humanitarian aid

[Paul Mackin]

Thanks, Mike. Now my comment. Doing a little quick arithmetic we can say the
4 million Afghan refugees who are hungry because of the country's long
drought and the mistreatment by the Taliban (which the questioner was
referring to) plus the 4 million  Barbara says the U.S. is slowly starving
to death makes 8 million, a figure you won't read  in the Post or the Times.
The p-list has become part of that alternate news source it illbehooves us
to give short shrift to.
            P.

----- Original Message -----
From: "mike j" <michaelmailing at yahoo.com>
To: "Pynchon List" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 7:18 PM
Subject: re: humanitarian aid


> 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