posted on July 22, 2002 01:27:55 PM new
saabsister - Agreed...many issues still to be discussed and worked out.
snowyegret - Yes, hopefully we learn from past history. On your question, I'd answer for the betterment of the whole [group].
Thanks to all of you for posting the reasons you feel so strongly the way you do. That's what I wanted to learn. The other side.
And as I'm sure all can see, I'm aware abuses have been/still can be a problem. We learn from what we did wrong...hopefully not to repeat it again. Is it perfect? No Will we it ever be? No. It is true I do have more trust in our form of government than most here. I do trust that basically we have a form of government that will not allow a 'dictatorship' by President Bush.
posted on July 22, 2002 02:40:23 PM new
Thought you might be interested in this article. Sorry, I had to type the whole thing because I couldn't get a link from their website.
-----------
We're USDA Cops–Watch What You Say to Glickman!
The Washingtonian
P.12
March 1998
Harry Jaffe
Screenwriter Thad Mumford was walking home after an early movie at 4000 Wisconsin Avenue, Northwest, when he recognized Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman. He greeted Glickman and mentioned that they walk their dogs in the same park.
"Can I talk to your for a moment?" Mumford asked.
"Sure," Glickman said.
Mumford said he had been moved by a television documentary he'd seen about discrimination against black farmers n the South.
"Can you do something about the way these people are being treated?" Mumford asked.
"I'll try." Glickman responded.
Mumford told Glickman that USDA had not been honest with the farmers, and he added, "Please, Mr. Secretary, no more lies."
A few days later Mumford answered a knock at his door. The two men identified themselves as federal investigators with the USDA. They wanted to ask Mumford a few questions: Did he have a conversation with Secretary Glickman? Did he make any threats?
It was news to Mumford that the USDA had its own gumshoes. He said he'd rather meet them at his lawyer's office.
In mid-January Mumford met special agents Anthony Troeger and Kevin Harrell at the office of his attorney, Ed Weindenfeld.
"Do you investigate every person who encounters the Secretary?" Weindenfeld asked. The agents explained that the night after Mumford spoken with Glickman, he had received an obscene
phone call at his home. Mumford became a suspect.
"Did you do a background check on Thad?" Weindenfeld asked.
"Oh, yes," Harrell said. "We know everything about him."
"And you're still investigating him?"
"Everyone's a suspect," Harrell said.
The interrogation continued for 30 minutes and ended when Harrell asked: "Do you intend to do the Secretary any harm?"
Mumford said no. Then he and Weindenfeld asked if all federal agencies have special agents. Harrell said he was one of "hundreds" of government criminal investigators.
posted on July 22, 2002 02:49:09 PM new
Clarksville,The Bible code is good for after
the fact.If there was just a way to peek
in before a happening.........
Here is a different spin with astrology
and the Bible on the end days.I was shocked at who was named as the anti Christ.
http://revelation13.net/
Maybe just maybe Bush was suppose to be there(Not a Bush fan)But what if by a
design? Food for thought.
[ edited by junquemama on Jul 22, 2002 02:51 PM ]
[ edited by junquemama on Jul 22, 2002 02:52 PM ]
posted on July 22, 2002 03:04:50 PM new
"The governor of CA informed clinton [as if he hadn't already heard], and clinton issued the "required" proclamation to disperse.And he ordered the Sec. of Defense to employ assets of the DoD to restore order. All this resulted in confusion between the
national guard, the LAPD and the military".
Watts riot in 1992? Pah. The REAL watts riots were in 1966.
Gosh, and here I thought that Clinton was elected in 1992 and inaugurated in 1993. Did he do all of this while Governor of Arkansas?
The law in question does not pertain to the national gaurd or the navy or marine corp. oddly enough, but only to the army and air force.
Saabsister, I saw your question and you've probably already realized that it isn't a fair one. I can say that I spent two nights in full gear on a flightline in Ft. Rucker, Ala. in 1968 and then went to Selma for a picnic with three rounds of live ammo to use if I was fired upon, and will also tell you that one of my proudest moments is a time when I refused to fire on two big white hats on a path through a field which was well in a free fire zone until we could get closer. I used the distance as my excuse, and we did go closer to find that the hats covered the heads of two pretty little Vietnamese girls six and eight years old. We landed and I jumped out to take them up in my arms to fly back to a basecamp where we turned them over to ARVN police. Didn't kill them, and that's a true story.
So I refused an order that day and got a lot of BS later from the bastard pilot. Each day was different, but the pilot was later killed and I wasn't so I must have earned some karma.
posted on July 22, 2002 03:14:17 PM new
Linda, I'm not trying to display a superior attitude to you - just a more educated and experienced one. If it seems condescending to you, that's because I'm not on here to change anyone's mind and all education of this sort is futile, because you need to be on the receiving end for a long while before you can fully appreciate the discussions that we sometimes have here.
Linda, just because you hold an opinion or opinions that many Americans share does not mean that it is right or even a majority view. That you come in here and asked of gravid and snowy: "I don't want to argue, but rather to understand where your distrust of certain things our government does comes from" means that you are going to get opinion, however valid. I put in my own information to explain it to you in as straight and condensed a manner as possible. In no way can you have lived in a third world country under a dictatorship (even though an American - the USA Constitution and Bill of Rights doesn't apply in foreign countries) and seen for yourself what these kinds of repressive governments are like. You apparently also have not read up on and to keep track of important events and history that pertains to these discussions (except here in the RT). You are lacking both education and experience and that makes it difficult for you to comprehend the gravity of this situation and just how thin and sheer that veil that protects us from government and religion is. In your lifetime, I hope that you get the chance to go live under a dictatorship outside the USA so that you can update your point of view.
posted on July 22, 2002 03:15:33 PM new"It's my opinion that IF Bush said that, it was because he knew the 'law' was on his side. What the FL court had ruled was allowing the law to be changed. You can't change the rules of law after an election. That's why the Supreme Court returned the issue to FL...but when they saw they weren't following the law....the USSC stepped in. Again, another thread. We'll never agree on this. Sorry."
posted on July 22, 2002 03:33:16 PM new
Krs, if my husband wants to add to this later, he will. He's at a city Council meeting tonight. His father was an Air Force officer and because of that background and the draft, he said he was conditioned to join the service. It was what was expected of him and not something he questioned. Also he said that he thought that it was the patriotic thing to do. He partied in college in 1966, flunked out, and joined the Air Force to avoid the Army or Marines. He was stationed at two bases in Vietnam . His barracks were fired on once but no one was injured then. When he returned to the States, he was a base policeman(sorry, don't know what they're called in the AF). He said on a patrol of the base one night, he pulled his gun on a kid. He never wanted to do that again so refused to carry a weapon afterward. He was made a clerk for the next 1-1/2 years. He didn't know if they would jail him and thought about going to Canada, but stayed.
To him joining the service was the expected action. He was eighteen when he joined and twenty when he was in Vietnam. It sounds as though you and he took the honorable road. Some don't and that's what I worry about. But to be put in the situation where you have to make those types of decisions at that age is difficult. Now in our fifties, we old farts get to decide where some kid has to go and what he'll have to do. It's just too bad that kids have to mop up our messes.
posted on July 22, 2002 03:40:07 PM new
I agree junquemama. What a brave thing to do krs.
P.S. Saabsister, I saw a documentary last night called "I Regret To Inform You". It was about a woman who lost her husband in Viet Nam and went back there to see the place where he died. It made me cry...all those soldiers were so young. One person said 'what you saw on TV back home was nothing compared to what was really happening'. I hope your husband is OK.
[ edited by kraftdinner on Jul 22, 2002 03:52 PM ]
posted on July 22, 2002 04:10:39 PM new
kraftdinner, my husband was at two relatively safe bases. His brother was an Army medic there in 1969 - he doesn't talk about his experience.
posted on July 22, 2002 04:32:43 PM new
Oh boy.... 1992 huh? Guess that's what happens when I'm trying to deal with auction closing, emails, etc..
and posting at the same time.
I apologize to all. The year was 1965 and the president was Johnson.
posted on July 22, 2002 04:47:56 PM new
Borillar, my husband once took a seminar on management styles. Part of the seminar involved taking the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator. He came home and told a friend and me that the most startling thing he learned was that not everyone was like him and, not only that, but they didn't aspire to be like him. we wondered how he could have been so clueless for so long.
posted on July 22, 2002 04:55:14 PM new
Linda, you are an insult! You and every American like you is an insult to all of those brave men and women in the last two hundred and fifty years who died fighting for those freedoms and rights that you couldn't give a damn about. It is the ignorance of you and people like you that shames the rest of us who value what we have because we know or understand what it would be like to not have them. Your little world and people that share your world is what is going to be the downfall of democracy here in America. People who are as uneducated and uncaring as you are about your civil rights likely voted for Bush (you said you didn't. But others). It is the ignorance of how frail and flimsy is the protection that we all enjoy - or used to enjoy in this country. That simple math escapes you and you ilk does not surprise me, as it doesn't take a degree in rocket science to see that a suspension of rights for the duration of the war and the fact that this is a war that never ends easily equates to kissing your and my and everyone else's rights goodbye FOREVER! That you have continued faith in the monster that took them away, that you have unswerving faith in the corruption of those who appointed him to his throne, that you support the revocation of our Rights and Freedoms that are now gone - FOR GOOD, tells me that you and people like you are an insult to every true-blooded American! And when you and your type are old and gray, you'll remember that it was your ignorance that put all of America and Americans in Harm's Way on a permanent scale. Of course, you'll just plead ignorance.
posted on July 22, 2002 04:55:39 PM new
krs, I'm sorry for posing such a blunt and nosey question. I've felt from your responses to various topics that you've given much thought to where some of our policies might take us. Some people reflect on their past experiences and learn from them and others never do. I think that you're one of the former group.
posted on July 22, 2002 05:34:04 PM new
Saabsister,
No foul. It's only that most vets, probably especially Vietnam vets have things in their past which they would change if they could, many of them to do with having followed orders against their judgement. Many, including myself, have lists of such stuff of which they're not at all proud of or are even ashamed of and would not have exposed. There are questions best left unasked. Many vets, again including myself, have come to see that the only real way to resolve, or even to accept, those issues is to express them but almost all who do come to that can still only come to grips in the company of other vets with like life experiences.
You're right in that I've been one to try to find ways for myself. But the beginning of that effort came in late 1989, a full 20 years after I returned from Vietnam and got out of the army. Prior to that, after some very unpleasant immediate "homecoming" exchanges no one I met, not even my first wife to whom I was married for 12 years, even knew that I had been in Vietnam (she sure caught the brunt of some very odd behaviors though). For other vets that effort has not yet begun even now, and for others it may never occur.
Borillar is right, lindaK, word for word.
errr, 20 not 30 years. LOL!
[ edited by krs on Jul 22, 2002 07:27 PM ]
posted on July 22, 2002 05:38:50 PM new
Linda_K, my husband came home and said that what I had posted about his experience was right - except one thing. It was an older guy with a dog and not a teenager that he pulled his gun on. He said that as an eighteen year old here in the US he would have pointed his gun at whomever his commander wanted the gun pointed , but he wouldn't shoot anyone. If a prisoner ran, he would have fired over his head. He said he would not kill on command - and not here in the US. He said that if he were out of the country and the enemy fired on him, he's shoot to kill, if necessary. I asked him to post this himself but he said he'd gotten a message from AW asking him to choose a plan and he hadn't done so so he wasn't sure he could post. Anyway, he just got home after a looong meeting and is sitting in front of the tube enjoying a beer.
[ edited by saabsister on Jul 22, 2002 06:04 PM ]
posted on July 22, 2002 06:00:21 PM new
krs, my BIL has had a lifetime of problems. It's hard to tease out what is hereditary and what may be the result of his military experience.
posted on July 22, 2002 06:24:48 PM new
Anyone else want to insult me? Go right ahead. If it makes you feel better...go for it. I hold different opinions. You three [krs, Helen, Borillar] seem to be so interested in rights? But don't seem to support any persons freedom of speech unless it follows your beliefs.
posted on July 22, 2002 06:39:50 PM new
saabsister - One more thing before I log off.
Understood... your husband held his personal morals/values. We were of the vietnam generation also. We lost friends and questioned why at times - for what purpose? So I can understand. And of course, as we look back with our youth behind us, many see things differently now than we did then. For me, being attacked internally is different too....different than fighting another nations war. I'm very proud of our nation's service people, and I admire the fact that they are willing to give their lives for what our nation stands for.
We also have friends who served [in vietnam] who would still serve their government [in a minute] in times of our nation being attacked. They had terrible experiences that they rarely share. They don't hate our country or government while still admitting it's faults. And like many feel [those who do support what our country stands] with all our warts...we're still the best.
[saabsister - Not directing that all at you..just making some statements.] Nite.
posted on July 22, 2002 07:35:55 PM new
actually it was after the end of world war one and the veterans were asking for the benefits the government had promised them and withheld.
There was never any decision by the poeple to trat our soldiers as less than a citizen yet there exists this huge parasitic infrastructure within the military sucking the life out of our armed forces that is built on the premise that petty fascism is tolerable under certain circustances.
Now then all Mr Bush is trying to do is extend this to non members of the republican party.
posted on July 22, 2002 08:29:05 PM new
krs, your story of what happened in that free fire zone can give you at least one answer about the best you're capable of.
Saabsister, my husband had to go to work, but he did feel this was a bad idea. He started out Bush's presidency neutral in opinion. You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on July 22, 2002 10:14:45 PM new
No snowy, it wasn't so noble as that. I was more experienced than the pilot who was flying and I knew that the scene wasn't right. No NVA or vietcong walked around in the open wearing those light colored conehats. He just wanted to rack up a score. A 'cowboy' jerk who's stupid moves later got me wounded and even later got another crewchief and himself killed.
No more of this from me for two reasons. One is that we're heading back up to Washington before dawn with more of our stuff. Almost finished now, but damn! Incredible how much can accumulate and be forgotten about until it comes tme to move it.
It's my opinion that IF Bush said that, it was because he knew the 'law' was on his side. What the FL court had ruled was allowing the law to be changed. You can't change the rules of law after an election. That's why the Supreme Court returned the issue to FL...but when they saw they weren't following the law....the USSC stepped in.
I didn't say that Bush said this. I said
[b]Rush say on his radio program, about two weeks to a month before the 2000 election.
Rush said that a person on the Bush team, who was very close to Bush told him (Rush), that they were going to win. There was something that was a sure thing. Or something like that.[/b]
I can see where a person could misread it, Rush and Bush do look alike
My point was that when the election recount was going on, I recalled what Rush said on his radio show about 2 weeks to a month before election day and has since wondered if it had anything to do with the Florida situation, that the voting may have been rigged or messed with by Bush's supporters. Remember right after he won Florida there was mention of Jed "thanks Jed"?
Sorry Linda_K but I just wanted to make sure you knew I never said that Bush said anything. I am not picking on you.
Another thing, for all my life, I have never heard or seen anything good about McCarthyism until the other day. One of my channels that I get, had a show or documentry about how McCarthy was right. Is this propaganda to brainwash us? I think so.
