I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE.....

[ArtKramr]

From the NY Times letters to the editor..

To The Editor:

" I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America and
to the principles for which it stands, one nation under law, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all."
Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Marc Reeve]

ArtKramr > wrote:

> From the NY Times letters to the editor..
>
> To The Editor:
>
> " I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America
> and to the principles for which it stands, one nation under law,
> indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Not bad. I still prefer the Pledge of Allegiance without the 1954
additions, though. The 1911 additions were merely for clarification, but
the 1954 addition was a crass political move.

-Marc

(In case anyone's wondering, the original pledge was merely
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag and to the Republic for which it
stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The phrase "of the United States of America" was added in 1911.)

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE.....
>From: (Marc Reeve)
>Date: 10/20/03 12:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>ArtKramr > wrote:
>
>> From the NY Times letters to the editor..
>>
>> To The Editor:
>>
>> " I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America
>> and to the principles for which it stands, one nation under law,
>> indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
>
>Not bad. I still prefer the Pledge of Allegiance without the 1954
>additions, though. The 1911 additions were merely for clarification, but
>the 1954 addition was a crass political move.
>
> -Marc
>
>(In case anyone's wondering, the original pledge was merely
>"I pledge allegiance to the Flag and to the Republic for which it
>stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
>
>The phrase "of the United States of America" was added in 1911.)
>


Agreed.

Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Guy Alcala]

Marc Reeve wrote:

> ArtKramr > wrote:
>
> > From the NY Times letters to the editor..
> >
> > To The Editor:
> >
> > " I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America
> > and to the principles for which it stands, one nation under law,
> > indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
>
> Not bad. I still prefer the Pledge of Allegiance without the 1954
> additions, though. The 1911 additions were merely for clarification, but
> the 1954 addition was a crass political move.

In addition to losing the "under god," (before I finally abandoned saying the
pledge in the 7th grade as amounting to worship of an icon, as well as an
essentially meaningless but nevertheless coercive "loyalty oath," at least as
practiced in school), I tended to substitute "seeking liberty" for "with
liberty", as it more accurately reflected the ideal while acknowledging the
reality. But I rather like the letters to the editors version, with that one
change. I'd stick commas after "Constitution" and "America," to make it easier
to say (more pauses for breath). And I've never been all that happy about
"indivisible"; It kind of denies the whole idea of the Declaration of
Independence.

More importantly, we need to reduce the frequency of usage of the Pledge and
the national anthem. Constant repetition in purely routine and even trivial
circumstances cheapens them.

Of course, I've also long thought that the "Star-Spangled Banner" should be
replaced by "America the Beautiful," as the latter is both a better song and
singable by other than opera stars, although it would obviously need some
replacement lyrics for "God shed his grace on Thee" and some modern PC
changes. As in the case of the SSB, most people only know the first verse.
Here's the whole thing:

America the Beautiful - 1913

O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet
Whose stern, impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America!
God mend thine every flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law!

O beautiful for heroes proved In liberating strife.
Who more than self the country loved
And mercy more than life!
America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness
And every gain divine!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for halcyon skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the enameled plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till souls wax fair as earth and air
And music-hearted sea!

O beautiful for pilgrims feet,
Whose stern impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America ! America !
God shed his grace on thee
Till paths be wrought through
wilds of thought
By pilgrim foot and knee!

O beautiful for glory-tale
Of liberating strife
When once and twice,
for man's avail
Men lavished precious life !
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till selfish gain no longer stain
The banner of the free!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till nobler men keep once again
Thy whiter jubilee!

Guy

[Gordon]

>More importantly, we need to reduce the frequency of usage of the Pledge and
>the national anthem. Constant repetition in purely routine and even trivial
>circumstances cheapens them.

One of the worst feelings concerning the flag that I have had was when I saw a
Cub Scout troop erode the practice of saying the pledge to little more than a
joke. They used my flag, I taught them how to fold it, etc., but after a year
or so, the pack leader said we could 'forego the usual ceremony' which he
reduced to a quick pledge, while he held one of those ridiculous little
hand-sized flags (3"x5" on a tiny stick). To him, it made more sense than
"dragging out the big flag every time". I felt more than a little disgusted
that this former Eagle Scout thought we were wasting time teaching the basics
of respecting the symbol of our nation.

v/r
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

[John Mullen]

"Gordon" > wrote in message
...
> >More importantly, we need to reduce the frequency of usage of the Pledge
and
> >the national anthem. Constant repetition in purely routine and even
trivial
> >circumstances cheapens them.
>
> One of the worst feelings concerning the flag that I have had was when I
saw a
> Cub Scout troop erode the practice of saying the pledge to little more
than a
> joke. They used my flag, I taught them how to fold it, etc., but after a
year
> or so, the pack leader said we could 'forego the usual ceremony' which he
> reduced to a quick pledge, while he held one of those ridiculous little
> hand-sized flags (3"x5" on a tiny stick). To him, it made more sense than
> "dragging out the big flag every time". I felt more than a little
disgusted
> that this former Eagle Scout thought we were wasting time teaching the
basics
> of respecting the symbol of our nation.

With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our nation'
is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come, and
the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out, a
very long time ago.

Just one of the factors which makes it hard for us to understand each other
from the different sides of the Atlantic.

John

[Bob McKellar]

John Mullen wrote:

> "Gordon" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >More importantly, we need to reduce the frequency of usage of the Pledge
> and
> > >the national anthem. Constant repetition in purely routine and even
> trivial
> > >circumstances cheapens them.
> >
> > One of the worst feelings concerning the flag that I have had was when I
> saw a
> > Cub Scout troop erode the practice of saying the pledge to little more
> than a
> > joke. They used my flag, I taught them how to fold it, etc., but after a
> year
> > or so, the pack leader said we could 'forego the usual ceremony' which he
> > reduced to a quick pledge, while he held one of those ridiculous little
> > hand-sized flags (3"x5" on a tiny stick). To him, it made more sense than
> > "dragging out the big flag every time". I felt more than a little
> disgusted
> > that this former Eagle Scout thought we were wasting time teaching the
> basics
> > of respecting the symbol of our nation.
>
> With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our nation'
> is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
> one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
> behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come, and
> the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out, a
> very long time ago.
>
> Just one of the factors which makes it hard for us to understand each other
> from the different sides of the Atlantic.
>
> John

Depending on venue, most people think the last line of the National Anthem is
either

"Play Ball!"

or

"Gentlemen, Start Your Engines!"

( Definite RAM content for this one, considering the obligatory flyovers)

Bob McKellar

[Mike Marron]

>"John Mullen" > wrote:

[snip]

>With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our nation'
>is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
>one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
>behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come, and
>the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out, a
>very long time ago.

A very telling statement, to be sure.

You also summed it nicely when you wrote in the "why all the
Nazi/German threads" the following:

************************************************** **********************************
John Mullen:

US patriotism can look somewhat quaint and simplistic from a European
perspective. Ironically, the preservation of freedom of expression is
one of the things you can justly be somewhat proud of. I just wonder
how many USAians actually understand what it means.
************************************************** ***********************************

Most "USAians" are patriotic and justifiably so and know EXACTLY what
the "preservation of freedom of expression" means. In other words,
your comment is a bit of a troll (or a jab at Americans) and you know
it, John.

Reminds me of another telling comment from a UK bud who recently
visited. I picked him at the airport and drove him back to my house
for his week-long stay. Observing all the U.S. flags waving in the
breeze up and down the neighborhood, the Brit blurts out something
like, "Why does everyone fly the American flag?"

Rather than snatch up his stinkbait by explaining the obvious and
come back with something like, "well, if you have to ask..." I told
him to ask my Hungarian neighbor who lives across the street the
exact same question.

My Hungarian friend, a meat-cutter at one of the local supermarkets,
is old enough to have lived through the Hungarian Revolution of 1956
and remained in Hungary until the early '70's when he finally
immigrated to the U.S. He proudly flies Old Glory and also has
several U.S. flag decals plastered on his late-model pickup truck.

My bud from the UK never did bother to ask my Hungarian neighbor
the question pertaining to "why all the U.S. flags everywhere?" and
I wasn't about to waste my breath trying to explain it to him. You
see, my UK pal simply didn't want to hear the answer -- especially
not from some Hungarian whom could've provided a very poignant
explanation to my cocky UK bud. Deep down, my UK pal knows damn
good and well why Americans proudly pledge their allegiance to the
flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it
stands!

And based on his VERY telling comment above regarding the UK's
bygone glory days, Mr. Mullen also knows why as well. Like my UK
bud who recently visited, Mr. Mullen's innocent display of "ignorance"
as to why we cherish our flag is utterly transparent and it's obvious
that he is simply jealous and resentful.

[Gordon]

>With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our nation'
>is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand.

I doubt if I could clear it up, but I grew up thinking that our flag stood for
everyone on earth who wanted to live free. I know that time has proven this
notion to be wrong, but I also know that 29 of my friends gave their lives in
US Navy aircraft so that the rest of us could live ours in relative peace. I
think that when folks have died under this banner of ours, for no other reason
than to earn freedom for people in other nations, its a symbol to be held with
pride. I know - impossible to explain what that flag means but it represents
the freedom that all people deserve, to me.

v/r
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

[John Mullen]

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"John Mullen" > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our
nation'
> >is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
> >one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
> >behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come,
and
> >the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out,
a
> >very long time ago.
>
> A very telling statement, to be sure.
>
> You also summed it nicely when you wrote in the "why all the
> Nazi/German threads" the following:
>
>
************************************************** **************************
********
> John Mullen:
>
> US patriotism can look somewhat quaint and simplistic from a European
> perspective. Ironically, the preservation of freedom of expression is
> one of the things you can justly be somewhat proud of. I just wonder
> how many USAians actually understand what it means.
>
************************************************** **************************
*********
>
> Most "USAians" are patriotic and justifiably so and know EXACTLY what
> the "preservation of freedom of expression" means. In other words,
> your comment is a bit of a troll (or a jab at Americans) and you know
> it, John.

Only in your mind, Mike. You maybe have to accept that this is an
international medium, and that therefore you may have non-Americans
contributing to it. You'll get used to it.

> Reminds me of another telling comment from a UK bud who recently
> visited. I picked him at the airport and drove him back to my house
> for his week-long stay. Observing all the U.S. flags waving in the
> breeze up and down the neighborhood, the Brit blurts out something
> like, "Why does everyone fly the American flag?"
>
> Rather than snatch up his stinkbait by explaining the obvious and
> come back with something like, "well, if you have to ask..." I told
> him to ask my Hungarian neighbor who lives across the street the
> exact same question.
>
> My Hungarian friend, a meat-cutter at one of the local supermarkets,
> is old enough to have lived through the Hungarian Revolution of 1956
> and remained in Hungary until the early '70's when he finally
> immigrated to the U.S. He proudly flies Old Glory and also has
> several U.S. flag decals plastered on his late-model pickup truck.
>
> My bud from the UK never did bother to ask my Hungarian neighbor
> the question pertaining to "why all the U.S. flags everywhere?" and
> I wasn't about to waste my breath trying to explain it to him. You
> see, my UK pal simply didn't want to hear the answer -- especially
> not from some Hungarian whom could've provided a very poignant
> explanation to my cocky UK bud. Deep down, my UK pal knows damn
> good and well why Americans proudly pledge their allegiance to the
> flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it
> stands!

I do get your point here. But I'm not an American and to me it's all a bit
of a mystery and to be honest a bore, that level of 'my country, right or
wrong'. We've been there before here.

> And based on his VERY telling comment above regarding the UK's
> bygone glory days, Mr. Mullen also knows why as well. Like my UK
> bud who recently visited, Mr. Mullen's innocent display of "ignorance"
> as to why we cherish our flag is utterly transparent and it's obvious
> that he is simply jealous and resentful.

Hey, Mike, you started really well in the first person and now you're on 'Mr
Mullen' and 'he'!

Let's make this really simple (I think it is required!)

*Not everybody here is from your country*

Lots of European people really like and respect American ideals but to
criticise US foreign policy is not necessarily trolling.

I assure you I'm not jealous or resentful!

John

[Mike Marron]

>"John Mullen" > wrote:

[snieep]

>I assure you I'm not jealous or resentful!

I'm not buying your "playing dumb" act with regards to that nonsense
you posted about not understanding why Americans respect the
Stars & Stripes. You're obviously smarter than that and I think you
are jealous and resentful but are too proud to publically admit it.

[John Mullen]

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"John Mullen" > wrote:
>
> [snieep]
>
> >I assure you I'm not jealous or resentful!
>
> I'm not buying your "playing dumb" act with regards to that nonsense
> you posted about not understanding why Americans respect the
> Stars & Stripes. You're obviously smarter than that and I think you
> are jealous and resentful but are too proud to publically admit it.

If you can't understand what I said previously, I doubt if I can explain it
further to you.

I didn't say I didn't say I didn't understand why Americans respect the
Stars and Stripes. Hell, *I* respect the US flag, it's a nice flag and in
spite of everything still stands for a lot of good things.

What I don't fully understand is the way a lot of intelligent Americans let
ritualistic patriotism blunt their scepticism about their country's foreign
policy adventures and how they relate to the founding fathers' dream.

HTH

(but I doubt it!)

John

[John Mullen]

"Gordon" > wrote in message
...
> >With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our
nation'
> >is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand.
>
> I doubt if I could clear it up, but I grew up thinking that our flag stood
for
> everyone on earth who wanted to live free. I know that time has proven
this
> notion to be wrong, but I also know that 29 of my friends gave their lives
in
> US Navy aircraft so that the rest of us could live ours in relative peace.
I
> think that when folks have died under this banner of ours, for no other
reason
> than to earn freedom for people in other nations, its a symbol to be held
with
> pride. I know - impossible to explain what that flag means but it
represents
> the freedom that all people deserve, to me.

I concur. With the proviso that it might not be guaranteed in the future
that any adventure conducted under that flag is OK.

John

[Mike Marron]

>"John Mullen" > wrote:

[blah blah]

>What I don't fully understand is the way a lot of intelligent Americans let
>ritualistic patriotism blunt their scepticism about their country's foreign
>policy adventures and how they relate to the founding fathers' dream.

All you need to know is that not every intelligent American behaved
in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner during Vietnam, nor does every
intelligent American behave in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner
nowadays during the Iraq war.

In 'Nam, communism was demonstrably a grievous threat to the
U.S. and our allies and something called the "Domino Theory" was
in vogue at the time. In Iraq, terrorism IS a demonstrably grievous
threat to the U.S. and our allies and something called "Weapons of
Mass Destruction" IS in vogue at this time.

Not every American is patriotic and supports our foreign policy
adventures (as you so eloquently put it). But since you don't
understand American patriotism, you are the last person who
should be making snide remarks or questioning those of
us who aren't quite as confused as you are when it comes
to the simple concept of patriotism.

[John Mullen]

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"John Mullen" > wrote:
>
> [blah blah]
>
> >What I don't fully understand is the way a lot of intelligent Americans
let
> >ritualistic patriotism blunt their scepticism about their country's
foreign
> >policy adventures and how they relate to the founding fathers' dream.
>
> All you need to know is that not every intelligent American behaved
> in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner during Vietnam, nor does every
> intelligent American behave in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner
> nowadays during the Iraq war.

I'm certainly relieved to hear that.

> In 'Nam, communism was demonstrably a grievous threat to the
> U.S. and our allies and something called the "Domino Theory" was
> in vogue at the time. In Iraq, terrorism IS a demonstrably grievous
> threat to the U.S. and our allies and something called "Weapons of
> Mass Destruction" IS in vogue at this time.

Good comparison. So you think the WMD justification will look just as daft
in the future as the domino theory does looking back on it now?

> Not every American is patriotic and supports our foreign policy
> adventures (as you so eloquently put it). But since you don't
> understand American patriotism, you are the last person who
> should be making snide remarks or questioning those of
> us who aren't quite as confused as you are when it comes
> to the simple concept of patriotism.

I didn't make any snide remarks. That was you. And only the truly stupid
think patriotism is a simple concept.

John

[Mike Marron]

>"John Mullen" > wrote:
>>"Mike Marron" > wrote:

>>All you need to know is that not every intelligent American behaved
>>in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner during Vietnam, nor does every
>>intelligent American behave in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner
>>nowadays during the Iraq war.

>I'm certainly relieved to hear that.

You can continue to play dumb if you like John, but like I said
before you're simply jealous and resentful. And I might also
add that you're also too cowardly to come right out and admit
that you hate any American who happens to express their
patriotism by proudly flying the Stars & Stripes and/or reciting
the Pledge of Allegiance.

>>In 'Nam, communism was demonstrably a grievous threat to the
>>U.S. and our allies and something called the "Domino Theory" was
>>in vogue at the time. In Iraq, terrorism IS a demonstrably grievous
>>threat to the U.S. and our allies and something called "Weapons of
>>Mass Destruction" IS in vogue at this time.

>Good comparison. So you think the WMD justification will look just as daft
>in the future as the domino theory does looking back on it now?

I'm beginning to think your cynical and contemptuous "playing dumb"
act isn't an act afterall, John. Now, whether you realize it or not,
you've just insulted tens of thousands of brave men who died in
service to their country fighting the expansion of Communism.

Just to refresh your memory, recall that North Vietnam was a Soviet
client state and in the world of the 60's it was by no means obvious
that the USSR and Communism would ultimately self-destruct as it
did. It could easily have gone the other way.

The point is, right or wrong, we believed that the loss of Vietnam
meant the loss of all Southeast Asia, ultimately over to the
Phillipines, Malaysia, Indonesia and finally a serious threat to
India. Should we have stood aside? Then I suppose we should
have done so in Korea and other places where Communist bullies
tried armed takeover as well?

With regards to the threat of WMD by Iraq, what DON'T you understand
about Saddam's attempt to develop a nuclear weapons program such
as the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad? What about Saddam's
chemical weapons attack on the Iraqi Kurdish village of Halabja where
entire families died while trying to flee clouds of nerve and mustard
agents descending from the sky? How about the jet airliner fuselage in
Salman Pak, Iraq used to train Al-Qaeda terrorists? You've heard of
Al-Qaeda, right? They're the same bunch of Arab cowards who turned
our domestic airliners into deadly WMD's by flying them topped off
with 17,000 gallons of Jet-A into the WTC towers and the Pentagon.
Evidently you've chosen to conveniently forget about all this, matey?

>>Not every American is patriotic and supports our foreign policy
>>adventures (as you so eloquently put it). But since you don't
>>understand American patriotism, you are the last person who
>>should be making snide remarks or questioning those of
>>us who aren't quite as confused as you are when it comes
>>to the simple concept of patriotism.

>I didn't make any snide remarks. That was you. And only the truly stupid
>think patriotism is a simple concept.

Your closing comment above is yet another snide remark and you
know it. In fact, pretty much everything that you write are snide
remarks about patriotic Americans.

You insinuate that I'm "stupid" because I think patriotism is a simple
concept. You've insulted American's patriotism by referring to it as
"quaint and simplistic." You've alluded to "USAians" as being too
ignorant to know what "freedom of expression" means. You use the
disparaging term, "ritualistic patriotism" in a feeble attempt to
portray patriotic Americans as a bunch of brainwashed, flag-waving
zealots.

You then go on to insult the thousands of courageous and great
Americans who fought in Vietnam and are fighting and dying to this day
in the Middle East. You engage in speculation, empty and arrogant
moralizing, calculated affront, and offensive attention-seeking. Only
the fact that you put yourself on display in such a manner makes your
insults amusing and not to be taken seriously. If your opinions or
your manner demonstrated any humility or perspective, your
self-rightous, condescending insults and stinkbait wouldn't even
get noticed.

Continue to cast all the aspersions against patriotic Americans as
you see fit, John, because like you said that's what "freedom of
speech" is all about. But like it or not, it is all those "stupid,
quaint and simplistic, ignorant and ritualistic patriotic etc."
Americans who preserved your right to act like just another
ungrateful European asshole who publically insults American's
patriotism -- from behind the relative safety of your PC, of course!
Oh sure, you want your freedom of speech alright, but you also
want to have contempt for those who won that freedom of speech
on behalf of ingrates like you.

[Mary Shafer]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:06:03 -0400, Bob McKellar >
wrote:


> Depending on venue, most people think the last line of the National Anthem is
> either
>
> "Play Ball!"

My mother says that when I went off to school at first, I came home
one day to report that we sang the song from all the football and
basketball games. It took very little questioning to discover that I,
good little daughter of a football and basketball coach, had actually
learned the words at the games. Apparently I was surprised that the
song was sung elsewhere....

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

[John Mullen]

Mike Marron > wrote in message >...
> >"John Mullen" > wrote:
> >>"Mike Marron" > wrote:
>
> >>All you need to know is that not every intelligent American behaved
> >>in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner during Vietnam, nor does every
> >>intelligent American behave in a "ritualistic patriotic" manner
> >>nowadays during the Iraq war.
>
> >I'm certainly relieved to hear that.
>
> You can continue to play dumb if you like John, but like I said
> before you're simply jealous and resentful.

I'm truly sorry you think that. It isn't what I said or what I meant.

>And I might also
> add that you're also too cowardly to come right out and admit
> that you hate any American who happens to express their
> patriotism by proudly flying the Stars & Stripes and/or reciting
> the Pledge of Allegiance.

I genuinely don't hate any American who happens to express their
patriotism by proudly flying the Stars & Stripes and/or reciting the
Pledge of Allegiance. I also don't think I'm a coward for having my
own opinions.

> >>In 'Nam, communism was demonstrably a grievous threat to the
> >>U.S. and our allies and something called the "Domino Theory" was
> >>in vogue at the time. In Iraq, terrorism IS a demonstrably grievous
> >>threat to the U.S. and our allies and something called "Weapons of
> >>Mass Destruction" IS in vogue at this time.
>
> >Good comparison. So you think the WMD justification will look just as daft
> >in the future as the domino theory does looking back on it now?
>
> I'm beginning to think your cynical and contemptuous "playing dumb"
> act isn't an act afterall, John. Now, whether you realize it or not,
> you've just insulted tens of thousands of brave men who died in
> service to their country fighting the expansion of Communism.

That's ********! I didn't insult anyone.

> Just to refresh your memory, recall that North Vietnam was a Soviet
> client state and in the world of the 60's it was by no means obvious
> that the USSR and Communism would ultimately self-destruct as it
> did. It could easily have gone the other way.
>
> The point is, right or wrong, we believed that the loss of Vietnam
> meant the loss of all Southeast Asia, ultimately over to the
> Phillipines, Malaysia, Indonesia and finally a serious threat to
> India. Should we have stood aside? Then I suppose we should
> have done so in Korea and other places where Communist bullies
> tried armed takeover as well?
>
> With regards to the threat of WMD by Iraq, what DON'T you understand
> about Saddam's attempt to develop a nuclear weapons program such
> as the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad?

Destroyed by Israel.

>What about Saddam's
> chemical weapons attack on the Iraqi Kurdish village of Halabja where
> entire families died while trying to flee clouds of nerve and mustard
> agents descending from the sky?

Supported at the time by your country. Whether you like it or not.

>How about the jet airliner fuselage in
> Salman Pak, Iraq used to train Al-Qaeda terrorists? You've heard of
> Al-Qaeda, right?

Yes. I know they got a lot of CIA support in the early days. For all I
(or you)
know, the CIA are still training loonies like that.

>They're the same bunch of Arab cowards who turned
> our domestic airliners into deadly WMD's by flying them topped off
> with 17,000 gallons of Jet-A into the WTC towers and the Pentagon.
> Evidently you've chosen to conveniently forget about all this, matey?

No, I would say you have, 'matey'. Do you regard 9.11 as a foreign
policy success for your country? Serious question, please answer it.

> >>Not every American is patriotic and supports our foreign policy
> >>adventures (as you so eloquently put it). But since you don't
> >>understand American patriotism, you are the last person who
> >>should be making snide remarks or questioning those of
> >>us who aren't quite as confused as you are when it comes
> >>to the simple concept of patriotism.
>
> >I didn't make any snide remarks. That was you. And only the truly stupid
> >think patriotism is a simple concept.
>
> Your closing comment above is yet another snide remark and you
> know it. In fact, pretty much everything that you write are snide
> remarks about patriotic Americans.

Only in your mind. Think about it from my point of view, if (and I
doubt it) you can do that.

> You insinuate that I'm "stupid" because I think patriotism is a simple
> concept. You've insulted American's patriotism by referring to it as
> "quaint and simplistic." You've alluded to "USAians" as being too
> ignorant to know what "freedom of expression" means. You use the
> disparaging term, "ritualistic patriotism" in a feeble attempt to
> portray patriotic Americans as a bunch of brainwashed, flag-waving
> zealots.

More or less true.

> You then go on to insult the thousands of courageous and great
> Americans who fought in Vietnam and are fighting and dying to this day
> in the Middle East. You engage in speculation, empty and arrogant
> moralizing, calculated affront, and offensive attention-seeking. Only
> the fact that you put yourself on display in such a manner makes your
> insults amusing and not to be taken seriously. If your opinions or
> your manner demonstrated any humility or perspective, your
> self-rightous, condescending insults and stinkbait wouldn't even
> get noticed.

Hey, great invective. But next to you, that status would be hard to
attain. You sound like a Stalinist. Did you ever listen to Radio
Tirana? Too young? Pity, you would have liked it.

> Continue to cast all the aspersions against patriotic Americans as
> you see fit, John, because like you said that's what "freedom of
> speech" is all about. But like it or not, it is all those "stupid,
> quaint and simplistic, ignorant and ritualistic patriotic etc."
> Americans who preserved your right to act like just another
> ungrateful European asshole who publically insults American's
> patriotism -- from behind the relative safety of your PC, of course!
> Oh sure, you want your freedom of speech alright, but you also
> want to have contempt for those who won that freedom of speech
> on behalf of ingrates like you.

I don't think I've ever encountered anyone in 7 years of Usenet use
who was as (I think) wilfully perverse in misreading what I've
written.

Think about the international nature of this wonderful, US-invented
medium.

Think about what freedom of speech (one, as I've said, of the things
your country stands for that I'm proud to agree with) actually means.
Sorry if that's difficult for you.

Think of what I've actually written in this thread, and that from the
other thread you quoted, and what your insane paranoia says about you.

Try and say something intelligent, rather than just taking offence.
Have you travelled widely in the world? If not, consider it.

John

[David Lesher]

"John Mullen" > writes:


>With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our nation'
>is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
>one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
>behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come, and
>the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out, a
>very long time ago.

>Just one of the factors which makes it hard for us to understand each other
>from the different sides of the Atlantic.

Here's another way we differ. Take this:

"I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States
of America and to the principles for which it stands, one
nation under law, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all."

Just as in the oath a federal employee takes ("support and defend the Constitution")...

But the oath is to:

not the President....
not the party in power...
not the government....

but the Constitution itself. We take this for granted, but non-AmCits can have
a hard time grasping that the Armed Forces are NOT loyal to the President...
they are loyal to the document....

So? Well play alternate history. Suppose Nixon tried a coup when on
the ropes. Where would the Army land? With the CinC of the moment...or
the Constitution? Ask yourself that about Haiti, or Liberia, or most
anywhere. In the Commonwealth, it's not even the nation's army --
it's Her Majesty's!

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[John Mullen]

"David Lesher" > wrote in message
...
> "John Mullen" > writes:
>
>
> >With all respect Gordon, this sort of 'respecting the symbol of our
nation'
> >is probably very hard for most Europeans to understand. Particularly this
> >one, to whom the UK flag is a symbol of an Empire whose great days are
> >behind it, the EU one a symbol of a dream whose time has not yet come,
and
> >the Saltire a symbol of a nation which sold itself out, or was sold out,
a
> >very long time ago.
>
> >Just one of the factors which makes it hard for us to understand each
other
> >from the different sides of the Atlantic.
>
> Here's another way we differ. Take this:
>
> "I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States
> of America and to the principles for which it stands, one
> nation under law, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
> all."
>
> Just as in the oath a federal employee takes ("support and defend the
Constitution")...
>
> But the oath is to:
>
> not the President....
> not the party in power...
> not the government....
>
> but the Constitution itself. We take this for granted, but non-AmCits can
have
> a hard time grasping that the Armed Forces are NOT loyal to the
President...
> they are loyal to the document....

Good point.

> So? Well play alternate history. Suppose Nixon tried a coup when on
> the ropes. Where would the Army land? With the CinC of the moment...or
> the Constitution?

Great question! They would have a difficult choice to make, that's for sure!

>Ask yourself that about Haiti, or Liberia, or most
> anywhere.

Trouble is, a lot of these places aren't really countries in the sense that
you or I would understand them. They were drawn on a map in Germany or
Britain, taking no account of ethnicity or anything else. No reason for the
locals to feel allegiance to any particular govt or constitution.

>In the Commonwealth, it's not even the nation's army --
> it's Her Majesty's!

Last time it was a major issue in UK history AFAIK was the Curragh Mutiny in
Ireland, where just before WW1 many British officers were prepared to refuse
orders on this basis. In the event, WW1 came along, we had the Easter
rising, partition, followed by 70 odd years of sporadic problems in Ireland
and Britain. My alternate history, where WW1 is delayed by even a year or
so, might give rise to a more peaceful Ireland in the 20th century.

John