Sjoerd

"TMOliver" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
    > "Sjoerd" <[email protected]> vented spleen or mostly mumbled...
    > >
    > > "TMOliver" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > >> After travel in now six decades, I'm quite comfortable that we gauche
    > >> USAians possess not a few virtues in excess of those claimed by
    > >> Uropeens, the greatest of which are our capacity to celebrate and
    > >> visibly record our failures, excess, lapses, ulcers and warts,
    > >> instead of attempting to sweep them beneath a collective rug of the
    > >> self-assumed mantle of moral superiority which emanates halo-ish from
    > >> the keyboards of the "We're
    > > better
    > >> because we're progressive" set.
    > >
    > > And arrogance is another of your "virtues".
    > >
    > > Sjoerd
    > >
    > Loverly....
    > There you are, S, a highly visible and graphic manifestation of the
quality
    > which I had just described. Sjoerd's doesn't even have to be pointed at
    > the bait. He simply snaps at the lure as it passes.

And you Mr. TM Oliver, are just a loser pretending to be clever. And an
arrogant one, also. Bye Sir.

Sjoerd

Devil

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:42:32 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > Keith Willshaw <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> "ramraideruk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >> >
    >
    >> > and what would the US Japanese say about the torture Japan subjected the
    >> > Europeans and Americans to in the second world war? Still "a dark part of
    >> > our countries history"? I don't think so!
    >> >
    >> >
    >
    >> Actually they would say that since their country is the USA
    >> and they were singled out for internment during WW2
    >> unlike German and Italian Americans. Many lost homes
    >> livelihoods and businesses to this piece of racial discrimination.
    >
    > Let us not forget that not only did Canadians do the same, but they outright,
    > officially confiscated the homes and farms of the Japanese they interned,
    > while the US did not. Nex

That's not pretty, sure. But then it's not an excuse for the treatment in the
US either.

Yossarian

"Tom Bellhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "Yossarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > (SNIP)
    > > The French Quarter of New Orleans got very gentrified. So there aren't
any
    > > whorehouses in the vieux carre. Just a lot restaurants and bars. For
that
    > > you have to go to the westside of New Orleans where there are a lot of
    > Asian
    > > women specialising in "massage or so I have been told.
    > >
    > > Yossarian
    > >
    > New Orleans once had a legal red light district, roughly in the old
Quarter,
    > but it was closed down by the Dep't of Navy during WWI. I knew an old
    > fellow who had frequented the "social clubs" of that time. His stories
    > were amazing. The places were like country clubs, men brought their wives
    > for fine dining and entertainment, and some places published their own
    > newspapers. Imagine: "Mr. Pierre Boudin and his lovely wife Porcine
    > attended the dance at Madame LaRoche's last Friday."
    > Things were different then.

The good old days. Sigh...

Yossarian

    > Tom in GA

Alan Pollock

devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:42:32 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > > Keith Willshaw <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >> "ramraideruk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >> news:[email protected]...
    > >> >
    > >
    > >> > and what would the US Japanese say about the torture Japan subjected the
    > >> > Europeans and Americans to in the second world war? Still "a dark part of
    > >> > our countries history"? I don't think so!
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >
    > >> Actually they would say that since their country is the USA
    > >> and they were singled out for internment during WW2
    > >> unlike German and Italian Americans. Many lost homes
    > >> livelihoods and businesses to this piece of racial discrimination.
    > >
    > > Let us not forget that not only did Canadians do the same, but they outright,
    > > officially confiscated the homes and farms of the Japanese they interned,
    > > while the US did not. Nex

    > That's not pretty, sure. But then it's not an excuse for the treatment in the
    > US either.

Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex

Devil

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:28:26 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:42:32 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:
    >
    >> > Keith Willshaw <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> "ramraideruk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> >> news:[email protected]...
    >> >> >
    >> >
    >> >> > and what would the US Japanese say about the torture Japan subjected the
    >> >> > Europeans and Americans to in the second world war? Still "a dark part of
    >> >> > our countries history"? I don't think so!
    >> >> >
    >> >> >
    >> >
    >> >> Actually they would say that since their country is the USA
    >> >> and they were singled out for internment during WW2
    >> >> unlike German and Italian Americans. Many lost homes
    >> >> livelihoods and businesses to this piece of racial discrimination.
    >> >
    >> > Let us not forget that not only did Canadians do the same, but they outright,
    >> > officially confiscated the homes and farms of the Japanese they interned,
    >> > while the US did not. Nex
    >
    >> That's not pretty, sure. But then it's not an excuse for the treatment in the
    >> US either.
    >
    > Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
    > tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex

I still don't see what Canadian identity (if any) had to do with the
discussion, except as a straw man? (The previous posters didn't seem to
be Canadian).

Alan Pollock

devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:28:26 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > >
    > > Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
    > > tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex

    > I still don't see what Canadian identity (if any) had to do with the
    > discussion, except as a straw man? (The previous posters didn't seem to
    > be Canadian).
    >

Puts the whole thing into perspective, the two countries being neighbors and
reacting to to the then current situation in similar but different ways. Nex

Devil

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 15:56:50 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:28:26 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:
    >
    >> >
    >> > Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
    >> > tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex
    >
    >> I still don't see what Canadian identity (if any) had to do with the
    >> discussion, except as a straw man? (The previous posters didn't seem to
    >> be Canadian).
    >>
    >
    > Puts the whole thing into perspective, the two countries being neighbors and
    > reacting to to the then current situation in similar but different ways. Nex

But that was not the topic under discussion, and you brought this up out
of the blue as if it were.

If we want to bring up all similar darkness from all over the place and
history, we can argue for a while...

Alan Pollock

devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 15:56:50 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > > devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:28:26 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:
    > >
    > >> >
    > >> > Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
    > >> > tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex
    > >
    > >> I still don't see what Canadian identity (if any) had to do with the
    > >> discussion, except as a straw man? (The previous posters didn't seem to
    > >> be Canadian).
    > >>
    > >
    > > Puts the whole thing into perspective, the two countries being neighbors and
    > > reacting to to the then current situation in similar but different ways. Nex

    > But that was not the topic under discussion, and you brought this up out
    > of the blue as if it were.

    > If we want to bring up all similar darkness from all over the place and
    > history, we can argue for a while...



I'll say what I wish in relation to the topic at hand. Moreover, hounding
somebody who adds information in relation to what has been said in a thread
is not cool. It's intolerant and reeks of the vainglorious martinet.

If you can't accept the fact that Canada acted in a more dastardly fashion
than the US did in that instance, just say so honestly. If that's not it, then
kindly stop your pathetic attempt at nitpicking.

Translation? Say something of substance or let it go. Nex

Devil

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:12:59 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 15:56:50 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:
    >
    >> > devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:28:26 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Of course not. However in the Pristine Innocence of Canadian Identity, this
    >> >> > tidbit shouldn't be forgotten either. Balance. Always balance. And truth. Nex
    >> >
    >> >> I still don't see what Canadian identity (if any) had to do with the
    >> >> discussion, except as a straw man? (The previous posters didn't seem to
    >> >> be Canadian).
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> > Puts the whole thing into perspective, the two countries being neighbors and
    >> > reacting to to the then current situation in similar but different ways. Nex
    >
    >> But that was not the topic under discussion, and you brought this up out
    >> of the blue as if it were.
    >
    >> If we want to bring up all similar darkness from all over the place and
    >> history, we can argue for a while...
    >
    >
    >
    > I'll say what I wish in relation to the topic at hand. Moreover, hounding
    > somebody who adds information in relation to what has been said in a thread
    > is not cool. It's intolerant and reeks of the vainglorious martinet.

Wow, touchy, aren't we?

You are free to say anything you want obviously. However, I think I am
also fre to comment, and characterizing my followup as "hounding" strikes
me as a gross exaggeration.

    > If you can't accept the fact that Canada acted in a more dastardly fashion
    > than the US did in that instance, just say so honestly. If that's not it, then
    > kindly stop your pathetic attempt at nitpicking.

That was not the point, was it? Sounded to me like an argument to the
effect that what the US did to their Japanese-American population was not
so bad because Canada did worse. I still don't see another explanation
for you to bring up Canada -admittedly worse- in the discussion.

    > Translation? Say something of substance or let it go. Nex

Whatever...

In any event, if I were to try and make a point, it would still have to be
that the history of WWII in the Pacific remains extremely biased both in
Canada and the US. Japan was not Germany, and this was mostly a conflict
about economic interests and control of the region.

Alan Pollock

devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Sounded to me like an argument to the
    > effect that what the US did to their Japanese-American population was not
    > so bad because Canada did worse. I still don't see another explanation
    > for you to bring up Canada -admittedly worse- in the discussion.
    >

I'm in a good mood so I'll walk you through it. Shall we begin?

From the post I replied to (by Keith in this very thread):

"Actually they would say that since their country is the USA and they were
singled out for internment during WW2 unlike German and Italian Americans.
Many lost homes livelihoods and businesses to this piece of racial
discrimination."

That was Keith. I replied to his paragraph above. Why?

Thought I'd add a little info, in effect, that just across the border there
was a country that actually did confiscate "homes livelihoods and businesses";
official policy there but not in the US. So the 'many lost', there becomes
'all lost'.

Pertinent.

That paragraph of Keith's I replied to was quoted in my original reply. I
don't know of any other way to explain it, and hope this clears it up for you.

No big - happens to me all the time: text can be confusing unless strictly in
context, especially in forums where so many people participate in such a
jungle of posts.


    > In any event, if I were to try and make a point, it would still have to be
    > that the history of WWII in the Pacific remains extremely biased both in
    > Canada and the US. Japan was not Germany, and this was mostly a conflict
    > about economic interests and control of the region.


I'd agree with that to an extent.

Let's not forget though, that once war begins, all those economic interests as
well as geopolitical control of regions become fair game, on *both* sides. And
who wanted control first, and who attacked whom first? Moreover, when trying
to compare the bias of a conflict's 'history' in respective countries, I doubt
that many would say Japan is less biased than the US or Canada. And on top of
that, history is almost never neutral when it comes to conflict, especially
when the events are so close in time. Nex

Darkginger

Alan Pollock <[email protected]> wrote

<snip>

    >Nex

Sorry, but I'm curious - what is this 'Nex' at the end of your posts? I keep
thinking it's 'next' which reads rudely! I'm sure it's not what you mean,
though, is it?

Jo



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/03

Alan Pollock

Darkginger <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Alan Pollock <[email protected]> wrote

    > <snip>

    > >Nex

    > Sorry, but I'm curious - what is this 'Nex' at the end of your posts? I keep
    > thinking it's 'next' which reads rudely! I'm sure it's not what you mean,
    > though, is it?

    > Jo

Leftover from the days of 300 baud. Nexus, my original alias shortened, is
Nex. On a 40 column screen, one post might typically take two or three
screenfulls to read, so a quick reminder of the poster's name at the end was
appreciated and shorter than a tag line or long sig (which would take forever
at 300 baud). It stuck. Nex

Devil

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 03:18:20 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

[...]
    >
    > I'm in a good mood so I'll walk you through it. Shall we begin?

OK, time to let this rest.

The thing was, there has been so much shooting from the hips and
deliberate attacks on the countries which did not support the war that
there is a good deal of touchiness these days.

    > Let's not forget though, that once war begins, all those economic interests as
    > well as geopolitical control of regions become fair game, on *both* sides. And
    > who wanted control first, and who attacked whom first? Moreover, when trying
    > to compare the bias of a conflict's 'history' in respective countries, I doubt
    > that many would say Japan is less biased than the US or Canada. And on top of
    > that, history is almost never neutral when it comes to conflict, especially
    > when the events are so close in time. Nex

Sure, no argument there. But I submit it would be in everyone's interest
to take a longer view. Which sooner or later is going to happen hopefully.

My daughter was taught about the American revolution twice, once in the US
and the following year in Canada. Wonderful experience for a kid.
Provides for a great sense of perspective. Which most of us really are
missing. Comes across in many of our discussions too, with many people
simply and honestly regurgitating the party line.

Alan Pollock

devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 03:18:20 +0000, Alan Pollock wrote:

    > [...]
    > >
    > > I'm in a good mood so I'll walk you through it. Shall we begin?

    > OK, time to let this rest.

    > The thing was, there has been so much shooting from the hips and
    > deliberate attacks on the countries which did not support the war that
    > there is a good deal of touchiness these days.

    > > Let's not forget though, that once war begins, all those economic interests as
    > > well as geopolitical control of regions become fair game, on *both* sides. And
    > > who wanted control first, and who attacked whom first? Moreover, when trying
    > > to compare the bias of a conflict's 'history' in respective countries, I doubt
    > > that many would say Japan is less biased than the US or Canada. And on top of
    > > that, history is almost never neutral when it comes to conflict, especially
    > > when the events are so close in time. Nex

    > Sure, no argument there. But I submit it would be in everyone's interest
    > to take a longer view. Which sooner or later is going to happen hopefully.

    > My daughter was taught about the American revolution twice, once in the US
    > and the following year in Canada. Wonderful experience for a kid.
    > Provides for a great sense of perspective. Which most of us really are
    > missing. Comes across in many of our discussions too, with many people
    > simply and honestly regurgitating the party line.

So give us a couple of examples where facts were different, or differently
presented? Nex

Darkginger

Alan Pollock <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Darkginger <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > Alan Pollock <[email protected]> wrote
    > > <snip>
    > > >Nex
    > > Sorry, but I'm curious - what is this 'Nex' at the end of your posts? I
keep
    > > thinking it's 'next' which reads rudely! I'm sure it's not what you
mean,
    > > though, is it?
    > > Jo
    > Leftover from the days of 300 baud. Nexus, my original alias shortened, is
    > Nex. On a 40 column screen, one post might typically take two or three
    > screenfulls to read, so a quick reminder of the poster's name at the end
was
    > appreciated and shorter than a tag line or long sig (which would take
forever
    > at 300 baud). It stuck. Nex

Thanks for the explanation. It was bugging me!

Jo


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/03