The MASM Forum Archive 2004 to 2012

Miscellaneous Forums => The Orphanage => Topic started by: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 03:10:41 PM

Title: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 03:10:41 PM
Haiti, what a terrible disaster!

Why does man continue to build and live along earths fault lines?
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: dedndave on January 13, 2010, 03:11:49 PM
because - they are everywhere, maybe ? - lol
otherwise, that would be a hell of a commute   :bg
it's not my "fault"   :P
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 03:48:09 PM
Dave, you drunk? The Red Cross fears around three million people affected by that 7.2 quake. Christ, what the hell is so funny about that??

Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: ecube on January 13, 2010, 04:15:47 PM
Quote from: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 03:48:09 PM
Dave, you drunk? The Red Cross fears around three million people affected by that 7.2 quake. Christ, what the hell is so funny about that??



Bill,
Haiti is a beautiful place to live, and I understand the natives not wanting to leave their home, put yourself in their position. It's unfortunate that earth quake happened, and hopefully the people affected are alright, or too much damage hasn't been done, but on the same token a lot of people die everday. It's out of your control, and everyone hands death differently, Dave maybe trying to make light of the situation, or maybe he doesn't care to an extent. Either way I don't think it's fair to get mad at him, I mean if you heard WAN in china died yesterday, would it honestly bother you? Yes it's not a good thing, and to me it's uncomfortable, but nothing I can do, besides try to live my own life to the fullest, and provide best life I can to me and mine.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 04:26:05 PM
I am always concerned when a large number of lives are lost by catastrophe or war. Now let be clear, I am not a religious man but I do care about the human race. It's just in my nature.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: FORTRANS on January 13, 2010, 04:45:27 PM
Hi,

Quote from: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 04:26:05 PM
I am always conserved when a large number of lives are lost by catastrophe or war. Now let be clear, I am not a religious man but I do care about the human race. It's just in my nature.

   Good.  As for your original question, I would say that it
is that we have short memories and few easy options.

Regards,

Steve
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: dedndave on January 13, 2010, 05:00:41 PM
i wasn't aware until you mentioned it - and i looked it up on the internet
of course, i am concerned about the loss of life
what i thought was funny was the question you asked about living near fault lines
they are on every continent - hard to avoid them, really
and - many may not show much activity, but that just means they are due for some
the shifting tides and tremor activity are inter-related - activity in one spurs activity in the other
we are in for more of this type of thing - and it will affect land masses all over the world
it seems that Indonesia is the first place to know about it
the fact that it is occuring in Haiti is a precursor for more activity in the western hemisphere
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 13, 2010, 05:27:16 PM
It is certainly tragic.... The world's tallest skyscraper has just been unveiled in dubei it can withstand 6 richter scale tremors.... I know little about tremors but I would expect that if you can build the worlds tallest skyscraper to withstand 6 then there is a technology issue at fault here if these small buildings couldnt survive 7
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: ecube on January 13, 2010, 05:36:48 PM
Quote from: oex on January 13, 2010, 05:27:16 PM
It is certainly tragic.... The world's tallest skyscraper has just been unveiled in dubei it can withstand 6 richter scale tremors.... I know little about tremors but I would expect that if you can build the worlds tallest skyscraper to withstand 6 then there is a technology issue at fault here if these small buildings couldnt survive 7

haiti use to be the poorest country in the america's, now it's second I believe, so applying tremor protection a luxury that's not practical for a that region. Even the presidents palace sustained a great deal of damage.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 13, 2010, 05:38:41 PM
Quote from: E^cube on January 13, 2010, 05:36:48 PM
for that region

yet we can put millions of dollars of rover on mars
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: ecube on January 13, 2010, 05:45:23 PM
Quote from: oex on January 13, 2010, 05:38:41 PM
Quote from: E^cube on January 13, 2010, 05:36:48 PM
for that region

yet we can put millions of dollars of rover on mars

exploring another planet is abit different than dumping funds into a poorer country. Trust me I have issues with a lot of things, "rappers" getting payed millions to act like idiots and "talk" on a mic, that's not even music, while teachers who help shape peoples lives get payed nothing.  But as a business man I get it, the rap music makes millions of dollars too, as entertainment to simple minded individuals, while the teacher directly doesn't help make money.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 13, 2010, 06:01:25 PM
Makes you wonder if we forgot the value of money doesnt it.... It tends to be off in a little subclass of it's own these days
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 13, 2010, 07:35:40 PM
I'm just glad to hear we are already on the way down to Haiti with humanitarian aid. They are saying there could be 100's of thousands dead. Think about that, women and children crushed like bugs. Terrible thing!
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 13, 2010, 09:21:11 PM
Yeah I really cant imagine, we dont get anything like that in the UK, tv pictures tell a story a world away, sorry these disasters make me frustrated of late.... pizazz news reporting what it is these days
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on January 14, 2010, 09:00:07 AM
Bill,

I have only seen a few of the photos in the news but it looks terrible. I know Haiti is a poor country and where you have poor people they don't have the economic mobility to avoid living in dangerous places and have the least capacity to respond in times of disaster.

We have an occasional quake here on the east coast of OZ, roughly about every 20 years or so but they are short duration, usually about 20 seconds. I have seen 3 in my lifetime, all around the 7 mark and the last one trashed a lot of buildings about 100 miles up the coast in Newcastle and a number of people died in some of the buildings that collapsed.

On the bright side, I was in the kitchen during the Newcastle one which could be felt here in Sydney, after it hit my mum came down and chewed my ear for doing something that shook the house, I had to explain to her that it was an earthquake.  :P
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Farabi on January 14, 2010, 11:28:54 AM
Its on the newspaper here.
That was a big one, even a building and a hospital colapsed.
Thats terrible.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: ecube on January 15, 2010, 04:09:43 PM
Bill what's your thoughts on this
http://freakoutnation.com/2010/01/13/rush-limbaugh-should-be-deported-to-haiti/
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 15, 2010, 04:39:13 PM
Quote from: E^cube on January 15, 2010, 04:09:43 PM
Bill what's your thoughts on this
http://freakoutnation.com/2010/01/13/rush-limbaugh-should-be-deported-to-haiti/

E^cube,

Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson are sickos that should be. . . .baaaa, morons!!

Doug Thompson of Capital Hill Blue puts it pretty well, he calls them sub-human dregs. http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/21564

Edit: I have edited this post and apologize to everyone for my angry outburst. No one should speak as I did there.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 16, 2010, 10:17:42 PM
Here in the states this is what conservative and evangelical mind sets have come to. I'd say those two sickos Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson are very evil people.

Video of the sickos Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rElMVoZ-vQ&NR=1)



Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: rags on January 17, 2010, 01:20:14 AM
Bill,
I can't comment on Robertson, BUT, Rush does have a valid point.
Donate to the Red Cross or other relief organizations, not to Whitehouse.org.
That way you are more sure the money would go towards the relief effort.

Our dear Commander in Chief found it not necessary to come out and fully address
the American sheeple until THREE days after the shooting at Ft Hood, ever treading
so lightly  so he can be as PC about it as possible and not offend anyone.

Another THREE days passed after the "underwear" bombers failed attempt, before he
found it necessary to address the American public.

But almost immediately he made a speech about the earthquake, which we all know happened
in Haiti, not the U.S..
It just seems that he is more concerned about his image in world affairs,
than events that DIRECTLY effect the safety and security of the people who elected him to that office.

Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 17, 2010, 12:03:59 PM
If all the idiots making that statement would check out the Whitehouse.org site you would see that the links direct you to the Red Cross and other organizations where you can contribute to Haiti. For anyone to believe that their money is going to go to the government from that site simply because an asshole like Rush Limbaugh tells them so is total asinine absurdity. People like that need to pull their heads out of their ass. They are sick, sick in the mind and spirit. And they call themselves Christians, HA!!

How you can compare the importance of 100's of thousands of dead human beings to some nut case on an airplane is beyond me. Rush Limbaugh and all his brain dead ditto head followers are simply crazy nut cases. Are you a ditto head rags? Sure sounds like it to me pal.

You really are a cynical person rags. I've know my share of postal workers "federal employees" thru my life and they are all cynical SOB's. Why is that? Hell, you postal workers got it better then most. We taxpayers see to that!
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 17, 2010, 02:29:28 PM
Roger states it better then I;  :thumbu

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100114/OPINION/100119985

There is a prejudice evil nature in my country that needs removed!
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on January 17, 2010, 02:54:32 PM
Guys,

Just a words of wisdom from an old fella, disasters tend to bring out all sorts of reactions and I doubt anyone blames the poor bastards who died there. We have had them close to us, the tsunami a few years ago had dead bodies all over Asia and we lost people who were on holidays when it happened. These things tend to transcend politics and it is to the credit that many Americans have reached into their pockets to help these poor bastards out, even when they are feeling the pinch themselves.

the details of how the money is collected, even though it does in fact matter is a secondary consideration to the fact that they are at least getting some help with a disaster of this scale.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 17, 2010, 04:25:36 PM
Steve,

You're right of course it's just that I get upset by some of what I'm hearing. Why the right is making the Haiti disaster political I just can't comprehend.

Here is the gov link that is being reported to be sending money to Obama. Please someone; show me where on the site this can be done.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/01/14/president-haiti-first-waves-our-rescue-and-relief-workers-are-ground-and-work
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: rags on January 17, 2010, 06:03:40 PM
Quote
Why the right is making the Haiti disaster political I just can't comprehend
Bill it's because Chairman Obamao seems to care more about other countries than the one he's been elected to protect.

Granted Haiti is a disaster, and it's a real shame that all those people died,
but it's not his first responsibility as president of the US.
His first priority is to the American people, to protect them from all enemies both foreign and domestic.

When the President takes 3 days to address the people after each of 2 seperate incidents of terror
in this country, it shows that he doesn't give a rat's a*s about the safety and security
of the American people.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 17, 2010, 06:12:56 PM
The 2 are intertwined, you cant have a safe country if other countries hate you.... The children of the world live in the United States this is why it is the richest country.... For all countries to promote the US is for them to promote future values in an increasingly dangerous world.

We all know dinosaurs rule the planet from outer space I do find all this right/left stuff rather childish
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on January 18, 2010, 02:14:38 AM
Mike,

I am not sure that the comparison from present to past administrations in the US is flattering, the last one that mouthed protection, security and economy while starting two impossible to win wars, bled the savings of older Americans so they cannot live in comfort in their old age, trashed the economy so badly they had to rely on charity from their enemies to fund the New Orleans disaster relief and did their swan song by ripping trillions out of the economy to line the pockets of the merchant banking sector.

Their rhetoric did not match what they did but they sure shafted ordinary Americans to the tune of trillions that went out of the US and will never come back. Funny how Haliburton is now set up in Dubai.

No, Obama is not a right wing loonie Republican but he is solving massive problems left over from the last administration while having put in place security measures that actually protect Americans, is doing something effective against the Taliban in Pakistan that the last lot failed to do and has stabilised the economy aft5er the last lot did their best to destroy it. Why do some of those war criminals like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearl and the like own villas in Europe for ? How many of your taxpayers dollars went into these ripoffs ?
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: rags on January 18, 2010, 11:24:17 AM
The complaint is not with the act of helping the Haitian people, They do need the help.

It is with the speed of the response to the American people about his decision to do so,
while issues involving national security get put on the back burner.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 18, 2010, 11:46:31 AM
Shame this thread has been highjacked and now I'm just as much to blame for it.

Poor misguided ditto heads.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/29/bush-waited-nine-days-to_n_406307.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2009/dec/30/obama-terrorism-response
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: vanjast on January 18, 2010, 08:32:43 PM
I heard that they had 2 years 'notice' of a big quake... Poor or not - there's no excuse for not heeding warnings like this.

It's tragic, but when they start blaming the world (according to local news) for not helping them in their moment of tragedy... hmmmm!!!
Frankly they're lucky to get any help at all, from people who care. :eek
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 19, 2010, 12:16:28 PM
Quote from: vanjast on January 18, 2010, 08:32:43 PM
Frankly they're lucky to get any help at all, from people who care. :eek

Well it is quite obvious you do not!

Michael Tomasky says it best in the guardian link above; "Conservatives have a darker view of human nature and see things more in good-versus-evil terms. Liberals are obviously not unconcerned about the possibility of holes being blown in the sides of airplanes, but they (okay, we) don't tend to think in those categories."

You'd fit right in with the conservative view of things vanjast, that is, if you were an American citizen.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: japheth on January 19, 2010, 12:52:34 PM
Quote from: Bill Cravener on January 19, 2010, 12:16:28 PM
Quote from: vanjast on January 18, 2010, 08:32:43 PM
Frankly they're lucky to get any help at all, from people who care. :eek

Well it is quite obvious you do not!

If it is "quite obvious", then why can't I see it?

Quote
Michael Tomasky says it best in the guardian link above; "Conservatives have a darker view of human nature and see things more in good-versus-evil terms.

But ... IMO this is exactly what you're doing in this thread: suggesting that all people who have an opinion which differs slightly from yours are on the "evil" side ("careless", "drunk", "crazy", ...), while your side then - inevitably - is the remaining good one.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 19, 2010, 01:11:10 PM
Quote from: japheth on January 19, 2010, 12:52:34 PM
But ... IMO this is exactly what you're doing in this thread: suggesting that all people who have an opinion which differs slightly from yours are on the "evil" side ("careless", "drunk", "crazy", ...), while your side then - inevitably - is the remaining good one.

Bingo !!
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on January 19, 2010, 01:12:32 PM
Ideologies scar the soul of man and blind him to the truth
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 19, 2010, 01:55:24 PM
We are in a new civil war here in American. What I see coming from the right is simmering hate, thoughts of revenge and terrible bitterness. Conservatives don't give a damn about this country's future and its place within the rest of the world. They see themselves as poor victims of their own fears, weaknesses and prejudices. It's what separates losers from winners, you know, that feeling of being a victim. It's contagious and it is manifesting itself in more and more beguiling ways.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Ficko on January 19, 2010, 04:08:35 PM
I think the main problem is that we are writing 2010 and still no such thing as ,,planetary disaster plan" or simile exist and no international organization is entrusted with full responsibility to act unquestionable in such situations.
What we get is a disastrous respond in a disastrous situation.

That's how I would do it.:

1. Establish an international fund for disaster relieves overseen by the international community and make sure it is well supplied with money before any disaster happens.
2. Establish an international command authority which would keep track of resources around the world with the full authority of coordinated mobilization.
It should have his own well equipped medium size storage facility as first respond resource as well.

By a disaster I would not leave the "victims" out of the game.
You make "victims" by telling them and treat them as a victim.
If someone survives a catastrophe without too big injuries he isn't a "victim" he is a lucky man.
He becomes a victim by the time others come in and patting him on the head and starting sympathizing with him leaving him alone with his sorrow and thoughts.

The best thing to do is to "recruit" them immediately for the cause.
Establish immediately a "battalion" where they have to master up get orders and food may even money for the work they are doing.
Give them some equipment and assign them work like help by rescue, collect bodies, distribute aid, clean the street whatever is needed.

By this you not only get almost immediately inexhaustible work force but you also keep would be looters busy, increasing the moral of the society in general and keeping individuals in a mentally stable condition.

And after the dust settled they will be a proud tight community going on maintaining high level of moral and not feeling degraded like a bum or a panhandler and wanting to stay and depend on international help forever.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Farabi on January 20, 2010, 12:30:57 PM
At least no one hunger there, because it will lead to crime. How to do that?
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on January 20, 2010, 12:44:49 PM
They had a second quake this morning a 6.0 magnitude. I'm afraid its not over yet. There will be more shaking to come.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on February 04, 2010, 09:19:00 PM
It is terrible that Haiti is in such need of help from the outside world, there is a story running at the moment about a load of children that were 'kidnaped' from their villages and because the US is spearheading the relief effort it is very hard for the Haitian authorities to take action against them
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 04, 2010, 09:43:55 PM
Yep, ten members of a U.S. missionary group (in other words, Baptist looney tunes) who said they were trying to rescue 33 child victims. Bullshit, lock them wackos up and throw away the key.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: rags on February 05, 2010, 01:37:08 AM
Bill why do you consider them looney toons because they may be Baptists?
Would they still be looney toons if they were athiests?

I'm not defending their actions.
It was most definately wrong for not going through the proper proceedures for wanting to do
what they did.

The only ones in Haiti who should be locked up with the key thrown away,
are every member of its government including the president for squandering every penny of aid it has received over the
years, and forcing its people to live in abject poverty.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 05, 2010, 03:48:54 AM
I am a bit both ways on the attempted evacuation by the missionaries. If the choice was to leave them there to starve to death or contract diseases due to the damage then I would suggest that their action is preferrable to the alternative.

I probably agree with Mike that their Government is negligent but I doubt that dsistinguishes them from most governments around the world when it come to funding, New Orleans is a good example of spending taxpayers money waging war but not looking after Americans in their time of need and this is by no means unique at a world level.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 05, 2010, 05:07:54 AM
Quote from: rags on February 05, 2010, 01:37:08 AM
Bill why do you consider them looney toons because they may be Baptists?

It's been reported repeatedly that a good number of these kids have parents and are not orphans and that those lying baptists knew they were not orphans because they met with the parents and showed them bullshit brochures promising a life of wealth and luxury.

Families of some of these poor kids reportedly showed aid workers brochures provided by the baptist nut group promising a better life including "swimming pools and tennis courts", and that they were lured into an unmarked vehicle by telling the children that their parents had arranged for them to go on a "vacation trip".

They are baptist looney toons the great believers of inerrancy and creationism. :tdown

Does that answer your question rags?
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 05, 2010, 05:55:16 AM
hmmmm,

Thats another flavour altogether, sounds like back door child trafficking with an ideological angle to it. I actively oppose seperating children from their parents for any reason apart from neglect or abuse.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 05, 2010, 12:07:12 PM
Steve,

Laura Silsby the leader of that looney toon baptist bunch has a long history of flouting the law.

Hope you can pull up the link below from her home state of Idaho. If not just do a search for "baptist Laura Silsby".

http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/1067267.html
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 05, 2010, 10:28:15 PM
 :bg

She sounds like a real "star attraction". I would like to know why the children were moved though, if it actually was for their benefit I don't see any real harm in it as many governments are run like a circus but if it actually does involve child trafficking she probably deserves what she gets.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: jj2007 on February 06, 2010, 07:43:51 AM
Quote from: hutch-- on February 05, 2010, 10:28:15 PM
I would like to know why the children were moved though, if it actually was for their benefit I don't see any real harm

Their parents were alive. Do you really think it's ok if somebody tells you "your son has been adopted by an American, be happy because he'll have a better life"...?
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: UtillMasm on February 06, 2010, 08:46:49 AM
no children, just poor old man....
en... mybe we can give usa 500000000 chinese poor old people. :green2
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: MichaelW on February 06, 2010, 09:28:01 AM
QuoteDo you really think it's ok if somebody tells you "your son has been adopted by an American, be happy because he'll have a better life"...?

I think there are probably some places in the world where it would be OK, and it would not surprise me if Haiti were one of those places.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on February 06, 2010, 09:42:15 AM
Quote from: UtillMasm on February 06, 2010, 08:46:49 AM
no children, just poor old man....
en... mybe we can give usa 500000000 chinese poor old people. :green2

heh I like that comment, a much better thing for the country would be to look after a countries old people giving the younger people more time to train and learn new skills and give the children a better life.... That would be a sign of a truely civilised society
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 06, 2010, 12:55:07 PM
JJ,

You missed the context of that comment, taking a child from their parent by some crappy con trick is not in the child's best interest but there are enough cases in a country that has just had a massive death count for there to be orphans who are sick and hungry, pick your evil, leave them to die in squalor or do otherwise.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 06, 2010, 01:07:00 PM
Quote from: jj2007 on February 06, 2010, 07:43:51 AM
Their parents were alive. Do you really think it's ok if somebody tells you "your son has been adopted by an American, be happy because he'll have a better life"...?

I'm with you on this one jj. Just because a kid is adopted (in this case abducted) by an American doesn't mean they will have a better life. You folks overseas would be appalled at how many kids are abused, molested and hungry here in the States.

Look, there is a right way to deal with Haiti's orphans and a wrong way. That bitch Laura Silsby and her fellow baptist goons took the wrong way. :tdown
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: jj2007 on February 06, 2010, 01:44:10 PM
Quote from: hutch-- on February 06, 2010, 12:55:07 PM
...taking a child from their parent by some crappy con trick is not in the child's best interest but...

Hutch,
You are not a daddy so I will try to rephrase the question for you: Imagine some spooky coalition of dimwits hacks this forum and decides it is in the child's best interest to block Steve Hutchesson from accessing these pages. Got it?
:wink
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on February 06, 2010, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: jj2007 on February 06, 2010, 01:44:10 PM
....spooky coalition of dimwits....

:lol more wiki bashing
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 06, 2010, 10:39:13 PM
 :bg

JJ,

> You are not a daddy so I will try to rephrase the question for you: Imagine some spooky coalition of dimwits hacks this forum and decides it is in the child's best interest to block Steve Hutchesson from accessing these pages. Got it?

Funny the stories I could tell you about that phenomenon but it would be boring listening.

Now try my other comments from the other end, how many poor countries around the world have unhappy hungry and sick ORPHANED children  that they do not provide for or protect or keep healthy yet deny adoption to foreigners who can do all of those things. Child trafficing scams already exist but its not for the poor, hungry and sick children, its pointed at attractive healthy children with parents that are stolen and sold into prostitution and sometimes worse.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 08, 2010, 12:07:48 PM
Quote from: rags on January 17, 2010, 01:20:14 AM
Another THREE days passed after the "underwear" bombers failed attempt, before he
found it necessary to address the American public.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/25613
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: alp on February 10, 2010, 01:49:38 PM
I think the world is better off without American "aid"
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 11, 2010, 01:50:46 PM
Quote from: alp on February 10, 2010, 01:49:38 PM
I think the world is better off without American "aid"

You referring to American humanitarian aid? You don't much like us Americans do you? (http://www.quickersoft.com/gigglesmile.gif)
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: dedndave on February 11, 2010, 03:53:53 PM
alp - i'll wager it isn't your belly that is empty   :P
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: BlackVortex on February 11, 2010, 04:11:38 PM
I think alp is referring to the USA meddling with other countries' affairs. And bombing the shit out of them.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: jj2007 on February 11, 2010, 04:22:09 PM
We could turn this now into an intellectually stimulating argument about the benefits of supporting American farmers in their attempts to get rid of their surplus, the corresponding effect on the job perspectives of farmers in poor countries etc etc but maybe it's better we just stick to invoke Sleep, 10000 :wink
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: Bill Cravener on February 11, 2010, 05:17:01 PM
BlackVortex, if that is what was meant then my bad. I think anyone who reads my posts is aware as to how I feel about my country and its sickness to make war. I wish we would mind our own business and just stay home but like Dave stated we Americans (well, most of us I believe) have no qualms about helping anyone who is dealing with disaster and starvation.


jj, your example would be best to follow, and I couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: jj2007 on February 11, 2010, 05:58:05 PM
Quote from: Bill Cravener on February 11, 2010, 05:17:01 PM
jj, your example would be best to follow, and I couldn't agree more.

Invoke Sleep, 24*60*60*1000 ?
:wink
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: alp on February 12, 2010, 08:32:37 AM
>>You referring to American humanitarian aid?

Humanitarian aid??? your "aid" is not for humanitarian purpose, but for your own selfish goals, the guys from USAID are not simple workers but officers from "physiological  warfare" department of US army gathering intelligence.

>>You don't much like us Americans do you?

yes

>>alp - i'll wager it isn't your belly that is empty

an american trying to teach me about an "empty belly", i live in a third world country i know more about "empty belly" than you will ever know

Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: TmX on February 12, 2010, 01:18:57 PM
Quote from: alp on February 12, 2010, 08:32:37 AM
an american trying to teach me about an "empty belly", i live in a third world country i know more about "empty belly" than you will ever know

where do you live, alp?
i also live in a third world country...  :wink
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 13, 2010, 12:22:38 AM
There is a trick to first world countries, its first world if you have enough money, 2nd world if you are just getting by and third world if you have an empty stomach. It may not be Haiti but hunger is no respector of culture or social theory, it is among the disgrace that first world countires suffer that they actively tolerate hungry people in their own country. There is no real difference between kids living off a rubbish tip in the Phillipines and a down and out living as a dumpster diver in the big apple, result is the same.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on February 13, 2010, 01:32:48 AM
Well said Hutch
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: rags on February 14, 2010, 04:59:07 AM
Quote
Humanitarian aid??? your "aid" is not for humanitarian purpose, but for your own selfish goals, the guys from USAID are not simple workers but officers from "physiological  warfare" department of US army gathering intelligence.
Alp, can you provide evidence to back this claim up?
If, you don't like the food/whatever is provided free of charge, then don't take it.
You can't be that bad off, if you have the money to spend on Internet access, rather than on food to fill your "empty belly".
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: alp on February 14, 2010, 10:19:03 AM
>>Alp, can you provide evidence to back this claim up?

depends what do you mean by evidence, i am sure i will never be able to meet your criteria of "evidence".

The military assets moved to Haiti and previous US interventions tells a different story.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20100115&articleId=17000

your other points are simply not worth my time.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: dedndave on February 14, 2010, 12:11:34 PM
the empty bellies i was refering to are those of kids that have probably never seen a computer
they certainly aren't writing assembly language programs or hanging out in a forum

but, you know, sometimes i wonder if you aren't right
there are a number of ungrateful sons of bitches that don't deserve our help
we try to help them out, and their government tells them the US is evil
they believe it so fervently, that some of them are willing to strap a bomb or airplane to their ass and kill themselves
in the mean time - their government officials are hoarding all the money and allowing their people to starve
but - those officials aren't evil people - the blame is all on the US

alp - if you are short on straps, let me know
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: hutch-- on February 14, 2010, 12:35:01 PM
 :bg

It cuts both ways, during the Bush years Chavez was funding cold Americans up and down the east coast of the US in winter and Dubai was funding part of the reconstruction of New Orleans while Bush and his cronies were foulmouthing Arabs and communists and stuffing the pockets of their buddies with American taxpayers dollars while waging two unwinnab;e wars. Thank God for Obama.
Title: Re: Haiti. . .
Post by: oex on February 14, 2010, 01:43:10 PM
It could be fixed in a generation, equal global media coverage and random joint foreign leadership in every government, any country that didnt conform would just look stupid and be sidelined.

There is a problem with all this 'global economy' lark.... 'global politics' comes next.... The internet has been leveling the world for 20 years, all of my teenage and adult life, if we dont sort out the world we will have another world war. Unfortunately in our rush to become civilised everybody jumps on the technology power band wagon.... I would give all my tech away tomorrow for wife kids and ranch, all the things emerging economies like China and India are destroying as they 'enter the 21st century'.... I just wish they knew now what they are giving up, I would give up my place here in the UK for any of them.

My community is so civilised that it introduced child porn to minors 20 years ago when a new technology came in.... It continues to do similar things with newer technologies, bullying on mobiles, loss of careers through facebook postings and all with no real education for parents from the government and no incentive for companies to do so, any attempt is decried as censorship....

Consider the introduction of the motorcar.... When first introduced thousands upon thousands of people were killed all over the place, no seat belts no speed limits no driving tests and we look back and think 'stupid people'.... Well what does that make us introducing the internet with no child protection education it's akin to opening retail stores and putting child porn by the sweets section. Or attracting predators by not monitoring kids in a designated child's playground. It results in indiscriminate carnage and corruption that may give more political power through taxing and condemning it's vices but nothing more. Dictators no introducing the internet and communist wanting to monitor it are looking far more to the long term than the profiteering of the West because they will have to pick up the tab in 20, 30, 40 years time by which time any Western government will have been out of power for 15 years.

I guess it's just how you look at the world, to me it would have been morally wrong to ignore the issues of technology and selfish to be concerned about my future with these issues affecting so many. Now at 30 when all these issues have finally reached mainstream media as the first to use these technologies have reached their 30's and have a career voice I feel duped that I wasnt selfish like many others and guilty I should feel that way.... We have created a society where those who dont care, who dont consider how their actions affect others get ahead but ever exacerbated by the extremes of technology the issues get worse....

We continue to follow ideologies like sheep currently believeing freedom of information is all but soon to realise as a generation grows up the weight it puts on 'our' children and there is no escape.... If I wanted my own rice paddy in China I would never be able to service my UK debt assuming of course I would be allowed to move there.

We dont live in a free or fair world and the things we promote, the ideologies we promote, be they corporate or governmental do us no favours.... It is not the US that is evil or China or Iran it is a few people clinging to an ideology that front these ideologies as being superior where these people have obviously not even reached first base of intelligent civilisation.

The UK has no death penalty, both China and the US do but these are larger countries and I can understand to some extent that a larger country might need a bigger deterant to maintain public order. This doesnt *necesarilly* mean we are more civilised

Just because you live in the UK doesnt mean you wont be left to starve, just because people have more money doesnt mean they are nicer people, just because someone works for an aid organisation doesnt mean they wont rape a child. Never place your faith in someone because they have more money or because they have a position in society. Base your respect on their continued positive actions. And always always remember, the internet masks all, virtual/real balance is a must.

I have nothing against the US or China. I have seen first hand where there ideologies are targeted and can respect both sides of the arguement equally. The US is richer because it has more land mass for 1/4 the people and all the resources per person that go with this but it is easy to forget this is not an entitlement. It shapes viewto greater extremes is all.