Archive for July 2009
. . . and The Cyber Bullies
Yeah! That’s me behind that lovable face.
Who is the “me”? For all you know, Joe Blow can and could be anybody. Actually, he’s not really hiding. So, why not just identify him? Or, is it them? Who knows?
Joe Blow is NOT anonymous, either. Joe Blow is an Internet identity that when seen is instantly recognized and understood to represent a certain personality with well-established characteristics. He’s no different than Elmo, or Kermit with a little bit of Miss Piggy thrown in. All anyone really needs to know about Joe Blow is posted for all to see:
Number One Nobody! Born in Eureka, (Fifth generation) raised in Humboldt County. World traveled and life educated. American refugee. Lives forever.
The Joe Blow Report’s purpose for existence is also clearly posted for all to see:
This report is about fair and honest observations and not about opinions.
The governing principle driving that purpose is also posted:
Everything Is About Something Different
Joe Blow is here to ferret-out the “hidden agenda.” This is the reason the Joe Blow Report exists. If possible, to find the hidden, the covert, the subterfuge, the deception, the scheme, to show the truth behind the lie. Ultimately, to expose the liar; the “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” To quote an old saying: Neither Joe Blow, the Joe Blow Report nor its writer(s) have an “ax to grind.” That means: “Have a dispute to take up with someone or, to have an ulterior motive/ to have private ends to serve.”
Joe Blow knows there are risks involved in such an endeavor, but that is not why he or she, (or is it they?), write behind the pseudonym, Joe Blow. Joe Blow is and always was a “NOBODY”! To objectively write “observations” he must remain a “NOBODY.” To become “somebody” is to interject personality with the logical worthless opinions that accompany that person(s). For Joe Blow to lose his state of obscurity would destroy his Report.
Bullies, we all know, exist by sucking off of other people they believe are only there to serve their wants and needs. Anyone that doesn’t conform to that bully’s opinions is a direct threat to that bully’s existence. They live only to control and will sink to whatever depths of deprivation necessary to achieve that goal. The transparent reality of a successful bully is to threaten violent assault on their victim’s person, property, family or whatever they think is important to evoke an emotional response; either anger or fear.
Joe Blow clearly understood the risks of promoting such a Weblog. That is why he clearly posted the Report’s purpose under:
More About Joe Blow
Please be aware that the Joe Blow Report speaks for itself. You may or may not agree, but just remember, that is your issue. The Report is offered as a free gift to whomever desires to read it. Please accept it as such. The Report respects the rights of all individuals to be who and what they are. All the same there are consequences for what each individual does and does not do. If the Report stimulates a little thinking, it has fulfilled it’s purpose.
Joe Blow fully understands that whatever is posted on the Internet or printed in newspapers or spoken on television or on the radio bears the responsibility for being PUBLIC property, albeit sometimes copyrighted. Let’s hope that those Joe observes and reports about understand that as well. In other words, if you do not want to read or hear about someone’s observations, keep quiet! Or if you’re going to stand up on a soapbox in a public place and spout off you’d better be ready for a rotten egg or two.
Diatribe personally attacking the messenger, is not welcome.
No where in the recorded history of these Reports does Joe Blow single-out any individual, group, business, political organization, religious organization, sexual orientation, nationality, government, country or any of the many other diverse peoples whose sole reason for existence is to promote or denigrate other people or issues for special and personal assault. To produce credible observations Joe Blow must remain neutral — no personal, political, religious or any other bias.
These Weblog Reports are dedicated to thinking people. If the bigoted racist, the stupid, inane, moronic, paranoid, vacuous bully, or the ideologue believer that’s locked into the Dark Ages, is offended by this, then so be it. They need to grow up and get a life.
That is how they expose the truth of themselves. Merely infer that what they say or write is lacking some sense of knowledgeable logic or that they ignorantly made a “simpleminded” mistake then sit back to see if it was a simple mistake or a malicious and deliberate deception. If it was a mistake or a simple error in judgment, people will usually acknowledge it, correct the problem and simply move on. However if they were deliberate and malicious, they get extremely angry, go ballistic and personally attack with all kinds of foul and malicious accusations. That is how they show everyone exactly who and what they are. They are thus judged by what they do and say and everyone is a witness to that judgment. At that point the Universal Law of Karma is enforced and these people receive exactly what they sowed.
Joe Blow’s life endeavor is to practice the four governing principles of “The Four Agreements” as documented by Don Miguel Ruiz.
- Be Impeccable With Your Word
- Don’t Take Anything Personally
- Don’t Make Assumptions
- Always Do your Best
Sometimes bullies can be very intimidating, specially when they threaten your family, your property and livelihood, making a perfect application of these Agreements very difficult. It’s in the trying that defines the character.
It is in this “trying” that the Joe Blow Report finds inspiration in a world of bullies, descending into chaos and the Dark Ages.
The Report has been a bit critical with the staff and management at the Times-Standard of late, but occasionally they DO come through. The following article by John M. Crisp about lessons learned (?) worth thinking about.
John M. Crisp (firstname.lastname@example.org teaches) in the English Department at Del Mar College in Corpus Christi, Texas. So, right away this means he’s head and shoulders smarter than the most of us, right?
He writes: What we learned from Vietnam. If you want to know what “he” learned read the following. It’s well worth your time. Specially, all of you people that believe in the latest “Hope Messiah.”
THE DEATH of Robert McNamara creates an apt occasion to consider the Vietnam War. For many Americans, it’s already ancient history. In fact, most of my students know more about the Civil War than about the decades-long Southeast Asian conflict that consumed millions of lives.
But for Americans of a certain age, Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense during much of the war, represents that episode in our history better than anyone. When he died last week at age 93, he was one of the last of the men responsible for carrying on the misguided conflict that became “McNamara’s war.”
The Vietnam-era presidents are long gone: Eisenhower, who provided resources to the wrong side for at least a decade before American troops arrived; Kennedy, whose misgivings about the war were eliminated with his assassination on Nov. 22, 1963; Johnson, who escalated Vietnam into a real war; and Nixon, who perpetuated the bloodshed long after the war, in practical terms, was over.
The generals are gone, as well: Maxwell Taylor, Earle Wheeler, William Westmoreland, Creighton Abrams. And with the death of McNamara, so are most of the young civilians — the “whiz kids” chronicled by writer David Halberstam — who administered the war according to their flawed faith in the organizational and management capacities of the corporate world. About the only principal left is Henry Kissinger.
But there are still plenty of survivors of the Vietnam War among us, late-middle-aged men — and a smaller number of women — who honorably performed what they believed was their duty when they were young. Others survived long after the war ended, but eventually couldn’t cope with what the war had done to their lives. And there are the old people who never fully recovered from the loss of a child among the 58,000 American soldiers who didn’t make it home.
The irony, of course, is that even though the effects of the wars we fight linger long after the details themselves are forgotten, we rarely learn anything from them. The generals are famous for always fighting the last war. But the politicians and the rest of us don’t learn much either, especially from a war like the one in Vietnam, whose purposes and goals were vague and dubious to begin with.
So, 35 years later, if we bother to think about the war, at all, we find ourselves wondering what all the suffering was for.
A few days after McNamara died an Oliphant political cartoon pictured him being welcomed warmly into hell by Satan himself, as demons nearby celebrate amid the flames. A character asks, “Is Henry the K here yet?”
Both these men have a lot to answer for, but this judgment seems harsh. Our criticism of them should be tempered by the fact of our continued willingness to use war in the service of our interests, rather than as a last resort.
At present, we’re carrying on two undeclared wars in the midst of considerable uncertainty about their purposes, benefits, or goals. We’re desperate to portray Iraq as a “victory,” but the predictable increase in civilian deaths and the threat of chaos before we’ve even left the country challenge that depiction.
And while the war in Afghanistan seemed like a worthy cause eight years ago, many Americans have only a vague sense its purpose now and no clear concept of how our current tactics can achieve that purpose in a land that has served as a sinkhole for the armies of the great powers for generations.
So, as the deaths — Afghani civilians and Americans and 15 British soldiers in the last 10 days — mount in Afghanistan, this war calls for a scrupulous re-examination of its goals and our capacity to reach them.
Perhaps we know what we’re doing in Afghanistan. But at one point the “best and the brightest” thought they understood Vietnam perfectly. Years later we discovered, after great national cost, that unquestioning faith in our leadership was unjustified.
When you see the current betrayal, you’ve got to know it’s still UNJUSTIFIED.
Some argue he was just a technocrat put in charge of political architecture that was initially setup by Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. Either way, he was responsible for the wanton butchery of millions of innocent civilian people, mostly all Asian. He, later in life, admitted that some of what he was responsible for doing , even during World War Two, were war crimes for which he and other Americans could have been prosecuted. Yet, he was allowed to die a peaceful death.
The question remains today, how could these so-called American patriots right after prosecuting and executing German and Japanese for the very same war crimes, turn right around and do the same things? Specially in his case, where he was just as dirty and knew what he had done to the Japanese! Were they stupid? Actually, historians tell us these men, Robert MacNamara in particular, were very bright, intelligent and well educated. History also tells us that he was at the same time, as were the majority of his compatriots, morally bankrupt. To be specific, his whole generation, the so-called “Greatest Generation” was morally bankrupt. That’s the generation that grew up during the Great Depression that learned to survive by doing whatever it took no matter how degenerate and self-debasing — to them the end always justified the means.
The Guardian newspaper of England reports on his World War Two exploits:
A graduate of Harvard Business School, McNamara applied statistical methods to the US bombing campaign over Japan in the second world war, as an officer in the US air force. He greatly increased the efficiency of US air attacks, devastating the civilian populations of Japanese cities
What they’re talking about here was his use of fire-bombing on civilian targets that murdered 100,000 people in a single night, the same as was used on German cities — the effect was the same as the atom bomb.
He then moves on after quiting his job as Secretary of Defense because he could see, but was too gutless to tell anyone at the time, that the US would lose that war, to run the World Bank. The World Bank along with the IMF has totally devestated the majority of Third World Nations ability to feed themselves. The World is on the brink of a food crisis of unimaginable consequences. MacNamara orchestrated the mass starvation of untold numbers of the Earth’s poplulation the likes of which, makes his mass murder of Asian people insignificant.
What lessons were learned? According to historian Howard Zinn – NONE! This is what he says about the current President Obama:
Unfortunately, you know, the present administration is still stuck in that kind of thinking. You know, I hear them talking in the White House and around the White House, Obama and the others, about winning in Afghanistan, and not asking, “Is it right that we are in Afghanistan?” To me, that’s one of the important things to think about when we try to learn something from the life of this figure McNamara.
What kind of thinking is Zinn talking about?
It seems to me one things which we should be thinking about, is that McNamara represented all of those superficial qualities of brightness and intelligence and education that are so revered in our culture. This whole idea that you judge young kids today on the basis of what their test scores are, how smart they are, how much information they can digest, how much they can give back to you and remember. That’s what MacNamara was good at. He was bright and he was smart, but he had no moral intelligence. What strikes me as one of the many things we can learn from this McNamara experience is that we’ve got to stop revering these superficial qualities of brightness and smartness, and bring up a generation which thinks in moral terms, which has moral intelligence, and which asks questions not, “Do we win or do we lose?” Asks questions, ” Is this right? Is it wrong?” And McNamara never asked that question. Even when he was leaving, even when he decided he had to leave the post of Secretary of Defense, even when he left, his leaving was not based on the fact that the war was wrong. His leaving was based on the fact, well, we weren’t going to win.
That’s the Robert MacNamara Legacy . . .
For more on lessons not learned you can read some revealing commentary by Howard Zinn, Marilyn Young and Jonathan Schell.
More from the Guardian here.
The Humboldt Herald Blog posted the following June 29, 2009: “Eureka Police blog spawns lawsuit.” According to the article, “The lawsuit alleges libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress” and “at the center of the controversy is a blog” that, according to the Herald, “largely contained petty, personal gripes” and that the suit “alleges the blog contained false statements.”
Why is this important to the Joe Blow Report? Take a look at the very first person to make a comment. The name is DAVE. Click that link and you go to the local Web blog, ‘As It Stands’ by Dave Stancliff. Look around that blog and you come to these two articles he posted about me: 1) Trolls Exposed: what kind of troll is disrupting your online community? and 2) Joe Blow (conspiracy) Report staff bawl like babies!
Read what he says about me and my Report and it is about as libelous as anyone can get!
The question is, has he and all of his libel caused injury? Obviously, no one is free to say anything they want just because it’s a blog. Yet some people do. More importantly, this matter was taken to the Times-Standard newspaper here in Eureka, because they publish his “As It Stands” column. I wonder if they would continue to do so if Dave Stancliff found himself facing a similar lawsuit.
Ironically, everything that was initially written in our article, “Trolls and The Thought Police” about one of Dave Stancliff’s columns was born out to be true. No less by Dave Stancliff himself. Unfortunately for him, he’ll never know if or when we suffer damage as a consequence of his libel.
By the way, my Report article was NOT about Dave Stancliff; it was not personal. It was about the issues he raise in his newspaper column and the travesty people of his ilk have caused decent law-abiding Americans.