humanitarian aid

[mike j]

to paraphrase: we are not the world's denny's, are we?
besides, how much does one ration weigh? the
journalist mentioned 700 tons a day OR a week going
over? umm, big difference between those two
assertions, no? you'd think the journalist would have
his facts straight, or is it you that forgot? don't
compare apples to oranges, or in this case,
potato/bean vinaigrette to rice. we may or may not be
being 'manipulated terribly,' but to suggest that the
US is starving a population seems a bit off base. no
need for rumsfield to spin, it IS the fault of the
Taliban that it's people are starving and/or dead
already.

---------
I just listened to Donald Rumsfield on TV.  It was a
press conference to
discuss the recent Bomb Damage Assessment in
Afghanistan.  Two reporters,
however, brought up the Food issue.  One noted the
37,000 daily rations the
US is dropping off to the refugees isn't nearly enough
to feed the presumed
4 million starving.  He only responded with, 'Well if
you were one of those
37,000, you'd be pretty appreciative, wouldn't you.'
The other reporter noted that before September 11
there were some 700 tons
of food moving across the Afghan boarder on a daily or
weekly basis: 'So
even with the aid packages the US is dropping,  isn't
there a net loss in
aid going to Afghanistan?'  Donald Rumsfield got a
little flustered with
that one, and all he could say was, 'It would be a
terrible
mischaracterization to say there's a net loss.'   I
was so appalled by then,
I can't remember what he said after that, but he
definitely tried to spin it
back on the fault of the Taliban regime before moving
quickly to the next
question.
Our government is manipulating us terribly, not to
mention slowly starving
to death 4 million Afghan refugees.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1