Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ujeni] Crisis Corps

Expand Messages
  • Christine West
    Hello all!, Just to let everybody know, Crisis Corps gave me a call to see if I wanted to work on a 6 month project with Unicef dealing with a Cholera outbreak
    Message 1 of 13 , Nov 8, 2002
    • 0 Attachment

      Hello all!,

      Just to let everybody know, Crisis Corps gave me a call to see if I wanted to work on a 6 month project with Unicef dealing with a Cholera outbreak program in Lilongwe.  They are looking for people in the health field to work as part of a 10 person team.  I imagine most people are busy with work, graduate school and/or family obligations as I am, but I thought I'd  put the information out there. 

      Contact Michele Giselli, mghiselli@... or 1-800-424-8580, x2260 if you are interested.  

      Christine



      Do you Yahoo!?
      U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
    • Paul DEVER
      The more you work in countries en route to development , and you see how much of The Lords of Poverty rings true, you begin to lose faith in man s (as a
      Message 2 of 13 , Nov 8, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        The more you work in "countries en route to development", and you see how
        much of "The Lords of Poverty" rings true, you begin to lose faith in man's
        (as a race or genus...not sexist) ability to help his fellow man, not that
        everyone should be selfless, but if only half the polpulation could help one
        person each, then everyone woould be helped!

        Simplistic, yes...but if people can sometimes think of others (while
        thinking of him/herself) and do a bit of good, then we would be better off.


        Paul's Pablum of the day...






        ----Original Message Follows----
        From: "Weber" <weber@...>
        Reply-To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
        To: <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: Re: [ujeni] trying again
        Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:13:27 -0800

        Hey Mark...It isn't this one that spurs me to action here...but yee gods,
        what a statistic and to think I felt safer riding in Malawi than in a
        collective taxi hurtling down a hill in Jamaica or on a bus flying around
        mountain curves in the middle of the road in Ecuador! Little did I know. I
        remember Danny Smith, one of our group's trainers, saying he didn't like
        express buses because they went too fast and that the locals were more his
        speed. But about your aid statistics, I'm speechless! Have been for
        years. I've known about some of Christine's information for for a long time
        from a friend who worked for USAID and lobbied Congress for their aid
        budget. He became a cynic just like Paul... Really, what can one say, or
        more importantly do? Cathy

        -----Original Message-----
        From: holland@... <holland@...>
        To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:58 PM
        Subject: [ujeni] trying again


        >Ok, that one seems to have failed to spark much interest. How about this
        one. Can it be true as printed?
        >
        >Number of people killed in traffic accidents of all types, per 100m
        vehicle-km
        >
        >Malawi 1117
        >India 65
        >Egypt 44
        >Kenya 41
        >Latvia 25
        >
        >Malawi has 15 times the vehicle death rate of any other country in the
        world?
        >
        >Mark
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >



        _________________________________________________________________
        The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
        http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
      • Kristof Nordin
        ... From: Christine Chumbler To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:59 AM Subject: Re:
        Message 3 of 13 , Nov 11, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          -----Original Message-----
          From: Christine Chumbler <cchumble@...>
          To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
          Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:59 AM
          Subject: Re: [ujeni] trying again

          Also, I think I remember hearing that
          >Malawi's traffic deaths have increased in recent years as the roads
          >continue to deteriorate.>

          Hey all, I'm finally back from a long trip to the USA and I'm slowly wading
          through e-mail backlogs in no particular order. I would have to disagree
          with this comment about roads continuing to deteriorate, the roads have
          improved tremendously over the past 5 years - and maybe that is the true
          problem? Better roads, faster speeds? Definitely more and more cars. Who
          knows the real causes.

          Stacia
        • Vyrle Owens
          20 November 2002 Dear all, Mark tried to get a response to foreign aid and traffic fatality rates. Sorry I am not up to date on foreign aid. My opinion is
          Message 4 of 13 , Nov 20, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            20 November 2002

            Dear all,

            Mark tried to get a response to foreign aid and traffic fatality rates.
            Sorry I am not up to date on foreign aid. My opinion is there is little
            relationship between money aid and either economic, social, or
            "democratic" development.

            As to traffic fatality rates, I was aware of the extremely high fatality
            rates in Malawi (and other places in Southern Africa) when I was in
            Malawi. Not that anyone actually paid much attention to the statistics,
            but you can understand a little more about why I was so reluctant to
            have PCVs traveling around the country. I thought we were all safer at
            home (in Malawi).

            Now to a new set of numbers:

            Perhaps we could call this "Republican Presidential Mandate???"

            According to the census there were 281,421,906 people in the United
            States in the year 2000. http://factfinder.census.gov

            Of these people about 220 million are younger than the president and 60
            million are older (give or take a few million)

            Of these people 205,815,000 are of voting age.
            http://www.fec.gov/pages/2000turnout/reg&to00.htm
            Basically everyone over the age of 18.

            Of the voting age population approximately 15 million are not eligible
            to vote. Non citizens and others, including 1.2 -1.5 million felons.

            Of the voting age population 156,421,311 were registered to vote in the
            2000 general election. Of the registered voters 105,586,274 cast a
            ballot. Some 2% did not vote for president

            Now, of interest to note, there were 16 candidates for the office of
            President on the ballot someplace. This varied by state. There were
            also miscellaneous write-in votes.

            According to http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm there were
            105,405,100 votes cast for the office of president.

            George Bush received 50,456,002 votes (47.87%).

            Al Gore received 50,999,897 votes (48.38%).

            All other candidates received the balance. (3.75%)

            "Miscellaneous write-in", "none of these candidates", blank, and void
            votes, numbering 138,216 were not included in some totals.


            Now to the question (maybe this is a riddle).

            In our "democratic" government of the people, by the people, for the
            people, who won the presidency?

            And

            Who in the executive branch, legislative branch, or the judicial branch
            of our representative republic really represents the people?

            Thanks for your thoughtful replies,

            Vyrle

            PS. By the way, feel free to ask and answer any other question that
            comes to mind.

            I also have some traffic fatality numbers to stimulate conversation at a
            near future date.


            -----Original Message-----
            From: holland@... [mailto:holland@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, 06 November, 2002 19:58
            To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [ujeni] trying again

            Ok, that one seems to have failed to spark much interest. How about
            this one. Can it be true as printed?

            Number of people killed in traffic accidents of all types, per 100m
            vehicle-km

            Malawi 1117
            India 65
            Egypt 44
            Kenya 41
            Latvia 25

            Malawi has 15 times the vehicle death rate of any other country in the
            world?

            Mark




            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Vyrle Owens
            20 November 2002 Dear Rand, Dolly finally has her own email address and would like to subscribe to the ujeni. Would you be kind enough to instruct her?
            Message 5 of 13 , Nov 20, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              20 November 2002

              Dear Rand,

              Dolly finally has her own email address and would like to subscribe to
              the ujeni. Would you be kind enough to instruct her?


              dollyowens@...

              Thanks,

              Vyrle
            • Paul DEVER
              That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral college, and do not have the popular vote. Some wish to return to the popular vote,
              Message 6 of 13 , Nov 21, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral
                college, and do not have the popular vote.

                Some wish to return to the popular vote, but they too are missing the point.
                Barely half of the eligible people voted, so neither candidate had a
                "majority" per se, but a majority of the votes cast. There is quite a
                difference. Once could argue that the eal winner wa "no one", in the NO ONE
                received the largest vote of "present <in the country>, but not voting"



                _________________________________________________________________
                Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
                http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
              • Holland, Mark
                I think the question of mandate has been largely obviated: Bush was elected without any mandate whatsoever, he proceeded to ignore that fact completely and
                Message 7 of 13 , Nov 21, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  I think the question of mandate has been largely obviated: Bush was elected without any mandate whatsoever, he proceeded to ignore that fact completely and govern as if he had the undivided support of the nation, and in the midterm elections the American people granted him exactly the authority he sought. So clearly Bush won the election: it just took him 2 extra years to do it. My dislike for the outcome and also for the mechanisms he's used since 9/11 to solidify his domestic support does not change their reality.

                  Mark

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Paul DEVER [mailto:pcpaul@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 5:47 AM
                  To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [ujeni] trying again, and again


                  That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral
                  college, and do not have the popular vote.

                  Some wish to return to the popular vote, but they too are missing the point.
                  Barely half of the eligible people voted, so neither candidate had a
                  "majority" per se, but a majority of the votes cast. There is quite a
                  difference. Once could argue that the eal winner wa "no one", in the NO ONE
                  received the largest vote of "present <in the country>, but not voting"



                  _________________________________________________________________
                  Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
                  http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail




                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                • Vyrle Owens
                  5 December 2002 Dear Mark and also Paul, Thanks for the response to my election numbers. Mark you were able to very succinctly summarize several of my
                  Message 8 of 13 , Dec 5, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    5 December 2002

                    Dear Mark and also Paul,

                    Thanks for the response to my election numbers. Mark you were able to
                    very succinctly summarize several of my thoughts regarding the
                    situation. And Paul, thanks for the electoral college reminder. If we
                    as an electorate had not been so evenly divided, the electoral college
                    input would have been mostly perfunctory.

                    I am, of course, disappointed at the manner the president and those who
                    closely support him are manipulating the situation. But I have been
                    around long enough to know that the world is mostly run by well
                    organized minority groups, be they dictators with a small army, or
                    republicans with apparent support of 20-40 percent of the electorate.

                    Later,

                    Vyrle
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.