The Daily Roxette

Roxette World Tour 2011 schedule
The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.

The Absurdities of the US Government

26 replies

Of course... most of us knew this already. However, this is taking it a little bit TOO far in my opinion:

Lincoln Memorial Video May Be Revised
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour ago

WASHINGTON - The National Park Service sought out footage of “conservative - right-wing demonstrations” to revise the video shown to visitors at the Lincoln Memorial after being pressured by conservatives who complained the display implied Abraham Lincoln supported abortion, homosexuality and liberal causes.

Park Service documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show officials purchased video of President Bush, pro-gun advocates and pro-Iraq war rallies and also considered removing images of Democratic former President Clinton at the memorial.

Park Service officials said they wanted the video to be politically balanced but refused to provide a copy of the revision to The Associated Press, saying it was still being evaluated.

The current eight-minute video, which has been viewed by millions of visitors since 1994, was created by the Park Service in an unprecedented collaboration with high school students around the country. It shows Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, presidential visits and glimpses of dozens of protest marches at the memorial on the Mall.

Students and teachers who collected money to pay for the project and worked with the Park Service a decade ago said they were surprised by the effort to give their display a more conservative touch.

“The Lincoln Memorial is America’s soapbox,” said Ilene M. Morgan of Los Angeles, who as a Scottsdale, Ariz., high school student helped organize the project. “This was where people have stood to get America’s attention. That’s what we were trying to capture.”

The service has spent about $20,000 revamping the video and buying footage - including some from The Associated Press - after conservative political groups criticized the current display and organized a campaign of petitions and e-mails demanding changes.

“The video gave the impression that Lincoln would have supported abortion and homosexuality,” said the Web site of Rev. Louis Sheldon’s Traditional Values Coalition. It cited footage showing events at the memorial staged by abortion and gay rights supporters and war opponents but no similar footage from Christian and conservative interests.

“Absent from the video were any Promise Keepers marches or Marches for Jesus rallies at the capital. The video was totally skewed to present only a leftist viewpoint,” the Web site said. Sheldon did not return repeated phone calls to his office seeking comment.

Documents about the revision were released to two liberal advocacy groups, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and the People For the American Way Foundation, after they sued under the Freedom of Information Act. Major portions of the 1,500 pages, provided to AP by the groups, were blacked out on grounds they included pre-decision information that did not have to be disclosed.

“This is yet another example of the Bush administration’s efforts to turn the federal government into a right-wing propaganda machine,” PFAW president Ralph G. Neas said. “Now they’re trying to rewrite history on the basis of ideology and abuse FOIA to conceal the evidence.”

Park Service Deputy Director Don Murphy disagreed, saying the service has a “responsibility to present a balanced approach. We do not respond solely to any special interest group.”

On Feb. 3, 2003, the conservative Web site CNSNews.com criticized the video, particularly a montage of marchers carrying signs that included, “The Lord is my Shepherd and Knows I am Gay,” “Ratify the ERA,” and “Keep Abortion Legal.”

Sheldon said he complained to the White House and said in a broadcast transcript that was distributed among Park Service executives: “If Bush is in office, let’s have it our way. Let’s make it fair now.”

The agency said no one from the White House ever contacted the Park Service or Interior Department about the video.

But within weeks of the first conservative complaints, the Park Service’s Harpers Ferry, W.Va., design center was put to work on revisions.

In a Feb. 20, 2003, e-mail, Tim Radford, a Harpers Ferry Center employee, requested a search of video archives “for footage of conservative - ‘right wing’ demonstrations (several lines blacked out) Lincoln Memorial. please ’rush.’”

On March 5, 2003, Radford e-mailed his boss: “replacing clinton would require creating a totally new interpretive production. please remember many other presidents, republican and democrat, are shown.”

In an Oct. 21, 2003, e-mail, Park Service production assistant Amber Perkins asked CNN for video of a recent ceremony at which a Bush administration political appointee helped unveil a marker at the spot where King gave his famous speech. She also requested “pro-gun rights/NRA events at the Lincoln memorial.”

A Feb. 3, 2005, document says the revisions project bought video footage of Bush and his father walking down the Lincoln Memorial steps, protesters carrying signs opposing gun control, a rally supporting the war in Iraq, a vigil supporting the war in Afghanistan and the Million Man March.

In a Dec. 10, 2004, memo, the Harpers Ferry Center said the revisions were the result of “concerns and complaints that the interpretive video in the memorial exhibit space focuses on protests from liberal or special interest groups from one point of view and excludes or minimizes other points of view of a more conservative perspective.” Proposed solutions are blacked out.

Vikki Keys, superintendent of parks and monuments on the Mall, said the video work has now been folded into a routine reassessment of the entire memorial exhibit.

She said people today appear more interested in Lincoln’s life - “how he pulled himself up by his own bootstraps from backwoods frontiersman to president” - than in the memorial’s role as a soapbox.

Jaime L. Marquez of Scottsdale, one of the original student organizers, said an exhibit on Lincoln’s life would be different from what the students attempted to create a decade ago.

“I hope they don’t completely redo it, because a lot of kids hold personal ownership of it. It demonstrates that even if you are a sixth-grader you can still make a difference,” she said

Mrs. Marquez said, “We had support from liberals and conservatives in Congress and we had students who were both. It was not a political platform.”

Gregg Behr, who as a student in Pittsburgh’s suburbs helped design the exhibit, said the protests shown in the video “should move, provoke or charge us and outrage us. That isn’t an endorsement of any view.

“I’m glad Rev. Sheldon is outraged,” Behr said. “An exhibit so bland that it offends no one would dishonor all our fellow Americans and friends who came to that space for all sorts of different reasons.”

Some of the footage purchased by the National Park Service for use in revising the video played for visitors to the Lincoln Memorial, according to government documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

- President Bush and his father, the former President Bush, walking down the steps.

- Protesters carrying signs reading: “Ban criminals, not guns,” “No More Gun Control,” and “Liberate Iraq.”

- The Oct. 16, 1995, Million Man March, which crowded the Mall but had its speakers at the Capitol, on the opposite end from the memorial.

- A March 23, 2003, rally at the memorial to support the war against Iraq and of a March 16, 2003, “Win Without War” candlelight vigil there by liberal religious groups.

- From Associated Press Television News, the service purchased video of a Sept. 24, 2001, Afghan show of support and interfaith vigil at the memorial backing the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

- Also from APTN, video taken May 25, 1997, of Navy veteran Jim Smith complaining about the government’s handling of Gulf War Syndrome complaints: “They’re stonewalling us. They are smoking us, not giving us any answers. They are hiding their heads.”
On the Net:

A video version of this story is available at: http://wid.ap.org/video/lincoln.rm

View the entire eight-minute Lincoln Memorial video at: http://wid.ap.org/inv/lincoln.html

National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov
————————————————————————————————————————

I watched this video clip and yes, I agree that it could be updated with current information. However, I did not get the impression that Lincoln “supported” any one cause. He would have “supported” ALL causes. Listen to his words about “all men are created equal”, that he quotes. He meant EVERYONE no matter what your beliefs, race, religion, sexual preference.

I think it’s absolutely WRONG for the current “regime” in office to change it because they’re upset that their views aren’t being represented. Their views are what has this country going to hell, and rather quickly I might add.

If Bush decides something, you know it is going to be an disaster.
That man is a walking disaster area.

I feel sorry for the americans having such an incapable (on all issues) prime minister.

Reminds me a bit of 1984 (George Orwell), in the point that the government changes the history so that no one can ever contradict them.

let’s make him say that the Iraq war was a good thing... *rolls eyes*

Bush makes decisions, yes. The reason all of his Democradolescent political opponents are so popular with about half the US voters is that they NEVER decide anything, they NEVER take action intending to solve anything – they just smile, and gripe about Bush, and tell the public what they think the public wants to hear at the moment. The Democradolescents are like the parent who spoils the kids and lets them do anything they want... and of COURSE the children always like that parent more than they do the strict one. That is, until the children grow up.

Rather than squealing and whining and moaning about Bush, the folks in Europe better wake up and figure out how to deal with the mushrooming religious fundamentalist influx there. One thing all the women in “Eurabia” can do right now is begin sewing the burkhas they will be required to wear.

Religious conservatists are dangerous on both sides of the pond... You in the US have you fair share, but so do we. Let’s not let the idiots take over this world completely.

True, Bush takes decisions.
But the problem is that he takes consequently the wrong decisions.

- Blaming iraq for having weapons of mass destruction: if so, it is clear why: they were bought from the USA!
But until now it has not been proven.
Only good thing about it all is, that Hussein is now gone, but if that was the reason, just say so and don’t come up with stories of weapons of mass destruction.

And I have a strong guess the USA has weapons of mass destruction themselves.
Don’t say: yes, but that is allowed since the USA is a “good” side and the other ones are “bad and evil” sides. Which country is a “good” and “bad” side depends on who you ask.
This means the USA has to get rid of their weapons as well, but that will never happen.

- Another thing in which is made clear that Bush & co are unreliable is the NOT signing of the kyoto-protocol. Most of the world signs this protocol for getting a cleaner world, but the USA (the biggest polluter) turns it down, because they know they can not meet the limits stated in the protocol.

Any other president then Bush (or even putting a monkey on that chair) would have resulted in a better world than the world with Bush as leader of the USA.
This also means that a president who would not have made decisions, would have made the decision not to do the things Bush did, and that is always better than what has been done now.

And talking about raising up kids: The usa is not the one in charge of the world (although they like to think so), even though they are the most powerful country in the world.
But that doesn’t mean that all countries have to follow the rules of the USA.

If there is a country who should be raised, it is the USA itself.
But it is hard to believe that the USA will take anything from an other country, since there is only 1 country who can be right of course and that is the USA, so why listen to other countries?

there is a fair share of other ignorant things that religious leaders have done in other countries, like the president of the congo that said aids can be cured with lemon rinds and garlic,
or the pope who said that ewomen have no place being clergey
or the fanatical taliban that basically destroyed icons in afghanistan that were thousands of yrs old, or the crusades, or the ethnic cleanisng in the sudan by back muslims, so seriously this america bashing is getting really out of line you people all have your own problems you’re not perfect either so please just seriously shut up

oh and my addendum
True, Bush takes decisions.
But the problem is that he takes consequently the wrong decisions.

- Blaming iraq for having weapons of mass destruction: Yes america sold him weapons, but after the gulf war france and germany and china sold him weapons, the russians offered him nuclear power plant designes so who exactly is wrong?

And I have a strong guess the USA has weapons of mass destruction themselves. yes we do have nuclear weapons, but lets be honest only a fool would leave himself completely disarmed. Noone is saying america is 100% good but i for one know my people no matter what any other country in this world did would ever approve the use of nukes on anyone, although sometimes the idea of an irradiated mecca sounds good :)

- Another thing in which is made clear that Bush & co are unreliable is the NOT signing of the kyoto-protocol. bush didn’t sign the kyoto protocal because it took countrys liek china which are rapidly developing industiral powrshouses and exempted them from most of the kyoto provisions by stilll declaring them 3rd would undeveloped countries. China has an appauling enviromental record

Any other president then Bush (or even putting a monkey on that chair) would have resulted in a better world than the world with Bush as leader of the USA. so you say but i do imagine your own country has had its fair share of morons in power

And talking about raising up kids: The usa is not the one in charge of the world (although they like to think so), even though they are the most powerful country in the world.
But that doesn’t mean that all countries have to follow the rules of the USA. noone says you people have to follow anything we say, but relize the same applies to use why you try to edict our poliocies and the protection of our peopel from the radical nut jobs youd rather hide from than do anything about

We could either have the pro-Saddam terrorist sympathizers cheering for dictator/tyrant Saddam still in office, living in his palaces and acting as slave master of the Iraqi people,

Or we could have the pro-Saddam terrorist sympathizers condemning the USA for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam, removing the slave master and allowing his people to put him on trial for crimes against them.

The second alternative is better for the world – so, all you pro-Saddam terrorist sympathizers just continue squealing at the horrible old USA all you want to. Nyah, nyah, nyahhhhhh.

“The second alternative is better for the world – so, all you pro-Saddam terrorist sympathizers just continue squealing at the horrible old USA all you want to. Nyah, nyah, nyahhhhhh.”

You know Oldag... I thought you were childish before... now you’ve gone and proved it by this comment.

Just heard on the radio that Amnesty International is going to start a petition to close Guantanamo Bay, because civil rights are being violated there on a big scale.

If it were for an other country then the USA, mr. Bush would probably already have sent troops to that country to invade it, to make an end to it, but this is happening IN the USA, by american people.

So don’t come here whining that other countries have dictators and bad leaders, because Bush is a criminal himself as well and should be brought to justice (as he himself likes to say that).

BTW Oldag: Off course it is good that Saddam has gone, but the problem is that getting Hussein out, was not the reason for invading Iraq.
Bush made that the reason AFTER he couldn’t find weapons of mass destruction.

In my opinion, changing reasons for invasion is lying and a proof for the fact that this US Government can’t be trusted.

Being against Bush doesn’t necessarily mean that you are pro-Hussein.

Sommar: Just so you know, Guantanamo Bay isn’t IN the United States. It’s in Cuba. Clarification purposes only :o)

Any democratic nation has the right to invade and topple a dictator. Dictators are masters of slave pens and have no rights whatever. May we please hear some reasons that Saddam should have been allowed to stay in office ? Please be specific.... it will be enlightening, to hear from those who support dictator’s rights.

It’s interesting that 29 Democrat senators, including Hillary, Kerry and Edwards, betrayed their party, betrayed Europe and so forth, by voting FOR the resolution to use force against Iraq. Had they voted the other way, Bush would not have had congressional permission to invade Iraq. (The US government has three branches that check and balance each other. The representative branch, in this case, did not, as it could have, prevent the war from occurring. Nobody ever mentions that... they just dump on Bush, because it feels good to call him names.)

Now, everyone always KNEW that Bush was a liar and a criminal. So, how come these Democrat senators looked at the evidence presented by a KNOWN liar, and accepted it? Everyone has known all along that Bush is stupid – so the Senators simply accepted his “evidence” and voted to allow him to invade? Were they duped by a stupid man, a known liar? Or, were they accomplices? The 29 Democrat Iscariots who stabbed their own party in the back, and allowed war to be unleashed on Iraq, have some explaining to do. They are just as guilty as Bush, if they were duped by a known liar, a known stupid guy. How competent does that make THEM ?

Off course Hussein had to go.

You didn’t read my last line in the previous comment. So don’t say I am pro-Hussein or any other dictator.

About all the senators who voted for the invasion of Iraq: they did that because it is all politics and politics is always a dirty game.
They knew it would be better for their own career to vote FOR invasion.

@LS: Thanks for clearing that up.
I meant of course to say it was on a US base (although this base is in Cuba) .

there is still no conclusive evidence that any abuse at all is going on at guantanmo bay at all. All this is is publicity bull crap for people still agaisnt the invasion...the rest fo the world wants to go back to pilfering from the oil for food program,

and amnesty internation is a bunch of hypocrites, where were they during all the genocide in sudan, bosnia, the congo

i am so sick of half asses thinking they are rightepus when they aren’t

Sommar: Yep, is a USNavy base. What the US is doing with a base in Cuba kind of eludes me at the moment... last time I checked, Castro wasn’t high on the A-List of friends.

But I could be wrong

Oldag: fine to fight against dictators, but why not ALL dictators? and not only the ones that are located on rich ground or far from US? Why not China? Why not Cuba?

Regarding Europe being invaded by muslims: we don’t have to worry, big US will save us once again. Or?

Can’t someone just put Bush out of his misery... do the whole world a favour!

Comment removed by author

“Any democratic nation has the right to invade and topple a dictator.”

So any person living in a dictatorship against his/her will has the right to die because of some foreign politician lacking any credibility whatsoever in his own country wants to recover some popularity declares himself “the lord of freedom”?

Face it dude, in wars innocent people are the ones who die, and even if you remove the dictator, it takes time for the people that had made a living during those times to want to be “democratic”.
And talking about democratic regimes... what’s it with Chile and Pinochet...? wasn’t Mr. Noriega of Panama a CIA informer...? Did not the USA support during long years Saddam...? Was he so much better then? What made him change if so...?
As far as I see, freedom for some countries is just a matter of “point of view”, and you should not declare the right to die of thousands of people for the sake of the point of view of the current geopolitics, that makes you simplistically evil.
:)

it’s amazing that a president, who has caused more damage to its own country than any terrorist has ever caused there, is still being defended by his folks, only in the USA :)

Still: I ain’t defending him in any way shape or form. I didn’t vote for im, sure as shit didn’t want him in office, and wish to hell he ain’t in there now.

Just to let everyone here know:

I followed the link that Lawyer posted. All well and good, not a problem with that link. HOWEVER the link that is on that page has some SERIOUS issues with it. My computer was attacked by Trojan.Moo and lucky for me, I have Norton Anti-Virus on this thing. For the last 45 minutes or so, I’ve been scraping off AdAware / SpyWare / Viruses.

DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK ON THAT PAGE!

Lawyer: The page you posted is all well and good. It’s the link on THEIR page that has a problem.

LS: I could see that and I respect you for the way start seeing things now!

StillFar: E-mail me at [email protected]

I will send you a link that I go to every day. Let’s just say that after certain events in recent US History (oh... the re-election of said twit) I’ve had some “eye openers”.

Didn’t vote for him the first time either. In fact... since I’ve been old enough to vote... I’ll admit I voted for Clinton in ’96 for the simple fact that Dole was too full of shit and a liar (aren’t all politicans though?) Every other time... I’ve tried to read up on everything and vote for the “lesser of two evils”.

Oh, and Santi? I’m STILL trying to figure out why it is we’ve toppled people that WE PUT IN POWER!!!!

clinton was a great president and people relelcted bush because kerry would have been a pussy in office he would have pulled usa support out of iraq and turned iraq over to the un who would have allowed a nut job arab cleric with strong ties to nuclear hungry iran and we would have had to go back in , so while bush may not be perfect he’s not as bad a person as you claim, you all have politicians under tyour own flagsa who have sucked just as much or worse rember that

Comment removed by author

Close

Get the latest articles to your mailbox, subscribe to The Daily Roxette newsletter.

Enter your email address:


Delivered by
FeedBurner