I agree with the British cartoonist who portrayed the British PM as Bush's lapdog.
Personally, I would be happier (and much more relieved) if George Bush and Tony Blair were removed from power than if the the U.S. and Britain, the real "evil empires" of the 21st century, eliminated Saddam's Iraqi government.
Obviously, Saddam is no angel. However, he is, IMO, mostly a regional threat to the Persian Gulf. The U.S., and, to a lesser extent Britain, represent a much greater threat to global security. Sooner or later, both countries, if they insist on continuing on their present course, will, I believe, "taste what their hands have wrought." As a patriotic American, I pray almost everyday for Bush's impeachment.Reply to message about "Teacher Formation"
mail from info@teacherformation.org Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:32:45 -0400
to mfoster@postmaster.co.uk
cc
subject Reply to your post
memo Rick Jackson replied to your post at the site: .
http://forums1.teacherformation.org/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=gendisc&Number=45
Mark,
The Courage to Teach program, and the work of teacher formation, is chiefly informed by the work of Parker J. Palmer. As well as being an educational leader and writer, Parker has long been influenced by the writing and traditions of Quakerism. For over a decade he was director of studies at Pendle Hill, the Quaker retreat center in Pennsylvania. Many of the simple processes developed over the years by Quaker are helpful in teacher formation work precisely because they are non-sectarian methods of inviting persons to explore their inner lives and inform their outer work in the world.
Rick JacksonThe Right loves George W. Bush. What do you call a guy who promises to have a more humble policy toward the rest of the world, and then becomes the king of the chicken hawks (neoconservatives)?
The Right, including the Fox News Channel, loves its employee, Ollie North. What do you call a guy who lies to Congress about the international terrorism perpetrated by the Reagan administration in Latin America?
The Right hates Bill Clintion. What do you call a guy who lies to Congress about having an affair?
Motto: It is okay to lie about the big stuff, as long as you are a conservative. However, if, like a lot of fairly average guys, you lie about having had an affair, you are, to these conservatives, the scum of the earth.
Should we believe these conservatives when they claim to be the voice of American morality, or are they simply lying?Juliet [on Fox and Friends, a program on the Fox News Channel] made the statement that "Allah'u'Akbar" is a Jihad rallying cray. That is simply misleading. If members of a Ku Klux Klan organization yell, "hallelujah," does that make it a Christian Identity rallying cry?
Allah'u'Akbar means "God is Great." Like hallelujah, it is an invocation to the Creator. It was used in Islam centuries before the Wahabbi and other radical Islamist movements started.
[an email]>>at least we all agree that the USA has the right to strike back and defend it is citizens<<
In Afghanistan, I agree in principle (although I do not feel that Bush's motives were all too altruistic). However, how does that relate to Iraq?
Personally, I despise unilateralism. In international relations, I do not accept that one nation, including the U.S., has the right to determine the fate of another nation. King George is basically saying:
"Okay, United Nations, either go along with what I am telling you, or we will do it ourselves."
In other words, Georgie's latest speech is simply a continuation of his cowboy diplomacy, "You are with us, or you are against us." Might equals right. Sooner or later, this political arrogance will come back to haunt my country.>>I don't know enough about World War II to say anything intelligent on this topic. They did target Japanese civilians though... I've never heard that a Japanese invasion would have been inevitable though.<<
Yep. Isn't that what the U.S. government calls terrorism? Targeting civilians?
Oh, wait, since it was done by America, it can't be terrorism. I almost forgotHi, Jerry [Nachman - of MSNBC],
Sorry for the second message, but I wanted to respond to your discussion of anger.
I think that there are two kinds of anger.
There is the non-productive anger that wells up inside one's heart and consumes one from the inside.
Then, there is the more productive anger, sometimes called righteous indignation, which is a sensible response made by a person of conscience to social and individual injustice. It is this righteous indignation which should motivate each of us in our response to terrorism.
It is unfortunate, I think, that we use the same word, anger, to describe both of these emotions. They are really not the same.
Cheers,
Mark A. FosterIf you like Mozila, try K-Meleon (for Windows):
http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/
It is an unbloated Mozilla - not the same strain of Mozilla used by Netscape.
There is also a similar browser for Linux:
http://galeon.sourceforge.net/
SourceForge is a good site to look at. They have hundreds of projects hosted.>>And: Have you noticed how after last September all kind of absurd laws have passed (in Europe and America)? Most of them were already there and only waited for the right state of paranoia and an atmosphere of fear so people would not notice how their freedoms gets taken away step by step.<<
Which is one reason why some have argued that the Bush administration (though not necessarily G.W. Bush himself) had specific advance knowledge about the time and location of the attacks but elected to do nothing about it.
At one time, I actually agreed with the above statement. Now, I have my doubts. However, I would not, by the same token, put much past the criminal Bush administration.Sorry that happened to you. Although I have visited Britain a few times, I don't know much about your legal system.
In the U.S., I would be inclined to blame it on John Ashcroft, the man who lost his seat in the senate to a dead man and was then appointed Attorney General by Bush.
>>Please post your thoughts on the USA plan to go to war with Iraq (possibly) and what stance your country has towards the plan. Please don't turn this into a spam thing and think about your answer before you post, thankyou. I will reserve my thoughts until later on.<<
I would rather:
1. see the European Union invade the U.S. and
2. have the International Court arrest and try Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc. for war crimes.
Then, after the U.S. has, in its present form, been thoroughly deconstructed, we can talk about Iraq.
In principle, I had no objection to the U.S. overthrowing the Taliban government in Iraq, since they were harboring the al-Qá'ída, which were complicit in the events of Sept. 11, 2001.
However, the problem is that the so-called war on terrorism is more about making the world safe for American capitalism than it is a war on terrorism. In other words, it is merely the latest phase of American imperialistic adventurism.Jerry [Nachman],
Here is my suggestion for MSNBC prime time:
Make it into a three-hour program, hosted by Chris Matthews, that would be a cross between Hardball and the Today Show. There could be segments by Phil Donahue, Ashleigh Banfield, Dan Abrams, yourself, and others.
In my view, Jerry, you have some of the most talented journalists on MSNBC (and NBC). With the right format, I think it can really work.
Cheers,
Mark FosterAn email to the show, "Fox and Friends" (Fox News Channel):
I am sorry to see that Col. Oliver North displayed the same arrogance in his interview this morning as he demonstrated in the 1980s congressional hearings.
Instead of expressing gratitude and humility at the comparison Steve made to Tom Clancey's novel, North bragged about how his novel is higher ranked than Clancey's and that while he, North, worked with the boys in uniform, Clancey only interviewed them.
North is evidence that old dogs don't die, they just bark louder.
Cheers,
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.Copyright © 2002 Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. All rights reserved.
|
