"A part of adolescence is feeling that there's no one else around who's enough like yourself to understand you."

"The World According to Garp"

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: cbailey on 2001-10-22 09:47 ]</font>

Parents try to "Millennialize" kids as David said by being strict and mean parents and wanting their kids to grow up to fall into their perfect ideal of what their son or daughter should be like. Teachers also give treatment that isn't typically given to Nomads or Prophets. But instead of accepting the demands as Heroes do, we rebel against them and live it all out in a very un-Heroic way. While parents make stricter and stricter rules we break them more and more in response. What we DO is clearly un-Millennial. Someone who takes a look at an '85er or an '81er with the way he or she acts and dresses and whether or not s/he accepts rules would gather that the person in an Xer, or if not an Xer at least not a Millie. But as I've mentioned many times before, if they had to go with Strauss/Howe's model that says there are NO generations or people between Xers and Millies they'd clearly be an Xer.

I'll throw something into the fray here (and pose a questions of sorts).

When I was in middle school and high school, I tried very hard to emulate the generation that came before me. In other words, my friends and I tried very hard to be more Prophet-like than Nomad-like.

It's hard to explain, but we beleived that we were exactly like the Boomers all over again, even my own parents (Boomers) remarked that nothing changes, and the battles of a young adult are always the same.

But as I got older, I began to realise that I am nothing like my parent's generation. I never felt that sense of security that they did, but I tried, still to wear their clothes. Only they looked very different on me.

While my brother and sister are also 13-ers, I have many cousins that are Millenials, (ranging in age from 19 all the way down), they have tried to do the same thing I did. They have the outward trappings in a 13-er (the blue hair, the rebelliousness etc).

But they don't have that inner seething rage that seems to be about the only common thread I can find with my generational cohorts. To them blue hair is a way to have fun, to "express themselves" and tie in with their peers.

When I was a teenager it would have been insulting for a friend to dye their hair the same color as you. Now it seems like a gaggle of girls get together and all dye their hair blue as a show of solidarity within their peer group!

It's hard to explain, but the Millenials certainly have the window dressing of the X-ers, just like we adopted the peace signs of the Boomers. But we didn't quite wear them the same way.

Jen

[quote]
On 2001-10-21 23:03, sv81 wrote:

So, unlike so many people that just want to get back to T.V., I, for one welcome the demands of the fourth turning. I welcome a hasty end to affirmative action programs, a major revamping of our welfare system, and a wholesale reevaluation of every entitlement program.

We did get a major revamping of our welfare system in August 1996, when Congress passed, and the President signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconcilation Act of 1996, known by welfare analysts as "PRWORA". This legislation ended welfare as an entitlement, devolved standards and administration and eligibility back to the States, and mandated a shift from income support to temporary assistance and moving people from welfare to work. Perhaps most important, it mandated a five-year lifetime limit on welfare benefits, except for the disabled and those caring for a disabled person.

What is interesting is that States are coming up to the five-year limit now, right when the economy is heading south. In the Washington, D.C. area, jobs in the hospitality industry, a common place for unskilled workers to find jobs, are drying up. States are very worried about how they will find jobs for welfare recipients who are running up against the lifetime time limit.

You apparently haven't gone where I've been of late! I'm seeing a sea of flag and patriotic T-shirts, pins, and slogans from Xer and Millennial agers all around me.

Agreed. I don't know what it is, but people seem to be constantly stuck in thinking that Boomers are perpetually 30-40 years old. Most of the Boomer generation is crossing into the 50s mark (ok, the late 40s mark).

Most of those flag decals you see on cars are certainly belonging to both X-ers and Boomers fairly evenly.

But Xers have never been a generation that takes to symbols as well as the Boomers have. And I think seeing the lack of symbolic gestures from our generation has caused a lot of people to think we don't care.

But I think the key thing about X-ers is that we never really move as a unit overtly. We're moving as a unit covertly though. Most of the rescue workers, military personnel, and charity workers are X-ers. If that says antyhing. :smile:

Speak for yourself, Craig! :smile: This Xer is for the most part quite impressed with Mr. Bush (and it takes a bit for a Prophet to impress me).

Well I'm more impressed with Guilliani (sp?), but Bush isn't doing horribly bad. He could have bungled this all up pretty bad, and even if he does appear to have that constant deer-in-the-headlights look these days, he's not doing terrible at rising to the job that's been placed upn him. He looks pretty haggared, but he's getting there.

Don't confuse a lack of noise with a lack of resolve. Often the two move in inverse correlation to each other.

Well stated!

Now THAT does describe me, at least. Not that I see anything contradictory about it.

Well I only started listening to Rush Limbaugh after the attacks. What scares me most is that I was nodding in agreement. That's what makes me sure I've changed. :smile:

Jen

And yes, there are manners now. People are now much nicer to people. Children are nicer, Xers are nicer, and families have really coalesced after 911.

Another interesting observation from my trip up to Washington this weekend. Now normally NoVa [1] is a seething pit of bad manners, especially when it comes to road rage.

This weekend, we observed that it's remarkably tame around the Beltway traffic-wise. Sure there are still a few lingering people who insist on being rude, but for the most part we were amazed at how people were actually observing 3-way stop signs, and letting people merge in front of them and the like.

If there was ever a sign that American manners have changed, the behavior in a road construction zone in NoVa is it.

Jen

[1] Northen Virginia to all those that don't visit the Beltway regulary

And who's telling me now that they take back everything they ever said about America and its policies?

Most of what was said wasn't just coming from the X-ers, but from all adult generations. Should they *all* take them back? Should the Silents take back the policies that they implemented that have led to stagnation?

Xers of either type don't seem to think carrying a flag will keep their children safe.

This is because unless you use it to cover your mouth and nose, it isn't all that effective against preventing you from getting anthrax.

I'll have to look long and hard before I find an Xer who's holding a flag decor anything (although I did see a grey-haired Silent woman with a flag-covered duffel bag the other day).

This X-er has an American flag flying on her cube wall. I was amazed the few days after the attacks when everyone kept asking where I bought it. I didn't buy it, I've had it since I was 9 years old.

Everyone here seen any evidence that people in their late twenties and early thirties generally hold feelings that Bush is illegitimate?

Well he was elected legitimately according to the Constitution. Whether or not he was elected by the mandate of the people is another story.

Either way, he's the big kahoona now, and well, he's doing his best to live up to that.

Now XERS....let's get down to the REAL Xers, the Kurt Cobains and Catherine Zeta-Joneses and Wynonas and Beastie Boys. They generally still haven't started families yet, and these people are dressing the same way as they did on September 10...over one month later.

Speaking as an X-er that hasn't bred yet, I don't see what my appearance has to do with my convictions. What do you expect me to change about the way I dress?

Jen

How many readers here think the crisis of terrorism, be it WTC, anthrax, or bombings will cause the changes I suggest?
[/quote]

I don't... I don't think these are the changes we will see due to the 4T.

Speaking of 4T civility and folks being nice to one another ...Out here in Utah, (and I realize that it is a state much different from most)we had a double murder and another domestic homicide this weekend. Remember we only have 3+million population.

The weekend's murders bring Utah's homicide total to 56 for the year. That exceeds the 41 homicides that ocurred in all of 2000. So far this year exceeds a 10 year high(1995).

This is Mormon country. The most patriotic and Republican state in the U.S.

When I was a teenager it would have been insulting for a friend to dye their hair the same color as you. Now it seems like a gaggle of girls get together and all dye their hair blue as a show of solidarity within their peer group!

It's hard to explain, but the Millenials certainly have the window dressing of the X-ers, just like we adopted the peace signs of the Boomers. But we didn't quite wear them the same way.

Jen

I've got to go with you on that. I remember about six months ago eating lunch at a cheese steak place in California with four X'er cronies. All of us have short hair and were in business attire. There were two High school students at the table next to who looked like they were lifted their entire wardrobes from Sid Vicious - blue spiked mohawk, ratty leather jackets - the works.

We saw them and that started us off talking about our own High school days - some of us had been punks, some of us had been metalheads, but all of us had a hardness, a cynicalness and and anger that was just missing in these kids. For lack of a better term, despite their ostensibly fearsome wardrobe - they were just cute. Their clothes and hair were a costume really.

Naturally, looking at them and laughing got their attention, so the one with the blue hair got up and walked over and "What's the matter? Ain't ya never seen a punk before?"

The four of us just lost it and started laughing hysterically - and these two kids, evidently used to shocking Boomers and Silents didn't know what to make of our reaction. Finally I got up, looked at him and actually said, "Son (I can't BELIEVE I used that word) I know punks, some of my best friends were punks, I was listening to the Screaming Trees and the Dead Kennedies since before you were born. You, my friend, are not a punk."

He gave a me a sneer as if to say "Yeah, right."

So I proceeded to rattle off every Dead Kennedies album every made - in chronological order - including live stuff and bootlegs. The two kids said nothing, looked shocked and just turned and walked away. I'd like to think that maybe they gave up those outfits, because nothing's more uncool than to find out that you have the same musical taste as some ancient, decrepit, 32 year old like me.

Patriotism, my foot.

I don't like isms. I don't like flags. I don't like nonsense.

I think it's to vomit hearing all these middle-aged boomer men get on TV and be all gung-ho about sending another generation of kids off to war when they couldn't be bothered to treat Vietnam veterans like human beings for 20 years. I think it's to vomit being so full of how determined we all are in the face of the enemy because we've red, white and blue merchandising spewed all over everywhere.

As. if.

But you know what really bakes my cheese? It's the media.

You know when it takes a friggin' television drama like The West Wing to deliver the 5 Ws (who, what, where, when, why) , the journalistic profession should just lock up and go sailing. No, instead we have endless 3T nattering, 24 hours a day. "Could people armed with box cutters be capable of putting anthrax letters in the US Mail?" uh, is that journalism? No. It's talk show.

The media is obsessed with how it makes people "feel" and when the weapon is T-E-R-R-O-R that spells fear people, all the coverage does is the terrorist's work for them. Dumb, dumb, dammit, dumb.

Lemme tell you what would happen if I ruled the world here. I'd go back to two television broadcasts. One at 6pm. One at 11. In these two broadcasts I'd keep the coverage to just the facts. This number of anthrax cases in these cities. This many people being tested. These schools and businesses are closed. These town meetings are at thus and such a place.

Then I would take all that money we spend on saturation coverage of absolutely nothing and I'd send some actual reporters overseas to these countries that "Americans don't care about" so we can find out what's going on in the mosques and marketplaces and have a clue where the dangers might come from and what the issues actually are. So that at least if Americans want to say, "my country right or wrong," we can at least know what we're right or wrong about.

Now that would be real patriotism as in, SERVING your COUNTRY not pandering to RATINGS by TALKING TOUGH (i'm sorry am I SCREAMING???) not to mention not PAYING "content providers" oh, I'm sorry I mean REPORTERS, you know those people who sometimes risk their LIVES for stories that get bumped for coverage of MADONNA's WEDDING. (not making that up)

But no, if we put a flag on the tv set of our broadcast, that's patriotism.

ARRRGH!

Edward R. Murrow, where are you? (okay, dead, I knew that)

On 2001-10-22 10:00, Jenny Genser wrote:

We did get a major revamping of our welfare system in August 1996, .......... This legislation ended welfare as an entitlement, ......... Perhaps most important, it mandated a five-year lifetime limit on welfare benefits, except for the disabled and those caring for a disabled person.

I understand that you are the food stamp guru and I acknowledge that you know alot more about entitlement programs than I do.

Anyway, my question is practical. Why allow anyone a five year maximum benefit? I mean, sure it's a vehicle to phase in some limit for current recipients, but really, why give all the new applicants a five year term?

Such a limit acts to institutionalize welfare as much as limit it.

They say you need 60 days to make or break a habit. I'd hate to see more people fall into entitlements that could run as long as five years. Why even six months of employment benefits is generous - methinks.

Respectfully yours, Scrooge

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sv81 on 2001-11-14 12:31 ]</font>

Wasn't sure if I cited this webpage before or not.

http://www.ptimes.com/

It has comment from another point of view than our own, (therefore most will think it subversive, biased and evil).

Happy reading.

On 2001-10-22 21:58, sv81 wrote:
Wasn't sure if I cited this webpage before or not.

http://www.ptimes.com/

It has comment from another point of view than our own, (therefore most will think it subversive, biased and evil).

Happy reading.

there is nothing wrong with a site such as this. it contains perfectly legitimate viewpoints and not long discredited nazi and/or klan apologist propaganda as so many of the other sites you have posted about. some of the opinions may be somewhat biased and exhibit a bit of historical revisionism but that is to be expected considering the circumstances.

please don't insult the intelligence of people who post on this board as well as, i believe, the sincere palestinians who gave their opinions on that site, by confusing honest opinions with discredited anti-jewish, nazi and klan propaganda. they do not belong together and it only does a disservice to the true grievances that the palestinian people may have by implying that their opinions are equal with such "gems" as the "protocols of the elders of zion" and other such vile nonsense.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: enjolras on 2001-10-23 12:53 ]</font>

On 2001-10-22 16:36, angeli wrote:
Patriotism, my foot.

I don't like isms. I don't like flags. I don't like nonsense.
...
But you know what really bakes my cheese? It's the media.

You know when it takes a friggin' television drama like The West Wing to deliver the 5 Ws (who, what, where, when, why) , the journalistic profession should just lock up and go sailing. No, instead we have endless 3T nattering, 24 hours a day. "Could people armed with box cutters be capable of putting anthrax letters in the US Mail?" uh, is that journalism? No. It's talk show.

The media is obsessed with how it makes people "feel" and when the weapon is T-E-R-R-O-R that spells fear people, all the coverage does is the terrorist's work for them. Dumb, dumb, dammit, dumb.

Lemme tell you what would happen if I ruled the world here. I'd go back to two television broadcasts. One at 6pm. One at 11. In these two broadcasts I'd keep the coverage to just the facts. This number of anthrax cases in these cities. This many people being tested. These schools and businesses are closed. These town meetings are at thus and such a place.

Then I would take all that money we spend on saturation coverage of absolutely nothing and I'd send some actual reporters overseas to these countries that "Americans don't care about" so we can find out what's going on in the mosques and marketplaces and have a clue where the dangers might come from and what the issues actually are. So that at least if Americans want to say, "my country right or wrong," we can at least know what we're right or wrong about.

Now that would be real patriotism as in, SERVING your COUNTRY not pandering to RATINGS by TALKING TOUGH (i'm sorry am I SCREAMING???) not to mention not PAYING "content providers" oh, I'm sorry I mean REPORTERS, you know those people who sometimes risk their LIVES for stories that get bumped for coverage of MADONNA's WEDDING. (not making that up)

But no, if we put a flag on the tv set of our broadcast, that's patriotism.

ARRRGH!

Edward R. Murrow, where are you? (okay, dead, I knew that)

Hey Angeli, you might want to spread this around: http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/776750.html

<font color="blue">Ventura denounces Minnesota media
Dane Smith
Star Tribune

Published Oct 23 2001
Following through on his promise last week to wage his own personal war on the Minnesota media, Gov. Jesse Ventura devoted most of a 2 1/2-hour guest radio appearance Monday to a wide-ranging denunciation of the local news organizations that cover him.

Saying that the Twin Cities media are intent on "destroying" people, he advised Minnesotans to boycott local newspapers and TV news.

"Don't read either [daily] newspaper and don't watch the evening news," said Ventura, who was filling in for "Garage Logic" host Joe Soucheray on KSTP (AM 1500). "And then you will not be infiltrated with the half-truths, the National Enquirer journalism that's practiced today.

"Listen to talk-radio, I'll tell you, it's more accurate on there," said Ventura, who has his own weekly one-hour radio show on WCCO (830 AM).

Ventura at times said he was joking and trying to have fun, but he was clearly serious much of the time.

Last Friday on his radio show, Ventura promised that this week he would wage a "war" on those he perceives to be his media adversaries and get them "running and hiding as fast as the Taliban."

Ventura acknowledged that he is still angry about the way his Oct. 2-3 trip to New York City was covered. Minnesota reporters were excluded from Ground Zero, the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack. Only "Good Morning America," which paid for the trip, was allowed to film Ventura at the site. Ventura insists that the exclusion of reporters was strictly the call of New York Gov. George Pataki.

Since then, Ventura has said he wouldn't talk to local reporters and has tried to keep his schedule a secret, saying that he is a possible terror target, although he retreated from that policy somewhat last week.

He theorized that reporters who detailed the New York arrangement were envious. "A lot of them told their friends and family, 'Ooh, I'm gettin' to go, I'm gonna follow the governor, I'm goin' to get to go to Ground Zero' ... and they probably got egg on their faces."

Ventura had some fresher gripes too. He said a recent Associated Press report in which he was quoted making fun of Sioux Falls, S.D., and its effort to attract businesses from Minnesota, missed the point that he was joking.

David Pyle, AP's Minnesota Bureau chief, said Ventura's criticism was "way off base." The report began with the phrase, "A little ribbing between Minnesota and South Dakota governors," he noted. "We made it perfectly clear that it was all good-natured."

Meanwhile, Ventura said the St. Paul Pioneer Press is trying to dig up information on his childhood and military career. "What, to find out if I threw a snowball at the bus in the winter?" he said.

Ventura said reporters are looking into his service with a Navy underwater demolition team and he speculated that they are trying to pin him with the kind of story reported in the New York Times about former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey. Ventura described the report as "wild stories that [Kerrey] massacred civilians" during the Vietnam War.

"It's much more of an attack mode at the local level, of destruction, of destroying you as a person and destroying everything about you," Ventura said.

Pioneer Press Editor Walker Lundy said it was "unusual, even for our governor, to complain about a story that hasn't yet been published. Usually he waits until he actually reads the story."

Lundy added: "In our alleged campaign to get him, did he mention the Pioneer Press poll from last week that said his popularity had survived intact despite all his recent gaffes?" A recent Star Tribune Minnesota Poll also reported that Ventura's job-approval rating -- 58 percent -- is the same as it was six months ago.

Star Tribune Editor Tim J. McGuire said he was "amazed that Governor Ventura would suggest talk-radio as a recommended source of news."

But McGuire said he refused "to get in a war of words with the governor. I and all the journalists of the Star Tribune take our responsibility very seriously, and we will continue to assume the governor also takes his responsibilities seriously."

In response to a caller who speculated that Ventura dislikes the local media because they are "less superficial and demand more specific answers," Ventura said that journalists in the national media "respect my position more. They ask me questions about policy rather than going after me personally."

But he faulted the national media's coverage of the war in Afghanistan, saying that few journalists have served in the military and that they are critical of the war because of the secrecy surrounding it. In addition, he lambasted several Twin Cities sports columnists, saying that they are unqualified to cover athletics and that most of them are in bad physical shape and have "never had a jockstrap on."

Most callers to the show sympathized with Ventura but a few challenged him. A woman named Deborah said she agreed with a recent New York Times column by Minnesota humorist Garrison Keillor, who took jabs at Ventura for ducking the media.

"Are you afraid of something, sir?" she asked.

A caller named Dennis told Ventura that his "insecurities and whining about the media are unbecoming for a statesman and for a Navy SEAL."

Ventura responded that he saw a sign during the recent state employees strike that read: "'Governor, Do Navy SEALs Run and Hide?' And my response was, 'Yes, that's our mode of operation. We're not Marines. SEALs don't charge the beach. ... We hit the enemy when the enemy least expects it." He continued: "I just like to fight back. They're the ones whining because I'm not talking to them. ... There's an old saying, 'Don't bite the hand that feeds you' and the Minnesota media's bitten my hand too many times. So now the hand's not feeding them anymore."

Ventura claimed at one point that he often has the upper hand with the media. "I fooled them when I got elected," he said of local journalists. "I fool them right now whenever I feel like it."

John Wodele, his spokesman, said that he didn't hear all of the radio show but that it "seemed like vintage Ventura. Sometimes it's not easy to figure out whether he's serious or not."</font>

Germany is harboring terrorists!! America decides to bomb Germany. This starts World War III, in which Germany gets their asses kicked yet again by the United States of America! (notice: do not take my comments above seriously)

<font color="blue">Ashcroft: Germay-based terrorists planned attack

WASHINGTON (AP) ? A terrorist cell operating out of Hamburg, Germany, since at least 1999 included three of the hijackers and three accomplices who are being sought in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, Attorney General John Ashcroft said Tuesday. Ashcroft said the three fugitives, Said Bahaji, Ramsi Binalshibh and Zakariya Essabar, are sought for planning the attacks. German authorities previously issued international arrests warrants for the three. ''Their connections to the hijackers are extensive,'' said Ashcroft, appearing at a news conference with German Interior Minister Otto Schily. He identified the three hijackers as Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, the suspected pilots of the hijacked planes that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York, and Ziad Jarrah, suspected of flying the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania.

Ashcroft said the three hijackers were roommates in Hamburg while attending school there in the 1990s. He said Binalshibh and Atta started a Muslim prayer group in Hamburg and Essabar went to Florida in February at a time when both Atta and al-Shehhi were known to be there. And Essabar, Jarrah and al-Shehhi all appeared in a video of Bahaji's wedding, he said.

"It is clear that Hamburg served as a central base of operations for these six individuals and their part in the planning of the Sept. 11 attack," Ashcroft said.

Ashcroft said 12 FBI agents have been assigned to various locations in Germany to assist in the investigation.

Ashcroft also released copies of anthrax-contaminated letters mailed to NBC's Tom Brokaw and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, as well as the envelope used to mail another anthrax letter to the New York Post. But he said authorities don't have the evidence to link the anthrax letters to the Sept. 11 attacks.

"We must say we failed to see it" beforehand, Schily, the German minister, said of the attacks on New York and Washington. "But to be very open-minded" about it, "we altogether failed. ... We have to re-examine our security system."

Schily said Monday that foreign exchange companies operating globally could have been used by terrorists. He would not name specific companies but urged money exchange firms to cooperate.

"I don't want to mention some names, but it also includes the role of some companies doing the exchange of money and delivering money. Maybe they are situated in the United States," said Schily, who oversees interior security in Germany, where several suspected hijackers lived and may have plotted the Sept. 11 hijackings. He was in Washington on Monday to meet with Bush administration officials.

A Saudi man who apparently holds a student pilot's license was arrested in Missouri on a bank fraud charge. The FBI has not tied Adel F. Badri to last month's attacks in which terrorists crashed airliners in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

In New Jersey a man detained following the attacks has been charged with lying to an FBI agent about checks he wrote and deposited into his bank account.

Mohammad Pervez lived with two other detainees, Mohammed Jaweed Azmath and Ayub Ali Khan. Investigators have taken particular interest in those two men since they were detained in Fort Worth, Texas, the day after the attacks, carrying hair dye, about $5,000 in cash and box-cutting knives.

Pervez was accused of lying when he said he didn't know about certain checks and money orders that moved in and out of his bank account, according to an Oct. 16 complaint filed in U.S. District Court in New York City by the FBI.

Badri was charged with bank fraud for cashing allegedly forged checks worth $10,000, according to an FBI affidavit released by the Justice Department.

The checks were written on an account at Chevy Chase Bank in Maryland that had been closed. According to the FBI, the closed account's holder was Fatmah Ibrahim, a woman who Badri said lives in Virginia and works for a "specific organization in Washington, D.C." Badri denied writing the check for himself.

Authorities tracked down the organization and found no record of the woman, and a forgery expert said Badri wrote the checks, the FBI said.

Badri deposited the checks on Oct. 4 and 5. By Oct. 11 various checks and debit card charges totaling more than $10,000 were incurred on his account, including a $603 debit card purchase of a US Airways plane ticket, more than $700 in cash withdrawals, a $20 car rental charge and $200 in payments for cellular phone service.

Federal Aviation Administration records show a person named Adel F. Badri was certified as a student pilot in the FAA's eastern region covering the District of Columbia and Maryland, Virginia and other Atlantic seaboard states.

Some of 19 alleged hijackers suspected of crashing four planes on Sept. 11 and killing more than 5,000 people had U.S. pilots' licenses or took flight lessons in the United States.

The FBI affidavit does not specify whether Badri had links to the attacks. The Justice Department's practice is to release court records about cases that come up in the terror investigation. A hearing will be held Tuesday in federal court in Kansas City.</font>

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Life is not a cancer of matter; it is matter's transcendence of itself." - John S. Lewis
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Einstein

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2001-10-23 17:53 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2001-10-23 17:53 ]</font>

CBS Radio reports that the bombs that hit the nursing home in Herat were misguided; as if they were some sort of wayward children.

Silents Rule! HTH

Don't we relish, as one of our freedoms in this country, to view all evidence, and draw conclusions accordingly?

There are many sites on the internet, some more reactionary than others. However, your wholesale prohibition that I not cite anything vile or offensive sounds like prior restraint censorship to me. I didn't create the sites, and they do have a direct relevance to our middle east conflict, and particularly how, in the face of 4T events, how our country deliberates on justice.

You may discover, as I have there is a thread of truth to all of the positions, (and equally distortion as well).

Long before "discrimination" became a prejorative term, it was regarded as a high mental faculty. I suggest you label less and discriminate more.

Certainly I do.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sv81 on 2001-12-31 23:53 ]</font>

I wonder how many civilians will die in the next week, and what coverage the U.S. will get of the coverage.

Think such a thing could happen here? In Oregon, a lady sent a hoax Anthrax letter, and they caught her. See:

http://www.kgw.com/kgwnews/terrornor...?StoryID=29187

And yes, this does have alot to do with the Fourth Turning.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sv81 on 2001-12-31 23:54 ]</font>

Angeli wrote:

I don't like isms. I don't like flags. I don't like nonsense.

What do you mean by not liking flags? Don't make the mistake of assuming that all the flag-waving is mindless, or Mitty-esque. (I'm not saying you do, but the post sort of comes across that way.)

I personally know a Silent, who served six years in the U.S. Army, and his hitch ended just before he would have been sent to the early stages of Vietnam (he was enlisted). He avoided the war just by a narrow stroke of luck, and I have no doubt that he would have gone and done what he perceived as his duty there, had that bit of luck gone the other way.

He flies a flag at his home, and has for many years now, with great and quiet pride.

Does that make him a middle-aged man playing at symbols?

Displaying a flag certainly can be a way to follow the pack, and I share your annoyance at the way veterans have been treated with a mixture of contempt and patronizing condescension for many years.

However, displaying a flag can also be a quite sincere statement of support for the actions of your fellow countrymen, of the young people at risk in a war, and in the ideals of that country.

(Heaven help me, I sound like a Boomer!)

Just for the record, I am an Xer, cohort of '68. But while cynicism is often justified and indeed sometimes required, it is just as naive to assume that nobody is ever sincere as it is to assume that everyone is always sincere.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HopefulCynic68 on 2001-10-23 21:15 ]</font>

On 2001-10-22 16:33, Delsyn wrote:

So I proceeded to rattle off every Dead Kennedies album every made - in chronological order - including live stuff and bootlegs. The two kids said nothing, looked shocked and just turned and walked away. I'd like to think that maybe they gave up those outfits, because nothing's more uncool than to find out that you have the same musical taste as some ancient, decrepit, 32 year old like me.

You know, I'd like to think that I had the same experience in my life, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized it never happened.

Perhaps like you, I was on the fringe of generations, however, my brothers in arms were older, not younger. Being born in 1958, I too saw enough of the "good old boomer world", to be imprinted for life. Enough that that my views on music, fashion, culture and counterculture ring true to the boomer group.

But since they were, for the most part older than I, it was they who laughed at me for mimicing their youthful rebellion long since past. We didn't have punks, but we did have hippies.

The point of this is that, as between the generation as defined by S&H, there really are clear points of demarcation, where one generation ends and another starts.
Similarly, we might not relate to those out of our grouping, but for those within our generation, they are perhaps: early, middle or late in the pack, and that sequencing will dictate class identity, confidence and cohesiveness within the group. Maybe leaders and followers.

Nobody that I knew had blue hair, but I believe that long hair was given up last by the trailing boomers, not the early boomer pioneers. I can't say anything about other boomer manifestations, such as the drug culture, for it wasn't in my locality (that I know).

Lastly, one of the strongest messages I uncovered from The Fourth Turning concerns the boomer inclination to care more about procedure than result. That is to say, unlike the hard scrabble Gen-X group, that are so pragmatic and care only about what works for their world view; I can say my generation cares strongly that (1) some voice of justice be heard, (2) that all competing viewpoints be brought to an audience and once disclosed, (3) agree to whatever happens - just happens.

I'd say my posts reflect that as well, for of the vast range of people using this forum, the primary respondents to my comments gravitate to one age group - yours.

Perhaps further,this illustrates the friction between boomers and Gen-X. Your generation considers it anathema to hear the "voice that cries in the wilderness". Ours, disdains that an entire generation has such strong opinions without the benefit of a second opinion. Perhaps that is why stereotypically, asking a Gen-X to put the "shoe on the other foot" is met with an antonished look. Try it some time, you'll see what I mean.

On 2001-10-21 17:25, granger wrote:
When veiwed from this perspective, 911 may not be too early for a catalyst event. I beleive that there is a core of boomers who saw the sixties, but where a step removedfrom the essense of participation and have been ready for a return to values.

I'm ready

On 2001-10-21 18:28, neiltice wrote:
This is not the WWII Crisis. This Crisis is about America maturing to its leadership role in the world. In order to do that, respect for the world is required. Plus, it's pretty obvious that a lack of concern for events in the rest of the world is what got us here.

Totally agree, and one way to get up to speed with the world's events is to do some crash reading on the middle east.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sv81 on 2001-12-31 23:56 ]</font>

[quote]
On 2001-10-23 19:27, sv81 wrote:

Let me know, prey tell, how I, or anyone else for that matter, are to differentiate between the sincere palestinian viewpoint, and the most vile anti-jewish, nazi and klan propaganda? Don't we relish, as one of our freedoms in this country, to view all evidence, and draw conclusions accordingly?

There are many sites on the internet, some more reactionary than others. However, your wholesale prohibition that I not cite anything vile or offensive sounds like prior restraint censorship to me. I didn't create the sites, and they do have a direct relevance to our middle east conflict, and particularly how, in the face of 4T events, how our country deliberates on justice.

I say, see it all. View with distrust cites from sources like David Duke, Jew Watch and the like, but (Allah forbid)don't ask me to pick and choose for you.

You may discover, as I have there is a thread of truth to all of the positions, (and equally distortion as well).

I have cited the USS Liberty, since so few people know about it, as well as the Israeli Ministery of Defense, with their unsanitized painting of the current events. Actually I think I've given close to equal time.


Long before "discrimination" became a prejorative term, it was regarded as a high mental faculty. I suggest you label less and discriminate more.

Certainly I do.

sv81, far be it from me to suggest that you show any "restraint" in your offering up internet sites that spout old and tired anti-jewish, nazi/klan hate propaganda. i have stated on here before that you should feel free to do so because keeping them hidden only serves to add some air of credence to their vile nonsense. but doing so only serves to diminish the impact that the non-reactionary viewpoints may offer.

your contention that there is a "thread of truth" to all positions reminds me of the logic that adolf hitler used to use in his "big lie" approach to propaganda. cloak a small dollop of truth in a big batch of lies to the right group and they will swallow it all as truth! of course, this is also the very same argument that the neo-nazis, aryan nation, klan, etc. use to try and give intellectual cover to their attempts at holocaust denial, etc. and to recruit the naive into their fold.

you also mention your posts concerning the u.s. liberty and the israeli ministry of defense which tells me that you apparently know the difference between the reactionary propaganda and truth, whether it be objective or subjective truth, so apparently you don't need to be "told" how to discern the difference. but for some strange reason you often seem compelled to offer up both as if they are on the same footing as far as veracity goes.

i have not "labeled" anything, as you suggest. any "discriminating" individual, with no axe to grind, can usually tell the difference between racist and vile lies and accounts of "truth" as subjectively seen by someone directly involved in a conflict. my suggestion to you is that you use your own apparently sharp ability to "discriminate" out obvious reactionary propaganda. but perhaps there is some intention to "shock" on your part. i really have no idea.

anyway, now that i have done my duty as a goyim (two-legged animal) mouthpiece for the global zionist conspiracy, i must be off to serve my jewish masters in the financial markets.

shalom!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: enjolras on 2001-10-24 09:04 ]</font>

re: USS Liberty. At the time, there were several official inquiries into the attack, some conducted by the U.S., some by Israel. There was a degree of difference among the conclusions -- mostly with regard to whether or not the US Navy inadvertantly strayed too close to Israeli waters during the conflict -- but all of them agreed it was an accident. Only those predisposed to believing in a 'vast Jewish conspiracy' would have to conclude that the US government was willing to blithely ignore and forgive the deaths of all those soldiers. Ergo, a reasonable person would see it as an unfortunate accident (like the bombing of the UN depot in Afghanistan).

On 2001-10-21 18:28, neiltice wrote:
This is not the WWII Crisis. This Crisis is about America maturing to its leadership role in the world. In order to do that, respect for the world is required. Plus, it's pretty obvious that a lack of concern for events in the rest of the world is what got us here.

Interestingly, if you are willing to take Osama bin Laden at his word, then it is the United State?s interference in the rest of the world that he found infuriating. His reasons for hating the U.S., given in his order, are: 1) the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia, 2) American-led sanctions against Iraq, and 3) American support of Israel.