Globalization: a tangent to Fort Hood

[Hooked on Fenix]

The United States of America is the only republican democracy that has ever existed for long. Much of why the U.S. has lasted with it's unique form of government is isolation. The nature of our government, while keeping most of the power in the hands of the people, allows for slow change, but generally isn't the best at making quick decisions. This has for the most part, kept our country as the land of freedom and opportunity, compared to other countries. However, our innovations in transportation (air travel, cars), space exploration (rockets), and energy (nuclear power) have taken away our isolation that was a buffer against our foreign enemies. We live in a time when an ICBM with a nuclear payload launched overseas can destroy an entire metropolitan area or an EMP from one can wipe out the power grid, communications, transportation, the flow of fuel/energy, and water pumps needed to supply water, in the blink of an eye. A virus such as H1N1 or something worse can spread around the globe within days thanks to our invention, the airplane. We invented the instruments of our own destruction. Our government won't last long in these conditions.

With the increasing threat of rogue nations developing nuclear weapons, I'll admit that it may be necessary for us to work with other countries to tackle these threats. However, I see us dangerously approaching a situation where we will cede our sovereignty in exchange for assistance from foreign powers to help solve global problems, whether these perceived problems are real or imaginary. Our debt to other nations puts us in a poor bargaining position when it comes to decisions that affect us and the rest of the world. They may coerce us into decisions that aren't in our best interests. Look at the Copenhagen Treaty for an example. I don't mind our government doing everything in their power to protect us from real enemies that can be seen and killed. What I do have a problem with is when our government decides that it needs to protect us from everything from changes in weather patterns, to overpopulation, to anything that they deem to be not true, or ideas they don't like. I don't mind if some people in our government don't believe that there is a God, but I sure don't want them thinking and acting like they are God. I don't want them deciding who lives and who dies and using this power to justify their battle against the overpopulation of the earth and the depletion of it's resources. I don't care if they believe in global warming or not, but I don't want them messing with the weather on a global scale. Where would I run to if they messed up and made everything worse?

The incident at Fort Hood was a game changer. It showed us that no matter how many foreign terrorists we keep out of our country, it will never protect us from U.S. citizens being trained to be Muslim extremists and killing more of us within our borders. The government can't read minds, though with some invasion of privacy, they can know practically everything else about you. Infiltration seems to be the new weapon of choice for our enemies. This will be a new excuse for another power grab of our rights "to protect us". However, what is there to protect us from our government being infiltrated by our enemies after our government takes away our defenses for our own good? What if our government is being infiltrated now?

 

[gorn]

McGizmo, I also grew up in California. You make some good points. I think the term terrorist is fairly new to us. I recall having air raid drills, ducking under my desk because the Russian nukes were falling. To this day I still get a bad feeling when I hear those type of sirens. The part of California I grew up in is the San Francisco east bay. I don't ever recall hearing the term terrorist, but as I look back I think that term can be applied to the zebra killers, the black panthers, the symbionese liberation army and possibly even the zodiac.

I lived a few blocks from the Concord shootout with the SLA, their safe house was right next door to my Uncle's house. So I believe it was there even then. But with instant media coverage of every thing that happens along with media bias both conservative and liberal it is more in our face. Those groups I listed above and others were not terrorists then, they were criminals.

Time and events have changed our perception.

 

[StarHalo]

But I also suspect there is some vast wisdom that can be passed on to the new and younger generations and I would like to think that at some point civilizations can evolve to the point that they can evolve and shed their old skins and old ways without needing to die off.

This is a key point for any critical thinker who wants to understand how a nation can prevent failure; in any other first world country, you have the civic machinations of the people and the government working together to resolve what either perceives as issues. In the US, you have corporate intercession - the corporation may not feel having some problems brought to light in the media would be beneficial, and the solution may not be profitable.

The US government has its system of checks and balances to keep its integrity, the people have the rule of law to maintain order, but business writes the rules for business. The corporate entity has the rights of an individual, but not the responsibilities. The power of a nation but not the limitations. Many corporations that began in the US will still be around long after the US is gone.

To some extent, we don't necessarily have to follow our leaders, do we? I am not advocating mutiny or revolution and it's probably a bad idea to even type such words but I do have that freedom at this point and damned if I will give it up without contest.

To gauge how popular this would be, you need only measure the success of third-party presidential candidates (not invited to debate on television) in the last few decades. And despite how popular the internet is, I can't think of any particular cause that has exacted any mass (non-internet) change.

Kennedy said we have nothing to fear but fear itself.

That day came and went long ago; anyone wanting a position of political power must now have a "fear point", something for their constitutes to fear. Reagan had communists, Bush I had Iraqis, Bush II had terrorists, Gore had global warming, etc.

The public has bought into the idea of globalization and corporate profits above all else lock, stock, and barrel. They were sold on the idea by the illusion that they too would benefit along with the giant corporations.

This is a crucial element to corporate control, the idea that everyone always benefits. How can things be that bad when we still have IBM computers, Ikea furniture, and Hummers? The critical thinker notes that IBM sold their PC-making division to China, Ikea isn't an American company, and Hummer was also sold to China..

 

[orbital]

+

Very good thread Don,
The bigger a question gets, the more difficult the answers.

What's most important to people,
Global Social issues or Global Environmental issues....What is the balance?
*I first learned of Thomas Malthus over 20 years ago, very important to read/understand his theory

side note: My privacy is much more valuable, than any perceived threat.

 

[js]

jtr,

Great point about prison and rehabilitation and the root causes of crime vs. reactionary policies aimed at control instead of cure.

StarHalo et ali,

Coropations are indeed running amok in the modern world, and the finanacial system is totally insane. It is going to fail as it currently stands. But, personally I have hope that after that happens we will be able to end up better for it on the other side. Of course, it would be even better maybe if we could change things now, but that's rather unlikely. And personally I do NOT think that globalization is the answer--not in a political sense, a one world government sense. Certainly there are global issues and everyone should be concerned about them and try to learn about them and what we should do, etc. But, in terms of society, personally I see the return of the tribe. We're already seeing it. CPF is a tribe of sorts. It's online nature makes it less cohesive and less obviously a community, but a community it is. I've been thinking about this since the "Is this a tatoo era" thread. I think, yes, it is a tattoo era, and I think what that means is that the power of conformity, convention, and top-down mores are on the wane.

People might think that this would mean more conflict, more strife, more dissonance, but it depends on the nature of the tribes. People who join together because they love flashlights, or coffee or tattoos have a much more durable and flexible and peacable bond than people who join together because they hate some intellectual/political thing, or because they are all joined by some intellectual position or dogma. In the latter case, the bond is usually only temporary and of an ad hoc nature--for a special cause, a temporary aliance. But in the former case, people get together, taste wine, shine flashlights across fields or at walls, enjoy each others company, enjoy food and drink, and bond. And they don't for a second think that loving flashlights precludes loving coffee, or that one group needs to vie with the other. These sorts of tribes naturally and peacefully coexist, much as the followers of all the various gods and goddesses in polytheistic times did. (Well, they killed each other a lot, to be sure, but not over religion or dogma--surprising but true).

More and more in todays society we are abstracted. We rarely touch each other, we rarely look each other in the eyes. And yet, touch, voice, gesture--these things are vital to our mental wellbeing. Or at least they are according to some of the psychological and neuroscientific studies that I've been reading about lately. One book in particular, "Born to be good", brought out the importance of emotions, facial expressions, gestures, touches, etc. Take these things away from a developing child, even if he or she has everything else, and the child will turn inward, become very unhappy, and die. Literally die.

Oh, and jtr, by the way, I just had to take a couple harassment courses as part of my supervisor training, and they did indeed specifically say that the only places you should touch one of your employees are the arms and shoulders. And really, not even then. Best just not to touch.

As for mass media, I think that commercials and propaganda are indeed as StarHalo characterizes them. But it is also my considered opinion that we are living in a golden age of television and movies. There have been some SPECTACULARLY good TV series. Stuff I would place up against anything, classics, romantics, renaissance, . . . whatever.

This is the return of the IMAGE, of the Goddess, of the feminine, of the right side of the brain. All the dogmatic, left-brain, code-based creeds are against the image, against pictures and statues and fiction, and even against colorful clothing. The modern world has brought all of that back in an unrepressable way. And that is a good thing, because it balances out the left-brain. Older generations may not see the upside of television. All they may see is the reality TV, the gossip, the stupidity, the dross. And that is there, to be sure, but there is much much more. There are some really good programs airing. And there are even better ones waiting to be rented. And most people don't even watch commercials, especially if they watch their shows rented on DVD from Netflix or their local video rental store. I love Jane Austin's novels dearly. Love love love them. I own them all in hardcover and will read and re-read them the rest of my life probably. But I also love Gilmore Girls and Mad Men and Veronica Mars and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And no less.

There's a lot to be hopeful about today, methinks. And this is new for me. 5 or 10 years ago I had a much darker outlook for our future. I always seem to be ahead of the current trend (which doesn't mean I'm right, necessarily!!!). Not too long ago I remember being very concerned about our economy and what the fed was doing and what was happening in the housing market. It wasn't hard to see what the result would be, I thought. I was scared. Now, most people are very concerned with double digit unemployment numbers (and rightly so) and budgets and inflation and so on, and for the life of me--I can't really figure out why--I'm really optimistic about the future of our country and even the future of our planet and our species. It's a bit a-rational (but not irrational, I don't think), but I think the excesses and hard times and disasters that are coming will be the birthing pains of something new, something better.

In evolution and natural history times of great upset and mass extinctions are also the times of by far the greatest proliferation and creation of new species. Maybe that is what will happen at the social/political scale. I am hopeful!

 

[thelightdude]

These are some of the best and most thought provoking posts I have read on CPF. Great discussion!

 

[McGizmo]

These are some of the best and most thought provoking posts I have read on CPF. Great discussion!

Agreed. I really appreciate the effort and time some of you have taken in responding here as well as the thoughts and considerations conveyed. If we can gain some insight into what's going on around us it might help is not only in understanding and accepting some things better but even guide us in the little ripples that we as individuals set in motion on our global sea.

I like the contrast and perspective provided by js and his left brain/ right brain discussions. I would guess it's a turn off for some and may seem too touchy-feely and yet contact and intercourse are part of being in touch and this is probably critical when the problems we face are of an alienation and repellent nature.

The thought of some new world order with a centralized and global government is frightening to me if it even comes close to dictating rules and laws at an individual level. How can we come close to any algorithm that would be comprehensive over such a diverse group and landscape?!?! But we do have the multinational corporations who hold the purse strings operating on this level. It's a global market and finite resources are going to the highest bidders regardless of geography and nationality. In the US, we have communities within cities within states within the United States. Federal law trumps state law which trumps city law which trumps community regulations. Ideally as you move up you also move away from particular and specific local areas of concern and focus on the common areas which are best dealt with at the pertinent government level you find yourself at.

I would hope that any global unification would only address global issues and the individual only to the extent they are involved as a global resident. For instance, if it has been determined and accepted that the only way for swordfish to avoid extinction and the only way to get the stock back to a survivable level is to avoid fishing them for some determined time then hopefully we leave the swordfish be for the time being; all of us. If where I live, the community has determined that a certain beach should be designated as a bathing suit optional beach and where you live, veils are required in public then so be it and we don't need or appreciate any intervention from a distance not in tune with our local.

With the internet and our computers, we have global contact and are sharing thoughts, images and news with each other. Beyond the media and despite whoever owns it, there are other ways information is being spread and shared. That is not to say we aren't also spreading and sharing lies, false information and either knowingly or unknowingly furthering special interests. Our dollars are votes in a real sense and we are now voting with our wallets on a global scale whether we consider ourselves global citizens or not.

Regardless of the level of jurisdiction a law may encompass, it only works with law abiding citizens who are aware and willing to comply and to any extent it may be over reaching, it impedes or impairs the law abiding citizen. I sometimes think the laws are as much a guide line for enforcement agencies as they are a mandate for citizen behavior. If they are not enforceable or the cost of enforcement is greater than the real good they bring about, why have them? International law is as far removed from the individual as you can get. IMHO, Hasan broke all kinds of laws whether written or not, enforceable or not. It would appear that he followed a belief that exists at a global level among a few individuals and is independent of national or geographic boundaries. He represents a global problem that we as members of a global community or should I just say as members of humanity, need to deal and contend with.

It is what it is. It's up to us to know what it is.

 

[StarHalo]

But, in terms of society, personally I see the return of the tribe.

I think more and more people are coming to the conclusion that the automobile-based strip-mall-surrounded-by-suburbs sprawl architecture may have been a mistake, but if anyone's working to reverse the trend, it's not obvious. In previous eras, man has almost always self-regulated his community arrangement for balance; not so many people that the populace becomes dissociated (no more than several thousand), and not so few people that the collective can't survive disasters or will die out without a history (more than a couple hundred).

In Ancient Rome, you had the government that was completely dissociated from the people, and thus lived lifestyles on the backs of and passed laws to the detriment of it's own citizens. The idea of letting in hordes of uneducated outlanders was, to its senators, a fine way to show Romans just how humane and giving they were, especially since none of them had to deal with the new immigrants. And now we visit the mere scattered ruins of that city.

Meanwhile in Crete around 1700BC, you had some unknown group of people who made the Phaistos Disk, a clay disk featuring an array of symbols pressed into it's face using stamps/dies of some kind. Printed text, using a mass-printing method, 2,400 years before the Chinese invented stone printing blocks, and 3,000 years before the Gutenberg bible. But whatever society produced it was apparently so small that it never even had the chance to pass on the technology, what the disk says, means, who it came from, all a complete mystery, died out from a tribe too small.

The Phaistos Disk:

As for mass media, I think that commercials and propaganda are indeed as StarHalo characterizes them. But it is also my considered opinion that we are living in a golden age of television and movies.

I agree here, I'm not trying to make some hard-nosed "all television is stupid" statement; entertainment is always entertainment, and we have some of the best available now. But the television as a means of dissemination and discussion is definitely in trouble. A good example would be the recent arguing between MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Fox's Bill O'Reilly - a good back and forth political battle between two commentary giants sure to stir debate. But then the chairman of General Electric (which owns MSNBC), Jeffrey Immelt, and the chairman of News Corporation (which owns Fox News), Rupert Murdoch, were brought into a room at a "summit meeting" for CEOs in May, where Charlie Rose engineered an end to the "feud"; both CEOs agreed that the dispute was bad for the interests of the corporate parents, and thus agreed to order their news employees to cease attacking each others news organizations and employees. Debate was bad for business, so it was ordered removed from the programming. How you feel about this topic was brought to you by General Electric..

This is the return of the IMAGE, of the Goddess, of the feminine, of the right side of the brain. All the dogmatic, left-brain, code-based creeds are against the image

I think it's less to do with left/right brain than it is fore/rear brain; the front of the brain being the seat of logic and reason, and the rear being the facility of aggression, sexuality, and instinct. In a society based almost exclusively on immediate gratification, on awareness and forethought being optional, you're going to end up with a lot of failure to plan and primal behavior. Why would one person commute in a three-ton commercial-sized vehicle that has a cost of operation so high that it could pay for a second car? Not a lot of fore brain involved there..

The thought of some new world order with a centralized and global government is frightening to me if it even comes close to dictating rules and laws at an individual level.

The new world order is a handful of corporate entities that aren't centralized at all, except for where they agree on trade/business practices, which can and does change very quickly and very often. Good government is like a great solid rock standing tall against whatever is thrown at it, corporations and their alliances are like abstract clouds floating in a metaphorical space. You know where to go if you need action within the government, but when you need a corporation to do something, it's pure existential dilemma..

Our dollars are votes in a real sense and we are now voting with our wallets on a global scale whether we consider ourselves global citizens or not.

Truer words never spoken. Take any hypothesis or conclusion you could deduce from this statement, regardless of how inhumane or terrifying it is, and it will be correct.

 

[Brewer]

The concept of the corporation and shareholder really looms large at the root of the problem.

Private companies, generally, operate under the conscience of the proprietor. He has a product or service and he sells it in the marketplace. His business is an extension of him and his personality, and operates under his principles. He probably seeks to keep his customers happy, and he probably seeks to build a future for his company.

The corporation, however, is a psychopath. It has no principles, other than 'make money now'. It is a monster created almost entirely to separate it's masters from any responsibility for its actions, and to make fast money by any means possible, with no guidance other than law (and as we know, they often flout even that). It stretches to near breaking-point the gap between money charged and goods delivered. It buys and then kills its competition.

The corporation mantra is 'monopolize and exploit, monopolize and exploit'. The reason we don't see solar panels and wind generators on every rooftop isn't because they don't work, of course they do - it's because nobody will get stinking rich from distributed, decentralised power, so there is nobody really influential championing the idea. And the reason that supermarkets sell everything and are so keen to provide bags (lets face it, we all have our own bags) is that they don't want us to THINK. If we have to plan our shopping and bring our own bags, then we may just write a list - and if we write a list, we may just stick to it - and if we stick to our list then all their impulse purchase tactics will fail and our 'dollar spend' will decrease.

McGizmo's point about voting with your dollars is an excellent one. We decide who gets our dollars, but we must resist the warm comfort of not thinking.

I have a feeling that the world would be a more civilised place without corporations and their instant-gratification-seeking CEO's and shareholders altogether. I'm not sure how you'd achieve this without making more laws, but you could start by paying CEO's smaller salaries and longer term bonuses based on the health of the company after they leave it.

Perhaps implementing a mandatory 10-year ownership of shares before trading them would have a similar effect on cooling the jets of shareholders?

 

[McGizmo]

..... but we must resist the warm comfort of not thinking.

.....

I reduced the quote but not because I didn't appreciate the balance of the thoughts and comments within. I think the portion I retained really hits at the heart of the matter and many matters, for that matter.

For some, there is no warm comfort and thoughtful response and actions are critical. For many of us, no thoughts required and on so many of the issues we may be concerned with, our thoughts and ideas will have no bearing or be heard where it might make a difference; the proverbial waste of time. However, we are the increments and do make a difference at a micro level which in aggregate, defines the macro.

Yesterday, the UPS driver noticed and commented on my PV panels on the roof. He asked about cost and how they have impacted my utility bill. He was very interested and stated he wanted to look into solar for his house. Grass root initiatives that make sense can take hold and can bring about change. Because we are neighbors here on CPF, we have the potential of grass roots and yet we cover the globe.

Back to resisting the comfort of not thinking. If we don't do the thinking, who is doing it for us and do they have our best interest at heart?

 

[LuxLuthor]

I found watching the PBS 8 DVD series on New York by Ric Burns absolutely fascinating in many ways, and highly recommend it. Much of it addresses the themes spoken so well in this thread, and much more.

One of the most interesting aspects was how the United States was an inspiring beacon and relatively innocent player on the world stage--taking all the huddled masses, and providing opportunities and hope that was unparalleled throughout history. It does require being able to somewhat overlook the ravages of native indians & slavery (which was not a uniquely American practice at the time). We generally did not go poking our noses all over the world and throwing our weight around excessively.

Then came World Wars 1 & 2, neither of our own making. Once it became obvious that our strategy of isolationism from global affairs would not work, we began to dramatically swing the pendulum in the opposite direction, exploding forth and trying to control everything.

We quickly re-tooled our previously peaceful industrial complex into a military-industrial complex, with sacrifices and rationing of all public goods until a massive bohemoth was created. The new American war machine had its tenacles in every facet of our country, and we began to swell up with our own formidable power.

America fundamentally changed its national identity during those years--organizing towards waging war and wreaking destruction.

Developing and exerting such massive power and domination inexorably created fear, resentment, backlash from the rest of the world, and profound enemies. Those in positions of political and economic power further decided that they would make the United States the new center of world trade. This idea was pursued steadily until fruition of the World Trade Center in NYC by leaders such as the Rockefellers. It was further decided that the USA would maintain a massive military that would guarantee America's dominant role and being the world's disciplinarian.

The League of Nations failed to prevent WW-II, and it was replaced with the United Nations, also put in New York City. The US Dollar was made into the world's trading currency. On and on things went, but America had fundamentally shifted from an admired & respected beacon of hope--that provided opportunities, hope, justice, and a source of productive innovation....into a power hungry bully. Essentially we used to be how Japan and China are now. It makes perfect sense why the Twin Towers were repeatedly attacked, as they represented the blackened heart of the now overshadowed, but once pristine, Statue of Liberty.

Every person, family, leader, group, organization, religion, city, state, nation, this CPF forum, or other entity that abuses anyone (or is perceived to abuse them) will eventually be attacked, destroyed, or implode from the corruption of its own power...and the bigger they get, the louder the fall (the British Empire being one of the most extreme examples of the phenomonen).

In defending itself, and joining the World Wars, America forever lost its way, and started on a process of rapidly falling from its glorious peak. Everything is happening much faster with the accelerating technologies and global communications networks. There's no cooling off time while a message is carried by a sailing ship or Pony Express courier.

As an open society, our security in key cities and facilities is almost non-existent. Our infrastructure in many areas (electrical grid) is fragile and easily compromised. The widespread availability of WMD's ("dirty nukes" are the easiest) make it relatively easy to hit a few key cities (NYC, WDC, LA, Chicago) and cause a fatal knockout blow from one of the many radical groups that are dreaming of such an attack. I have no doubt that Major Hassan would have willingly used such a weapon if he had been supplied.

Even if we somehow avoid such crushing terrorist attacks, we are still imploding from within. Based on the lessons of history, it seems that this is now our destiny as much as it was all the great powers that rose and fell before us.

With the rapid increase in debt, increasing size & out of touch government with astronomical spending obligations, deflation of our currency, energy dependency, inflated salaries/benefits having priced our skilled labor out of practical existence, many corrupt corporate & government leaders, we are already at a point of not being able to recover financially or politically. We are exactly paralleling the hedonistic gluttony that was so obnoxiously obvious to anyone who studied the ancient Greece Empire....right down to our obsessive sexual expressions, and epidemic of obesity.

So in some ways, the 911, Ft. Hood, and other attacks will become footnotes in the historical fall of America. I wish I saw sufficient awareness and a motivated critical mass able to turn this great country in another more optimistic direction, but as sad as it is to see it happening, it appears the die is cast.

 

[RocketTomato]

This thread has been a very interesting, and very depressing read.

My view on the US in general is that, yes, we may have our ups and downs but our great experiment in democracy is still evolving and going strong. Every generation has issues that need to be confronted and resolved and how our generation confronts those issues will define us. I believe we can and will continue to overcome our problems and become the better for it.

Now I personally do not see what the Fort Hood shooter did as any different then the number of other rampages we have seen before. If anything, if it was motivated by religon, then it can at least be better understood by me. What I find unfathomable are, for example, the Columbine killings or the Virgina Tech massacre. What was their motivation? I do not think we will ever really understand and that I find much more frightening then some misguided zealot.

 

[Empath]

The last few posts have been removed as too tangential to the tangent expressed in the opening post of the thread.

Discussions of what is best in the U.S., vs worse in other nations are better suited for the Underground. Please remember that "globalization" is the operative theme of the topic.

 

[McGizmo]

Lupara,
Your ray of optimism is heartening. I agree with your take on Lux's post to a degree and hope you are right where he is in error. I hope the US can somehow rise to the challenge and be seen in history as how decay and economic disaster can be avoided and not be viewed as yet another civilization that ran its course. The statue of liberty still stands even if today's conditions are contrary to her inscription:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

I have never seen the statue but my father did as a child when he and his family were processed at Ellis Island. On a personal note, I would not be here today were it not for her welcome.

I did a google for the quotation above and from another hit on google, I found the source for this quote and on the page was also an interesting foot note comment about it:

This is an eloquent and beautiful portrayal of what was once the promise of America: a new land of equal opportunity. It is carved into the concrete pillar at the base of the Statue of Liberty. This statue was given to the United States by the French in celebration of their twinned revolutions for democracy. Both of these revolutions were heavily influenced by the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, especially the concept that a government could breach the social contract and thus be in need of replacement (John Locke expressed the same idea in his Two Treatises on Government). Now, as F. Scott Fitzgerald would attest, something of that bright, pioneering spirit has been lost.

In addition to the negative view of the US that is held by so many around the globe today, I believe there is also those who still see the US as a land of opportunity and somewhat in keeping with the welcome expressed and symbolized by the statue of liberty.

I can't support my suspicion but I really think the pressures of population densities we see and experience in our cities everywhere around the world give us legitimate cause for concern and put us on guard and the defensive. The masses are massive and not enough resources and wealth to go around. Musical chairs that isn't a fun game. (well beyond seating capacity for the players)

The "invitation" expressed on the Statue of Liberty was a global invitation but back when the global community was much less connected, much less pressured and much less intimidating in its dire needs. At the very least, we should hang a "closed until further notice" sign on her. Perhaps Hasan's parents have an opinion on her that would be enlightening and I wonder if they shared their opinion with their son.

Now I realize that some would cite this as mere window dressing and say that those in power back then realized that the best way to grow and serve a new market was to being the market close by. Shipping, distribution and marketing were not easy to accomplish across oceans back then; nothing like today.

I watched an interesting and unpleasant doomsday movie lat night, "Children of Men". It's enlightening in itself that doomsday movies have such interest these days and I know there is even a thread on it although I haven't followed it. Well in the "Extras" included on the DVD were some contemporary "thinkers", philosophers, economists and what have you all giving their take on humanity and I was quite surprised at some of the comments and how the focus to a great extent was on economic globalization, overpopulation and really much of what was said would fit right well in this thread! One man made a comment that was really on the mark and especially in light of the Fort Hood shooting. He mentioned that never before in history has technology and the connectivity of the masses been such that a single person can make a global statement like he can now. I don't recall the particulars but his comments could have applied to Hassan, verbatim!

Upon a preview of this post, I just noticed Empath's comments and the removal of some posts I was responding to. I don't know if this post now is within acceptable parameters or not. I have revised this post and removed some comments and further quotations in hopes of avoiding the need of moderation.

Hasan as a US citizen as well as a global citizen having adopted a set of beliefs contrary to the well being and health of his fellow citizens and workers clearly broke US laws and IMHO, tore the fabric of humanity itself. Did he break any global or international law and if not, should there be such a law? Is it necessary to have such a law and would it make any difference, in his case, if there were such a law?

I think Rocket Tomato has a good take on Hasan and it is healthy, IMHO, in that it removes a perceived need to make any changes or significant response in light of Hasan's action and undermines the impact perhaps of what he and those of his ilk may have hoped for.

:shrug:

 

[nisshin]

Did he break any global or international law and if not, should there be such a law?

What comes to mind is Article 3 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." Member nations have agreed to the Declaration, so it seems like an international law.

 

[copperfox]

What comes to mind is Article 3 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." Member nations have agreed to the Declaration, so it seems like an international law.

But that is irrelevant. Regardless of UN law, it's already illegal to murder in this country. Did the existence of that "law" (I quote it because I don't what kind of legal power this declaration has, of it simply exists as some kind of guideline for the sensibilities of men who create laws) prevent Hasan from his rampage? What reason does anyone have to believe that a person who disregards the laws of a land would stop and reconsider his or her actions if only another law was creating making those actions extra illegal. To think that global law could prevent something like this incident is fantasy.

 

[LuxLuthor]

My previous post was mainly a summary of that wonderful PBS series which was so informative on the long history of New York City, with the reality of the last 8 years thrown in. I wish much of the latter parts presented in the series, and the current state of our country were not true, but it becomes obvious how America changed its fundamental direction as a result of being drawn into the World Wars.

Interestingly, the PBS series done in 1999 was revised with 2 new episodes added after the 9/11 attack.

The series had very interesting details about the WTC buildings in particular, which had been planned since WW-II, and how eminent domain was used by the extremely powerful Port Authority to take over private homes and businesses in the 1960's, and embark on the construction. The towers were long considered a disastrous project, being created during hard recessionary times of 1960-1973, at a cost of almost $1.5 billion.

Much of the original filming of Philippe Petit doing his "Man on Wire" (superb movie, btw) event was in the PBS series and served to humanize the buildings as they slowly started filling up. However, combined with the severe 1987 stock market crash, significant vacancy persisted until almost 1991 when they finally became profitable. So the WTC only ended up being a profitable investment for 10 years.

On July 24, 2001, for $3.22 billion, Silverstein Properties purchased a 99 year lease for private leasing ownership of the WTC. How would you like to be holding that paper a few weeks later? He did not get final payments of $4.6 billion from the 24 insurance companies until late 2006, but has been required to keep paying the Port Authority $10 million/month lease while rebuilding is slowly ongoing...and likely high vacancy starting all over again.

Back to the globalization topic, there is nothing wrong with trying to be optimistic, but ignoring the reality of how radically America has changed direction, and become increasingly weakened in so many fundamental ways as a result, seems overwhelmingly obvious to me. I don't see anything on the 5, 10, or 20 year horizon that is sufficient to resolve or overturn the current USA financial, political, cultural, & global directions & problems. I would be pleased to be wrong, but like it or not, history has always repeated itself.

 

[RAGE CAGE]

Back to the globalization topic, there is nothing wrong with trying to be optimistic, but ignoring the reality of how radically America has changed direction, and become increasingly weakened in so many fundamental ways as a result, seems overwhelmingly obvious to me. I don't see anything on the 5, 10, or 20 year horizon that is sufficient to resolve or overturn the current USA financial, political, cultural, & global directions & problems. I would be pleased to be wrong, but like it or not, history has always repeated itself.

This is fear itself...and we should fear it........

HR 3162 RDS
107th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3162IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESOctober 24, 2001


Received
AN ACT
To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) SHORT TITLE- This Act may be cited as the `Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001'.

 

[StarHalo]

Another footnote regarding your money = your vote:

New York Times, November 14th, By Robert Pear:

WASHINGTON — In the official record of the historic House debate on overhauling health care, the speeches of many lawmakers echo with similarities. Often, that was no accident.

Statements by more than a dozen lawmakers were ghostwritten, in whole or in part, by Washington lobbyists working for Genentech, one of the world's largest biotechnology companies.

E-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that the lobbyists drafted one statement for Democrats and another for Republicans.

The lobbyists, employed by Genentech and by two Washington law firms, were remarkably successful in getting the statements printed in the Congressional Record under the names of different members of Congress.

Genentech, a subsidiary of the Swiss drug giant Roche, estimates that 42 House members picked up some of its talking points — 22 Republicans and 20 Democrats, an unusual bipartisan coup for lobbyists.

Your representative's feelings on this matter were brought to you by Genentech..

 

[MarNav1]

[Statements by more than a dozen lawmakers were ghostwritten, in whole or in part, by Washington lobbyists working for Genentech, one of the world's largest biotechnology companies.]

[/QUOTE]Incredible. :shakehead