quote: The newspaper also noted in that interview that its reporters were told that some soldiers who had complained of morale problems had faced disciplinary actions known as Article 15s, which can result in reprimand, extra duties and forfeiture of pay.
So, a private can't complain about conditions, but a three-star general can tell the world that the US is in a holy war against Muslims, who worship idols?
Where is the Oohhm page again?
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."
It's amazing how much ignorance and bigotry is expressed in this statement.
"Allah" is a word that means God. It actually shares a root with "Elohim" which is more than can be said about the English "God"
Muslims have never ever EVER worshipped idols. that's why there are little to no Arab/Islamic paintings, because they considered such things to be idols.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Muslims have never ever EVER worshipped idols."
In fact, one of the more scripturally just criticisms of mainstream Christianity by Muslims is, in fact, that most Christians -- with their paintings of Jesus and sculptures of the Crucifixion -- ARE idolaters.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kayla, I suppose that both sides of the political spectrum are guilty of it, but it sure seems that the right wing has made hypocrisy into an art. They are willing to hide behind the ideal of "free speech" when someone in the military makes a controversial but right wing statement but when anyone in the military says something that detracts from their agenda, its treason. The only real ideal they value is their own ideology. Truth and justice are only important if they conveniently support their preconcieved notions.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
I don't know what mailing list I'm on, but both Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have been upping the number of "We're so glad you're one of us; please send money." they are sending me.
Anyway, what surprised me about the ACLU was how partisan it was. The letter was basically an anti-Bush diatribe and a demand to bring all soldiers home right now. Not impressive. Do they even pretend to serve liberty alone anymore?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
katharina: it's a fund raising letter by a flunky. That's how it works in non profit orgs, in my experience. Hence, it's a letter written how that flunky thinks, and it's written in an attempt to appeal to what the flunky sees as the ACLU's most likely to donate audience.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Do they even pretend to serve liberty alone anymore?"
Perhaps they have concluded, as all right-thinking people have (*sarcastic grin*), that serving liberty now requires active opposition to the administration.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fugu, the "we're incompetent; please ignore the dust" is a worse condemnation of them than if the letter was sincere. Why should I send money to an organization that lets the morons run the asylum?
posted
No, they're a highly decentralized organization that tries to put as much of their money into legal funds as possible, leaving fund raising (unfortunately) for an afterthought. Many admirable organizations unfortunately rely on similar fund raising efforts. Until recently, the red cross did. Many admirable christian groups (I'm thinking entire denominations) have simialrlyl awful fundraising/publicity.
That they are incompetent at fund raising is not a condemnation of their ability to defend liberty. I'm sure I can come up with things you're incompetent at, but that doesn't mean you aren't skilled at something else.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
kat, I’d emphasize the other part of what fugu said – it’s not that it’s a moron writing the letter, it’s that the letter is designed to appeal to the audience most likely to contribute. And that would be the more radical group. People who like rational, well-reasoned discourse aren’t as likely to be influenced by direct-mail campaigns anyway.
Around here at least the actual work of the ACLU seems pretty balanced. They’re defending a student’s right to lead a weekly prayer meeting around the school flagpole before school and opposing a school district that wants to have a formal prayer read over the loud-speaker before football games.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"We suck at fundraising; it means we're busy with other things!"
Nope. I work for a non-profit. Fundraising is important - it is by far the most personla public face those who are not directly affected by the actions of the organization will see. Granted, fundraising is not my organizations best area, but there are still serious guidelines as to tone and what you can and cannot put in fundraising letters. Can you imagine getting a fundraising letter from the Boy Scouts that says "You must give us money or your son will turn out like that scumbag Clinton." It would SO inappropriate.
dkw: How did I get on a mailing list of people-to-whom-jingoism-will-appeal? I'd love to know. *thinks*
posted
I'm not saying all non profits are run like that, I'm saying a lot are. I quite agree that fundraising is important. However, of the NPOs I've gotten to know well enough to know about their fundraising and how it works, about half have no coherent approach to fundraising (and a good part of the rest have only a mediocre campaign). It results in a lot of wasted effort, unfortunately. But don't expect good fundraising to be common.
Besides, as I pointed out, fundraising is not what the ACLU's primary purpose is. Judge them by how well they achieve their primary purpose. I don't want people judging me on how good my handwriting is, because it sucks, but I have to do it sometimes, so people do see it. NPOs have to do fundraising, even if they suck at it.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That I can’t tell you. But I’m on a lot of mailing lists that I really don’t think I’m the target audience for. The whole principle of mass mailings is that you send to as many people as possible, and a small percentage will respond. Stirring up a greater frenzy in those who are likely to write a check is worth alienating you [kat], since you weren’t likely to donate anyway. (I’d like to note that I don’t actually agree with this philosophy of fundraising, I think it damages the overall mission of the organization, but it is effective as a fundraising strategy.)
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that the ACLU has realized that the presence of the Bush administration in general, and John Ashcroft in particular scares the bejeezus out of many of their members, and that they can effectively be used as boogy men* to scare a fairly large portion of their demographic into contributing more.
*can somebody be called a boogy man, though, when the threat they pose is real? I'm thinking of Ashcroft here; is anyone here going to argue that the Patriot Act is constitutional?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
But Tom, LEFT-WING jingoism? Did anyone really look at "Boy Scouts of America" in my employer box and think, "She's gonna love a letter bashing Ashcroft for being religious."?
I mean, what HAVE I been doing that put me on that list? I don't get any mass mail that's supposed to appeal to right-wing. I'm vaguely insulted. Why not?
My impression of the ACLU is that they are much saner outside of Utah, but inside of Utah, their principle target is the church, and they're insane. I'm tempted to sign my dad up on their mailing list as a prank. That would be so funny.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
*places Chicken Soup for the NASCAR Soul prominently on Noemon's desk; surrounds book with soppy tissues*
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
kat, shall we discuss some of the mail I get -- snail and e -- and the target groups they seem to think I belong to? Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
*skips happily*![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
kat![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Wasn't it?![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
