Madness

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
.net...
Thank you. Just read the site. Problem solved!

You're welcome Dudley!

It was immediately obvious to me when I read the post that it describes a
right-winger's fantasy of what liberals are like, and that it was almost
certainly a hoax. It took about 30 seconds of searching to confirm my
suspicion.

--Gary


Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:66%Lb.17297$5V2.29019@attbi_s53...
The rumors you propagate below are false, as you could have discovered
with
a quick web search. http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/target.asp
provides documentation.

--Gary

"karl" wrote in message
...
Allong a similar note:

By: Dick Forrey of the Vietnam Veterans Association

Recently we asked the local TARGET store to be a proud sponsor of the
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall during our spring recognition event.
We received the following reply from the local TARGET management:

"Veterans do not meet our area of giving. We only
donate to the arts, social action groups, gay & lesbian causes, and
education."

So I'm thinking, if the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and veterans
in
general do not meet their donation criteria, then something is really
wrong
at this particular TARGET store. We were not asking for thousands of
dollars, not even hundreds, just a small sponsorship for a memorial
remembrance
As a follow-up, I e-mailed the TARGET US corporate headquarters and
their
response was the same. That's their national policy.

Then I looked into the company further. They will not allow the
United
States Marine Corps to collect for 'Toys for Tots' at any of their
stores.
And during the recent Iraq deployment, they would not allow families
of
employees who were called up for active duty to continue their
insurance
coverage while they were on military service. Then as I dig further,
TARGET
is a French-owned corporation.

Now, I'm thinking again. If TARGET cannot support American Veterans,
then
why should I and my family support their stores by spending our hard
earned
American dollars and to have their profits sent to France.

Without the American Vets, where would France be today?
Speaking German and eating weinershnitzel perhaps.

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:Sw%Lb.17545$sv6.52969@attbi_s52...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
.net...
Thank you. Just read the site. Problem solved!

You're welcome Dudley!

It was immediately obvious to me when I read the post that it describes a
right-winger's fantasy of what liberals are like, and that it was almost
certainly a hoax. It took about 30 seconds of searching to confirm my
suspicion.

--Gary

Actually, you might have spent 45 seconds instead of 30. :-)))
It doesn't look like a hoax at all. I'm reading it as an actual event that
got out of control because the vet and the store employee weren't on the
same page when the vet made the initial request. It looks like the store
employee didn't have the sense to realize the volatility of a situation like
this and allowed the vet to leave feeling his cause was slighted. Then the
vet in turn went over board with his telling of the tale, steering it way
past what it actually was by generalizing it to make it appear worse than it
was in reality. All in all, I'd grade this as a bad performance by BOTH
sides. Hardly a hoax though!
Glad it's getting straightened out for Target's sake. They could have
avoided this whole thing by handling this vet's request better at the point
of sale. Obviously someone didn't know their job. I'm glad whoever that
person was never worked for me. It's a no brainer really. When things like
this walk into a large company, someone who knows what the hell they're
doing should immediately be assigned to handle it....correctly........with
respect.......and so that there is NO misunderstanding that could lead to a
veteran leaving with the impression this one did. Obviously, if the request
was handled properly at the store, and the vet started a totally false
rumor, this would be a different scenario entirely, but from what Target has
said, this doesn't seen to be the case; not to me anyway.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:Sw%Lb.17545$sv6.52969@attbi_s52...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
.net...
Thank you. Just read the site. Problem solved!

You're welcome Dudley!

It was immediately obvious to me when I read the post that it describes
a
right-winger's fantasy of what liberals are like, and that it was almost
certainly a hoax. It took about 30 seconds of searching to confirm my
suspicion.

--Gary

Actually, you might have spent 45 seconds instead of 30. :-)))
It doesn't look like a hoax at all. I'm reading it as an actual event that
got out of control because the vet and the store employee weren't on the
same page when the vet made the initial request.

Yes, it seems to have begun as an honest misunderstanding. But if you read
for 60 seconds instead of 45 :-)), you'll see that many inflammatory details
were added to the vet's letter as it circulated around the 'net. So that
added portion, at least, is a hoax.

Regards,
Gary

It looks like the store
employee didn't have the sense to realize the volatility of a situation
like
this and allowed the vet to leave feeling his cause was slighted. Then the
vet in turn went over board with his telling of the tale, steering it way
past what it actually was by generalizing it to make it appear worse than
it
was in reality. All in all, I'd grade this as a bad performance by BOTH
sides. Hardly a hoax though!
Glad it's getting straightened out for Target's sake. They could have
avoided this whole thing by handling this vet's request better at the
point
of sale. Obviously someone didn't know their job. I'm glad whoever that
person was never worked for me. It's a no brainer really. When things like
this walk into a large company, someone who knows what the hell they're
doing should immediately be assigned to handle it....correctly........with
respect.......and so that there is NO misunderstanding that could lead to
a
veteran leaving with the impression this one did. Obviously, if the
request
was handled properly at the store, and the vet started a totally false
rumor, this would be a different scenario entirely, but from what Target
has
said, this doesn't seen to be the case; not to me anyway.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:yp0Mb.17916$sv6.54629@attbi_s52...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:Sw%Lb.17545$sv6.52969@attbi_s52...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
.net...
Thank you. Just read the site. Problem solved!

You're welcome Dudley!

It was immediately obvious to me when I read the post that it
describes
a
right-winger's fantasy of what liberals are like, and that it was
almost
certainly a hoax. It took about 30 seconds of searching to confirm my
suspicion.

--Gary

Actually, you might have spent 45 seconds instead of 30. :-)))
It doesn't look like a hoax at all. I'm reading it as an actual event
that
got out of control because the vet and the store employee weren't on the
same page when the vet made the initial request.

Yes, it seems to have begun as an honest misunderstanding. But if you
read
for 60 seconds instead of 45 :-)), you'll see that many inflammatory
details
were added to the vet's letter as it circulated around the 'net. So that
added portion, at least, is a hoax.

Regards,
Gary

You could say that I guess Gary, but it seems inconclusive if we're
discussing the issue in an analysis context. Saying it's a hoax as that
applies to the entire issue only covers what the vet did AFTER the incident
at the store. Any in depth analysis would have to include the events that
occurred at the store that precluded the vet's response. I think we're both
dealing in semantics a bit here :-)) It's a matter of interpretation I
guess. I'm reading from what Target has said that they honestly believe that
their employee mangled the situation; in fact; causing the misunderstanding.
This doesn't excuse the vet expanding the issue for his own purpose, but I'm
reading what the vet actually said as his interpretation of Target's
corporate policy based on what he understood from the way he was handled by
Target. This would alter my thinking when considering what he said as
interpretation or a hoax. I'll admit, it's a fine line, but I think you have
to factor in his action as unrelated to what happened in the store before
you can assign a hoax title to what he did.
So I'm reading this as separate interpretations; the store's; the vets';
yours; and mine.
Talk about nobody being on the same page!!!! :-))))))))
Dudley

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
nk.net...
Talk about nobody being on the same page!!!! :-))))))))

Well, I think we're close enough on this one.

Regards,
Gary

Dudley

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:hf1Mb.18243$5V2.30636@attbi_s53...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
nk.net...
Talk about nobody being on the same page!!!! :-))))))))

Well, I think we're close enough on this one.

Regards,
Gary

All the best to you and yours in the coming year.
Dudley

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
k.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:hf1Mb.18243$5V2.30636@attbi_s53...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
nk.net...
Talk about nobody being on the same page!!!! :-))))))))

Well, I think we're close enough on this one.

Regards,
Gary

All the best to you and yours in the coming year.
Dudley

Thanks Dudley, you too!

--Gary