you know that those who have lived abroad learn to understand other people's (different) reactions to identical problems. However, IMHO, the situation now may be turning into something like a chicken and egg situation, because it is not clear who is inducing who..... Was GWB taking advantage of public sentiments when he and his top advisers decided to start this "war"? Is the public now so influenced by govt. officials (look: they are now saying that Iraq is next and then Colombia and maybe Latin America...!!!! it's hard to believe, really) that has become so irrational to literally "exile" a whole town, as the article below suggests???.
We may be witnessing the lowest o f political oportunism here, the worst aspect of "short-mindeness" (sp?). As I watched CNN last night and I heard "Lets Roll".....I thought that our children may be thinking this is a nice game to play....
Back to the point, I would not be surprised about ANY reaction coming from the public at this point....to some extent is 100% understandable.
Juan
Hakki Alacakaptan wrote:
> BBC News Online: World: Americas
>
> Friday, 2 November, 2001, 14:25 GMT
> Berkeley boycotted for anti-war stance
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/world/americas/newsid_1634000/1634103.stm
>
> The city of Berkeley in northern California has been branded unpatriotic,
> and businesses there are being boycotted, after the council became the first
> in the nation to oppose the bombing of Afghanistan.
>
> The city's Mayor, Shirley Dean has been inundated with e-mails and letters
> ever since the controversial 5-4 vote calling on the government to "bring
> the bombing of Afghanistan to a conclusion as soon as possible".
> The mayor, who abstained in the voting, says the message landing on her desk
> from businesses and individuals has generally been uniform.
>
> "We've had thousands, literally thousands of e-mails that they are not going
> to come to Berkeley and spend money. And generally they all mention the word
> boycott. And we have been hearing from specific businesses in Berkeley that
> they have been hurt," she said.
>
> (...)
> -------------------------------------------
> As an ignorant foreigner, I am puzzled at why the above piece of news has
> been ignored by the list. Chauvinist vigilantes, singly or in groups, are
> hounding a dissident municipality and have contributed greatly all over the
> US to silencing the media. Some of it may be organized by right-wing
> organizations but it appears to be largely spontaneous (as much as anything
> can be in the media-blitzed land of the free). Doesn't this worry anyone
> over there?
>
> I mean, items like this are obviously far less important than the
> earth-shaking issue of what may or may not have happened to Nancy Oden,
> which the learned list members continue to thoroughly dissect, may Allah
> increase their great wisdom. But as a clueless out-of-towner I'm nervous
> that the steady creep of right-wing bigotry that began with the Reagan
> restoration - which in my ignorance I call fascism - is now reaching a
> frenzied climax; the clouds are gathering very rapidly and it looks like
> it's going to rain hard for a very long time. To the untrained eye, it looks
> as if you guys haven't noticed the weather; in fact I'd swear that it looks
> like you're in the middle of a chatty picnic.
>
> Would anyone care to explain this optical illusion? Is the _real_ discussion
> taking place elsewhere, perhaps? Is this just a front for the FBI's
> Carnivore?
>
> Hakki