posted March 04, 2003 02:54 PM            

DEFINITION OF AN AMERICAN

You probably missed it in the rush of news last week,but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.

So an Australian dentist wrote the following to let everyone know what an American is, so they would know when they found one:

An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish,German, Spanish, Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian,
Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Australian, Iranian, Asian,or Arab, or Pakistani, or Afghan. An American may also be a Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navaho, Apache,
Seminole or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.

An American is Christian, or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan. The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of
them chooses.

An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.

An American is from the most prosperous land in the history of the world. The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God given right of each person the pursuit of happiness.

An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need.

When Afghanistan was overrun by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country. As of the morning of September 11, Americans had given more than
any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.

Americans welcome the best, the best products, the best books, the best music, the best food, the best athletes. But they also welcome the least.

The national symbol of America, The Statue of Liberty, welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, tempest tossed.
These in fact are the people who built America. Some of them were working in the Twin Towers the morning of September 11, 2001 earning a better life for their families. I've been told that the World Trade Center victims were from at least 30 other countries, cultures, and first languages, including those that aided and abetted the terrorists.

So you can try to kill an American if you must. Hitler did. So did General Tojo, and Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tung, and every bloodthirsty tyrant in the history of the world. But, in doing so you would just be
killing yourself. Because Americans are not a
particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom. Everyone who holds to that spirit, everywhere, is an American.

------------------
"Lahn dádzaayú nahikai leh ni' nyelíí k'ehge," Goyathlay (Geronimo)

"Once we moved like the Wind"

posted March 05, 2003 01:25 PM            

We owe alot to many countries, cultures and religions for contributing so much to our own culture. Because of the many combinations within our country, we have become stronger and more tolerant. Even in the old days of the tribes, there was a common knowledge among certain groups (Apache being one of the major tribes) that it would increase the livelihood of the tribe and strengthen their men to take over and assimilate other tribes into their culture. Some did this by kidnapping or conquering a neighbor tribe and keeping the women and children.

Genetically it makes sense. The more diverse the population, the less susceptible it is to various mutations and the stronger it becomes.

posted March 05, 2003 04:30 PM              

Yep, yep - that's why I tend to look askance at "early reports of our demise".
If nothing else, the constant influx and assimilation, the change and adaptation inherent in America as a whole as made it vital and, I believe, will keep it so.
That people can come here and both make themselves anew and help to create this country anew...fills my heart w/ warmth.
(And I LOVE my neighborhood: it's a working-class townhouse complex, and on any given day you can walk outside and see a group of kids of myriad shades and any number of religions - I can't think of any major faith not represented here - tossing a football, gossiping, playing streethockey, or throwing snowballs. There'll be a group of young teenage girls - a couple with hijabs - walking along, when one's father pops his head out of the door and gives a lecture in Hindi, Urdu, Arabic, Thai, Chinese, Spanish, Korean...you'll hear anything really; and then the girl says back, "Yes dad, I know. I know - I'll be careful,"...a typical exchange between father and daughter.)

And I'm all for cultural identity and heritage (I figure the more people stay connected in one way or another with their roots, the more good restaurants will be available ), but I love how after a generation or two, it all kinda starts to meld together. Ask many Americans (especially on the coasts) about their heritage and you'll get a laundry list (me: Scottish, Protestant Irish -ole' Scotch Irish Stock, English, German, Belgian, Spanish - Mexican, Cherokee, Blackfoot, Crow, and lil' bit of African).
And when people have that going on, and then know people from myriad places in Africa (both recently and a bit further back), Native Americans who are vociferous in rightly advocating their interests, Pakistan, India (who're neighbors and have dinners together), Thailand, China, Korea, Russia, the Ukraine, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, all over South and Central America, Mexico, the Caribbean, the Pacific Islands...heck, everywhere...and people that're previously unimagined combinations of the above...it's really difficult to still seperate the human race into "us" and "them".

Re Randall's comment: There's no way American's will allow our freedoms to go quietly into the night. We've much too much of a fighting spirit for that. And that's another great part of this country:
We all fight and speak for what we believe to be the right - from War against a terrible dictator, to protesting that same war on grounds that I won't get into here ( ); and we all have the right to be what we want - from a protestor in the streets, to a soldier fighting to protect that person's right to protest, from butcher to baker to candlestick maker.

Woo-hoo!!!

posted March 06, 2003 10:41 AM            

I totally agree with that!!! We all have the right to free speech and people do have the right to protest the war and I fully support that right.

I am only offended when it gets to name calling and others insinuate that those for the war must be greedy capitalists with an agenda.

I do admire what Bush said. He could have lowered himself and shot back to the same people that have denegrated him in public over this war. Instead, he took the higher ground and that is something I respect.

------------------
"Lahn dádzaayú nahikai leh ni' nyelíí k'ehge," Goyathlay (Geronimo)

"Once we moved like the Wind"

posted March 13, 2003 09:43 PM            

Not to mention the fact that wherever he goes, his supporters are allowed to position themselves in plain sight of the pResident and the media, while the dissenters are relegated to the "Free-Speech Zones" . I mean, WTF!? Since when do we have to be in the proper 'zone' to excercise our rights!??

Sorry to always be such a downer but the threat looming largest to our freedom, the way I see it, isn't across the ocean, it's in our own capitol.

posted March 14, 2003 12:54 PM              

That's why your arguments always revolve around personal attacks rather than specific issues & related facts

posted March 14, 2003 01:53 PM            

Did you know about that?

It seems to me that my distaste for Bush clouds the facts that I do put out there and nobody responds to them. You and others just respond to the attacks. So I will try to leave out my personal feelings on the matter, although that will be very difficult at times, because I would very much like to hear your feelings on the facts of the matter.

posted March 14, 2003 02:38 PM            

First of all the 'Free Speech Zone' made it's initial appearance on college campuses during the 1980's as a way to detour what some felt was "Offensive Speech". More of then than not, the group that was most often subjected to the zone was the Anti-abortion protestors.

Presidents began to use the zones to screen out potential elements that may be prone to violence and possibly infringe on the safety of the President.

Former president Bill Clinton ALSO utilized the "Free Speech Zones" to keep Anti-liberal / Anti-Clinton speech from getting too close to his "person".

President Bush is also using the same "Free Speech Zone" technique.

My question is this: Why is it NOW such a big deal when hardly any media outlet or agency made a peep about this zone when Former President Bill Clinton was guilty of the same thing?

------------------
"Lahn dádzaayú nahikai leh ni' nyelíí k'ehge," Goyathlay (Geronimo)

"Once we moved like the Wind"

posted March 14, 2003 02:55 PM            

Not that I'm saying Clinton didn't do anything worthy of getting out in the streets and speaking out against, it's just that his dirty polital deeds registered alittle more underneath most people's radars than this potential war with Iraq does.

I didn't know about 'Free Speech Zones' before Bush took office because I was still taking a 'stick-my-head-in-the-sand-and-hope-it-blows-over' kind of attitude towards world events but then I got pregnant at the same time Bush "won" the election and my priorities changed.
So now, for my son's sake, I want to try to create a better world and part of that involves letting my elected representatives know that I disagree with what they are doing in my name. That's when I discovered that I'm not allowed to do so within sight of Bush.
If I'd known about it in Clinton's time then I would have perhaps made a stink then.

posted March 14, 2003 04:35 PM            

I completely understand what you are saying, but I have to disagree about the number of people protesting around the time of Clinton. He did have numerous people against that came out in protest against him.

I was attending a summer session at Portland State (I was a full time student and graduate of Concordia and lived in Portland for about 5 years) when he came out for some damn speech. His people made sure that major areas were blocked off that that opponents DID NOT have access to him at all. Now, as you know, living in PDX, that most people weren't against him at least not downtown, but get outside of Eugene and PDX and you have a massive conservative population.

Land and water issues were causing major discourse with that administration, but the opponents were not allowed to adequately demonstrate.

Can I ask why you personally hate Bush so much? I mean, I couldn't stand Clinton, but I still supported him as my president. Do you have this distaste for all things Republican or just him?

I'm just curious. I am not trying to put you on the spot. I think that you are a very intelligent person and I just want your perspective. I know that we have gone toe to toe on other threads, but I don't hold that against you.

------------------
"Lahn dádzaayú nahikai leh ni' nyelíí k'ehge," Goyathlay (Geronimo)

"Once we moved like the Wind"

posted March 16, 2003 02:58 PM            

Not just from the attacks but because all of this bickering about Republicans/Democrats, communists, socialists and futher factionalization only serves to distract us from what's really important... What we have done and continue to do to our precious earth, and in turn, what we do to our enviroment is a direct reflection of what we do to ourselves.

And for the record, I may dislike Democrats less than Republicans, but only by alittle. I can see valid points on both sides and certainly there are good people on either side but it's the Republican stance on the enviroment that I can't abide by.
Honestly I think they both should just give up the silly posturing and just tell it like really is -Republicrats...Demoblicans or whatever. They are two sides of the same greedy capitalist coin if you ask me.
And thank you, Pidaua, for respectfully asking for my opinion, I appreciate that. We may sharply disagree on somethings but the fact that we are both on this site says that we probably have a great deal in common as well.

Oh and if anyone is going to march out the tired pinko-commie statements or some such thing because I have a problem with capitalism, please don't. I am not a communist, nor a socialist. I believe in a free market but not at the expense of the well being of the enviroment, social and natural.. I am for creating a society that takes these nine points into consideration...I don't really have a label for it or anything..

1. We must protect the viability of the life-sustaining systems of the planet, which are everywhere under attack.

2. A realm of the sacred exists, of things too precious to be commodified, and must be respected.

3. Communities must control their own resources and destinies.

4. The rights and heritages of indigenous communities must be acknowledged and respected.

5. Enterprises must be rooted in communities and be responsible to communities and to future generations.

6. Opportunity for human beings to meet their needs and fulfill their dreams should be open to all.

7. Labor deserves just compensation, security and dignity.

8. The human community has a collective responsibility to assure the basic means of life, growth, and development for all it's members.

9. Democracy means that all people have a voice in the decisions that affect them, including economic decisions.

So there it is, my opinion..(well, I can't take credit for the wording of the nine points, Starhawk laid them out very concisely, so I am using her words, but in no way does that mean I don't have opinions of my own, as Lost Leo and Jwhop have said in other threads. I have felt these things in my bones since I was a little girl. Starhawk is just a writer who happens to know the song in my heart and can sing it back to me when I've forgotten the words.)

Capitalism is inherently unstable because it is based on the premise of unlimited growth and the fact of the matter is, we live in a world of limited resources. We need a total reworking of the system.

Practically speaking, I don't see that happening without some major catastrophe happening first to wake the public up to this fact and that may be coming sooner than we'd like. The effects of global warming are becoming rapidly evident in the extreme north, like my home state of Alaska...We really do only have one or two generations left to radically change our ways before humanity is doomed. That's not my speculation but the conclusion of a large international panel of scientists..

But the optimist inside me won't give up the fight to transform our society into one that can sustain itself before that catastrophe happens, even if it would defy all odds. I still believe in miracles.

Okay I'm ranting again..sorry.

Oh hey, Lost Leo, I still want to hear your opinions on the Free Speech Zones. Do you think they are justified or legitimate? And Pidaua, you've made the point that they are nothing new but you haven't yet stated any sort of opinion on the matter...
I'm just curious..

Oh and to bring it back to Pid's original question of me, here's a link to a listing of when bush has said one thing and then does another..I do not find what he says credible because his track record is so poor.. http://www.house.gov/appropriations_democrats/caughtonfilm.htm

But then again, I have difficulty believing stuff that comes out of most of our elected officials' mouths...

posted March 17, 2003 04:24 PM            

Having come from a family that is deeply involved in law enforcement, I have to say that I support "free speech zones" only in the respect that there needs to be a buffer against the psychotic element and innocent people.

BUT, I believe that outside of those zones, all opinions need to be expressed. I have to also qualify that with "All VALID" opinions need to be expressed.

Too many times we see people that I like to call "Cause-heads". These are the people that just want to yell, scream and promote anarchy. They do not care about the result nor the real cause of the matter, they just want to be a part of something. I DETEST those people like you would not believe.

This weekend there was a massive protest in DC. I think it's great that people have the right to express their emotions and opinions (BTW there were only 20,000 people MAX not the 200,000 people that they have stated). I know this because my ex's police dept. works with the Park Police and they always use the same method to count the number of people.

Anyway, they asked people that were carrying placards "Do you know who the president of Iraq is?"..the answer "ummmmm, no" "Do you know where Iraq is?". Ummm, no.

Damn it, so many of these people were out there only to be a part of "something" not knowing what it was, but getting caught up in it. That bothers me. Then I watched the speakers. So much anger and violence coming out of some of their mouths. How does one get their point across with spit bubbles and protruding veins being all that we can see? I rather have the mild mannered peeps.

I was also disppointed at the American Indian rep that used this cause to promote the freeing of Leonard Peltier. Hell, that dude is a murderer, but everyone forgets that fact. Take away the death of the FBI agents, and the fact remains that he still killed others while he was on the run.

So I do support the zones, but I do not support the wacknuts that use that opportunity to cause chaos and mayhem.

To play Devils advocate Harpy, I can see why some of us have come out strong against you on this thread and others. It was only as a response to some of your accusations, which I don't think you meant to come out at accusations. Also, people like Lost Leo, Jwhop, Alena and I, among others, all want facts. So, when people make statments, we are prone to say "Hey, support it, find the link..etc.." in other words...educate us or drop the point.

I mean, that is just my take on it. I may be speaking out of turn for the people I just referred to, if I have, sorry please let me know.