GAO Report: GA Security Threat

Martin Hotze wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote:

Are you suggesting that Saddam is winning the war? Then you have an even
stranger definition of 'winning.'

at best there will be a corrupt democracy, at worst it will be a religious led
country.

All democracies are corrupt. Who was it that said "democracy is the
worst form of government in the world, except for all the others"? Do
you REALLY think Iraq will be worse than under the Baathists? Wow.

The outcome will be more terrorists and more terrorist attacks. And you
will enforce more "security" and "defend your country" in other parts of the
world because of the rising terrorist attacks.

Here's a news flash - the terrorists don't hate us because we take
action against them (note all the attacks under the Clinton
administration). They understand force. They hate us because our
values are different from theirs, and because they don't understand
us.

They don't understand us because they're fed a non-stop stream of
propaganda via their media. If you've ever seen coverage from Al
Jezeera, you may be shocked to realize that many Arab countries won't
allow it to be broadcast because they consider it TOO LIBERAL. Yikes.

Having a "real democracy" (warts and all) in the midst of that area
can only be a good thing. Witness the pro-democracy protests in Iran
that happened after the fall of Saddam.

And then you will sit back and will wonder why less people like the way you are
acting.

I don't wonder at all. It's only human nature to want to ignore tough
problems, and hope they "just go away". That was a viable option
before technology got to the point where a small group of terrorists
can kill millions instead of hundreds. Now we deal with it, or let a
handful of murderers set international policy by intimidation.

Not the kind of world I want to live in. YMMV.

Mark Hickey

There's "objective" and there's "biased". If you watch Al Jezeera
(sp?) you come away with the same conclusion. Either way, even the
most US-centric news agencies end up spending all their time talking
about the the occasional attack on coalition forces, and almost none
on all the progress that's being made in Iraq and Afghanistan
(remember Afghanistan?) which is a MUCH bigger story in reality.

Ok, so what is this unbiased news source you use reporting all this
"progress"?

I suspect that your news is as biased as ours, only with different slants.
Our news has taken a turn in the direction of being more critical of policy
and action in Afghanistan and Iraq. During earlier times, they were more
supportive.

You say "Politician(s) never lie. They just tell their own truth." So it is
with the press. Anyone who has ever had any dealing with them knows that
they are always looking for an angle or a slant to a story so that it will
sell. Ordinary, factual reporting of unsensational events does not sell.

Humbly yours,
Father John
Havre de Grace, MD

P.S. to Jean-Paul: Sorry, I couldn't resist my two cents, but I agree with
you, without the "f" word -- let's get back in the air and fly our
ultralights.


"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
"John T" wrote:


Not to mention learning what's happening in Iraq. "Good news is no
news."


so we might have to discuss wether the news we (in Europe) get are more
objective than yours. I don't know what you get, but if I only believe 50%
of
what I see here (in European news) than I would be ashamed of beeing an
American
claiming to live in the western free world.

#m
--
Politician never lie. They just tell their own truth.
(Dave in r.a.p.)

Hotze is an anti-Semitic bigot who thinks the US should stop protecting
Israel so that the Arabs will be free to slaughter all the Jews. He is not
worth bothering with.

Mark,

There's "objective" and there's "biased".


Wrong! There's no objectivity in journalism - one of the first things
you learn as a journalist. I am one. We are human, too.

Oh, and to describe Foxnews (oxymoron alert!) or even CNN as even
"near-objective" would certainly be a stretch. They are just like Al
Jazeera (sp?) - only on the other side.

What are your sources for your superior knowledge? I can see no
progress at all in Afghanistan, quite the contrary, in fact.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

C,

wow, now there's a reality-distortion field if ever I saw one.

Why is it that guys like you and Tom S. always resort to low-level
insults when you run out of fact-based arguments? I thought you were
grown up?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:47:48 +0100, Martin Hotze
wrote:

so we might have to discuss wether the news we (in Europe) get are more
objective than yours. I don't know what you get, but if I only believe 50% of
what I see here (in European news) than I would be ashamed of beeing an American
claiming to live in the western free world.

Martin, if your SPIEGEL-TV thing was any indicator at all, then yellow
journalists have control over in European news, and I wouldn't trust
'em as far as I could throw their TV truck.

Rob

--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:40:32 +0100, Thomas Borchert
wrote:

Many Germans and
Japanese fought and killed Allied troops long after the war.


I am German. I am quite well educated in my country's history (I can
point at Iraq on a map, too). Your above statement is total BS.

Y'know, I once asked the a couple graduates of Germany's Realschulen
and Gesamtschulen (arguably much, much better than the public schools
in the U.S.) what they knew of World War II.

One of them told me that his study of history included a curriculum
which reached the point of Hitler's rise to Chancellor of the Weimar
Republic. Next day, they were talking about Konrad Adenauer. [1]
Skipped that embarrassing war altogether.

Therefore, I doubt your good education in your country's history
included the things these people are talking about.

No fear, though, American students, if they learn history at all,
never for a minute hear about the United States' failed invasion of
Russia in the early 20th Century.

Rob
[1] Adenauer was one of the first leaders of the Federal Republic of
Germany.

--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card

Robert,

I wouldn't trust
'em as far as I could throw their TV truck.


Yeah, Fox News is much less biased...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Robert,

One of them told me that his study of history included a curriculum
which reached the point of Hitler's rise to Chancellor of the Weimar
Republic. Next day, they were talking about Konrad Adenauer. [1]
Skipped that embarrassing war altogether.


This story has no basis in fact, at all. It is simply impossible that
you have experienced that, unless it was during the 50s - where we
didn't have Gesamtschulen. You're either a liar or you have been lied
to - sorry!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)