development and technology. So do the American people. Other countries prefer to do things differently when it comes to technology. As you point out in how the Russians use pencils in space and in how the British use an X when they vote. These kind of differences are great.
Yes, everything is cleared up now. Thanks.
I was interested in your post, Byron, about the NASA pen. Living near a NASA Research Facility and acquainted with many NASA engineers I can tell you that this is a joke that has circulated for 3 decades.. It can be found on many humour web sites. No one knows who the author was originally. Usually the figure given for the cost of the design of the pen is 12 billion dollars. But it is not a true story.
NASA likes research. development and technology. So do the American people. Other countries prefer to do things differently when it comes to technology. As you point out in how the Russians use pencils in space and in how the British use an X when they vote. These kind of differences are great.
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
Godzilla, fear not about the length of the responses which you want to make.
Can I say that someone I know very well spent some time in Japan.
The one thing which they found different from their own country and culture was that the Japanese people were so reserved and polite.
It was quite noticeable that the Japanese people had been brought up in a culture which frowns upon displays of unseemly behaviour, which includes how people show respect to others, even when there are times which are awkward.
Very many British people have also been raised on a diet of politeness and I know that people from other countries find it difficult to gauge the true depth of feeling which British people have.
You probably need to spend some time reading the postings from British contributers, before you can spot the little hints in the language, which gently underline the true feelings of the writer.
In some ways, our 2 cultures are similar, in that we each appreciate the importance of one another's personal space. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that we live on relatively small islands.
We don't have the big wide open spaces were we can go and shout our heads off, because the chances are that there will usually be someone within earshot, even if we cannot see them.
And lets face it, it's not very pleasant to have someone bursting your eardrums, just because they cannot be bothered to consider other people's personal space?
Turning now to your question about the WTC and Mr Bush.
In Britain, a person is considered innocent until they are proved/found guilty in a court of law, or if they plead guilty in that court of law. Even then, the prosecution has to corroborate the guilty plea with undeniable evidence. There is far more to it than that of course.
One interesting feature of British law is that in order to ensure that an accused person is entitled to be treated as fairly as is possible, the jury which hears the evidence in court, only gets to see and hear the prosecution case in that courtroom.
The British people find it unusual that in some countries, when an innocent person is accused of a crime (until found guilty) the whole of the media are allowed to publish and discuss details of the case. To the British way of thinking, this seems to be an infringement of a citizen's right to be treated as entirely innocent until the end of the court case.
In fact, there has just been a ruling that makes it illegal for any media to pay any witness, any money for any details about a case which that witness may be going to give evidence in.
It must be terrible to be an innocent person who finds all sorts of details about their personal life spread out before the whole world, even before they enter a court of law.
I know other countries have their own systems and I am not criticising them. They don't tell us how to do our job, and we don't tell them. That's good manners. We just happen to do things differently.
The French have a system in which an examining magistrate calls for all the evidence so that he can inquire into all aspects of a crime. It is an inquisitorial legal system. The British use an adversorial system, with prosecution and defence putting their respective cases.
The law is a very complex matter Godzilla, which makes your question an impossible one to answer in simple terms.
If you take on board all the points I made at the begining of this posting about how the British use respectful language in their writing in this forum, and put those lessons into practice about how I've responded to your question about Mr Bush, you will hopefully discover that I have made my position with regard to your question, perfectly clear.
Can I say that someone I know very well spent some time in Japan.
The one thing which they found different from their own country and culture was that the Japanese people were so reserved and polite.
It was quite noticeable that the Japanese people had been brought up in a culture which frowns upon displays of unseemly behaviour, which includes how people show respect to others, even when there are times which are awkward.
Very many British people have also been raised on a diet of politeness and I know that people from other countries find it difficult to gauge the true depth of feeling which British people have.
You probably need to spend some time reading the postings from British contributers, before you can spot the little hints in the language, which gently underline the true feelings of the writer.
In some ways, our 2 cultures are similar, in that we each appreciate the importance of one another's personal space. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that we live on relatively small islands.
We don't have the big wide open spaces were we can go and shout our heads off, because the chances are that there will usually be someone within earshot, even if we cannot see them.
And lets face it, it's not very pleasant to have someone bursting your eardrums, just because they cannot be bothered to consider other people's personal space?
Turning now to your question about the WTC and Mr Bush.
In Britain, a person is considered innocent until they are proved/found guilty in a court of law, or if they plead guilty in that court of law. Even then, the prosecution has to corroborate the guilty plea with undeniable evidence. There is far more to it than that of course.
One interesting feature of British law is that in order to ensure that an accused person is entitled to be treated as fairly as is possible, the jury which hears the evidence in court, only gets to see and hear the prosecution case in that courtroom.
The British people find it unusual that in some countries, when an innocent person is accused of a crime (until found guilty) the whole of the media are allowed to publish and discuss details of the case. To the British way of thinking, this seems to be an infringement of a citizen's right to be treated as entirely innocent until the end of the court case.
In fact, there has just been a ruling that makes it illegal for any media to pay any witness, any money for any details about a case which that witness may be going to give evidence in.
It must be terrible to be an innocent person who finds all sorts of details about their personal life spread out before the whole world, even before they enter a court of law.
I know other countries have their own systems and I am not criticising them. They don't tell us how to do our job, and we don't tell them. That's good manners. We just happen to do things differently.
The French have a system in which an examining magistrate calls for all the evidence so that he can inquire into all aspects of a crime. It is an inquisitorial legal system. The British use an adversorial system, with prosecution and defence putting their respective cases.
The law is a very complex matter Godzilla, which makes your question an impossible one to answer in simple terms.
If you take on board all the points I made at the begining of this posting about how the British use respectful language in their writing in this forum, and put those lessons into practice about how I've responded to your question about Mr Bush, you will hopefully discover that I have made my position with regard to your question, perfectly clear.
Well, Nan, you've just saved me a good 1/2+ hour tonite. I spent half of my lunch hour today answering the post by you re: the looking glass and my comment about "if all else fails." It was a friendly post, but a detailed one as to why I used my family to make three, entirely separate points in one fell swoop. I explained those. HOWEVER, when I clicked on Submit [being already 7 minutes late back from lunch], I found that the Internet had gone "down," so to speak. That was to be my tonite's assignment, recreating that post. So, now, with MUCH relief, for more than ONE reason, I see I don't have to, unless you're interested in having me outline my three points and reasons 
.
The bottom line is the most important one, and that's that this has been cleared up for/with you, and I'm glad. So, do you live in Florida or where?
I say no, no, no to the pencils for voting ~ at least in Florida. Too many erasures could alter the result, with too many swearing that the voter must have changed their mind.
I'm about to be late getting elsewhere again, so I'll just exit with telling you that I'm glad you accepted my apology for my side of our misinterpretations. As you'll recall, I contacted you privately when you first came here, regarding something totally unrelated to this forum, and would certainly not have followed that up with offending you. I'm glad to see you posting again.
~ Elizabeth
.The bottom line is the most important one, and that's that this has been cleared up for/with you, and I'm glad. So, do you live in Florida or where?
I say no, no, no to the pencils for voting ~ at least in Florida. Too many erasures could alter the result, with too many swearing that the voter must have changed their mind.
I'm about to be late getting elsewhere again, so I'll just exit with telling you that I'm glad you accepted my apology for my side of our misinterpretations. As you'll recall, I contacted you privately when you first came here, regarding something totally unrelated to this forum, and would certainly not have followed that up with offending you. I'm glad to see you posting again.
~ Elizabeth
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
Elizabeth, any erasures, alterations or additions to a simple cross, render the vote void. All that is acceptable is a simple x in a square next to a candidate's name.
The Ballot papers are emptied out of the ballot box in front of a room full of people and none has the opportunity to touch the ballot papers. The teams then go through every paper to ensure it contains a x and then the ballot papers are put into the seperate piles for their chosen candidate. It is watched from the time the paper is posted into the box at the polling station until the end of the count. Policemen are present at the polling stations to prevent trouble, in case someone tries to vote more than once. Our names are checked against the electoral register when we go to the polling station officials and we are handed the ballot paper. It is all very simple and closely watched. It is a system which has served us well and in which 'chads' are non existent. I know other countries use the same system. We find it difficult to understand why a system which is open to differing interpretations of choice is tolerated. But it's none of my business anyway. Except when supporting Andrew's gradual awakening.
The Ballot papers are emptied out of the ballot box in front of a room full of people and none has the opportunity to touch the ballot papers. The teams then go through every paper to ensure it contains a x and then the ballot papers are put into the seperate piles for their chosen candidate. It is watched from the time the paper is posted into the box at the polling station until the end of the count. Policemen are present at the polling stations to prevent trouble, in case someone tries to vote more than once. Our names are checked against the electoral register when we go to the polling station officials and we are handed the ballot paper. It is all very simple and closely watched. It is a system which has served us well and in which 'chads' are non existent. I know other countries use the same system. We find it difficult to understand why a system which is open to differing interpretations of choice is tolerated. But it's none of my business anyway. Except when supporting Andrew's gradual awakening.
-
vern.silver
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:58 pm
- Location: Sault Ste Marie, Canada
Dear Byron ~
Now, that is just so blissfully simple that it wouldn't allow enough wiggle room here. Sorry, too clear cut. Maybe it has something to do with the technology obsession? Outta the horse and buggy days into the technologically correct phase. Many of the voting precincts here are small enough to where this would work perfectly well, and as Andrew suggested, were it not for hanging chads, we wouldn't be in this war.
I'm very concerned with what our and your and Australia's troops are going to meet with when they reach Baghdad. Saddam's implications are severe, and I wonder just how it may play out. The casualties and POWs mount, as well.
Vern ~ I'm thinking Godzilla included you in the question, simply because of the similarity in your thinking, overall. Since he was asking for clarification, there clearly wasn't enough to go on, without asking. I have to say that I'm the largest proponent on that issue.
Godzilla ~ Of course, I think it's unfair to them for you to imply in any way that my views might represent any number of other Americans' views here. I don't recall the "crazy man" phrase, but the other two were clearly mine, and I'll include that one if you don't find a proper home for it. Robert is the only American that comes to mind who has been outspoken about these political quagmires, who lives in this country.
Well, if anyone is interested in clues as to how long the U.S. intends to be over there, I received a flyer [once printed off the computer] today that was work-related, that contains a few. Across the top of the 8 1/2 x 11 sheet are graphics of the American flag on the left, the bust & up of the Statue of Liberty in the middle, and the American flag again on the right.
Then, in large print and centered into three line breaks is: "DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY / FEDERAL JOBS / ONE-YEAR TEMP." In the description is "Distribution center positions from order fillers to accounting - These are Federal positions." It tells when and where to apply. At the bottom on the left and right are identical graphics of a man and woman packing cardboard boxes assembly-line style.
In the memo itself that accompanies the flyer, the message written is:
"There will be a DLA Recruitment at the [specific location] office on [date and time] for Federal Positions (one-year Temp) starting by 07 April. We do not have the exact positions and salary at this time, but the government (DLA) is opening an aviation distribution center at the NAS [Naval Air Station] Jacksonville as soon as possible. Positions will range from Pick/Pack, Forklift, Order Fillers, QA [that stands for Quality Assurance], Inventory, Ship/Receive and Office Support. Candidates will fill out an SF 612 [gotta love those government forms] and have an on-the-spot interview. All candidates must have transportation and car insurance to be able to work on the Navy Base. Please see attached Flyer. They are recruiting about 80 positions."
Anyone need a job and care to join the American War Machine? Good for at least a year.....I think it was 56 years that it took us to get out of Panama, but it would appear that active-duty packing will be pretty solid for the specified time here.
Well, need to catch up on some lost sleep from the past 24 hours [after I stop off at Comments & Questions]. Goodnite all and sleep well.
~ Elizabeth
Now, that is just so blissfully simple that it wouldn't allow enough wiggle room here. Sorry, too clear cut. Maybe it has something to do with the technology obsession? Outta the horse and buggy days into the technologically correct phase. Many of the voting precincts here are small enough to where this would work perfectly well, and as Andrew suggested, were it not for hanging chads, we wouldn't be in this war.
I'm very concerned with what our and your and Australia's troops are going to meet with when they reach Baghdad. Saddam's implications are severe, and I wonder just how it may play out. The casualties and POWs mount, as well.
Vern ~ I'm thinking Godzilla included you in the question, simply because of the similarity in your thinking, overall. Since he was asking for clarification, there clearly wasn't enough to go on, without asking. I have to say that I'm the largest proponent on that issue.
Godzilla ~ Of course, I think it's unfair to them for you to imply in any way that my views might represent any number of other Americans' views here. I don't recall the "crazy man" phrase, but the other two were clearly mine, and I'll include that one if you don't find a proper home for it. Robert is the only American that comes to mind who has been outspoken about these political quagmires, who lives in this country.
Well, if anyone is interested in clues as to how long the U.S. intends to be over there, I received a flyer [once printed off the computer] today that was work-related, that contains a few. Across the top of the 8 1/2 x 11 sheet are graphics of the American flag on the left, the bust & up of the Statue of Liberty in the middle, and the American flag again on the right.
Then, in large print and centered into three line breaks is: "DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY / FEDERAL JOBS / ONE-YEAR TEMP." In the description is "Distribution center positions from order fillers to accounting - These are Federal positions." It tells when and where to apply. At the bottom on the left and right are identical graphics of a man and woman packing cardboard boxes assembly-line style.
In the memo itself that accompanies the flyer, the message written is:
"There will be a DLA Recruitment at the [specific location] office on [date and time] for Federal Positions (one-year Temp) starting by 07 April. We do not have the exact positions and salary at this time, but the government (DLA) is opening an aviation distribution center at the NAS [Naval Air Station] Jacksonville as soon as possible. Positions will range from Pick/Pack, Forklift, Order Fillers, QA [that stands for Quality Assurance], Inventory, Ship/Receive and Office Support. Candidates will fill out an SF 612 [gotta love those government forms] and have an on-the-spot interview. All candidates must have transportation and car insurance to be able to work on the Navy Base. Please see attached Flyer. They are recruiting about 80 positions."
Anyone need a job and care to join the American War Machine? Good for at least a year.....I think it was 56 years that it took us to get out of Panama, but it would appear that active-duty packing will be pretty solid for the specified time here.
Well, need to catch up on some lost sleep from the past 24 hours [after I stop off at Comments & Questions]. Goodnite all and sleep well.
~ Elizabeth
The man who wrote this is a veteran of the Gulf War, and is still in the service so I do have faith in his knowledge.
So the Gulf war ended in 1991, Saddam signed the UN resolution, he was to allow inspectors in to his country to make sure he held up his end of the deal, they were kicked out I believe. Why did Saddam sign resolution 1440? Does his not living up to his end of the bargain have anything to do with what is going on now? Why was nothing done for twelve years? I don't have answers but in my mind things don't add up in Saddams favor that this war is unjust.
I doubt that I have been scaring people off this board for the past year, as for any new people I doubt if I will scare them off either. What I am saying is I am an American and believe opposite of many of you here and when I read the propaganda written by some Americans about our government, and our President, when we are at war, it is a nightmare.
Just about everyone across Europe and elswhere are horrified with what Iraq did with the POWs and what do I read on here about it when elazar mentioned it. No where else have I heard a comment like that, well come to think of it I did and I guess they were also cheering watching them being shot.
It is this thread that I have a problem with.
So the Gulf war ended in 1991, Saddam signed the UN resolution, he was to allow inspectors in to his country to make sure he held up his end of the deal, they were kicked out I believe. Why did Saddam sign resolution 1440? Does his not living up to his end of the bargain have anything to do with what is going on now? Why was nothing done for twelve years? I don't have answers but in my mind things don't add up in Saddams favor that this war is unjust.
I doubt that I have been scaring people off this board for the past year, as for any new people I doubt if I will scare them off either. What I am saying is I am an American and believe opposite of many of you here and when I read the propaganda written by some Americans about our government, and our President, when we are at war, it is a nightmare.
Just about everyone across Europe and elswhere are horrified with what Iraq did with the POWs and what do I read on here about it when elazar mentioned it. No where else have I heard a comment like that, well come to think of it I did and I guess they were also cheering watching them being shot.
It is this thread that I have a problem with.
Linda
AAAAAAARRRRRRRUGH Byron,
Yes cultures can be different yet same. We here in Japan would like those open spaces though. I have been a member since 20-12-02 on the Forum. I read all the new posts every day or two or three. I looked up the word trawl. Very good word. I trawl many times.
I admire Americans and British. They are not afriad to say what they think. Only British people speak more quietly about their country than about when they speak about America
This is why I asked about President Bush and the World Trade Disaster Theory. I understand now that you think he did it. Is that correct?
Godzilla
Yes cultures can be different yet same. We here in Japan would like those open spaces though. I have been a member since 20-12-02 on the Forum. I read all the new posts every day or two or three. I looked up the word trawl. Very good word. I trawl many times.
I admire Americans and British. They are not afriad to say what they think. Only British people speak more quietly about their country than about when they speak about America
This is why I asked about President Bush and the World Trade Disaster Theory. I understand now that you think he did it. Is that correct?Godzilla