Journalists or Americans?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

harimau #100 I am glad we are now talking at your level. Jackass.

Ref tahmed321 #: 76

[Gowardhan: I understand the Head-Lice Killing powder is on sale. Run and get it, and ask Jay or Harimou to mind your duty station at the Hindutva Morons Chowk Corner.]

How is the Friday Evening Circle Jerk at the local mosque coming along? Got enough participants? Urstruly wants to be a member of the club.

suxena #83,

I wasn`t talking to you, so just shush up and go braid your hair.

#96

SMP

``2. Indian intelligence ``

I like the best lol he he he he

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

thefridaytimes.com

TOP TEN CURRENT OXYMORONS:

10. Friendly troops

9. Silent majority

8. Taliban moderates

7. Humanitarian aid

6. Military control

5. Stable Afghan government

4. Mid-East peace

3. American diplomacy

2. Indian intelligence

1. Front-line reporting (as in: in front of the Marriott)

http://www.melvindurai.com/freespeech.htm

FREEDOM OF SPEECH TAKES A BEATING

While growing up in Zambia in the 1970s, I learned that it

was generally safer to kick a lion in a game park than to

criticize the president in public. Nothing but praise was

heaped on then-President Kenneth Kaunda, a man of such

integrity that he refused to be a dictator, insisting

instead on regular elections in which he would run -- with

amazing success -- against himself.

The suspense on election night was incredible. Would Kaunda

win again? Or would he lose to Kaunda? It was always too

close to call.

Despite the sham democracy, people were reluctant to

complain. They didn`t want their names transferred from the

voters list to the missing persons list.

The political climate has improved considerably in the

Central African nation, but I`d be surprised if Zambians can

speak their minds as freely as Americans. Few countries can

match the freedom of speech in America, where making fun of

the president isn`t just permitted, it`s highly recommended.

A virtual sport.

If there`s one thing Americans are always eager to share

with each other, it`s a Clinton or Bush joke. Even children

have fun with presidential jokes: ``Why did President Bush

panic when he spotted several ants walking across his desk?

Because he had heard about the ant tracks scare.``

As a writer and humorist, I cherish freedom of speech. It

allows me to express my views freely without worrying that I

might get in trouble with the government or, even worse,

with my wife.

Freedom of speech is one of America`s greatest virtues, but

it`s not quite as unfettered as I once thought. In the

aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, at least a

handful of Americans have been chastised for expressing

dissenting views. If you can`t bleed red, white and blue,

they`ve been told, go bleed somewhere else.

Seven television stations dropped the late night talk show

``Politically Incorrect`` after host Bill Maher decided to be

a little too politically incorrect. The comedian called past

U.S. missile attacks ``cowardly,`` a comment that some viewers

found politically insulting.

Maher later apologized, but to regain those seven stations,

he may have to change the name of his show to ``Politically

Innocuous.``

At least Maher kept his job. Columnists at two daily

newspapers were fired for criticizing Bush`s handling of the

terrorist attacks. The publisher of one of the papers tried

to appease readers by writing an opinion piece titled,

``Bush`s leadership has been superb.`` Ah, American journalism

at its finest.

On Sept. 10, Bush was fair game for ridicule; on Sept. 11,

he was Saint George the exalted one. Ready to slay Osama the

dragon.

Even colleges, traditionally a wellspring of debate, have

clamped down on errant voices. A library assistant at the

University of California at Los Angeles earned a five-day

suspension without pay for sending an email on a university

computer criticizing America`s support of Israel. He had

apparently forgotten to read the rules, which clearly state

that university computers are to be used for pro-Israel

purposes only.

A University of New Mexico professor received threats after

saying, on Sept. 11, ``Anyone who can blow up the Pentagon

has my vote.`` He has since apologized for being a ``jerk,``

noting that the U.S. Constitution`s guarantee of free speech

protects his ``right to be a jerk.`` He didn`t lose his job,

probably because he`s a tenured jerk.

Of course, the First Amendment to the Constitution forbids

only government interference in a person`s right to free

speech. Employers and others can apparently interfere all

they want.

This was funny

Bijli:

http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/oct/24spec.htm

“The penniless widow faced stiff opposition from the girl`s in-laws who refused to take Janaki back if she kept her babies. Yet, she refused to budge. After Janaki`s delivery in hospital, Chinnathayee brought the babies to her hut by bus, carrying them in a cloth market bag. She raised them till Janaki`s in-laws gave in and took her back. In Salem, Chungat took me to the house of Vijaya, a petty shopkeeper, who kept her fourth daughter after watching a street play on the evils of infanticide. At the Dharmapuri guesthouse where we were staying, many women came to proudly display the girl babies they had kept after seeing the plays organised under a Danida project. I also met Sarojini, a nurse who had saved hundreds of children in the villages where she had worked for over 15…”

…what is happening is sickening but as long as there are people like these women, there’s always hope…

Interesting article from Dr. Salman Shah on the posssibilities for the Pakistan economy, after Sep 11. I think Salman Shah is on the LUMS faculty.

``Many people don`t seem to realize that Pakistan`s economy is highly integrated in the world economy. Exports constitute roughly 17 percent of our GDP and imports are equivalent to another 19 percent of GDP. Thus external trade is around 35 percent of GDP. This is a much higher proportion than other countries like India....

If we don`t shoot ourselves in the foot, we can look forward to an era of great economic growth over the next decade or two. Growth, that can finally put us over the hump of grinding poverty and despair forever. I see this opportunity developing in phases over the next ten to fifteen years.......

The first impacts are already visible in the shape of rising value of the rupee, a bullish stock market and slight improvement in the real estate markets of the country. If this amount becomes a permanent feature of Pakistan`s external inflows, our persistent balance of payments shortfalls would effectively be over. For the first time the country would be in a position to provide external finances for its development program without external borrowing.

.....

If quota restrictions are removed and duties are eliminated it should not be difficult to double our exports in the next three years. This will add three to four percent to our economic growth rate and push the overall rate beyond six to seven percent. The added employment and wealth creation would have a secondary impact on domestic demand and the long drawn out economic stagnation will come to an end.

In the longer term timeframe of three to ten years, reconstruction of Afghanistan and opening up of oil and gas development in Central Asia will be an unparalleled opportunity for Pakistan. (complete article at http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/today/editor/opi6.htm)

Rsaxsena

Point taken.

shah 87

We try to solve Indian womens child birth problems. You try to get rid of obscurantism, ignorance and hatred in Pakistani Islam. Deal?

Scout:

``Stuka #51, ``However, Cspan provides coverage only. It does not, unlike CNN and Fox News, delve on commentary and editorialism.``

That`s all fine and dandy. But journalism, news reporting shouldn`t be like a buffet table so you can pick and choose what you cover. Commentary and editorialism shouldn`t be limited to one sided views only.``

OK, you make a point. However, you are now talking about the ideal, not the reality. The way the Media ``should`` be. I agree it isn`t. My question is why single out the Americans? Why CNN, and BBC, if every country`s media does the exact same thing?

hmmm... 80%?... 15%? hummm.. for what it`s worth, my own estimate, based on anecdotal but fairly broad-spectrum data is that the true number lies more or less smack band between those two.

...And then there`s taht issue of wording/ instrumental bias that Samina made referrence to, too.

Hey Shandana,

Where are you these days? Please feel free to contact me @ [myfullname]@hotmail.com. I`m presently in Karachi.

Pat.