THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM IS A FRAUD

[Michael Ernest]

See, this is what's so cool about Meaningless Drivel. *I* was kidding with the grammar lesson. The rest of you are starting to frighten me.

[Mapraputa Is]

We just square accounts with each other

[Nanhesru Ningyake]

I kind of knew my diction was screwed up. Honestly, some of it, like 'is deemeth' was intentional And the use of 'aforementioned' and the slash (/) can be classified as an NNism, my signature
Jim, you are now, officially, JavaRanch's own William Safire.
I am truly in exalted company here. That's why I am not going anywhere, Tony

[This message has been edited by Nanhesru Ningyake (edited November 03, 2001).]

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Txxxy Axxxxa:
OMAR KHAN:
You called me a Fascist so I deleted your post.

QED

[This message has been edited by OMAR KHAN (edited November 05, 2001).]

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Txxy Axxxxa:
Omar, Nanhesru, please:
... it is not the best outlet for your anti American hatred.

I should like to know how you did infer that I am anti-american?
I am just anti-fascist.
I do no tolerate intollerance, censorship and abuse of power.
I think that unbiased javarancers can judge by themselves.
[This message has been edited by OMAR KHAN (edited November 05, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by OMAR KHAN (edited November 05, 2001).]

[Jason Menard]

To be fair, since this is a private site, they can censor whatever they like. It is important to keep this in mind. The owners of the site are allowed carte blanche to determine what content is on it, that includes these forums. As such the sheriffs and bartenders are the designated agents of the site owners charged with carrying out their policies. They apparently are allowed a lot of latitude in this.
For example, I do not like that they have disallowed the posting of all images regardless of content. I think that in certain circumstances this constitutes censorship. On the other hand, I do recognize their right to do so, and I accept it, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter. If it bothered me to the point I couldn't handle it, I would simply go to another site.
As for abuse of his power, I guess that could be debated. The sheriffs and bartenders are undoubtedly told to remove offensive postings. They have to be the judge of what is offensive. If some impartiality is evident in carrying out those duties, it is enough just to point it out and not make a federal case out of it.
With recent events in the world, some of the Americans find certain things particularly offensive that they would have undoubtedly overlooked before 9/11. The events have touched different people in different ways. What may seem like innocent comments to a non-American can be taken far differently than what may have been intended by an American. I'm not going to go look through all your past posts and pass my own judgement on whether or not I feel you are anti-American, but I do seem to remember you being on the opposite side of me on some of the arguments here. It is possible that some found your past comments anti-American and offensive and felt compelled to take action.
My advice is just deal with events as they are, learn from it, and press on.

[Paul Stevens]

Omar,
This is being discussed in the JavaRanch forum if you would like to comment on it there. Your call.

[Shama Khan]

Originally posted by Nanhesru Ningyake:
[B]Shama Khan has often been a poster-child for moderation and rational thinking among the Muslims here, compared to some of the radicals we've seen. So I am trying hard to understand what she is saying... is she really supporting Osama bin Laden? She just seems convinced that there's no real proof that Osama was the mastermind behind the attacks on America. If that can be interpreted as "support" for Osama, it can then be extrapolated as "support" for his ideology, which among other grand plans, includes harming America. So the point here is: does an American citizen have a right to support an ideology promoting harm to his/her own country?
I may have gone off on a tangent here; so perhaps Shama can explain this better.

Nanhesru,
I haven't been here in awhile after being accused of being a muslim extremist. Anyway, as you can see in the following thread, http://www.javaranch.com/ubb/Forum32/HTML/001337.html
Andrew Shafer does back me up in my statement that Tony Blair did say so and so. I had read it as a headline which may have kept me from the details that another posted later explained.
I didn't say I was convinced of anything. I said only what I had heard about Blair's statement. As you may have realized that muslims all over the world have had to deal with the challenge of the current events.
You may not believe it but when the collapse of WTC occurred, my first thoughts were that the religious leaders in the muslim world (ie. the local mosque) do not speak out enough against terrorism and if they had done so then muslims wouldn't have to become as nervous whenever the terrorist acts took place. My thoughts were later represented in muslim and non-muslim media alike. I think they are learning fast now this major atrocity of WTC collapse has been committed.
As to supporting, Usama Bin Laden. No, I don't support him because he is misusing Islam to gain his personal objectives. Then why would I ask for proof! well, because there are bombs being dropped in Afghanistan because of the allegations made against him. As I have made clear in previous emails - no one wins in a war - only innocents die. Violence never helps any situation - it only exacerbates and prolongs the problems.
I can't possibly support his idealogy because I believe life is sacred (suicide is a sin), jihaad (as in fight against an oppressor) is declared by heads of state only, fatwas can be decreed only by religious leaders - Usama Bin Laden does not fit into any of what I stated above so I don't support him.
However, I will say that we in U.S. get a lot of propoganda about the Muslim world in much the same way as the Muslim world gets a whole lot of propaganda about the U.S.
Another reason I believe this strongly is because I still remember all the hogwash we were fed in school about the Russians. Now that Russia is no longer seen as a major competitor in the bid to rule the world, there are many Russian immigrants here. After all the hogwash we were taught, I have come to learn otherwise about my Russian-American friends.
I have learned it the hard way that we can not believe all of what we hear or say because I have come to know through reading (again on the guardian) that when U.S. started bombing Afghanistan, the Pentagon soon afterwards bought all the rights to pictures taken by the only civilian satellite out there. They bought the rights rather than ban the showing of the pictures because they may have been challenged in the courts by the media. They did this so that the American population will not find out about the real extent of civilian casualties that occur and therefore will not rescind the support of war against Afghanistan. By the way, there are also more casualties among the U.S. force than has been reported.
When we know this kind of atmosphere exists, why can I not question it. I don't think it makes me un-American!
I hope I have explained some of what you asked.
Shama
[This message has been edited by Shama Khan (edited November 13, 2001).]

[Real American]

For those of you who claimed to be American (naturalized, fake passport, birth, etc�) if you are not happy with what we real Americans are doing to the taliban and bin laden then be a real man (or woman) and move to Afghanistan to join your hero bin laden. Just make sure you bring all your pro-bin laden friends with you.

[Jason Menard]

Shama,
Glad you are back.

By the way, there are also more casualties among the U.S. force
than has been reported.

May I ask why you say this? Just like any piece of information one gets on either side of the conflict, one needs to make careful judgements on its probable validity.
The US military does not hide casualties. They may not always be forthcoming about the causes of the casualties, but they do not leave them unreported. People do have families, and it is kind of difficult to hide the fact from them if their loved one was killed.

Violence never helps any situation - it only exacerbates and prolongs the problems.

Please read this thread and then please tell me what you think some realistic alternatives are. It sounds like you may be advocating either inaction or that we bow to their demands, but I'm not sure. In any case it sounds like you have some alternatives so please read that thread and then tell me what you think our course of action should be.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Real American:

For those of you who claimed to be American (naturalized, fake passport, birth, etc�) if you are not happy with what we real Americans are doing to the taliban and bin laden then be a real man (or woman) and move to Afghanistan to join your hero bin laden. Just make sure you bring all your pro-bin laden friends with you.

If you're going to be beligerant, at least have the cajones to post using your normal registered name.

[Gareth]

It has taken me a while to read through this thread, and what is quite apparent is that America is picking and chosing on who they wish to call terrorists. Bin Laden's only mistake was to carry out the attack on the American soil, he allegedly was behid the attacks in Africa. Could it be that if the a similar attack had been carried out on London, Frankfurt, Rome, Hong Kong, Tokyo or Kuala Lumpa, the current action in Afghanistan would not be taking place.
I believe that for many years America has turned a blind eye to world terrorism as and when it suited its own needs or they could call the terrorist 'freedom fighters'.
American funded IRA freedom fighters are already selling their know how across the world in exchange for heroin and cocaine, how long will it be before this knowledge is passed onto other groups closer to American homeland.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Gareth Penn:
It has taken me a while to read through this thread, and what is quite apparent is that America is picking and chosing on who they wish to call terrorists. Bin Laden's only mistake was to carry out the attack on the American soil, he allegedly was behid the attacks in Africa. Could it be that if the a similar attack had been carried out on London, Frankfurt, Rome, Hong Kong, Tokyo or Kuala Lumpa, the current action in Afghanistan would not be taking place.

Well, I can't say about Hong Kong and Kuala Lampur, but if London, Frankfurt, Rome, or Tokyo were the target, you could probably expect basically the same results. The UK, Germany, and Italy are members of NATO, and as such we are treaty bound to take action if another NATO nation is attacked, under Article 5 of the NATO charter. If Tokyo were attacked, I am pretty certain we have a mutual defense treaty with them of some kind, which would have been activated had they been attacked by a foreign entity.
As for us picking and choosing who we call terrorists, I believe the FBI has a long list of worldwide groups who we consider terrorists. And yes, the IRA is surely on that list. Right now however the focus is on international terrorism, not domestic terrorism.

I believe that for many years America has turned a blind eye to world terrorism as and when it suited its own needs or they could call the terrorist 'freedom fighters'.

Really? We've turned a blind eye to international terrorism have we? You might want to ask Libya about that. Or maybe Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Or Black September. The list goes on. I am also unaware of any international movement of freedom fighters. By definition I think freedom fighters must be domestic.

American funded IRA freedom fighters are already selling their know how across the world in exchange for heroin and cocaine, how long will it be before this knowledge is passed onto other groups closer to American homeland.

You seem to be misinformed. The US government does not send funds to the IRA. There are citizens in the US who are sympathizers who donate money as individuals. There is a large Irish Catholic population in the US, particularly in the North Eastern states. Some of these families undoubtedly have sympathy for the Catholic view of things over there. But be very, very clear that these are individuals and in no way represent national policy.
[This message has been edited by Jason Menard (edited November 13, 2001).]

[Real American]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
If you're going to be beligerant, at least have the cajones to post using your normal registered name.

I am not belligerant anyone. I am just provide the pro-bin laden with an option. I feel sorry for you if you think you got a big cajones by just registering your name.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Real American:
I am not belligerant anyone. I am just provide the pro-bin laden with an option. I feel sorry for you if you think you got a big cajones by just registering your name.

Registering doesn't show you have big brass ones, but making provocative statements while cowering like a frightened child and hiding behind an unregistered name certainly shows a lack of them.
What it also shows is that you have no commitment in your own words and thoughts, and that you are ashamed to have them associated with the name you normally use here. It shows therefore that you are not to be taken seriously and that since you don't stand by what you say, nobody should give what you have to say a second thought.
Now the way your words came across to me it sounded like you were taking a shot at people who haven't been American several generations back, and by calling yourself 'real American, you were implying that they were less so. If that's what you were implying, that's just a bad attitude. Your family were most likely immigrants once too (assuming you're not 100% pure blood Native American). If that's not what you meant to say, then one of two things happened: (1) I simply misunderstood you, (2) you need to do a better job choosing your words.

if you are not happy with what we real Americans are doing to the taliban and bin laden

And I just have to ask this.... what exactly are you doing to the Taliban and bin Laden?
All I'm trying to say is if you are trying to be provocative or insulting, feel free, but at least try to be a (real) man about it and take some responsibility for your words.
[This message has been edited by Jason Menard (edited November 13, 2001).]

[cowering frightened child]

Nanhesru,
I haven't been here in awhile after being accused of being a muslim extremist. Anyway, as you can see in the following thread, http://www.javaranch.com/ubb/Forum32/HTML/001337.html
Andrew Shafer does back me up in my statement that Tony Blair did say so and so. I had read it as a headline which may have kept me from the details that another posted later explained.
Yeah, wouldn�t want a little thing such as �details� to get in your way. Don�t bother with �truth� either as that may not always support your opinion.
I didn't say I was convinced of anything. I said only what I had heard about Blair's statement. As you may have realized that muslims all over the world have had to deal with the challenge of the current events.
Yes, but they are not the only ones. This is not just a Muslim issue but it seems to me Muslims are making it out that way.

You may not believe it but when the collapse of WTC occurred, my first thoughts were that the religious leaders in the muslim world (ie. the local mosque) do not speak out enough against terrorism
That was/is my thought as well. It seems not only do many not speak out against terrorism many support it.
and if they had done so then muslims wouldn't have to become as nervous whenever the terrorist acts took place.
Yup, those poor Muslims. They are the true victims in this tragedy�.. Why is it all about Islam? Is Islam terrorism? Do these attacks and terrorists actually represent Islam? Why does it seem there is great support for the attacks throughout the Muslim world and that includes countries that are no Middle Eastern?
My thoughts were later represented in muslim and non-muslim media alike. I think they are learning fast now this major atrocity of WTC collapse has been committed.
Well if they are finally (after 2 months) learning about this I have hope for you with facts as well. I just am not sure of your timeline.
As to supporting, Usama Bin Laden. No, I don't support him because he is misusing Islam to gain his personal objectives. Then why would I ask for proof! well, because there are bombs being dropped in Afghanistan because of the allegations made against him. As I have made clear in previous emails - no one wins in a war - only innocents die. Violence never helps any situation - it only exacerbates and prolongs the problems.
The thing you need to remember is that this is not the only attack he is suspected of being involved in. He has ADMITTED to other attacks in the past including the embassy bombings in Africa. The problem is that if we ignore terrorism it will just continue to grow. Something must be done to save lives in the future.

I can't possibly support his idealogy because I believe life is sacred (suicide is a sin), jihaad (as in fight against an oppressor) is declared by heads of state only, fatwas can be decreed only by religious leaders - Usama Bin Laden does not fit into any of what I stated above so I don't support him.
But the Taliban does and it called for a Jihad. Do you support them?
However, I will say that we in U.S. get a lot of propoganda about the Muslim world in much the same way as the Muslim world gets a whole lot of propaganda about the U.S.
Except two months earlier? As for it being propaganda you yourself are confirming many of my opinions about the Muslim world. You have stated that YOU feel �that the religious leaders in the muslim world (ie. the local mosque) do not speak out enough against terrorism� and I feel the same way. Then I ask myself why? And the answer I come up with is that they at the very least accept the terrorism or even encourage it.

Another reason I believe this strongly is because I still remember all the hogwash we were fed in school about the Russians. Now that Russia is no longer seen as a major competitor in the bid to rule the world, there are many Russian immigrants here. After all the hogwash we were taught, I have come to learn otherwise about my Russian-American friends.
Just because your Russian American friends are great people does not mean that the Soviet Union was Utopia. Stalin was responsible for the deaths of more people than Hitler and was in many, many ways much worse than Hitler. Sure the US did some stupid things during the cold war. But I think that Russians will be better for it in the future. We make mistakes but also have the capacity to learn from those mistakes.

I have learned it the hard way that we can not believe all of what we hear or say because I have come to know through reading (again on the guardian)
Do you read it or just the headlines? I use multiple sources and formulae my own opinion. But silly me, I also read those pesky articles!
that when U.S. started bombing Afghanistan, the Pentagon soon afterwards bought all the rights to pictures taken by the only civilian satellite out there.
Is this illegal?
They bought the rights rather than ban the showing of the pictures because they may have been challenged in the courts by the media.
WOW! And your proof of this is? There are dozens of reasons that they could have done this and most of them are intelligence and safety related. Why would you let CNN do a free detailed analysis of your campaign so that the enemy could use it against you? That is just stupid. Also the US may need these satellites to do target assessment and MINIMIZE the loss of innocent life. Though it may be a fact that they purchased the rights you do not know WHY. Please admit this.

They did this so that the American population will not find out about the real extent of civilian casualties that occur and therefore will not rescind the support of war against Afghanistan. By the way, there are also more casualties among the U.S. force than has been reported.
War sucks. People die. Just look at New York on Sept. 11, 2001. Your statement is just conjecture because you have no proof of WHY they purchased the rights. But don�t let facts stand in the way of what you WISH to believe.
I would also like to see a valid source for the casualties BTW.
When we know this kind of atmosphere exists, why can I not question it. I don't think it makes me un-American!
Well that depends on WHY you question. If it is only because you are Muslim and that is your only concern that is un-American. You have to realize that Americans have the right to live without being murdered no matter what your religion thinks. That this is not just a Muslim issue and that supporting the war against terrorism is not supporting a war against Islam��well unless terrorism is what Islam is.
I hope I have explained some of what you asked.
Shama
Nope, but I didn�t ask. Have a nice day

[Jacob George]

Dear all,
I know that things were very bad for American people and I personally feel very bad about it. Who ever behind this attack should be punished. There is no doubt regarding this.
What I am concerned about is the present course of actions taken by US and its allies to wipe off terrorism. Are we people creating more and more terrorists in the course of actions(I mean war)?? I think this is a point we should consider seriously . In a war like this, many innocent people also gets killed (which is inevitable) along with these terrorists/extremists; Their relatives have nothing except hatred for US in their mind for they have done no harm to you people. And its perfectly normal that these people turns anti-US.. Are'nt u people actually creating new terrorists in the course of demolishing a few.
So I thinks events are just trolling. Can't this be stopped??? :-(
PS: NOBODY IS BORN AS A TERRORIST
-------just a thought-----
regards Jacob

[Paul Stevens]

So using your logic. Americans should have hatred and become terrorists. And it is ok. But wait you also said it is wrong for us to bomb them. So which is it?
Que Jason to post his link to alternatives thread....

[cowering frightened child]

Dear all,
I know that things were very bad for American people and I personally feel very bad about it. Who ever behind this attack should be punished. There is no doubt regarding this.

The problem being we tried to punish those responsible but they had STATE protection. One of the countries that were harboring them decided that it was OK with them whatever action these people took. It was explained to them what would happen if they did not comply and surprise when they did not comply it happened.
What I am concerned about is the present course of actions taken by US and its allies to wipe off terrorism. Are we people creating more and more terrorists in the course of actions(I mean war)??

I don�t know who the �We� is here because you are not included in my �we� but my terrorist �them�. It is silly to think that we should not respond to terrorism at all because it will make more terrorists. There are ALREADY terrorists. They ALREADY hate us. No matter what we did they would hate us because it is either not enough or too much or wrong or amoral. Take a pick, they are just hate looking for a cause.

I think this is a point we should consider seriously . In a war like this, many innocent people also gets killed (which is inevitable) along with these terrorists/extremists;

Actually not many innocent people have been killed in this war. The US unlike many nations has taken great pains to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that the people responsible for their safety, their leadership, are trying to use them as shields or create situations in which they will die by Americans for press purposes.
As an example the US was the largest contributor nation of food to Afghanistan prior to this. How many lives were saved by this food aid? Do you know? No, you do not care about the good that was done just your own terrorist agenda.
Their relatives have nothing except hatred for US in their mind for they have done no harm to you people.
Before it was �we� now it is �you� odd�.. I am sorry for the people who have died in this campaign but bombs kill. Just because someone hates us now does not mean they did not hate us then.
And its perfectly normal that these people turns anti-US..
Turn? Or were?

Are'nt u people actually creating new terrorists in the course of demolishing a few.
So I thinks events are just trolling. Can't this be stopped??? :-(
�U people�? So what you are saying is we should kill them ALL to stop terrorism?
PS: NOBODY IS BORN AS A TERRORIST
Their religion just makes them that way?
-------just a thought-----
regards Jacob

[Jason Menard]

Que Jason to post his link to alternatives thread....

Well... I wasn't going to... but since you asked, here it is. http://www.javaranch.com/ubb/Forum32/HTML/001363.html . I have come to the conclusion now though that even those who don't want us defending ourselves have come to conclude that we have totaly taken the correct course of action.

What I am concerned about is the present course of actions taken by US and its allies to wipe off terrorism. Are we
people creating more and more terrorists in the course of actions(I mean war)?? I think this is a point we should
consider seriously .

What should we have done?

Their relatives have nothing except hatred for US in their mind for they have done no harm to
you people. And its perfectly normal that these people turns anti-US.. Are'nt u people actually creating new terrorists
in the course of demolishing a few.

People will always find a reason to hate the US. There is nothing we can do about it. There is a point to be made now though that any state who thinks about sponsoring or otherwise supporting international terrorism really needs to think seriously as to what the repercussions could be. We have demonstrated on multiple occassions that we can find where the terrorists are from, so any supporting state would have to fear for its continued existance. So while we may be further reinforcing the hatred of some towards the US, it should be more difficult for a successful terrorist operation to be launched against us, since no one will want to lend support.

PS: NOBODY IS BORN AS A TERRORIST

You are correct. Only through constant exposure to propoganda and religious brainwashing are terrorists made. There were many of these people immediately after 9/11 who truly believed that Israel was directly responsible, because that's what their religious leaders told them. Reason is not a factor with these extremists. So in other words, many of these people will simply believe anything their religious leaders tell them,regardless of how insane it is.
CNN awhile back had a special where they went inside some of the religious schools in Pakistan. Some parents send their children there around age six or so. For the next 10-12 years they get nothing but their teachers' version of the Koran. They memorize the Koran before they even can speak Arabic and comprehend the meaning of what they are memorizing. Their teachers feed them a constant diet of anti-Israeli and anti-US propoganda every day. They spend their childhoods nourished on hatred. The students and their teachers were intervied, and the things coming out of their mouths might have sounded ridiculous to many of us, but the fact that they so thoroughly believed them made it frightening. Places like these are where terrorists come from.
On an equally sinister note, are you aware that the stated aims of many of these extremists groups is to overthrow the godless governments of the West and replace them with governments espousing their form of Islam?

[omar khan]

And also most terrorists call themselves freedom fighters
The result is that nobody still have a straightforward definition of what terrorism is or what a terrorist is.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:
And also most terrorists call themselves freedom fighters
The result is that nobody still have a straightforward definition of what terrorism is or what a terrorist is.

Freedom fighters:

• are by definition domestic.
  
• do not intentionally target civillians
  
• do not attempt to cause terror
  
• have no need to hijack the causes of others as their own in order to gain sympathy.
  
• are fighting against government opression, not trying to spread their own religion
  
• are motivated by freedom, not hatred of another group
  
• may lose sight of their mission and lapse into terrorism
  

Terrorists:



• although possibly sponsored by or acting on behalf of some state, they are not the state
  
• seek to cause terror by using the methods and weapons of terror
  
• seek to intentionally target civillians including women and children
  
• seek to spread their beliefs, often religious, often political. They always have an agenda.
  
• often act without regard for political borders (ie internationally).
  
• often motivated by hatred for some other group of people
  

I think it's pretty clear, although there is some overlap. Those who wish to justify the actions of terrorist groups or support their stated aims may have a more difficult time making the distinction. Some groups who may legitimately start off as freedom movements sometimes enf up as terrorist organizations. For example the IRA, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al-Queda/Islamic Jihad are all terrorist organizations.
[This message has been edited by Jason Menard (edited November 15, 2001).]

[Sandy Lindsey]

Now that you are done shooting your mouth off why don't you read this article:
BIN LADEN'S NUCLEAR SECRETS FOUND IN AL-QAEDA'S KABUL SAFE HOUSES
After reading this article you still believe the war is a fraud please respond.

[Paul Stevens]

Sandy don't hold your breath for the original poster to respond.

[cowering frightened child]

The problem is that the other side confuses what it wants to be with facts. They support terrorism by not opposing and sometimes actually defending it. They use portions of the truth to make wild accusations (As evidenced by Shama Khan reading just the headline of an article and drawing an opinion from it that was not true). When you point out the real facts they just shrug it off. No big deal, they know they hate America for other reasons so facts really do not matter to them.
What can we do about this? Nothing really. My hope is that a lot of those H1�s dry up and they can go hate America in their lovely, fair, peaceful countries. In their countries it is all roses and love.
If you hate America why are you here?

[omar khan]

Jason.
Your definition of terrorism is good IMHO.
It is a pity that sometimes some states and some individuals-and I am not referring to anybody in particular- choose to ignore it for political convenience and to pursue their own interests.

[Lalooprasad Yadav]

Originally posted by cowering frightened child:
They support terrorism by not opposing and sometimes actually defending it.

Thanks for saying that. The government of the United States did exactly that when the same group was attacking our country. You should be grateful we did not respond in kind.

[God]

Originally posted by cowering frightened child:
My hope is that a lot of those H1�s dry up and they can go hate America in their lovely, fair, peaceful countries. In their countries it is all roses and love.

Please be more specific. I do not like statements like "lot" , please supply exact percentage. If possible supply a table with a countrywise breakdown based on the nationality of the H1s.
eg:
<code>
Country numbers to send away
------ ---------------------
Afghanistan You must be kidding
Argentina ??
Brazil ??
India ??
Iraq Are you trying to pull my leg ?
Paraguay ??
Pakistan I cant see many Pakistani H1s from here
Uruguay ??
</code>
Please liaise with my representative to set up EDI standards for future requests. I do not like vague requests.
Actually organising that many airplanes to ship all of them out at short notice can be difficult. Would you settle for a plague
of locusts or something ?

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Lalooprasad Yadav:

Originally posted by cowering frightened child:
They support terrorism by not opposing and sometimes actually defending it.

Thanks for saying that. The government of the United States did exactly that when the same group was attacking our country. You should be grateful we did not respond in kind.

I am not sure what terrorist incident you are talking about here? Could you please be more specific and describe the kind of help that was requested? I mean Russia (If you are from Russia) is the country that would accept no help initially to save its own service men trapped in a submarine at the bottom of the sea. I know now that even that help would have failed but just like the soldier has a duty to the state the state has a duty to the soldier and if there was any way that those sailors could have been saved it should have been tried.
There is now a war on GLOBAL terrorism. The word Global was thrown into it to help keep third party nations from getting bogged down in internal affairs. It is sad but when you look at many of these from the outside who is right?

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by God:

Originally posted by cowering frightened child:
My hope is that a lot of those H1�s dry up and they can go hate America in their lovely, fair, peaceful countries. In their countries it is all roses and love.

Please be more specific. I do not like statements like "lot" , please supply exact percentage. If possible supply a table with a countrywise breakdown based on the nationality of the H1s.
eg:
<code>
Country numbers to send away
------

Blah, blah, blah. Geez, another kid on another board trying to use the God shtick. YAWN wake me when it�s over.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Lalooprasad Yadav:

Originally posted by cowering frightened child:
They support terrorism by not opposing and sometimes actually defending it.

Thanks for saying that. The government of the United States did exactly that when the same group was attacking our country. You should be grateful we did not respond in kind.

A couple of things. The US has no mutual-defense treaty with India, and India requested no assistance. So we were not ignoring your domestic terrorism problems, any more than we were ignoring the problems between Russia and the breakaway Chechen republic, or between Hamas and Israel or any other nations. Oddly enough, and I know you might have difficulty accepting this, we are much more concerned when 7000 Americans are killed on American soil in an act of war, than when 30 people in another country are killed as a result of an internal conflict. For some strange reason that just tends to provoke us a little more. That and the fact unlike some nations we are able to do something about it.
So while your country might not exactly possess the ability to respond in kind as you say, we are thankful, and you should be too, that you didn't mount any full scale operations as Pakistan and India would have quickly nuked each other, making Kashmer a moot point.
By the way... you all have your own way of dealing with terrorists who hijack your planes. You cave into their demands to release their bretheren from prison. Has that been an effective strategy? Being the anti-American you claim to be, you should take comfort in this. Because of this stance on terrorism on the part of the Indian government, one of the individuals who was released from an Indian prison promptly sent a large sum of cash (around $100,000 I think it was) to the exact terrorists (Muhammed Attah and company, in the US) who carried out the attacks on us.

[Thomas Paul]

Personally, I think it is time to revoke all the H1's. There purpose was to help companies get programmers when there was a programmer shortage. The fact is, of course, that there never was a programmer shortage and the whole thing has been a farce. There is absolutley no reason to continue the H1 program now with the economy in its current condition.

[omar khan]

What is H1?

[Lalooprasad Yadav]

So while your country might not exactly possess the ability to respond in kind as you say, we are thankful, and you should be too, that you didn't mount any full scale operations as Pakistan and India would have quickly nuked each other, making Kashmer a moot point.

What did you think "responding in kind" meant ? You seem to think only of bombs and bullets. I am speaking of witholding support.
These politicians are strange people. Before they do anything they need to seek world support , they go around speaking to everybody. Look at that guy Powell, why was he running around speaking to every head of state in the world ?
We dont quite see it that way do we ? you have a gun bigger than the other guy's , you shoot him before he does. Bam! Bam! eh
I agree with Thomas. The number of H1s need to be reduced in view of the economic downturn. This will reduce the surplus in the job market and help to alleviate the unemployment situation among the locals to some extent. That makes sense.
Because they are anti-american and taliban supporters etc etc ?
That is nonsense.

[Nanhesru Ningyake]

>I hope I have explained some of what you asked.
Yes, Shama, I agree. It's not un-American to indulge in some self-criticism. Just ask Bill Maher
>Personally, I think it is time to revoke all the H1's
Hehe, and reduce to rubble the already floundering industry? The H1s are here (atleast some of them ) because they are better than the locally available talent. And so given a choice, companies will prefer them. And this cheap foreign labor thing is mostly a myth. H1s often get paid better than the locals - simply because they fully deserve it.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Nanhesru Ningyake:
Hehe, and reduce to rubble the already floundering industry? The H1s are here (atleast some of them ) because they are better than the locally available talent. And so given a choice, companies will prefer them. And this cheap foreign labor thing is mostly a myth. H1s often get paid better than the locals - simply because they fully deserve it.

You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you? If it were not simply a matter of exploiting cheap labor who are willing to work for wages that Americans aren't, then the software idustry would be dominated by non-American companies, since all the best talent would be outside our borders. But that is not the case, and the predominant software in the world, in any category, is American made. If as you claim that the cheap labor our companies import is also consistently superior to American developers, wouldn't it stand to reason that the Oracle's, Microsoft's, IBM's, and Sun's of the world be created outside the US, since that's where the true inovators and superior software engineers must be? And if that were the case maybe you would have Americans scrambling to go work over there in droves. But we all know that's not how it is.
Really the H1B's are a very small percentage of the software industry in this country. While no one is claiming they aren't contributing as much as any other software developer on any given project, or in many cases are equally talented, to think that our industry would collapse without them has to be one of the funniest things I have heard in awhile. It would simply mean that the companies would have to increase payroll and hire Americans to replace the H1B's who occupy positions that should in many cases be held by American workers anyway.
It is a given that there are very talented software engineers all over the world. For the most part all those who attend universities to work on a CS degree are taking essentially the same curriculum, no matter where you are in the world. But for some reason our very many want to come here for school. Why is that you must ask yourself? For some reason many want to come here to work, why is this? If it's because this is where the most software jobs are, again you would have to ask yourself, why?
Bottom line is this, if you were to look at the groups collectively, H1B's and American developers are going to be about the same level talent wise. Similarly, H1B's are going to be lower paid than their American counterparts. This pay disparity is particularly glaring when long-term benefits are factored into the equation. This is wrong and it is part of the problem. Our economy has been in better shape, and the IT industry is going through a period of change right now. The availability of jobs are not what they were when the H1B plan was applied to IT people. The fact is that these are American companies making their profits on American soil and enjoying the benefits that our system provides them. Therefore any job openings they have must be filled by American employees above all else. The counter-argument that these companies should have the rights to fill their positions with the best people for the job regardless of citizenship does not hold water, not only for the reasons I just outlined, but because they are not looking for the best person for the job anyway. They are looking at a cost/productivity ratio. Since average productivity should always be about equal, the determining factor becomes cost. Americans, particularly because of long term benefits, cannot compete with the cost of cheap foreign labor that requires no long-term benefits.
Now America is great because of the many cultures we are made up of: European, African, Hispanic, Asian (Indic, Oriental, Arabic) what have you, all of the cultures of the world are represented in our citizenry. They all contribute to our strength. But they are also all citizens, granted certain raights and privledges and bound by certain responsibilities. If you want to come here, adopt our way of life and integrate it with your own culture, contribute to our country, and share in its prosperity, then you need simply get your green card and work towards US citizenship. We are more than happy to have you and welcome you with open arms as one of us. If on the other hand you are not interested in citizenship but only intent on using this country as a means to financially improve yourself at the expense of Americans, you may receive a chilly welcome from some.

[This message has been edited by Jason Menard (edited November 17, 2001).]

[Nanhesru Ningyake]

>You really have no idea what you are talking about
You are right. You really have no idea what I am talking about
This was just a counter-holier-than-thou post to the many I have seen from Americans recently. You guys are not holier. Deal with it. We have more holy men, and holy cows than you can shake a stick at.
And when I say H1s are better, that's not always the case. I have been fortunate myself to have worked with natives really better than me - they continue to inspire me and make me set and seek higher goals. So when I say "better than locally available talent", the stress is on 'available' - often companies seeking to hire, and willing to sponsor, would have a rich set of H1s to choose from, while there would be fewer (and perhaps less talented) native applicants.
So, you see, I am talking about H1s directly working for American companies, and not those employed by a subcontractor in India or Russia (which is indeed, cheaper labor). So in the case of a direct employment, the company does not have any long-term cost benefits by hiring H1s - all employees have the same insurance/savings/retirement options. And so a company that hires a H1 indeed found him/her better than other applicants.
And while the number of H1s employed in the US may be a numerically insignificant, their roles are not. Many H1s hold key roles, often leading teams, driving design and development, and influencing business strategies. Isn't it obvious that if you pull out these keystones, the companies would suffer a major setback? The skills may be replaceable, but experience and business knowledge is something built over a long period - yes, the companies would recover, eventually, but the initial setback is guaranteed.
>For some reason many want to come here to work, why is this?
All the standard reasons - better pay, better living standards, better schools... and so on. But the real reason is pretty intangible - friendly natives Yep, from what I've heard from folks who've lived all around the world, America has really friendly and accomodating people - it's probably the melting-pot syndrome - inviting everybody with open arms.
>If on the other hand you are not interested in citizenship
I don't see how becoming a citizen would make me contribute better. I will remain a citizen of India, and I am proud of that. But that does not mean I am here to just "financially improve" myself. Through my work, and by paying taxes , I think I am contributing to America. And this season, I'm donating my old clothes to the Salvation Army (don't blame me if they send it to Afghanistan). Am also planning to do some volunteer work at my local library - if I can find enough time for that. So, you see, I am not that selfish, after all. Tell me, how does the average American citizen "contribute" to the country anyway?
PS. Keeping in view the recent crackdown on threadjacking, I should note that this and the past few posts in this thread don't really belong here

[This message has been edited by Nanhesru Ningyake (edited November 22, 2001).]

[Jason Menard]

I don't see how becoming a citizen would make me contribute better.

Because then you have a vested interest in the strength and well-being of our nation. Your "contributions" would last well beyond six years. You could then do your part to see that America is stocked with future little programmers, extending your contributions through your lineage and beyond your lifespan. This is the cruxt of it IMHO. Showing up for to work and paying taxes for six years doesn't do all that much to help out the cause. Working and paying taxes here the rest of your life, social/community service (such as you already are doing), and the fact that they say smart people have smart kids, that's contributing.

I think I am contributing to America. And this season, I'm donating my old clothes to the Salvation Army (don't blame me if they send it to Afghanistan). Am also planning to do some volunteer work at my local library - if I can find enough time for that.

That's great. I applaud your efforts, particularly since you are a visitor here. Volunteerism in this country is relatively strong I guess, but I wish more people, citizens and non-citizens alike, would perform community service (without being sentenced to it ).

Tell me, how does the average American citizen "contribute" to the country anyway?

We do the things that citizens all over the world do to contribute to their country. Construction workers strengthen our infrastructure, emergency service personnel protect us, the kid stocking the shelves at Walmart is a cog in the wheel of capitalism that keeps this nation moving forward, mothers and fathers give their children in military service to their nation, etc... You get the idea. Everyone plays a part, and everyone contributes. Well, maybe not the insane drunk guy who lives under the highway bridge, but we can assume that he has contributed in the past.
And oh yeah, one more thing, the war against terrorism is not a fraud. See, we're on topic.

[Thomas Paul]

The purpose of the H1B visa is to provide a skill set that can not be found in this country. If that was ever the case for programmers, which I sincerely doubt, that is certainly not the case today where there are many programmers out of work because of the down-sized economy. The people brought here on H1B's were supposed to supply short-term skills that were not available otherwise. There is no question that the H1B program was abused and should be terminated.
And if anyone can tell me what the hell the original topic of this discussion was, I would be glad to discuss it.
[This message has been edited by Thomas Paul (edited November 23, 2001).]

[Paul Stevens]

And why should this thread be different than any of the others?