cc wrote:

> "Eric Takabayashi" <etakajp@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
>
> > Then people you know sure are different from those in Iraq interviewed by
> the
> > Pentagon's own newspaper
>
> You wouldn't want me to change my opinion after hearing a quote from the
> Pentagon's propaganda rag ? Be coherent.

Why would the Pentagon be stupid enough to print "propaganda" that a high
proportion of soldiers in Iraq report low morale and they don't want to
reenlist?

> > > Those that signed "without knowing"  and took seriously the crap
> > > communication on the webpage you indicated are dumbies.
> >
> > What did you say about not generalizing?
>
> That's not a generalization but a definition. I say the same for the people
> that signed for JET or whatever without checking information and come later
> to cry : "I didn't know".

Considering every employment situation on the JET Program is different, and
many had never been to Japan or held down regular jobs before, how can you
criticize them for not knowing? At the interview, I was asked if my family
members were healthy. According to the best of the DOCTORS' knowledge, they
were. How was I to know that my father, and grandmother whom I called "mama"
would BOTH die within a one year period? How was I to know that at least one
school had not properly defined my duties for over two years before telling me
during my last year, they had wanted something completely different, all the
while allowing me to be independent and telling me I was doing fine?

There are things that cannot be properly understood until they actually happen.

Like going to war. I know what I see can't match what they are living through.

> > Then what's all the crap about you being so qualified? Irrelevant.
>
> I've told you I was qualified to be a soldier ?
> Anyway I have never considered joining the army, because of my personal
> belief : armies are institutions that do wars (which are archaic) ,

So don't join the French Army. But who will defend France next time, if they
come under foreign attack, if not an "army"? Santa Claus? Jesus?

> and "freeze" an established order (that I'd like to see evolve.).
>
> > such as living comfortably doing other work,
>
> That seems to be your priority.

With enough money to live comfortably, the single most important thing to me is
time. Not higher status. Not more money.

> I could have made choices to live much more comfortably (materially,
> professionnally,
> socially, sentimentally, etc), with more money and more people wipping the
> seat before I put my ass on it. I'd have needed a greater resistance to
> boredom and unsincere situations.
>
> > unlike those who see the military as a great
> > opportunity, who are in the Middle East now.
>
> If they believe it's the good way to make the world progress, or if they are
> just ambitious and it's the price to pay to make a career, they are right to
> go there. I respect people that make choice different than mine. What I
> don't like are those that make a choice and complain about it.

Why, when they do not see the future?

> > The Japanese news has quite capably demonstrated the way the US government
> > produced propaganda
>
> Oh what a discovery ! Japanese TV are so smart.

No, they are propaganda producing mouthpieces for their own government
interests.

> You had not noticed yourself?

*I* know the US media produces pro US propaganda, and told you so. It was YOU
claiming last night, what you saw in the US over the period of months was NOT
different from what you saw elsewhere.

Are you changing your mind?

> Same thing can be said about Japanese,

Yes, I post about Japanese media propaganda.

> French or Spanish
> media/government/dominant social class. You say that in English "la pensee
> unique", unique thinking ? You'd listen to the media for a while, they
> repeat the same thing so many times that at the end, you'd finished to be
> convinced (if you were not able to switch off the TV and count how many
> times Bassorah has been conquered that week and how the whale meat could be
> safe with only  x% of polluant  while on another day foreign beed was
> dangerous with half of that....).
> That's the same for most countries, but I have not followed the news of
> everywhere. Certain places are much much much worse as the politic situation
> and linguistic isolation make it difficult for people to diversify sources
> of informations. Americans are free to read what they want and have access
> to English speaking media from all over the world. What prevents any
> American to follow  the BBC or Canadian news for instance ?

Lack of interest. The reason given for Fox finally overcoming giant CNN as the
primary TV news source, was their patriotic take on war coverage, with animated
eagles and billowing Stars and Stripes in abundance, and almost complete loss
of journalistic impartiality. Americans watched what they wanted to watch, and
believed what they wanted to believe. Even the White House publicly admits no
links between Iraq and the WTC attacks, yet 70% of Americans believe Iraq was
involved.

The mere existence of information, or freedom to it, does not mean people will
ever be informed or understand the truth. In Japan, I have encountered the
worst cases of "I don't believe it, because I haven't seen it" (while never
having looked into the issue themselves, and disbelieving the sources I present
them with), I have ever seen. They miss the point when I ask them if they
watched the A-bombings or interviewed all the survivors to confirm the number
of dead.

> > And did you hear the Iraqi side, or hear of the Iraqi casualties,
> .....
> >.The Pentagon has not even
> > released an Iraqi casualty figure, military or civilian.
>
> I know -from American media- that Iraq is occupied now and the journalists,
> media, or any person setting the foot in Iraq ( be them American, Iraqi,
> others) have to follow instructions of US army, that limits where/when they
> can go, what they can learn and what they can tell to the outside
> world....Historians will tell us what were are missing, maybe.

So you DO understand that the US media is not giving people what independent
and foreign journalists are getting? So you DO understand that what US media is
showing people in America literally every single day, is NOT what we are
getting here, which will take some effort on the American's part and would more
importantly, require them to question their belief in their government or
media?

> > the way Middle Eastern, Eastern or European and Japanese covered them?
>
> None of these media shows or says more than the American ones.

Now you are being ignorant again, despite what you just admitted twice above.

> They vary the
> comments and quantity of negative/positive images/information , but they
> show of both, even if it's to say it's the other side's propaganda. I have
> seen most images from Middle Eastern media on US TV websites.

How many images of dead and bloodied civilians did you see in the US media? How
many accounts of being on the receiving end of the American offensive did you
get? The Pentagon practice of embedding US journalists with US military units
all but eliminated that. It is you above who acknowledge how much the US is
controlling the media.

> > the war had maybe over 80% support, while the rest of the world including
> the British, great allies whose government stood with the Americans, openly
> opposed it.
> > How do you account for this?
>
> No, I don't think Bush and his communicators are doing an intelligent
> propaganda.

I did not say they were intelligent. People should be able to decide for
themselves that the US make unconfirmed claims, if not telling outright lies.
And doing such as proclaiming to an international audience, with jittery
Muslims watching, that he hopes for democracy in the Middle East is one of the
most unwise things he can do.

Bush tells the terrorists to "bring it on". Bush proclaims that the US is not
pulling out of Iraq.

He is pretty certain to get his wish at this rate.

> Americans know as much as I,

No, they do not.

> but many made their own opinion differently from mine. That's not possible ?

It is certainly possible when they are ignorant or fed propaganda.

> > It was necessary for the US NOT to accept the existence of Gulf War
> Syndrome.
>
> For the US or for the career of a few politicians and high-level militaries?

It was necessary for the American public not to believe in the existence of
Gulf War Syndrome, for the benefit of those who would have been held
responsible or had to pay for the mess.

> > > or ask  their country to spend more money on education, health
> insurance, and less on military, etc.
> >
> > Voters have demonstrated their ignorance
> ....
> >Would you perhaps like to make a generalization  about the intelligence of
> the American
> >public?
>
> No thanks, you're doing it yourself.

Ignorance does not refer to lack of intelligence.

Now how would you like to characterize American voters? For some reason, you
are sure trying to avoid taking a stand now. Previously, you were so sure about
who was mentally retarded, and who was so qualified and well informed.

> > For some reason, military action  is
> > a great way to distract Americans from domestic problems.
> ....
> > Preparing for war is a great and easy way to increase the military
> strength and
> > budget.
>
> etc, you realise the same things could have been said  about Saddam
> Hussein's regime a few years ago, or Hitler's Germany.

Yes. Some of my country's numerous problems, which I am willing to acknowledge,
unlike those who preach only the alleged superiority of their own countries,
such as how well informed and educated their militaries are, or how well the
government takes care of its citizens without conducting wars.

> > You can witness on this very group how little support I get for proposing
> ....
>
> Each time you "propose" something, a few line later you explain you don't
> accept the consequence or price to pay for it.

What are you talking about?

The only way to bring up the underprivileged, is to make sacrifices such as
paying our own money for it on taxes to directly benefit them only. I am
willing. I even pay taxes with no direct benefits to myself, such as national
pension for the current elderly. It is people with more money to spare, who
complain about paying taxes.

I would also be living in the dreaded EricWorld under the exact same conditions
as everyone else, even if it meant me being killed as one of the criminals.

> > before asking why "I" am not capable of doing
> > something on the national level such as educating the American public,
> changing
> > Bush's mind or changing military recruitment tactics.
>
> Yeah, why not "you" ?

Because people I encounter in the real world, care even less than people I
encounter online. For example, people deny that homeless people exist in
Fukuyama, when I could show you where they have set up camp and spend their
days. If they acknowledge the existence of homeless, then the UNIVERSAL claim
is that they live so by choice, or are explicitly "lazy", and thus not worthy
of aid, much less jobs.

People are unwilling to acknowledge even a local, physically demonstrable
situation. They deny the information before their eyes such as any number of
news stories and television features on mainstream, prime time television, on
 the lives and needs of the homeless featuring live homeless people, much less
be willing to do anything about it or allow anything to be done about it, such
as have a homeless shelter built in the community.

Yet you believe I can educate the American public or change Bush's mind, when
it is YOU claiming they know everything that you do, have the same availability
of information we do, and they are free to make up their own minds?

Just how do you believe I can do so?

> > > > What disgusting recruitment methods? Joining the military for
> education,
> > > > employment, and self improvement are perfectly acceptable.
>
> That's acceptable or you want to change it ?

People's ignorance is what needs changing, and people need a greater choice of
opportunities other than joining the military out of need, not the fact that
the military can make some very attractive offers. Military recruiters should
be up front from the beginning and in their promotional literature about all
service in the military entails.

> If people are really educated and "self-improved" by the army, they won't be
> taught to doubt or contest the "official speeches".

Indoctrination is part of the training and experience. They can't be acting
like self-centered individuals on the battlefield.