[Home Page]
KryssTal Feedback Pages:
KryssTal Pages:
|
Readers' Feedback
Democracy
Page 5 of 6
|
|
|
[Home Page]
KryssTal Feedback Pages:
KryssTal Pages:
|
Readers' Feedback
Democracy
Page 5 of 6
|
|
How I stumbled across your comidic website, I'll never know...but thanks for the laugh! This laugh is the reason why I am sending this E-mail. I am curious to find the point of your website? Is it jealosy of the US? Seems like you are severly jealous of the fact that "we" can do what "we" want in this world...when "we" want!!!! Doesn't that suck??? LOL I'd hate to be you!!!
I also really liked those pictures of the "Turkey Shoot." If you can...can you post some more pictures of Iraqis getting killed? I love seeing images of Iraqis and other American-Hating Middle Easterners getting wasted! That was great! Since we are about done with Iraq...hopefully we will move on to the other "Terrorist" nations in the Middle East...Syria, Lebanon, Iran, hell...even Saudi Arabia....that would be great!!!!
Too bad we don't just Nuke that whole area and avoid a few American lives from being lost! O'well...I guess that's the price of justice!!!!
Have Fun!!! LOL....
KryssTal Reply: What more is there to say. You say it so eloquently.
Hi KryssTal
Have just discovered your site while looking for info on UN resolution vetoes by US. I am currently having arguments with people I assume can be referred to as pro zionist - or perhaps anti Palestinian might be more to the point, and need to support some of the assertions I have made. Not that it makes any difference. I am sure anything i come up with will be anti semitic propaganda.
even so, thanks for the site - it is succinct and detailed - and you have documented some of the things I recall having heard about at the time, but which nobody else seems to remember.
sincerely, Marianne
KryssTal Reply: Thank you. It's all in the public domain but we're not reminded of it too often. Good luck.
Hi again KryssTal
Searching through your site I noticed you had something about US boycotts.
I've recently been told that Ron Lauder, boss of Estee Lauder, is one of the biggest financiers of illegal Jewish settlements. Do you know of any other companies where our dollar votes might be going to finance the dispossession of the Palestinian people of the little they still have?
I would like to boycott these, and so would many others, I'm sure.
I think with the erosion of democracy, as demonstrated by our governments' refusal to listen to the voice of the people over Iraq, how we exercise our dollar votes is important if we live in western industrialized countries. With market economics being one of the cornerstones of post cold war western society maybe we as consumers need to learn to use it to bring about changes we want. Money talks.
My thoughts anyway.
Thanks for your previous response, and thanks again for a great website.
Regards, Marianne
KryssTal Reply: As a Brit it seems to me that OUR government is here just to justify and support the USA.
The USA has just said that they are going to award contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq to countries that supported the war (meaning "invasion").
Our wonderful UK government, instead of querying whether the USA has the right to decide who reconstructs Iraq without asking the Iraqi people, jumps up and down like a school child yelping "It's their money - they can decide who gets it".
Oh, to be proud to be British.
Its the same here. We currently have a prime minister who thinks he is the governor of the fifty first state of the USA, and we will be awarded post war contracts in Iraq worth billions because of our role. Its interesting the US was still begging them to contribute to post war reconstruction though. The point you raise about the Iraqis making the decision about post war contracts has been discussed by a few people I know. Or is it really just a colony of the US - Is this the new colonialism and is Syria next in line?
While it has been my experience that people can distinguish between individuals and their governments, I still feel ashamed of what is happening in this country, and the latest on refugees makes it even worse - do you know about the hunger strike of the Afghani refugees on Nauru? Apparently they are not refugees according to our government, but still they would prefer to die of dehydration on Nauru than return "home" to what they believe is virtually a death sentence, anyway.
There are some serious human rights issues in relation to other refugees - who I guess are "non people," and based on what I read the demonization of refugees and fear generated by the war on terror has had an impact on the general population, who support the governments treatment of refugees. This nervousness is exacerbated by economic factors as well.
On the surface we live in a healthy economy, but collection of unemployment data has changed over the last twenty years so they are not measuring the same thing, the labour market has been increasingly casualized and entry into the primary labour market has become more and more difficult so we live in a climate of economic fear.
In the past (late 70's/early 80's) economic uncertainty also led to negative reactions to asylum seekers, however we had a government who could lead on the issue so the Indo Chinese refugees got a fair go.
I really wonder whither democracy? We seem to hear about democratic rights (of those of us lucky enough to be born in these countries) but we never hear about responsibility. But I know you can't have rights without responsibility.
As a democratic society we have a responsibility to treat all who come to us justly, we also have a responsibility to be informed if we want to maintain our democracy. And that includes being informed about what our governments are doing overseas. If our freedom and democracy is to be maintained at the expense of human rights in other parts of the world, can we really argue we live in a democratic society? It seems a bit shaky to me.
If we choose to just let it all be too hard, then...we will lose our democracy and those precious democratic rights we deny to others will be lost to ourselves as well.
regards.
You have an amazing site!! More people should read your excellent coverage on the atrocities the US has done over the years all over the world. I only have one complaint: there's not a word about the Navy presence in Vieques, Puerto Rico! I live in San Juan and although I am pro-independence, most of the population here (who are definitely not pro-independence) hated what the Navy did to one of our municipalities, Vieques (also Culebras, in the 70s). I'm not gonna write a long, boring email explaining what happened, but you should definitely look it up and draw your own conclusions.. And if you wanna know even more, check out the US backed assassinations of 2 pro-independence young men in 1978, knowns as the Cerro Maravilla killings.. I'm not really a political fanatic, I don't even belong to the independentist party around here (they started out fine a few decades ago, now even they are sucking up to the Americans), just thought you should know what this government does in their own colonies.. Have a nice day!
KryssTal Reply: Thanks you for the information. The Democracy pages are always being updated as I learn more.
Keep up the good work.
Making the facts known is of unquantifiable importance. Although it's up here and available for all to see, it still is incomprehensible to me the ignorance (especially amongst yer average american) of average americans of their government's actions over the past 50+ years in particular and I would argue since the foundation of america. ie Lest we forget slavery,lynchings of blacks, mexican spanish wars, and of course their forefathers' genocide of the natives of the americas. Change is possible, ultimately history will never forget these crimes.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for your kind comments. Knowledge is a good thing.
Dear Krysstal
When boycotting America, you suggest to people that a "good" alternative for baby milk is Nestle - you could not be more wrong.
They kill babies in Less Developed Countries!!!
For legal purposes, I should probably point out that they don't physically kill them, but that they aggressively advertise their baby milk to mothers in LDCs leads to deaths in that country.
The WHO (World Health Organisation) has said that 1.5 million babies die a year because they are not breastfed. That's one baby every 30 seconds. Here's the basics from the 10 Things Nestle Don't Want You To Know About Its Baby Business leaflet (source: www.babymilkaction.org)
1. Nestlé breaks the international marketing requirements for baby foods more than any other company. These requirements were adopted by the World Health Assembly to ensure that mothers are not discouraged from breastfeeding and to ensure breastmilk substitutes are used safely if they are needed. 1.5 million infants die around the world every year because they are not breastfed. Where water is unsafe a bottle-fed child is up to 25 times more likely to die as a result of diarrhoea than a breastfed child.
2. Nestlé is in court in India over its baby food labels, which failed to have required warnings in Hindi. The Managing Director of Nestlé India faces a prison sentence if Nestlé is convicted.
3. When Zimbabwe was introducing its law on the marketing of baby foods, Nestlé threatened to close down its factory if this went ahead. The Minister of Health, Timothy Stamps, realised it was an 'idle threat' and the law was introduced despite Nestlé.
4. Nestlé is not allowed to make direct or indirect contact with mothers, but in many countries targets them with baby clubs. For example, in Singapore a leaflet distributed to health centres says "Calling all mothers to be".
5. Nestlé has been successfully prosecuted for breaking national laws. For example, in Costa Rica it was fined after repeatedly ignoring calls from the authorities to change its labels.
6. A former employee in Pakistan, Syed Aamar Raza, has exposed corrupt practices, including bribing of doctors, implicating staff at the highest level of the company. Aamar says he was threatened when he raised this with managers. He remains in hiding and hasn't seen his wife or two young children three years. Nestlé conducted a so-called 'external audit' but banned the auditors for contacting Aamar or health groups. They could only interview doctors from a list provided by Nestlé.
7. Nestlé is the target of a boycott in 20 countries because of its unethical and irresponsible marketing of baby foods.
8. Nestlé (UK) leads the company's public relations offensive on the baby milk issue. But it fails to convince, losing public debate with Baby Milk Action (a video of a recent debate can be requested from Baby Milk Action). Nestlé is officially the UK's 'least ethical company' according to a survey conducted by Ethical Consumer Magazine.
9. In November 2000 the European Parliament held a Public Hearing into Nestlé malpractice. Although management told shareholders months before that they welcomed the Hearing, they refused to send a representative. At the time, Nestlé object to the presence of an expert witnesses from the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN). Later Nestlé claimed none of its 230,000 employees was available.
10. In May 1999 a ruling was published again Nestlé by the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). Nestlé claimed in an anti boycott advertisement that it markets infant formula "ethically and responsibly". The ASA found that Nestlé could not support other claims in the face of evidence provided by the campaigning group Baby Milk Action.
Yours sincerely
Evian is owned by Coca-cola - on the Coca-cola website they have a list of brands they own, and I think Nestle is there as well...
Dr Pepper is owned by Coca-cola
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for writing. I knew about Nestle and if they are owned by Coca
Cola I will change the data in the web site. I will also publish your information on my readers' feedback page for general interest.
I am glad people know about these things.
Hi,
On your boycott US companies trading in the UK site, which, I have to say, I'm all for, you have listed Reebok. Reebok aren't American, they were formed by a guy called Foster from Bolton in Lancs, hence the Reebok stadium. They just happen to make shoes in the US and import them into the UK to sell for hugely inflated prices.
Good site though! Cheers.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for that. I'll add a comment to my page about that. I'll treat Reebok like I treat Rupert Murdoch - not really American but as good as...
As you can guess I am not a wearer of what we used to call "plimsolls" that are now more expensive than "real" shoes.
Again, thank you for your support.
After a build up of tension in the region, Israel attacks its Arab neighbours. It occupies the Gaza Strip and the Sinai from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria. In the Golan Heights, the Israelis destroy 244 villages out of 249 and expel 147,000 people. 42 Jewish settlements are built housing 18,000 Israelis."
Interesting point, especially "after a buildup of tension in the region". To what lenghs are you going to alter history? How much do you hide behind the "tension buildup" words?
You totally ignore the fact that since its UN-backed creation, Israel has been the stage of reletless attacks from Arab states and their terrorist proxies bent on its anihilation. The "pressure buildup" you mention was created by Arab armies preparing to attack and destroy Israel as they did before and still do today.
To support you theory of the "evil Israel" you omit the shameless attack on Israel in '48 minutes after legally obtaining its independence, and again the Yom Kippur war when Israel was attacked by Arab armies while observing its most revered religious holiday.
You omit the fact that Israel had to "clean" southern Lebanon from a growing terror nest financed again, by Arab countries and Soviet Union. This came after countless terror attacks on cities along the international border. The Metula School terror attack where tens of children were massacred by terrorists is conveniently left out to make place for the Ein Al Hilwe Israel's attack which left 75 people dead. Not to mention that in Al Hilwe was a terror nest by itself and a preferred exit point for terror attacks against Israeli civilians.
But telling the truth and presenting a balanced view would take much of the steam off your arguments against Israel wouldn't it? And Israel has to be on your list - after all - Israel is the "Small Satan", brother of the "Big Satan" - the USA.
I read your site with interest but now, after seeing how you manipulate historic facts to sustain and support your theories, I see nothing more than a bunch of lies coming from a revisionist and anarchistic person who I tend to believe is financed by the likes of Al Qaida.
Shame on you!
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for taking the time to write. I have put your comments on my feedback page. As I mention at the beginning of my pages, I encourage all my readers to be skeptical and to check everything. Therefore your comments deserve publishing so that people can check.
The Palestinians have been fighting a war against Israel for nearly 50 years. There are several points you have failed to consider.
1. The hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees who are still being denied a right of return. If I was Jewish and living in London I would have the right to live in Israel and become a citizen. If I was a Palestinian who had lived in (say) Tel Aviv I would not be allowed to return and neither would I have received any compensation. This violates UN law which you mention in your statement.
2. Israel continues to violate UN law by confiscating Arab land and building settlements on this land. The destruction of fields and homes as collective punishment is also a violation. The wall snaking across the West Bank, built on confiscated Palestinian land is also a violation. People don't need to be brainwashed by terror groups to feel an injustice here. This injustice is the cause of the "terrorism".
You write: "You omit the fact that Israel had to "clean" southern Lebanon from a growing terror nest financed again, by Arab countries and Soviet Union."
Many innocent Lebanese civilians were killed by Israel in its invasion of 1982. The best figure I have found is 17,000. If terrorism is an attack on civilians then this qualifies. Israel is a democracy therefore its citizens (like the citizens of my country, UK) are responsible for the acts of their governments in a way that (say) the Afghans (without elections) are not. Many people in Israel itself believe that a JUST peace with the Palestinians is the only way to reduce tensions in the area.
As an atheist, I do not believe in a Satan (either big or small). I would like to see a JUST two state solution in that region with human rights and dignity applied to all. The refugee issue must be addressed - either a return right or compensation. Israel's AND PALESTINE's security must be guaranteed. The idea of the USA brokering a fair deal when it arms Israel and vetoes all criticism against it is not viable. The Palestinians want the conflict to involve the UN and Europe. Israel and USA refuse. This is a bias that does not bode well for the future.
I have never taken any finance from any group like Al-Quaida. Demonising your opponents is a method used by people whos arguments are weak. You are an intelligent and eloquent writer who has put together several excellent points and I don't see that you need to use insults. It cheapens your points.
I emphasise my statement about the Democracy pages that:
The following pages are dedicated to ALL victims of state violence and all victims of terrorism regardless of their colour, race, creed, gender, age, political affiliation, sexual orientation, economic system or nationality.
Again thank you for writing.
I agree that I haven't touched many subjects. The ones that I did were enough. I simply do not have the time to relate to everything you have put on your site - obviously you invested a lot of effort in writing/collecting the information but not enough in research or validation of the "facts" you disseminate. I am not sure you do care to research for as long they fit some general framework of preconceived ideas you might have. Be sure I do not even think that you woke up one day and said to yourself genuinely "let's fix the world. Let's make real justice". I suspect that the reasons behind your actions - reflected by your site - are far from pure.
KryssTal Reply: The Democracy part of my site was begun shortly after the 11 Septmeber 2001 attacks on the USA when people were asking "why?"
I was appalled by these attacks but not surprised. I wandered why it had taken so long. The listings on democracy_whyusa.html are all events that are in the public domain but I put them all in one place. As such they are a catalogue of attacks on countries around the world that explain some of the hatred felt towards the USA.
I decided to limit my brief to acts by the democracies or countries supported by democracies. There are two resons for this:
1. In a democracy, the citizens are responsible for at least knowing what their governments are up to.
2. The media in democracies tend to underplay their activities and concentrate on "the other side".
My pages attempt to redress the balance. Western headlines scream when Israelis are killed (quite correctly in my view - and I condemn all such actions) and journalists are allowed to be there. When Palestinian homes are blown up or missiles fired into Palestinian residential areas, no journalists are allowed and the stories get very little coverage. Very few names are given. Until the media scream in an identical fashion when both sets of people die, I feel I have to redress the balance.
Hiding behind a weak disclaimer is not absolving you of the responsibility you should display when dealing with such subjects. In addition, exhibiting the "facts" out of any historical context automatically delegitimizes anything that you have to say - regardless whether it is true or not. Saying the "many innocent Lebanese were killed as a result of the Israeli aggression" although factually correct, in no way equates that Israel is evil when taken in the correct historical context. What about the innocent Israeli citizens killed by targeted terrorist attacks coming from Lebanon when Lebanon was not invaded by Israel but controlled by Syria? Nuff said.
KryssTal Reply: I have no concept of Israel as being evil. Countries are abstract entities. It is government policies that I am criticising and publicising. In the UK, on 11 September 2002, we had to hold 2 minutes of silence for the 3000 USA victims. But there was no mention of the 3000 civilians killed in Afghanistan by USA bombing. To me this implies that USA victims are "worth more" than Afghan victims. I disagree with this. In the UK, only one newspaper mentioned that a few days after 11 September 2002 was the 20th anniversary of Sabra and Chatilla. Some crimes against humanity are remembered more than others (in the West).
As for Israel. It has been occupying Palestinian territory for over 30 years. This is a major cause of the Palestinian actions. Again I emphasise that only a just peace can begin to solve these problems. I would not consider the resistance of the Jews in Warsaw against the Nazis to be terrorism - but of course, the Nazis would.
This is a far cry from your claim that your site is dedicated to every victim, etc, etc. Your site is targeted against the west, the western democracies and you crucify them - OUT OF CONTEXT - for every alleged or factual crime they committed. This is hardly balanced. This does not make right all the evil that has been and still being done by the totalitarian and brutal regimes in ALL the Arab countries AND the Palestinian controlled territories. That of course includes all the other non-Arab nations as well - Cuba, North Korea and many African countries. No amount of west-bashing can hide the fact that since all of them gained independence from their former colonial powers - very precious few reached a stable and benevolent government type, or a viable economy. And some of them are already 50-70 years into their independence.
KryssTal Reply: This, of course, ignores all the brutal regimes supported by the West in many of these countries even when democratic leaders were assassinated. It also ignores the trade rules that the world runs under. It also ignores stable, democratic ex-colonies (like Namibia and India). It's actually a form of racism.
Israel got help from the US just like many other new states got either from their former colonists or from the UN financing engines of the International Bank. But instead of embezzling billions of dollars in private accounts like Saddam, Idi Amin, and Arafat did, Israel invested in education, industry and technology and all that while being continuously harassed by Arab states and terrorists financed by Soviet Union and after its collapse, by the Arab Oil. Israel is forced to channel most of its GDP to its military engine - just like its Arab neighbors do. Imagine if Israel will one day decide that it will disarm itself and become a pacifist nation. Not a minute later, it would be totally wiped off the face of the earth even before the UN would have time to convene and stop it. Now imagine that all the Arabs decided to stop any aggression against Israel and the west. I guess you can see that the world would become a better place. Interesting though - you still portray Israel as the evil part and the Arabs and their Palestinian proxies as the victims. If you seriously think that everybody believes the nonsense you put on your site, you must be joking!
KryssTal Reply: During and before World War II, the Nazis were the aggressors - Jews (and others) were their victims. I have no problems with this fact. In 2003, Israel are the heavilly armed occupying power - the Palestinians are the victims of ethnic cleansing, land confiscation, collective punishment and economic blockade. Three times as many Palestinians are being killed as Israelis. Until these facts change, I will continues to state them.
You decided to show that the democracies are not perfect, to say the least, and you are correct, but when you compare them to the alternatives, I will take the US or UK or French and indeed Israel's democratic form of government - with all their faults and past, present and future misdeeds, instead of preferring the Communist or Totalitarian forms of government or administration of Iraq, Algiers, or indeed, the corrupt and cruel Palestinian junta.
KryssTal Reply: I also support democracy. But by its very nature, democracies need to be kept on their toes. This is our right as citizens of democracies.
Iraq's totalitarian government was supported and armed by the West for 20 years. I also criticise this regime (from its inception not since its invasion of West-friendly and un-democratic Kuwait in 1990). If you criticise this regime why do you not criticise its supporters.
Algeria had elections in the early 1990s. These were annulled by the present military government. This is being armed and supported by the West. You criticise the regimes without criticising their supporters.
Yasser Arafat (who indeed has blood on his hands) has been elected by the Palestinans. Ariel Sharon (who also has blood on his hands) has been elected by the Israelis. A fair way to proceed would be EITHER for both leaders to be removed and new elections held OR for both leaders to remain in place and talk to each other. The solution offered (The Palestinan leader is changed while the Israeli one is kept) is the one that suits Israel and the USA. This is plainly another bias.
You see, among the many evils, I prefer the lesser one - the one that will not shoot me in the town's or village's square for criticizing "the great leader".
KryssTal Reply: Many of the people living in these regimes would like to be democratic if only the West wouldn't support thier brutal dictators.
I hope you find light and correct the way you so proudly attempt to show to anybody who cares, how bad the democracies are without showing the sad alternatives. Specifically, since I am Israeli, I also hope that you will care to do a serious research before claiming falsehoods based on Arab propaganda etc. The obvious bias shows in ANYTHING that you say about Israel and the Palestinians. This excludes you and your site as an authoritative or even informative source.
KryssTal Reply: Israel also has its propaganda.
Only the truly rabid anti-Israeli will gladly accept your ideas since they fit theirs. In this you accomplished nothing except reducing yourself and your site to being yet another member of the exclusive blind, deaf but loud Israeli-bashing club.
KryssTal Reply: I, too, look forward to the day when my criticisms of Israel will end.
You have to be the biggest bunch of cry babies i have heard.
Whaaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaaaaaa
America is too strong for us lets boycott. But when you say YANKEE GO HOME. right under it you write "but take me with you. Its the biggest bunch of European Hipocrasey in history. 98% of Americans want to Withdraw from Nato and the U.N. We were better off in isolation. Untill you euro fucks couldn't controle Hitler. You came crying to us for help and aid. We should have said no
We should have supported Germany you ingratful chicken fuckers.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for writing.
The boycott is a movement that has been building up for some time both in Europe and the Middle East. I have had support from the USA about this since not every body agrees with USA foreign policy.
I have no wish for "Yankees" to go home. They are as welcome as any other visitors to my country. I have no wish to live in the USA although there are many parts that I would like to visit. I found the USA to be too insular for my tastes although the people are friendly.
I don't think your 99% figure is correct. Opinion in Europe about NATO is divided. Many ex-Communist countries want to be members because it takes them away from Russia. I am one who supports a European force for Europe.
The UN is the international community but the structure with certain countries having a veto is subject to abuse. Both your country and mine have abused their veto power - yours over 70 times. The USA is seen by many countries as wanting one law for itself and another for everyone else. This is what you call "isolationism". Unfortunately the world economy is global now - the USA itself relies on raw materials from around the world (that's what Iraq was about!) and has its global markets. True isolationism would require you to be economically self sufficient and not travel or have visitors. Like North Korea, in fact.
Your comment about Hitler is a little shy of history. The USA did stand by and only joined the War when attacked by Japan. Indeed, some USA companies (like Coca Cola) did support Germany. Your "chicken fuckers" statement is not really a logical argument so I will ignore it. You call us "euro fucks" but unless you are a native American or of Asian origin you have as much European blood in you as I have. I could call Americans "gum chewing culture-less monkeys" but I won't as this lowers the level of debate. Also , the Hitler bit is not really a relevant argument for today's world. The UK stood "shoulder to shoulder" with the USA after the 11 September attacks even though the USA has been breaking treaties everywhere.
Again, thank you for taking the trouble to write.
Thank you for the reply.
What we as in the American see is europe hating us for no reson it could be the government leaves us in the dark. Its no surprise we have supported Dictators in the past hell we supported Saddam in his war with Iran. But to say that KFC=Imperalism is an overstatement. Its safe to say that Americans are angry coming from the fact that we were the people you didn't want. Britian tried to controle us they failed France tried to controle us they faild. My last comments were a little harsh so i do apologize.
Your 8 to 10 thousand miles away we have bigger problems of our own. We have no knowledge of what goes on everyday in Europe.
But what you don't understand is when we see our flag being burned we take it as a personal insult. A lot of people died for that flag. you might as well spit on us and say you are inferior because your American. And what about this imperalism BS i hear. We don't have colonies. So i guess taking over northern Ireland to show barbarians how to live is civilized.
Feedback if possible
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for responding.
We can agree to differ without insulting each other and we can both learn about the other's point of view. That's what democracy is all about. If you read the entries on the feedback page you will see that I always try to argue a case using evidence even if people insult me.
The point you made about your government leaving you in the dark is a very important one. I have travelled extensively around the world and I meet many USA citizens along with the citizens of other countries. We all joke about each others' national characteristics. Germans lack a sense of humour (or, as you would spell it, "humor"), the French are arrogant, the British are reserved (when they're not being hooligans!), the Italians are passionate, the Japanese bow all the time, etc.
Of course, these are stereotypes and are not 100% true. The stereotypical USA person is considered by Europeans to be friendly but very naive. We often joke about your lack of knowledge about the rest of the world, its culture and its politics. This is not a slur on the intelligence of individuals. After all, we know from your writers, scientists and business people that you are a dynamic, hard working and very intelligent people.
However,
I have spent some time in the USA and I have seen your TV media in action and I have to tell you that you get a very biased international view if international news is discussed at all. No country has perfect news media (no country is perfect in everything). I have discussed issues about economics and politics with "uneducated" people in villages in India that most Americans have never heard of. This is not to insult Americans. I refuse to believe that your intellect is not better than theirs. India invented positional arithmetic; the USA invented modern computers. Both peoples have contributed to the world's culture and science. However, their media discusses these issues in more detail that your media does. In a recent survey more than 70% of Americans stated that they believe that Iraq was behind the 11 September attacks on the USA. This is the case even though most of the hijackers were Saudis, as was the forgotten Bin Laden. In the UK with our somewhat more pluralistic media, 45% of us fell for that untruth. In Europe (where pluralism of the media is enshrined by law) only 10% of their populations were fooled. Nobody believed in the Middle East.
So, the Europeans had more information at hand and were less willing to go to war. The UK government followed the USA into war against the feelings of half its population. Since much of USA foreign policy is to do with trade, this led to the idea of the boycott. Also, many of the large American companies make payments to political parties that will further their needs abroad. That money comes from the consumers of their products. The fight is not against Americans. It is against the ruling elite who control the media, the military and the handful of multinational companies whos policies abroad affect so many people.
I certainly do not blame individuals for their lack of knowledge - things are kept from the masses. The information is there - it's just not put before the public or emphasised in any way. It's true that you don't have colonies in the way that the UK, Spain and Portugal did in the 19th and 20th centuries but that's not the way that the USA works. Direct control (as in Iraq) is unsuccessful. The USA has always gone for the indirect method. Put a dictator in place and support them. They do the oppression, the killing and all the other nasties. Your people are not told of this. Their people know who is behind their government.
Iraqis are aware that the USA (and my country as well) supported the Saddam regime for 20 years when it suited us. Only when he disobeyed us did we suddenly start crowing about "the butcher of Baghdad". When he gassed the Kurds in 1989, the story was avoided by most newspapers in both England and America because we were backing and arming him at the time. In fact (irony of ironies) a certain Donald Rumsfeld was President Reagan's special envoy there at the time. there are photos of the two of them shaking hands. Have you ever seen one?
Be proud of your country and support it but don't let your rulers pull the wool over your eyes by using patriotism and lying to you and demonising others so that they can get away with what they do. As a citizen of one of the most diverse and interesting countries in the world it is YOUR responsibility to be sceptical and find out more. Don't just accept what you are told, check for yourself. And that applies to everything I have said in this email or on my web site.
Don't take your flag being burnt as an insult to you - find out WHY it's happening. Always ask WHY. Feel angry and find out why. People have better things to do than burn your flag for no reason. You didn't throw our tea in the sea at Boston because you were evil or because you were terrorists or because you had nothing better to do - the reason was TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. A good reason to fight for. So what are they angry about? Find out. There is a British book called "Why Do People Hate America" by Ziauddin Sardar (an Islamic broadcaster) and Merryl Wyn Davis (a BBC correspondent). Read it and use it as a starting point to find out more.
I agree with your comments about Northern Ireland - we (that is, the UK) should not be there. I am as proud of my country as you are of yours - but I know when they are doing wrong. I cannot defend their actions in Northern Ireland and I have written about these actions on my web pages.
I am just a U.S. citizen, but I am very thankful for our President,Vice President, military, and Citizens. Who are committed in the war against terrorism.
If you know the Creator. Then you know some time there must be war to stop a form of evil that is a danger to many people. Mark 13:7 shows war some time must needs be. "And when you shall hear of wars, and rumours of wars, be you not troubled for such things must needs be."
Please remember that Jesus Christ him self used physical force and a weapon against a form of evil in his days. In John 2:14-16 "And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting. And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers money, and over threw the tables." This is form the King James version. Please read matthew 10:34-39 From a U.S. Citizen who cares.
Thank you all for your good commitment. from michael lee guillory in modesto,ca you may print this or use this.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for writing.
Both Bush and Bin Laden have the idea that they are good and their enemies are evil. Most of the world is stuck in the middle and trying to keep their heads down.
I am disappointed that you have chosen to be so anti American in your comments about the war in the gulf.
KryssTal Reply: I am sorry you percieve my site as anti-American. This is not an active policy of this site or myself personally. The USA has been the most powerful country for well over 50 years now so any study of world affairs will show them up more than other country. Had this web site covered the period 1850 to 1900 then the UK would have been the dominant power and would get the most mentions.
My statement that you are anti-American is based on the fact that you highlight the bad aspects of war without commenting on the benefits. There is no reference to the pro-American attitude felt by many Iraqis, there was no reference to the United States intervening in Bosnia to help the Muslims.
KryssTal Reply: Quote from Bill Clinton about Kosovo where the USA was also 'helping Muslims': "If we're going to have a strong economic relationship that includes our ability to sell around the world, Europe has got to be a key....That's what this Kosovo thing is all about."
I, like many others, would have preferred to have seen the situation in Iraq solved peacefully, however it was never going to happen. The Iraqis would never have been able to depose Saddam without external assistance and as we have seen Saddam and his thugs would have had no hesitation in using extreme violence and perhaps WMD to wipe out any rebels.
KryssTal Reply: The USA and UK are taking credit for deposing Saddam Husein (who, we all agree, is a vicious tyrant). However, both countries supported and armed him between the late 1960s and 1989. Do these countries take the blame for supporting him against the well being of the Iraqis?
As you know it is not quite so simple as that. As the regime became more extreme it was not supported and eventually UN sanctions were introduced to prevent trade with the regime. Unfortunately the adage 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' is applied to often and the anti-western extremist view taken by the Khommeni government in Iran led to support. It was as a result of this war that a near bankrupt Iraq invaded Kuwait in order to increase oil prices.
KryssTal Reply: But you can't deny that the USA has supported some pretty nasty characters in the past. Not just the USA but also the UK as well. As for Iran, our two countries removed the democratic government in 1953 and placed the Shah as leader, and trained SAVAK, the secret police, to oppress the population. That's why when he was removed in 1979, the West was not very popular. Incidently, the Iranians asked for him back but the USA refused. When our enemies go to other countries, we want them and are willing to threaten to get them. Iran's tormentor was allowed to go free. Saddam's real crime was to disobey us. We've supported worse than him as long as they obey.
Amnesty International have estimated that since Saddam became a prominent member of the Iraqi government over 1 million Iraqis have died at his hands. That is over 100 every day of his regime, far fewer than the number of innocent civilians who have died as a result of the 21 day war.
KryssTal Reply: So, since our two countries supported him for two thirds of his tenure we are responsibe for most of this carnage. The sanctions have only been in place for the last 12 of his 30 odd years.
During WW2 both Allied forces and Russian forces were fighting against Germany. I assume this means we were responsible for the carnage created as a result of Stalin's regime.
KryssTal Reply: Not a valid analogy - we never supported the USSR regime in peace time but we did support the Iraqi regime.
He has also been responsible for the deaths of over 1 million Iranians plus thousands who have died as a result of him starving the country of necessary food and medical assistance by lavishing his cronies with houses, cars etc at their expense.
KryssTal Reply: This is when we backed him. The USA vetoed UN resolutions condemning this invasion. When Saddam gassed Iranians our media failed to publish the story. He was our boy then. My point is the double standards. If Saddam was still towing the line would be hearing about his human rights violations now? We still call compliant Saudi Arabia a "moderate regime" - this country that has never had a democratic election and bans women from travelling by themselves. Remember when we "liberated" Kuwait. They still have an autocratic monarch with no democracy - all we did was restore the status quo. I just doubt the motives behind this invasion.
But to what extent does the Kuwaiti government apply thugish tactics to retain power? Very few countries will be totally happy with the attitude of their allies in every respect but the Kuwaiti government doea appear to be reasonably moderate. I do not agree with the Saudi attitude to women. What would you suggest? Invade or break off all relations entirely? At least there is a high degree of respect.
KryssTal Reply: Moderate = compliant. Words are used to obscure meanings. Saudi is labelled "Moderate" by the West. It all depends from your viewpoint. When the USA funded Bin Laden to fight the USSR, he was a freedom fighter. When he turned against the West he became a terrorist. The French fighting the occupying army of the Nazis are the "resistance". Palestinians fighting Israeli occupation are "terrorists". Kurds oppressed by Iraq are victims that must be saved from an evil tyrant. The 30,000 Kurds killed in Turkey are hardly mentioned.
You use articles to claim that the majority of people in Britain are anti war. They are not. In fact many people world wide would not be anti war if their governments were not feeding their citizens with a diet of anti western propaganda.
KryssTal Reply: The West has a lot to answer for if we study the way trade works and the number of non-democratic governments supported by the West.
Even you have fallen for the propaganda of these governments. I cannot be bothered to highlight the many areas where you are incorrect in your 'essay', but the most glaring error is the claim that the United States killed one of Gaddafi's children. In fact Gaddafi was not related to her in any way. He adopted her when he heard she had been injured in the bombing raid and would probably die. She was a publicity stunt for him.
KryssTal Reply: This raid did kill a number of people - can you imagine the outcry if Libya had flown all the way to the USA and dropped bombs in Washington in an attempt to kill the USA president?
The raid was as a result of the support given by Libya to various terrorist groups and the bombing of the La Belle discotheque in Berlin.
KryssTal Reply: That was propaganda from OUR side. There were connections to Syria rather than Libya. The attack on Libya was part of a campaign. In 1981 two Libyan jets were shot down by USA warplanes off the coast of Libya. The USA had been holding military maneuvers off the coast of Libya at the time. In 1986 the USA attacked Libyan patrol boats near the coast of Libya as well as Libyan shore installations, killing 72 people. In 1989 USA forces shot down two Libyan planes off the coast of Libya.
Imagine the outcry had Libya shot down two jets off the coast of the USA while conducting military maneuvers off the USA coast. What gives the USA the right to be provoking countries (apart from MIGHT IS RIGHT)? Remember the recent spy plane over China?.
Also in your claim that the cost of the 1991 Gulf war was financed by Oil price rises is totally incorrect. The cost of a barrel of actually fell at the start of the Gulf War, peaked during the 43 day war and fell to end the war at approximately $21 per barrel...the same as it was at the start of the war.
KryssTal Reply: This information is from a Milan site - and I will check it again.
The average price of a barrel of crude oil fell from $32.25 on Jan. 16, 1991, the day the US announced that the military effort to drive Iraqi forces from Kuwait had begun, to $21.48 the following day. Even if the Milan figures were correct this would mean that the extra profit on a barrel ($27) would necessitate 2.22 billion barrels being produced solely by Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and being extracted solely by American companies. During 1991, according to OPEC, Saudi Arabia averaged 8 million barrels a day and Kuwait 200,000.
I don't disagree with everything you are saying, but I would prefer a more balanced view. Why don't you produce a page highlighting the atrocities in China and the Soviet Union or the war crimes committed by Japan.
KryssTal Reply: In the introduction to my democracy site I do state my parameters. The atrocities of China and the USSR are covered by our media in detail. Our attrocities are not. I chose 1945 as my start date simply to keep the project manageable. As for the 2 nuclear bombs dropped on Japan, Agent Orange and carpet bombing over Vietnam, etc - the Geneva Conventions would have something to say about both.
Otherwise a great site.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you.