[IP] more on more on What if Cat Stevens had flown under a different name?
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tom Fairlie <tfairlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 24, 2004 10:38:24 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] more on more on What if Cat Stevens had flown under a
different name?
Hi Dave,
It appears that I can [virtually] kill two birds with one stone by
replying to the "Cat Stevens" thread and this new comment as well.
As the author of the "bohunk" missive, I agree that I was, for the
most part, engaging in anti-intellectual behavior. In fact, it was
mostly
an emotional response, as should have been obvious by my tone.
However, the real problem here and with society is the widespread
use of such anti-intellectualism to shut off true debate. As just one
example, using the word "fascist" to describe the current administration
should not automatically end the conversation. Although I doubt
GWB has any "Final Solution" in mind, there are enough authoritarian
bats up in his belfry to at least discuss where we're going. Remember,
a *lot* of people continue to praise Mussolini for prompt trains, etc.
Food for thought (to be read in order):
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0709-03.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0112-08.htm
Likewise, the Cat Stevens issue has polarized people into CAPPS II
pro/con camps instead of dealing with the core issues: terrorism and
security. Terrorism wasn't a major problem before GWB (relative to
other problems) and it hasn't been a problem [in the U.S.] since 9-11.
Given this, why are we spending $130+ billion in Iraq (with $70-200B
more to come) when the WMDs appear to be Pakistan, Iran, Malaysia,
North Korea, and elsewhere and the bulk of the terrorists are clearly
not in Iraq either? This money, besides being used to shore up health
care,
education, or campaign reform domestically, could certainly have been
used as aid to the poor countries that currently support the terrorists
or, instead, a campaign to isolate them.
Israel proved that all the security in the world, and a quasi-martial
law
society, doesn't reduce the threat from terrorism. By the same token,
the focus on education and economic growth in Ireland has transformed
the country from a dismally poor country that supported terrorism to
one of the more high-tech, progressive countries in just a decade.
I resent the fact that the administration has whipped the population
into a cowering, bigoted mess that is willing to throw our freedoms
and money out the window on a flawed whim to combat a menace
that will certainly never go away given our current course of action.
Most of the deaths due to terrorism since 9-11 have occurred this year
and the number of incidents each year has been on the rise since 9-11.
http://www.juancole.com/
2004_09_01_juancole_archive.html#109487993311862124
http://www.terrorism.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Attacks&file=index
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5889435
Of course, now I've stirred the pot even more. In the interest of
the educated IP audience, I would like to suggest that all of us
think about and debate these problems rather than follow the
rhetoric of our "leaders". I think neither candidate has a clear
path forward and I continue to assert that I am not a Democrat.
However, I do think that the path we've taken over the past 4 years
has been more destructive than I could have imagined.
Tom Fairlie
www.tomfairlie.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Farber" <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Ip" <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 4:01 AM
Subject: [IP] more on more on What if Cat Stevens had flown under a
different name?
Begin forwarded message:
From: suresh@xxxxxxxxxx (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: September 23, 2004 9:38:13 PM EDT
Cc: plevy@xxxxxxxxxxx, SBaker@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on more on What if Cat Stevens had flown under a
different name?
David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Paul Levy <plevy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
"But the IP list has consistently derided and opposed the
government's effort to do just that"
Does the IP list have a position on that question? I thought the idea
was to forward a variety of view on various questions.....
Maybe modify that to "a significant number of liberal / left leaning IP
regulars have consistently derided ..."
Though I see nothing very good in CAPPS II, or in Bush, or in
Schwarzenegger,
at least some IP posters seem to think deriding and abusing these at
every
given opportunity helps, or has any use at all, and that random abuse
is an
excellent substitute for logical argument.
For example, somebody called Arnold a "fascist, steroid addled bohunk"
in
http://lists.elistx.com/archives/interesting-people/200409/
msg00030.html and
then finished up with the "Full Disclaimer" that he was not a democrat.
Does Godwin's law about people losing arguments when they start
throwing around
words like "nazi" and "fascist" apply to IP the way it applies to
usenet? :)
srs
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as tfairlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/