Keith, You did forget to mention the around 50,000 dead children, because of lack of food and medicine as the direct result of the US led blockade of Iraq between the wars. It is difficult to see what the children did to deserve this.
Hakan At 22:58 10/05/2006, you wrote: >Sure, Randall, whatever. > >If I had any ire I'd maybe considering tempering it. > > >Here's the specific question I posed to some colleagues: Does/can > >mainstream exposure to progressive ideas really make a difference? > > > >"How can we tell?" was Howard Zinn's response. "Most actions/events, > >if they make a difference, make it imperceptibly," he says, "and > >it's only the accumulation of small differences that may > >occasionally reach a critical point and be identifiable as having > >been effective." ... > > > >William Blum took exception with how I phrased my inquiry. "You're > >really stacking the cards against the question," he counters. "I > >spoke to tens of millions of people who had never before heard of > >me, and I said lots of things they were very unaccustomed to > >hearing. The result of that can't be seen or measured as easily as > >your questions imply. Who's to say what the long-term effect of that > >will be? I assume -- and it's only an assumption -- that it will be > >positive, as one element among many of recent years of the left > >getting the message out. It's only the total effect that may have > >significant meaning." > >http://www.counterpunch.org/mickey04242006.html >April 24, 2006 >America Meets Bill Blum and Ward Churchill >15 Minutes of Radical Fame > >["... but what's it matter?"] > >And so on. > >You sidestepped what I said about blame and avoiding responsibility >and accused me of blame instead, you ignored what I said about the >difference between the responsibilities of citizens of (alleged) >democracies and those living under totalitarian regimes, I reject >your proposition that there's only your way of measuring >effectiveness (while you ignore mine), and that's not why you asked, >and your apparent idea that because I'm a professional I'm blind to >the problems of information access for people who aren't >professionals is ridiculous. You thank me, you're welcome, but if >there were any reality at all in that last point you'd have nothing >to thank me for. And because I say things you don't like you think >I'm angry. And so on. > >It much reminds me of one schism among many between Planet US and the >rest of Planet Earth, concerning Iraq, when somebody mentions the >Iraq war casualties. That's 2,427 U.S. military casualties, right? >Well, the rest of the world thinks Iraq war casualties means 250,000 >dead Iraqis. But the dead Iraqis are effectively invisible in the US >(even more invisible than the dead soldiers). The rest of the world >doesn't care about the soldiers of an army of occupation following an >illegal invasion of a sovereign state by a country run by war >criminals. In most of the world that's not even an inflammatory >statement. Most of the rest of the world doesn't make a cult of its >military either. > >Like Mike DuPree, you don't mention nuking Iran, and you only mention >torture once, in quoting me, and not again. > >What you do mention is about blame and unfair accusations and about >countries and so on. > >I think this is what it's all about: > > >To be blunt, I generally do not care what someone from another > >country thinks of my country when I know that their country is doing > >much of the same thing that they complain about my country doing. > >They are just being hypocrites--knowingly or unknowingly--and are > >usually just ignored. > >It's kind of hard not to pull a Godwin on that, LOL! Aarghh! I can >resist anything except temptation! > >Phew! > >We know that Americans can presto criticism, protest and opposition >into hypocrisy and then ignore it. Most Americans never even get to >hear about it in the first place, even when tens of millions and more >are right out there yelling at them. > >To be blunt, Americans are just as good at doing that as they are at >ignoring US torture, 250,000 dead Iraqis (and half a million more >dead before them), and how they're being duped into nuking Iran. > >Fool me once, shame on you >Fool me twice, I'm complicit. > >I don't think you've really responded. All I can say is what I've >said already, and then it all goes downhill. I'll leave you to it. > >Keith > > > >Keith, > > > >My point is not that people should not try to learn and do what is > >right and correct...it is that you CANNOT hold someone responsible > >for something that they have no CONTROL over. That is by its very > >definition, unfair. That is middle ages thinking at best. To be > >blunt, I generally do not care what someone from another country > >thinks of my country when I know that their country is doing much of > >the same thing that they complain about my country doing. They are > >just being hypocrites--knowingly or unknowingly--and are usually > >just ignored. > > > >You say over and over that information has been out there for people > >to gleen for years and years. True. However, how many people prior > >to the Internet, had the ability to search for and VERIFY > >information with the ease of today? 30 years ago, you would have > >needed access to a well equipped library with a large > >microfilm/microfiche archive, the time to browse for the relevant > >articles, read and then understand them. I would venture a guess > >that most people simply did not have 10 to 20 hours a week to simply > >read everything of interest to find something that may not be right > >in the world. That is where the "modern" media has done its > >disservice...the "help" by condensing this tremendous amount of > >information into something digestable to the average person. The > >PROBLEM as you have pointed out repeatedly is that there is a BIAS > >in the spin/digestion that is generally unhealthy and untrue. > > > >So, when you lambast people for not investigating enough, please > >temper your ire with understanding that most people are not by > >nature researchers. It takes a special type of person to be able to > >read, categorize, understand and verify large amounts of information. > > > >>There surely is no way of knowing something if you don't want to know > >>it. The opinion manufacturing industry doesn't really hide things as > >>much as render them uninteresting, the eye slides away, the ear goes > >>deaf, the attention wanders. It works very well. But not on > >>everybody. Not everybody is deaf to the truth, not everybody swallows > >>the lies. Why's that? How do some people - many people - manage to > >>stay awake and alert and undeceived? That has a bearing on > >>complicity, don't you think? > > > >Keep in mind that desire does not always play a key role in knowing > >something. Simply put, you do not know what you do not know. You > >can spend your entire life learning new things and have no time to > >DO anything with that knowledge. This does not excuse everything, > >but it explains some things. It is quite true that everyone is > >not deaf to the truth...hence this list and the great work you have > >done in nutruring, maintaining and helping it grow along with JTF. > >Let me say "Thanks" right now...it has been very helpful for me > >personally, and quite a few people that I have pointed towards it. > > > >You also say that asking people that are trying to help if their > >actions are effective is heartless. I disagree wholeheartedly. If > >people do not stop and reassess what they are doing periodically, > >they risk causing more problems then they solve. That is the heart > >of learning and progress. There are other questions that I would ask > >you, but would do so off-list. But, someone who is trying to help, > >should never mind someone asking them questions, including "is it > >working?" > > > >My activities have not been as far-ranging and involved as > >your's...but I have spent quite a few years trying to get people to > >THINK and consider options to just believing everything they see, > >hear or read. I can bring up even more topics ranging from the > >purely ecomonic, to the environmental and finally to "conspiracy" > >related items in this mailing list, but it would be out of place > >here. You have done a good job balancing this list, and that is > >important. > > > >It is more than ok to ask someone what they are doing with their > >life. Most recently, me and my wife have started trying to expand > >our effort to help some orphans in Ukraine and Russia. My wife is > >Ukrainian and she and some of her family (in Russia and Ukraine) > >have suffered directly from Chernobyl explosion and other problems. > >I do not think that it is helpful to try to to see who can "out > >help" other people...nor do I think it is helpful or polite to blame > >people for the actions of others. > > > >People have different abilities and capabilities to help...I wish I > >had more time, but our 15 month-old son needs our attention as well, > >and he doesn't yet (but he will) understand why daddy needs to read > >for a while and not play with him. In the end, it is the DESIRE to > >help that will save us all...without the desire, nothing else can > >happen. I know that there will be at least ONE more person in the > >world that understands...and he can help teach others. > > > >--Randall > >Charlotte, NC > > > > > >___________________________________________________________________________ > > > ><< Heisenberg may have slept here >> > > > >"If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six sharpening > >my xe." --Abraham Lincoln > > > >___________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Addison" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <Biofuel@sustainablelists.org> > >Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 9:00 PM > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Torture and/or Nuking Iran -- was Re: Poll in > >favor of Nukes on Iran > > > > > >>Hello Randall > >> > >>>Keith, > >>> > >>>You said: "We've just dealt with this, in the torture thread. > >>>Please go and read it. You are complicit. What are you doing about > >>>it? You're obliged to > >>>be aware of what your government does abroad with your tax money, > >>>and if you do nothing to counter it you are complicit. What other > >>>people > >>>or other governments do is beside the point. The only exception is > >>>if you live under a totalitarian dictatorship, then you're not > >>>complicit because you're just a helpless slave." > >>> > >>>By your statement, in order for someone to even have a chance to > >>>avoid the responsibility for any bad actions by their government > >>>(ie. pollution, torture or nuking a country), it seems that they > >>>will need to be a person who: > >>> > >>>1) Is capable of being aware of EVERYTHING that the government does > >>>domestically and internationally. To do this, you will need to > >>>posess God-like omniscience > >>>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience) since you will need to be > >>>aware of all actions performed by every single one of the MILLIONS > >>>of people that are connected with the US Federal government alone > >>>-- currently almost 2 million employees if you ignore the Military > >>>and > >>>the Postal Service. (http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs041.htm) How > >>>many more work for the various State and Local governments. How > >>>many people work for quasi-governmental institutions that have an > >>>effect on how the government operates? You quoted at least one > >>><http://www.pipa.org/>. > >>> > >>>2) Is able to influence ALL of those MILLIONS of people, or possess > >>>the knowledge to choose which of the MILLIONS of people you will > >>>need to influence to force all the remaining people that you cannot > >>>influence (time, distance, numbers of people to speak with, > >>>whatever) to do what you wish them to do. > >>> > >>>3) Possess the knowledge of the correct thing to do, and how to > >>>communicate this to all of the people that you will need to > >>>influence to make what you want to happen occur in the manner that > >>>you desire. > >>> > >>>--- or --- > >>> > >>>Is it ok for someone to just complain about the actions of the > >>>government to avoid being labeled complicit, or do they have to > >>>actually DO something? > >>> > >>>If they have to do something, does it have to be effective? If so, > >>>how effective does their action have to be? > >>> > >>>How closely related to the government in question can someone be, > >>>and avoid responsibility for that government's actions? Are other > >>>countries that benefit from the actions of your government > >>>responsible for the actions of your government? If so, are the > >>>people of those other countries then also responsible for your > >>>governments actions?? > >>> > >>>What if you don't want to give the government money, but they take > >>>it under the threat of death or imprisonment? > >>> > >>>So...let me ask you personally: What are you doing? How effective > >>>have your actions been? What will you do in the future to become > >>>more effective? When do you become blameless? Are you aware of how > >>>every single dollar is spent by our government? > >> > >>Whose is bigger eh? :-) > >> > >>What am I doing. For what's most visible, how about Journey to > >>Forever? Or running the Biofuel list and helping to keep it well fed > >>over the last six years with the kind of information you specify, > >>often against strong opposition by people who would much rather have > >>it left comfortably buried out of sight where the forces we're > >>discussing had put it, and put them too in a state of heedless and > >>uncaring ignorance, consent, and indeed complicity. > >> > >>That information includes about the best set of tools I've seen for > >>doing all the things you specify, including investigation, spin > >>detection, source checking, counter-spin and counter-propaganda, and > >>the kind of activism required if you're interested in a sustainable > >>future. There's been much discussion here on activism, and on "What > >>can I do?" That's all there too, with solutions offered. And I > >>provide this resource. > >> > >>That's just for now, some things. > >> > >>If you go back through my history you'll find an unbroken record of > >>opposing the forces we're discussing, in many ways and across a broad > >>range of issues, and in many countries, mainly but not only as a > >>campaigning journalist. It's something I've never stopped since I > >>started it long ago in white racist South Africa, where life tended > >>to be short and have ugly endings for people who felt they ought to > >>take a hand in deciding what they were going to be complicit in. > >> > >>You can find some of the details of all this at our website, and > >>elsewhere. I'm not planning on stopping. > >> > >>Have my actions been effective? Yes, they have. They are being now. > >>There are very many people, VERY many, who could give you their own > >>versions of that story. Together it all covers everything you specify > >>and much besides. Today these people work both separately and > >>together, sharing resources across a wide range of issues, the whole > >>range perhaps, via the Internet, the great leveller. Are their > >>actions proving effective? You could ask the WTO that question for > >>instance, or Monsanto, or ExxonMobil, or George Bush getting furious > >>because his ratings are plunging and he can't find anybody to nuke > >>for it. > >> > >>It's a heartless view to ask people who work for change what effect > >>they're having. It's the accumulative effect that creates change, and > >>when change happens it's impossible to say quite who or what "caused" > >>it. > >> > >>"If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping > >>with a mosquito." -- the Dalai Lama. > >> > >>You point out the disadvantages now facing someone in a country that > >>for 30 years and more has been increasingly supine in all aspects of > >>the vigilance required of a population over their government and > >>business interests. > >> > >>Not to say it was exactly perfect before that, but for 30 years and > >>more your media have been abandoning the flock they're supposed to be > >>guarding and joining the wolves, and now they're owned and run and > >>controlled by a very small number of wolves, in straightforward > >>collusion with an effectively cloaked government-corporate sector > >>that has gone far beyond the pale of responsible citizenship. Now you > >>point at this and other such results of heedless inaction as > >>obstacles to taking action. But aren't you just an accessory, along > >>with everyone else who let it all just slip through your fingers? > >> > >>The law says ignorance of the law is no excuse. Civil society might > >>say that ignorance of things you should know is no excuse. One good > >>reason for that is that none of these things has been truly hidden. > >>The information has always been there for anyone who wanted to know. > >>That it wasn't in the NYT or on FoxNews doesn't mean it wasn't > >>available. In fact it's quite surprising how much has been plainly > >>recorded in the NYT and the other mainstream newspapers that people > >>say they had no way of knowing. > >> > >>There surely is no way of knowing something if you don't want to know > >>it. The opinion manufacturing industry doesn't really hide things as > >>much as render them uninteresting, the eye slides away, the ear goes > >>deaf, the attention wanders. It works very well. But not on > >>everybody. Not everybody is deaf to the truth, not everybody swallows > >>the lies. Why's that? How do some people - many people - manage to > >>stay awake and alert and undeceived? That has a bearing on > >>complicity, don't you think? > >> > >>Now there are many people who genuinely believe that if it's not on > >>FoxNews it never happened, it doesn't exist. The influence and sheer > >>lack of quality and responsibility of FoxNews is not something that > >>could occur in a vigilant society. Nevertheless, everything that > >>isn't on FoxNews does exist and is there to be found, if only you > >>look. > >> > >>>>I just said in another message: "You have to stop the spin. The > >>>>trouble is it works so well most people aren't even aware of it, and > >>>>if they are they think they're immune." > >> > >>It's the PROBLEM Randall, not the excuse! > >> > >>>If they have to do something, does it have to be effective? If so, > >>>how effective does their action have to be? > >> > >>If they do their best, then the question isn't very relevant. Unless > >>you claim that individuals are helpless and opposition to power is > >>doomed to failure. In fact lots of little half-heard voices whisper > >>that in your ear all the time, and in everyone else's ear too. Or > >>rather they don't have to whisper that now, not for a long time, they > >>only have to reinforce it. > >> > >>Yet now everyone is talking of an awakening, and there's no doubt > >>that it's true. Especially since about eight months ago. > >> > >>How do you think that happened? > >> > >>It could not have happened had there not been *enough* committed > >>people doing their best to make a difference and achieving worthwhile > >>results since long before, always keeping the light burning, no > >>matter how often it sputtered. Enough for the rest not to have any > >>shred of an excuse. > >> > >>People point to social apathy as a problem too, and instead of trying > >>to get to the root of it they claim it's basic human nature, so > >>what's the point of trying to do anything about it. If you're a > >>"believer" in social apathy, do you think people were as apathetic 50 > >>years ago as they are now? A hundred years ago? They weren't. They > >>were a lot more skilful too. So what changed? > >> > >>Nothing is really hidden, not even the reason that so many people > >>don't ask the questions they should. > >> > >>So...let me ask you personally: What are you doing? > >> > >>What aren't you complicit in? > >> > >>You don't have to answer Randall. This is not how either of these > >>issues of torture and nuking Iran arose here. The talk of blame and > >>accountability and responsibility and complicity started when people > >>began protesting that it's not *their* fault, it's no use blaming > >>*them*. But there's rather more to both civic and personal > >>responsibility than avoiding blame. > >> > >>But look at the way you put it, in your second paragraph: > >> > >>>By your statement, in order for someone to even have a chance to > >>>avoid the responsibility for any bad actions by their government > >>>(ie. pollution, torture or nuking a country), it seems that they > >>>will need to be a person who: > >> > >>You say it a couple of times. Is that the holy grail, do you think, > >>to avoid responsibility? I'm sure you didn't mean to, but you imply > >>that the bad actions are okay as long as you can't be held personally > >>responsible for them. That's just how you (pl) got to where you are, > >>with all the problems you describe. Do you really think that? If not > >>what do you think? > >> > >>Best > >> > >>Keith > >> > >> > >> > >>>--Randall > >>>Charlotte, NC > >>> > >>> > >>>_________________________________________________________________ > __________ > >>> > >>><< Heisenberg may have slept here >> > >>> > >>>"If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six sharpening > >>>my xe." --Abraham Lincoln > >>> > >>>_________________________________________________________________ > __________ > >>> > >>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Addison" > >>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org> > >>>Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 5:20 AM > >>>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Poll in favor of Nukes on Iran > >>> > >>> > >>>>Hello Mike > >>>> > >>>>Why're you so doubtful about it? Sure, it's always good to check, but > >>>>it's well in line with what usually happens, as people are saying. > >>>> > >>>>For instance (from the list archives): > >>>> > >>>>http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/20263 > >>>>War on Iraq: The World According to a Bush Voter > >>>>October 21, 2004 > >>>>"A new survey reveals that Bush supporters choose to keep faith in > >>>>their leader rather than face reality... > >>>>"But here is the truly astonishing part: as many or more Bush > >>>>supporters hold those beliefs today than they did several months ago. > >>>>In other words, more people believe the claims today -- after the > >>>>publication of a series of well-publicized official government > >>>>reports that debunked both notions." > >>>> > >>>>That poll was conducted by University of Maryland's Program on > >>>>International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) and Knowledge Networks. Here's > >>>>the poll report itself: > >>>>http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/IraqRealities_Oct04/IraqRealiti > >>>>es%20Oct04%20rpt.pdf > >>>> > >>>>Then there's this: > >>>> > >>>>>Results of previous PIPA/Knowledge Networks poll [May 04]: > >>>>> > >>>>>- A 57% majority believed Iraq was either "directly involved" in > >>>>>carrying out the 9/11 attacks or had provided "substantial support" > >>>>>to al-Qaeda > >>>>>- 82% either said that "experts mostly agree Iraq was providing > >>>>>substantial support to al Qaeda" or "experts are evenly divided on > >>>>>the question" > >>>>>- 45% believe that evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda > >>>>>has been found > >>>>>- 60% believe that just before the war Iraq either had weapons of > >>>>>mass destruction or a major program for developing them > >>>>>- 65% said most experts say Iraq did have them or that experts are > >>>>>divided on the question > >>>>>- estimates of the number of US troop fatalities in Iraq varied widely > >>>>>- 59% were unaware that the majority of world public opinion is > >>>>>opposed to the US war with Iraq > >>>>>- asked how many nuclear weapons the U.S. has, the median estimate > >>>>>was 200 (the actual number is 6,000) > >>>>> > >>>>>These beliefs are closely correlated with intentions to vote for Bush. > >>>> > >>>>So what's new? > >>>> > >>>>Look at the escalation in the Iran case: > >>>> > >>>>>Iran has not violated the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty), > >>>>>does not have a nuclear weapons program, and poses no threat to its > >>>>>neighbors or the United States. Never the less, the spurious > >>>>>accusations in the media have precipitated a dramatic shift in > >>>>>public opinion. For more than a decade only 6% of the American > >>>>>people considered Iran the "greatest danger" to the United States. > >>>>>Now (according to a recent Pew Poll) that number has jumped to 27%. > >>>>>Also, the survey showed that "nearly half (47%) said they favored > >>>>>military action, preferably along with European allies, to halt > >>>>>Iran's nuclear program." -- Jim Lobe, "Polls: anti-Iran Propaganda > >>>>>Working", February 10, 2006 > >>>>http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=8526 > >>>> > >>>>Compare with the current Newsmax poll, it makes a curve. > >>>> > >>>>Worse than that, Lobe's piece three months ago said "the polls do not > >>>>show eagerness to take military action now or unilaterally. The > >>>>public appears to prefer an effort to settle the crisis > >>>>diplomatically, preferably through the United Nations." > >>>> > >>>>Now they do, and sod the UN. > >>>> > >>>>The Newsmax poll and what it says and who's spinning it if anyone is > >>>>irrelevant. The fact is that the US and Israel are creeping up on > >>>>nuking Iran, and dragging public opinion along behind, as usual. > >>>>Check it out for yourself. > >>>> > >>>>People are commenting on short term memory loss. It's not short term > >>>>memory loss, it's manufactured memory loss. > >>>> > >>>>Robert said "I think this illustrates how effective the propaganda > >>>>machine in the > >>>>US has become." Absolutely. > >>>> > >>>>"The United States is not only number one in military power but also > >>>>in the effectiveness of its propaganda system." -- Edward S. Herman > >>>> > >>>>I just said in another message: "You have to stop the spin. The > >>>>trouble is it works so well most people aren't even aware of it, and > >>>>if they are they think they're immune." > >>>> > >>>>>Hi Fritz and everyone...polls...hmmm...can anyone tell me more about > >>>>>"NewsMax"? > >>>> > >>>>http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?search=NewsMax&fulltext=Search > >>>>Search results - SourceWatch > >>>>NewsMax.com > >>>> > >>>>Not to be trusted, but in this case it's irrelevant. Tear your eyes > >>>>away from what's disturbing you about NewsMax, and do some work on > >>>>the Internet, and in the Biofuel list archives, on the mounting US > >>>>fear and loathing campaign against Iran. > >>>> > >>>>How come your reply doesn't even mention the word "Iran" in your > >>>>haste to defend... to defend what, exactly? > >>>> > >>>>>Who owns and controls this website? Fritz, have you asked anyone at > >>>>>NewsMax how this poll was conducted? What are the demographics of > >>>>>this poll? I see on their homepage as of today, Sunday, May 7, just > >>>>>after 7pm Central (USA), where they site a poll WITH HEADLINES that > >>>>>says Fox is the most trusted news source in the U.S., but the story > >>>>>says we're talking about 11% of the public making it this "popular." > >>>>>Hey, if only roughly One in Ten Americans are fatheads, we're not > >>>>>doin' too bad. I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of > >>>>>these 11% make up the largest percentage of the "voters" who > >>>>>answered the NewsMax poll, which would make that "77%" actually an > >>>>>incredibly small percentage of the U.S. population. Sorry you > >>>>>blame the "ordinary" U.S. citizen for however our government acts. > >>>> > >>>>We've just dealt with this, in the torture thread. Please go and read > >>>>it. You are complicit. What are you doing about it? You're obliged to > >>>>be aware of what your government does abroad with your tax money, and > >>>>if you do nothing to counter it you are complicit. What other people > >>>>or other governments do is beside the point. The only exception is if > >>>>you live under a totalitarian dictatorship, then you're not complicit > >>>>because you're just a helpless slave. > >>>> > >>>>>What's the deal in your country? Is your government walking in > >>>>>lockstep with the will of the overwhelming majority of the > >>>>>"ordinary" citizens? What is "ordinary" anyway???? I'll leave it > >>>>>at that for now. > >>>> > >>>>Sorry, you'll have to respond, those are the rules here. > >>>> > >>>>Keith Addison > >>>>Journey to Forever > >>>>KYOTO Pref., Japan > >>>>http://journeytoforever.org/ > >>>>Biofuel list owner > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>> > >>>>>From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Fritz Friesinger > >>>>>To: <mailto:biofuel@sustainablelists.org>biofuel@sustainablelists.org > >>>>>Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 5:09 PM > >>>>>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Poll in favor of Nukes on Iran > >>>>> > >>>>>Hakan, > >>>>>indeed dejea vu, > >>>>>once the propagandamachine works as fine as it does in the US,all > >>>>>out war is'nt far away! > >>>>>The whole polemic about the communist threat BS, it was and is > >>>>>always the migthy US who uses Nukes to intimidate the rest of the > >>>>>world! > >>>>>I dispise them for it and can not help to blame the ordinary US > >>>>>Citicen.As a German i felt long time the blame for the wrong doeings > >>>>>of the Nazis even i was born in 48! > >>>>>eh bien and so on... > >>>>>Get better Hakan,there is no time to loose > >>>>>Fritz > >>>>> > >>>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Hakan Falk > >>>>>To: <mailto:biofuel@sustainablelists.org>biofuel@sustainablelists.org > >>>>>Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 5:23 PM > >>>>>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Poll in favor of Nukes on Iran > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Fritz, > >>>>> > >>>>>Have a strong feeling of dejavu and this time I will save the info in > >>>>>a special place. Pre Iraq, I saw similar figures and also some > >>>>>support on this list. Today it is overwhelming negative numbers in > >>>>>support for the Iraq war and approval ratings for the president. > >>>>>Maybe I should frame this, for future use. > >>>>> > >>>>>Talk about a violent population, 77% in support of military action > >>>>>and killing Iranians. In two years we will have 65% in denial and > >>>>>against the US engagement in Iran. It will be an even bigger mess > >>>>>than Iraq, with attacks all over the world. > >>>>> > >>>>>Hakan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>At 20:07 07/05/2006, you wrote: > >>>>> >just received > >>>>> > > >>>>> >Fritz > >>>>> > > >>>>> >Poll: Strong U.S. Support for Bombing Iran > >>>>> > > >>>>> >An Internet poll sponsored by NewsMax.com reveals that Americans are > >>>>> >overwhelmingly in favor of the United States undertaking military > >>>>> >action to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program. > >>>>> > > >>>>> >Nearly 60,000 people have taken part in the poll so far, and more > >>>>> >than nine out of 10 say U.S. efforts to contain Iran's weapons > >>>>> >program are not working. > >>>>> > > >>>>> >A large majority of respondents also believe that Iran poses a > >>>>> >greater threat than Saddam Hussein did before the Iraq War. > >>>>> > > >>>>> >NewsMax will provide the results of this poll to major media and > >>>>> >share them with radio talk-show hosts across the country. > >>>>> > > >>>>> >Here are the poll questions and results: > >>>>> > > >>>>> >1) Do you believe U.S. efforts to contain Iran's nuclear weapons > >>>>> >program are working? > >>>>> >Working: 7 percent > >>>>> >Not Working: 93 percent > >>>>> > > >>>>> >2) Should the United States rely solely on the U.N. to stop Iran's > >>>>> >nuclear weapons program? > >>>>> >Yes: 11 percent > >>>>> >No: 89 percent > >>>>> > > >>>>> >3) Do you believe Iran poses a greater threat than Saddam Hussein > >>>>> >did before the Iraq War? > >>>>> >Yes: 88 percent > >>>>> >No: 12 percent > >>>>> > > >>>>> >4) Should the U.S. undertake military action against Iran to stop > >>>>> >their program? > >>>>> >Yes: 77 percent > >>>>> >No: 23 percent > >>>>> > > >>>>> >5) Who should undertake military action against Iran first? > >>>>> >U.S.: 45 percent > >>>>> >Israel: 35 percent > >>>>> >Neither: 20 percent > > >_______________________________________________ >Biofuel mailing list >Biofuel@sustainablelists.org >http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): >http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
