| Author | Message | ||
     Brokeback Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6903 Registered: 10-2001  |
I've never seen a contest for children where the individuals involved refuse to list their names. This is a first and frankly as a parent I'm concerned for the well being of the youngsters you and your band of unknowns are making contact with. | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 942 Registered: 10-2005 |
maplescorp- While I don't give a rats ••• one way or the other, who did judge these essays by the way? Just curious... -SLK | ||
| maplescorp Citizen Username: Maplescorp Post Number: 132 Registered: 12-2005  |
Judges include members of SOMA Stop the War who are media professionals, college-level political science professors, professional freelance writers and editors, local activists, editorial directors, newspaper columnists, and others. We developed a rubric for judging that includes clarity of thought, factual accuracy, creativity, and persuasiveness. I've run many contests before for professional organizations and never have we felt the need or the responsibility to list the names of judges, other than to list qualifications and a scoring rubric. It's not mandatory. If you want to learn more about the organization, send an email to somastopthewar@yahoo.com, attend a meeting, or visit the website. But don't pretend you're making any sense by suggesting we're endangering kids' welfare somehow. We're having a meeting soon to judge all of the entries. It will take some time. If there's really a groundswell, I'm sure people would be happy to announce their names if you think I'm lying about the judges. If you don't think I'm lying and take me at my word that these are qualified judges, then you really should have no beef. There are high-school-age members of the group, by the way. Their parents are aware and fully supportive. Maybe you just don't trust your kids? | ||
| Guy Supporter Username: Vandalay Post Number: 1613 Registered: 8-2004  |
These are the celebrity judges.       | ||
| maplescorp Citizen Username: Maplescorp Post Number: 133 Registered: 12-2005 |
Now, that was funny. But you left off Bill Moyers. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 855 Registered: 10-2004  |
maplescorp - thanks for your dedication to the cause of peace and sanity in the United States. I for one will make every attempt to attend the rally on March 19th. As far as an essay contest requiring judges to identify themselves - the idea is ridiculous. I looked up Essay Contest on Google and in all the links I selected the judges names were not given to the public. In fact the judges for your essay have been identified as members of SOMA-CTSTW. I do believe that you described the judges professions and qualifications earlier in the thread as "SOMA Stop the War members, which include professional editors, media specialists, editorial consultants, and political science professors. As for SLK, I do believe his ego is out of control. The SLK Effect is nausea | ||
| Guy Supporter Username: Vandalay Post Number: 1614 Registered: 8-2004 |
Sorry, I left out two Bills:   | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1652 Registered: 7-2004  |
The SLK Effect = writing incessantly (and poorly) about myriad topics without knowing what you are talking about. Nothing ever of substance, just RNC talking points and exceptionally lame attempts at humor. | ||
| SoOrLady Citizen Username: Soorlady Post Number: 3051 Registered: 9-2003 |
Hoops - there are two groups participating in Be About Peace Day on March 19th: Maplescorp's group and South Mountain Peace Action (SMPA), Paul Sourvell's group. People often confuse the two or think that they are one in the same. They are not. I've seen both groups in action and I would recommend that you attend SMPA's events (please visit their web-site at http://www.beaboutpeace.com/) or attend both events and decide for yourself. | ||
| maplescorp Citizen Username: Maplescorp Post Number: 134 Registered: 12-2005 |
I agree with SOORLady's encouragement to educate yourself about the mutual goals and unique tactical approaches of each group, and decide to support one, both, or neither. It's not an "us" or "them" thing. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 858 Registered: 10-2004 |
SoORLady - thanks for the information. The SMPA looks like it is having its "Be About Peace" day on Saturday March 18th at the Maplewood Library and then at the Ethical Culture society. It appears that this is more of a family/childrens gathering in the afternoon. If my schedule allows I will try to make one of the events. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12725 Registered: 1-2003  |
SLK, there's a place for balanced debate, and there's a place for affirming your viewpoint. They're both legitimate activities. You don't illegitimize (if that's a word) one by calling for the other. | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 945 Registered: 10-2005 |
Tom-thank you, good points. RL, What, feeling a bit ignored? And what is your excuse? Using foul language and constant whining about Iraq is what you describe as "substance"? keep talking baby, you so kinky mon....turning me on.... | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1654 Registered: 7-2004 |
SLK: You're losing it, dude. Pull yourself together, maybe take some time off, and get back to us when you're more coherent. Also, MOL isn't a contest over who can post the most. Quality counts, too, and I'd encourage you to put some greater thought into it. | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 951 Registered: 10-2005 |
RL, You are resorting to personal atatcks and say I need a break? Whatever.... -SLK | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 769 Registered: 2-2004 |
Quality counts? You just made my day RL. Of course, quality is in the eye of the beholder as is just about every subject discussed on this board. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 569 Registered: 2-2003 |
A point of clarification: Be About Peace Day is being sponsored by South Mountain Peace Action on Saturday March 18th from 1-5 pm at the Maplewood Library and from 6-6:30 pm at the Ethical Culture Society. SMPA is the sole sponsor of the event. A range of local businesses are generously contributing iems for a Silent Auction that will be used to defray the costs of the event and to help fund future events by South Mountain Peace Action. As Hoops noted, the afternoon portion is family-oriented, featuring Arts and Crafts for Peace for children ages 2-and-up as well as entertainment. There will also be a letter-writing table for children and adults to express their views on peace to the President and Congress. This is our Second Annual Be About Peace Day. For photos of last year's event, go to www.BeAboutPeace.com. There's a link to last year's photos on the continuation page. The evening portion of Be About Peace Day will consist of a re-dedication of the peace memorial that was created at last year's Be About Peace day behind the Ethical Culture Society building. We'll re-dedicate the memorial to the memory of Augie Schroeder, the CHS graduate and Marine who was killed in Iraq last summer. At the re-dedication, we'll announce the conclusions of a report by South Mountain Peace Action and Families of the Fallen for Change, the group created by Augie Schroeder's parents, on our February 8th Public Forum: "A Responsible Withdrawal from Iraq." The report will be presented to both New Jersey Senators, our two Congressmen and the President. South Mountain Peace Action invites everyone to come and enjoy Be About Peace Day on March 18th. Please contact me at 973-763-9493 or email me at paul@beaboutpeace.com for further information. | ||
| cmontyburns Citizen Username: Cmontyburns Post Number: 1771 Registered: 12-2003  |
I have repeatedly been confused about what "Be About Peace" means. (You're against the Iraq war? All wars? Some wars? None of the above?) So I went to beaboutpeace.com, and on the "about us" page for South Mountain Peace Action, I found this near the top: "The abolition of all nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction was our founding principle and it remains at the top of our agenda." I haven't seen much out of the group on this topic. Can you direct me to your recent work on this area with North Korea, Iran, India, Pakistan, or any of the other high-risk nuclear countries? I clicked around on the site, but just about everything I find seems to be about getting troops out of Iraq. (Disclaimer: I was, and am, against the war in Iraq, and think Bush is the worst president in the history of organized government. But I think hypocrisy is no slouch, either, and like to give it equal attention.) | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 961 Registered: 10-2005 |
Thanks for this post cmontyburns. So the US and is allies went into Iraq to rid the world of their WMDs and that was wrong? What am I missing here? So besides war, how else are we suppose to get rid of WMDs, ask nicely over a cup of hot chocolate? War ended facism, tyranny and slavery. It is not always the wrong option. As long as world has aggressive tyrants, war peace can't exist.... -SLK | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 571 Registered: 2-2003 |
cmonty, "Be About Peace," is the phrase on South Mountain Peace Action's lawn signs and T-shirts, which is counterposed to the word "War," which appears continuously in the background. There are a number of photos of the lawn signs and T-shirts on the website www.BeAboutPeace.com The signs first appeared in January 2003, when President Bush was urging the country to support War, although a peaceful alternative -- allowing the UN inspections to continue -- was available. This distinction between Be About Peace vs War expresses the meaning of the phrase to me. Of course it's a phrase that can mean different things to different people. Regarding the abolition of nuclear weapons, you are correct that we have not been very active on this issue recently, although our parent organizations Peace Action in Washington and New Jersey Peace Action in Montclair, have been. Our last effort in this area was participation in a demonstation calling for abolition of all nuclear weapons in May of 2005. There's a photo taken at the demonstration of me with Al Levin, who recently passed, on our website. Prior to the May demonstration, we petitioned, tabled and held meetings for the Nuclear Freeze movement in the 1980s and for Abolition of all Nuclear Weapons in the 1990s. In the 1980s, the Maplewood Township Committee, under Mayor Grasmere, passed two resolutions that we introduced -- supporting a Nuclear Freeze and a Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban. Yes, South Mountain Peace Action opposes the spread of nuclear weapons to any country, especially Iran. I was quoted recently in the Jewish News of New Jersey on this issue http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/020206/njLocalEfforts.html Your suggestion of "hypocrisy" is misplaced. We haven't been as active as we should on the nuclear questions because we've been pre-occupied with the issues of Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The issue of abolition of nuclear weapons remains on our agenda and we will engage it again at the first opportunity. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 573 Registered: 2-2003 |
SLK, As I argued on this board in January, February and March 2003, if the US had evidence of WMDs in Iraq, there was nothing preventing the administration from giving that evidence to the UN so they could seize it and find Iraq in violation of UN resolutions. However, we had no evidence of WMDs (Colin Powell's entire presentation to the UN consisted of distortions and falsehoods as he now concedes), so instead, Bush launched a war to pre-empt the UN from declaring that Iraq was free of nuclear weapons, which would have made it much more difficult for him to carry out his objective of conquering Iraq and making it a client state, as I posted above. | ||
| Duncan Supporter Username: Duncanrogers Post Number: 5843 Registered: 12-2001  |
I didn't know Maplewood had nukes. Or is it Millburn that poses the most immediate threat to our local security? Not for nothing but what was the Maplewood Town Council doing passing resolutions on issues that have nothing to do with the function of our local gov't? Not that I disagree with the stated objectives of such resolutions, but that that is not something that our TC should be engaged in as it is purely symbolic and largely ineffective. | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 965 Registered: 10-2005 |
Paul- A client state? That was the entire goal? Are you Fox Mulder in disguise? A chunk of the intelligence the US acted on was that of the UN. The UN enacted Resolution 1441 and then bailed on it. So we should trust the UN to fix this issue? I love this " don't seem em must not have em" attitude amongst the war dissenters regarding WMDs. The entire world thought he had them. Be against the war if you wish, but please don't grasp every position that you believe strengthens your position, especially the incredibly naieve ones. Paul, in case you haven't noticed, the UN is a farce, a bad joke....silence in Dafur, Iraq, the Palestine (of course unless it is against Israel)...you want me to trust a entity that has tyrants on the Human Rights Comission? Please.... You think with the Oil for Food Scandal some of you would rethink your postions.... -SLK | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 574 Registered: 2-2003 |
Duncan, A discussion of this issue arose over the Maplewood Township Committee's resolution (initiated by South Mountain Peace Action) in February 2003 asking the President to allow the UN weapons inspections to continue. One argument made at the time was that a Township Committee member is obligated to support the US Constitution, and under the Constitution the President is obligated to honor the UN Charter, which is a treaty we have signed. At the time of the Resolution it was obvious that the President planned to launch war in violation of the UN Charter. Hundreds of town and city governing bodies passed such resolutions in the months before the war, including most major US cities. The resolutions were symbolic, but they contributed to the national opposition to a war of choice. This past October, South Mountain Peace Action won support from the entire Township Committee and South Orange Board of Trustees, as well as the Columbia HS Student Council and nearly all of the Seton Hall Student Government Association for a public letter endorsing the Feingold Resolution for a timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq. The letter indicated that the elected members were signing as private citizens and not in their official capacities. The letter was thus not an official document, but was endorsed by virtually all local elected officials (2 of the 20 SHU Senators declined to sign). The letter was presented to Senators Corzine and Lautenberg by a delegation that included representatives from each group at the end of October. In my view, the impact of such a letter is virtually the same as an official resolution, especially when support is unanimous or near-unanimous as in this case. I discussed this question in my talk at the Ethical Culture Society last Sunday: http://www.beaboutpeace.com/archives/2006/02/talk_by_paul_su.html There's also a link on the bottom of South Mountain Peace Action's homepage to listings of Maplewood and South Orange as "Cities for Peace" as a result of the October 2005 letter and the 2003 resolution www.BeAboutPeace.com | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 967 Registered: 10-2005 |
Duncan- I am with you on this. Thank god that the MTC passed such a resolution. I feel so much safer from the evil diabolical dastardly plans of Millburn now... Pretentiousness at its best.... Paul, please stop "protecting the Constitution," because in my eyes you don't.... -SLK | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 575 Registered: 2-2003 |
SLK, The President's violation of the Constitution has created a very tragic situation for our country and the world. The tragedy has impacted some families much worse than others. The patriotic course of action is to correct the situation and make sure it never happens again. That is why I respectfully decline your request. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 137 Registered: 1-2006 |
PS knows the Constitution, and brooks no opinions to the contrary when it comes to his self-authored document. He also speaks for the whole world. His self-righteous conceit is a sign that he needs to take a break, so the rest of us can blow up the planet, unimpeded by his wisdom. He reads like a depressed Wilsonian on Paxil. Beaboutreality. jd | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 138 Registered: 1-2006 |
I re-read the heading for this post, and was profoundly disturbed by PS's attempt to usurp the thoughts of my generation. He does not speak for "my generation." Peter Townsend does. jd | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 576 Registered: 2-2003 |
Hi Joel, Personal remarks like those you've made are a sure sign that the writer cannot rebut the issues raised. I'll take your post in that spirit. Best regards. | ||
| The SLK Effect Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 968 Registered: 10-2005 |
Paul, I have asked this multiple times but you seem to ignore it. Don't you think you may possibly be oversimplifying these constitutional issues a bit? Let's backup.... In a nutshell, please tell me how you believe Dubya violated the constitution and we'll take it from there... I really need to mop the floors.... -SLK | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 14675 Registered: 10-2001  |
SLK, It goes something like this: Article VI Clause 2 of the US Constitution says the following: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding So the US Constitution says, if you sign a treaty, it's the law of the land. In Article 42 of the UN Charter it says the following:
So because we signed the UN Charter in 1945 and the charter is a treaty, Bush violated the Constitution by using force without explicit approval from the UN, something that is laid out in Articles 39-51 in the UN Charter. Have I got that correct Paul? | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 577 Registered: 2-2003 |
Sbenois, I think Article 2 paragraph 4 and Article 51 are more relevant to why President Bush's order to launch war against Iraq violated the Constitution with regard to the United Nations Charter. Article 2 is the fundamental law in international relations that proscribes acts of war by one country against another. Article 51 provides the one exception: self-defense. Article 42 relates to the right of the Security Council to authorize the use of military force. Only Article 51 authorizes individual countries to use military force against other countries. So in my view, Bush violated Article 2 and by admitting there was no imminent threat from Iraq, he has admitted that he was not acting under Article 51. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10868 Registered: 5-2001 |
This is another case where Paul and his group have gone off the deep end, yah know the one way over on the left side of the pool. I probably dislike the Bush Administration as much as Paul does. However, I also think that the UN is basically disfunctional and corrupt. The thought of the United States, or any other country for that matter, ceding its sovergnity to that group is truly frightening. We are also, very unfortunately, stuck with Iraq. As Secretary Powell put it, "you break it, you own it". While the main reason for going to war has proven incorrect, we still have to put the friggin' country back together. Suggestions that we cede that task to the UN are pretty scary. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 578 Registered: 2-2003 |
Bob K, If Bush had supported the UN Charter and allowed the inspections to continue, the world would be a much safer place today. The UN can be an effective organization if the US honors its Charter, sets an example for other countries and shows leadership. Obviously we have a long way to go, as the dominant attitude in Washington is the neocon vision of the New American Century in which the US imposes its will on other countries through military force. That vision has proved to be an illusion. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10871 Registered: 5-2001 |
Paul, I wouldn't argue that the inspections shouldn't have been allowed to continue. However, given Saddam's obstructionism I doubt it would have made much of a difference in the Bushies' decision to go to war. If the United States honored the Charter, we would be the only country to do so. Remember Oil for Food? In the UN all countries vote their national interests. | ||
| sylvester the investor Citizen Username: Mummish Post Number: 118 Registered: 6-2004 |
Most, if not all students carry the bias of their parents. Even in high school, kids really do not know their left from their right (not even meant to be political, but now that I think of it, it is kind of appropriate). So you are sponsering an essay contest which is basically asking the kids of the parents who oppose the war to chime in. What good is an essay that is already biased. You really are not asking for the childs thoughts, as they do not have any of their own. Even if you say that high school kids can think on their own, what good is it to have a 5th grader write about the war. Kids (even most college kids) do not read a paper or watch the news and are completely uninformed, therefore their opinions are worthless and only regurgitate the garbage forced on them by their parents. This is an complete waste of time. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 579 Registered: 2-2003 |
Bob, I agree that Bush had decided to launch war against Iraq regardless of whether there were WMDs or not. Saddam wasn't putting up any resistance to the inspections and Unmovic was given unfettered access to all of Iraq. It had inspected 400 sites at the time Bush ordered war. Food for Oil was an example of corrupt officials, but the scale of the corruption was far less than what we see in the US Congress or in the disappearance of about $9 billion in US funds destined for Iraq. The fact that there was corruption in a UN program doesn't mean we should reject the institution. Similarly, because there is corruption in Congress, we shouldn't reject the institution of Congress. The United Nations is merely a mechanism through which the nations of the world can act. Its effectiveness depends on the commitment and leadership of its member nations. Neocon ideology advocates US world domination through military force so it's no surprise that neocons and others of similar bent have engaged in a sustained campaign against the United Nations, because the UN Charter puts limits on what an individual country can do, most important it proscribes acts of war unless taken in self-defense. This puts the UN Charter in direct conflict with neocon ideology which advocates projection of American power through our military pre-eminence (war). This ideology is being applied in Iraq. It finds its ultimate application in the US Space Command's Vision 2020 which outlines a program of space and ground weapons to dominate the earth (full spectrum dominance) http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usspac/lrp/ch02.htm | ||
| joeltfk Citizen Username: Joeltfk Post Number: 366 Registered: 8-2001  |
Sylvester, With due respect, I have worked with kids for many years. I've worked for a major television network devoted to kids, and I have founded a major website devoted to delivering NEWS to kids. I have spoken before groups of graduating kids, and kids in classrooms. I have read hundreds of emails from kids and created a major kid report program in which kids have done everything from interviewing the President Bush privately to attending the political conventions on behalf of CBS News. That all kids don't care about what's going on enough to comment on it is a myth, just like the myth that all kids hate school. Now that's all about 5th graders. High school kids in particular are VERY sensitized to political events and are known for having their own opinions, separate from their parents (ever heard of The Beatles?). While parents are a strong influence, the essays I've read represent clear personal opinions, gounded in personal philosophies informed by the news. I'd recommend you come to the rally just to hear the winning essays delivered by the students. My guess is you haven't really spent that much time around real kids. Have you? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 140 Registered: 1-2006 |
Ahhh, can't get through a day without "world domination through military force...." Just you wait, first the world, then you. jd | ||
| The Oracle of MOL Supporter Username: Oracle_of_mol Post Number: 221 Registered: 2-2005  |
Do none of you mortals recall Joel Dranove from his "DWM" days? Do you not recall the awkwardly-stated positions, the chest-thumping beligerance of tone, the gaping holes in his "thought process"? Can these earmarks of DWM have simply escaped your notice because Joel has been a silent lurker for such a pitiously short stretch? Given his posting history, none should be surprised by his current blitherings. You all claim political fluency, yet fail to detect the accent of the Dead White Male. Laughable, then and now. Go in peace. --The Oracle of MOL |
