Thanks for the thoughts, Vasska,
AND to provide a supportive environment to cope with the things they get exposed to anyway, of course. That's what growth and development is -- it's a constant stream of new experiences. But there is no way to make a parent good at it. I mean I now have a 6 week old son, and not even being a pediatrician makes this easy.
I do not state that any parent will become a "super-parent" after the examples of classes and government control, but it should loosen up the situation a bit in a certain amount of cases.
I'm not questioning your parenting in any way, if you between the lines implied that ( I think not, but cannot be sure). Anyhow, a little late I guess, but congratulation's on your son.
These studies (the 9/11 ones) concentrate on the repeated images of the towers collapsing. You could argue that it was propagandized and it was certainly overdone, but it's the images and not the loudmouth psychopaths on cable news who really affected people during that first week.
The propagandizing has been overdone. Repeated showing of the images supported by the people talking about all the other terrorist attacks have made it worse. The first week has been an unusual week to say at least, even the New York Stock Exchange had been closed till the 17th of September. However this week has also been the most crucial week. I think the American, as well many other worldwide, media showed images that should not have been broadcasted like closeups on people who were either pushed (by pressure) or jumped out of sheer panic.
These images indeed do have an effect I won't deny that, but it should not have been broadcasted in the first place. I'm not voting for censorship by saying this, but we have after 9/11 broken some limits of what should, and what should not be broadcasted.
I'm indeed blaming the American, but also all other media for exposing the "weak" layer of society to these uncensored graphical images who were not needed in the first place. I can understand someone in NYC has had psychological problems, but someone let's say Texas or Kansas are just overreacting.
To further stress my point by examples; Someone like the fictional person Howard Beale staring in the film "Network by" Paddy Chayefsky's sure had an impact on me the first time I saw him.
Put him on modern day perspective, mix in all you can find on terrorism and you've got a propaganda that sticks to people. You can see his speeches here
That's a pretty extreme thing to say about 300 million people, even though I realize that you're probably overstating the stereotype. If the majority of Americans are downright dumb, then do you disagree with the oh 75% of us who disapprove of Bush and who think the war was a mistake?
I can understand that you, at times, think of me as a troubled teenager who, talks about things he doesn't even understand fully. At least that's the image I'm getting from some of the discussions here. And I unfortunately must at certain point agree with that, I'm too arrogant to admit my mistakes.
However, I'm calling America dumb due to the massive dumbing down of America that I have seen during history. A nice example being that people rather watch "The Simple Life" with a skank (Sorry if this word is not allowed) like Paris Hilton and to march against Harry Potter books being available in American schools than about something that impacts everyone in America like the "North American Union" which melts America, Canada and Mexico together without borders, and one currency (The Amero).
I must admit that European education has also been failing the last 5 years, and I'm really concerned about this, as I expressed in "Is education failing us".
Like 9/11 reports there have been written much about this subject. I want to stress only one website here, which is this one
, which is an 1895 test given to childeren in Kansas. See how much questions a 8 year old can answer today.
About me disapproving with the 75% of Americans who disapprove of bush, i can only say i do not disapprove of it. But simply saying you are against bush does not make you smart again, it does not make you a new Einstein, Nietzsche, Plato Socrates or anything else. You are just someone who woke up way to late and only now see the mistakes of it, i also want to say that Bush had been elected twice, whether by playing honest or not.
The majority accepted Bush, the majority accepted the war. The fact that everything had been a mistake, according to the 75%, does not change the historical fact that people supported Bush. The fact that everyone suddenly votes Democratic does not change anything either. Obama or Clinton might just as well be a mistake.
And have you ever considered that your opinion of us is just as distorted by the quality of your news as our opinions are by our news?
Other than most people my news comes from different sources including from Asia,(translated) Europe and America. I do not truthfully and without question watch the news. I read books from all around the world (where possible in original text), and by no extent even have limited myself to mainstream (American) film and (American) music only. I watch Asian movies just as often as I do American. Giving me a broader perspective than people who stay limited to only one language and one source of information.
I often go out to do some research of my own on subjects that interest me, whether this is about how an LCD-TV works or as we are on the subject 9/11.
Which "red-neck" parts of America have you been to? I live in North Carolina now, and you may find this hard to believe but there was far more hysteria about terrorism in Boston than there is in North Carolina. I was nearly arrested by the Boston Marine Police for taking a picture of the new bridge on the Charles River. These stereotypes just aren't accurate. The most paranoid parts of the country are the big cities, especially NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, Boston, LA, and San Francisco, all of which I've been to many times since 9/11.
Texas and Oklahoma, as well Florida, but i did not think of it as a Redneck part of America. But it already has been a few years back, so things might have changed. That does not take away that many parts of America have been undereducated, and resulted in what we call "Red-necks". But you might be right I might be to quick to label states, and America in general.
Nowadays cities like Boston, New York and Washington might be more paranoid about terrorism because they have realized they are a great target for terrorist attacks.
I'm NOT claiming to have been there. But to spend my life seeing how it's affected them, learning stories that no one else knows, and seeing how my own interface with the world is informed by their lives, is first hand experience, even if their actual lives and survival are second hand.
I'm leaving this part for the discussion, for we both have made our point about how we think on the subject given.
I hate to be nitpicky, but you're a bit mistaken about your European history here.
You are right. I've tried to memorize some facts from my memory, but as proved my memory cannot handle history as well as i hoped.
Nazi Germany declared war on the United States a day or two after Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan in December, 1941. The US would have probably found its way into the war eventually anyway, but it had nothing to do with a cruise ship.
You are thinking of the Lusitania, which was sunk by a German submarine in 1915 during the first World War, which needless to say was under the Kaiser and not the Nazis. But this was NOT used as an excuse to enter WWI. The importance of the Lusitania was that the US became very polarized against Germany, whereas it had been very neutral before.
The final straw by which the US entered WWI (in 1917) was the Zimmerman telegram in which Berlin tried to convince Mexico to attack the US.
In 1914 war broke out in Europe mostly among Germany and Britain. Americans had nothing to do with it, American president Wilson declared neutrality. However War means massive loses and a destroyed economy. You don't need an Economist to point out, Europe was very attractive for America as a new market with great opportunities. Colonel Edward House however wanted to be in the war, and bankers were happy to corporate and loan billions of dollars to the war, against interest.
The ship Lusitania was (deliberately) send to German waters, where German controlled military installations were known to be. Its like flying airplanes above Baghdad before and during the war, downright dangerous. The Ship as planned exploded and caused many dead.
Germany however posted, in American Newspapers, a message that ships in German water were liable to destruction. American as said had been agitated, and a short time after America entered the war, maybe because of the telegram you said, which I find rather strange and never heard of.
World War II, and Americans entry in this war had been provoked and wanted. Many documents have resurfaced and the attack had been known days and even weeks in advance, however since America did screw up after world war I by not colonizing and entering the European market, creating the predecessor of the UN and not entering it they left Europe, and mostly defeated Germany to wallow leaving a broken country, and finally making sure Hitler surfaced, for he only needed to create some hate, giving people work by saying Germany will be once great, and giving hell of a lot energy into it. He only needed to kick down the last remaining walls of the previous Weimar Government.
Back to Nazi Germany declaring war on America; America did all that was in their power to anger the Japanese, freezing assets, halted trade, aided their enemies, against war rules and made sure Japan only could attack America, Nazi Germany, with an at that time Hitler who changed from the Fuhrer to the mass murder, and cared little about the future anymore, declared war. America after the attack was again (just like 9/11) in a state of patriotism and wanted to go to war.
After that American profits for large corporations
have skyrocketed, creating an American allied and needed Europe. We never broke that relationship.
My idea might seem a little like a conspiracy, but thinking about it rationally you will see that is has it's truth.
I think we should try to end the discussion now, for we went from TV is bad to you to 9/11. I'm sorry for injecting subjects other than the original question into the topic.
But I'm just a dumb American, what would I know about the history of Europe.
I don't think of you as dumb, and never will. It's just that Americans as said above are dumbing down, and kept busy with things that don't even matter, and are addicted to TV and mostly it's un-informational programs.