The Chief wrote:Another issue that no one has yet posted here, are the ramifications of this whole gig if GM is found to be a fraud and having in fact acted financially inappropriately all at cost of the children of that region that he was supposedly helping. The Taliban will have a propaganda field day with this and it will only reinforce their ideology regarding any Westerner and their supposed compassionate ways. Yup... definitely a bigass growing concern for what the US has been trying to do over in both Pak and Afghanville if this goes down in a negative way.



The big picture friends... the big picture.

I find it hard to swallow that news of some misallocated school funds is going to sway Afghani/Pakistani sentiments of the US considering the United States toppeled the Afghan government, installed its own pro-US leader, and has militarily occupied the country for the better part of a decade. Maybe that was the Soviet's mistake? They misallocated some school funds and the whole country rebelled?

The Chief wrote:
And how do you feel about the potentially huge negative US policy ramifications in that entire region that may indeed be at bay if GM is found to be guilty in any way shape or form?

Are you aware of how the Taliban truly operates?

You're engaging in a remarkable bit of hyperbole, all the while disregarding or misinterpreting my actual point.

Do I think that the Taliban will find greater success in Af/Pak if it is discovered that GM was expropriating large amounts of funds that were supposed to be used for building schools, and instead lived a lavish lifestyle? I don't know, maybe. I'm not an expert. I suggest that it is conceivable but unlikely.

Do I think that the Taliban will find greater success if it is discovered that GM lied about visiting Korphe on his trip down from K2 versus visiting it a year later? Absolutely not. I think it's ridiculous if you think that.

See, my fundamental point was that I believe there are gradations. If you disagree, feel free.

Let me put it this way Chief:

Do you believe there is any difference between the two following alleged issues:
1. GM's book Stones into Schools aggregated 3 trips to the region into 1 in the narrative for the sake of making the story easier to follow, perhaps more convincing or something of that nature?
2. GM is claiming to build schools which weren't built at all.

Do you believe there is a moral or ethical difference?
Do you believe there is a difference from the standpoint of the efficacy of the organization?
Do you believe there is a difference in the reaction on the ground in Pakistan and Afghanistan?

ExcitableBoy wrote:I find it hard to swallow that news of some misallocated school funds is going to sway Afghani/Pakistani sentiments of the US considering the United States toppeled the Afghan government, installed its own pro-US leader, and has militarily occupied the country for the better part of a decade. Maybe that was the Soviet's mistake? They misallocated some school funds and the whole country rebelled?

The Taliban dude, have absolutely nada to do with any of the above. We nor the USSR's could nor can we ever eradicate the Taliban from that region. No matter how many cruise missles we deploy. And their influence and cultural impact on the general peasant population in that entire area is what has kept us there for almost ten frkn years. Propaganda in that area is a key and essential weapon for both us and the Taliban.

But like I posted, I do not expect you nor the avg CNN news guided American individual to even understand the ideological propaganda point that I am making.

builttospill wrote:Do I think that the Taliban will find greater success in Af/Pak if it is discovered that GM was expropriating large amounts of funds that were supposed to be used for building schools, and instead lived a lavish lifestyle? I don't know, maybe. I'm not an expert. I suggest that it is conceivable but unlikely.


Do you believe there is any difference between the two following alleged issues:
1. GM's book Stones into Schools aggregated 3 trips to the region into 1 in the narrative for the sake of making the story easier to follow, perhaps more convincing or something of that nature?
2. GM is claiming to build schools which weren't built at all.

Do you believe there is a moral or ethical difference?
Do you believe there is a difference from the standpoint of the efficacy of the organization?
Do you believe there is a difference in the reaction on the ground in Pakistan and Afghanistan?

It is obvious that you have not taken the time to read JK's article. There are far more allegations than just the two above you refer to.

I believe the following.... what GM appears to have done and the manner that he is currently behaving regarding this issue in general, across the board, is totally wrong, period. The Taliban will indeed use this to their advantage and against our policies and efforts over there. Religious ideology is far more important there in both Pak and Afghanville than any one American could ever understand. To the Taliban, this is just another example of the thieving infidel philosophy that the true Afghni or Paki Muslim should never accept nor tolerate, never.

Have either of you two (ExcitableBoy & builttospill) been in that region for any length of time?

Chief, while you are correct that GM is lying scum, don't go overboard with this Taliban nonsense. Anyone who has read any history of that part of the world knows that we never had a chance in hell of winning that war. This puny story won't even slightly affect the end game when we turn tale like every other invader in the past 2,000 years.

Alpynisto wrote:don't go overboard with this Taliban nonsense. Anyone who has read any history of that part of the world knows that we never had a chance in hell of winning that war. This puny story won't even slightly affect the end game when we turn tale like every other invader in the past 2,000 years.

Certainly will add to the Taliban and Al Qaeda negative ideology and generalization propaganda machine of all Americans.

My point is beginning to appear as valid exemplified by this rather interesting article just released on this issue by a Pakistani female editorial writer... three-cups-of-sincerity

"More disturbingly, Mortenson has become deeply entrenched in the counter-insurgency projects of the US military, with some of his girls’ schools now being inaugurated by the military top command. This has helped to reinvent the image of the US military as a harbinger of humanitarian development. While Mortenson’s emphasis on books appears to be an alternative to bombs, it actually complements them by helping to justify and sugar-coat the war at home. Journalists like Thomas Friedman and Christiane Amanpour dwell on the Mortenson-military partnership as if the war has really changed and its key characteristic is girls’ education, not occupation. Let’s not forget: The discourse of ‘white men saving brown women from brown men’ has a long colonial history. Imperial power as the beacon of women’s empowerment and civilisation was precisely the rationale used by British and French colonisers in Egypt, India and Algeria amongst other places for explaining their occupations.

Ghulam Parvi, a key character in Three Cups of Tea and CAI operations director in Pakistan for many years, resigned from CAI last year partly in response to the book’s blatantly false depiction of Baltistan as Taliban-central. Several of my friends from the region who are deeply grateful for Mortenson’s services are nevertheless thoroughly disappointed that he would use his platform to spread fundamental misperceptions about their region. Others are suspicious of his work with the military. If the CBS report is indeed true, then the casualness with which the director of a Pakistani think tank is portrayed as a Taliban kidnapper in Mortenson’s writings exemplifies a form of imperialist abuse that cannot be shielded under the guise of humanitarianism."

PS: The Mongols never turned tale when they invaded that entire region. They are in fact the only invaders in history that were totally successful in their reasons for their invasion of this particular region.

The Chief wrote:
It is obvious that you have not taken the time to read JK's article. There are far more allegations than just the two above you refer to.

All this time I thought that I was being unclear (here and on previous threads where we have discussed things). I assumed that it must be my fault that we seemed to be on different wavelengths and I spent far too much time trying to explain the point I was trying to make.

But it's now clear that it's not just me. You appear to be willfully misinterpreting what I write.

How can you possibly read my series of posts in this thread and come to the conclusion that I think those two allegations are the only two that exist? That is just blatant laziness. I wrote examples of several more allegations in a post TODAY that you quoted and responded to! I also made clear that I'm using EXAMPLES to demonstrate my argument. I don't know how I could possibly make it more clear than how I wrote it before--you and I have brains that must just operate in fundamentally different ways. And note well, I'm being charitable in that characterization.

builttospill wrote:

The Chief wrote:
It is obvious that you have not taken the time to read JK's article. There are far more allegations than just the two above you refer to.

All this time I thought that I was being unclear (here and on previous threads where we have discussed things). I assumed that it must be my fault that we seemed to be on different wavelengths and I spent far too much time trying to explain the point I was trying to make.

But it's now clear that it's not just me. You appear to be willfully misinterpreting what I write.

How can you possibly read my series of posts in this thread and come to the conclusion that I think those two allegations are the only two that exist? That is just blatant laziness. I wrote examples of several more allegations in a post TODAY that you quoted and responded to! I also made clear that I'm using EXAMPLES to demonstrate my argument. I don't know how I could possibly make it more clear than how I wrote it before--you and I have brains that must just operate in fundamentally different ways. And note well, I'm being charitable in that characterization.

Have you read JK's article in it's entirety?

A simple Yes or No would suffice. Thanks.

PS: The above post is a perfect example of your long winded academia dissertations in attempting to make your argument. I am not being charitable in that characterization. Just real.

The Chief wrote:
Have you read JK's article in it's entirety?

A simple Yes or No would suffice. Thanks.

Yes.

Do you understand why the fact that I chose two examples of allegations for illustrative purposes does not make it "obvious" that I had not read JK's article or that I was somehow ignorant of all the other allegations? A simple yes or no would suffice.


Here's a few thoughts Chief, while we're being "real." I've broken them down into numbered points for you, so see if you can follow along:

1. You are too lazy to read and digest arguments longer than a few sentences.

2. You are too stubborn to just keep your mouth shut when you haven't read or understood the entire post.

3. You are too obtuse to realize when someone is not actually arguing against your position.

4. You clearly think that your knowledge is more valuable than anyone else on Summitpost, no matter the other person's experience, knowledge or insights unique from your own.

5. Even when it is painfully obvious that your counterpoint is irrelevant, that you have misunderstood the basic argument or context of the argument, or that you have not read the entire post or thought about it for longer than it takes to hit "Post Reply," you even more stubbornly dig your heels until the person you are "arguing" with gives up out of frustration.


You've accomplished all of the above in this single thread, including the last bit of #5, so congratulations.

builttospill wrote:...the person you are "arguing" with gives up out of frustration

No one likes a quitter.

Winning an argument on teh internets is like winning the special olympics, but without the dedication, training, and sense of fair play.

builttospill wrote:Here's a few thoughts Chief, while we're being "real." I've broken them down into numbered points for you, so see if you can follow along:

1. I think you are too lazy to read and digest arguments longer than a few sentences.

2. I think that you are too stubborn to just keep your mouth shut when you haven't read or understood the entire post.

3. I think that you are too obtuse to realize when someone is not actually arguing against your position.

4. You clearly think that your knowledge is more valuable than anyone else on Summitpost, no matter the other person's experience, knowledge or insights unique from your own.

5. I think that even when it is painfully obvious that your counterpoint is irrelevant, that you have misunderstood the basic argument or context of the argument, or that you have not read the entire post or thought about it for longer than it takes to hit "Post Reply," you even more stubbornly dig your heels until the person you are "arguing" with gives up out of frustration.


You've accomplished all of the above in this single thread, including the last bit of #5, so congratulations.

Why thank you!

Nothing like getting advice and insight on who I really am from an extensively experienced worldly traveled young'n that still aint shaving his entire face and has yet to have all his public hairs sprouted. Lotta "I's" in that post young man. You should stop thinking so much. It is not conducive to an educated adult discussion. Just a very one sided egocentric academia one.... yours.

BTW, the two allegations that you referred to in your previous post only enlightened my obtuseness to the point of ignoring your post completely as neither of them were anywhere near the magnitude that others within JK's article are referring to. Those aren't my observations either. They are indeed those of the Montana State Attorney General who has formerly opened an investigation into the CAI's and GM financial dealings.

Please continue, it is quite entertaining.

Since so many have jumped head-long to support the original allegations from a BS for-profit utter crap organization for the trailer park IQ crowd like 60 Minutes, perhaps we'd like at least to hear first-hand from the accused before hanging him? Just a thought.

http://outsideonline.com/adventure/trav ... 55690.html

ExcitableBoy wrote:Winning an argument on teh internets is like winning the special olympics, but without the dedication, training, and sense of fair play.

That's pretty apropos right about now, esp. for a certain player. . .

dskoon wrote:

ExcitableBoy wrote:Winning an argument on teh internets is like winning the special olympics, but without the dedication, training, and sense of fair play.

That's pretty apropos right about now, esp. for a certain player. . .

sharperblue wrote:Since so many have jumped head-long to support the original allegations from a BS for-profit utter crap organization for the trailer park IQ crowd like 60 Minutes...

Gotta love it. When the chips begin to fall in the opposite direction, there's always the innuendos and personal attacks to revert to.

On topic....

Seems that the seriousness of this issue is beginning to resonate. As I posted, the Montana State Attorney Gen is jumping on the "trailer park IQ" bandwagon and as of this afternoon, is opening a formal investigation into ALL the allegations against CAI and GM. Don't be surprised to read in the next couple of days that the IRS is following suite.


An old tale of solid advice comes to play in this deal... "If it is too good to be true, run! Cuz if you don't, it most likely is and the ensuing firestorm will engulf you!"