The Different Views on Controversial Topics

Hello, everyone, and welcome to a new segment of "Afternoon with Andrew"! Today, we will talk about the controversial things that we had been introduced to by various people around us. (ahem.... such as English and Art teacher....ahem...)

Anyways, our first order of business is the controversy that was raised by the Red Maple Book, [The Shepherd's Granddaughter], where parents of young children are writing letters trying to have it pulled from the Red Maple competition and off libraries' shelves, saying that it "seems to be designed to make children hate Israelis". Now, we have to understand that this is, apparently, a complex matter from all I've read for it involves a long history of conflict between many countries against Israel and it should not be a matter that is to be exposed to a child. However, I disagree! I'm pretty sure Israel has less of a history than China, which is 5000 years old with at least 1 quarter of that being bloody conflicts! If I, a 13-year-old boy, could get the gist of the history of China, I'm pretty sure that anyone at my age or above can somewhat understand the history of Israel!

Also, as well with the rest of my controversial stories coming up, they all touch quite a bit on my speech topic, freedom of information. By putting this book off libraries' shelves, it's basically banning or censoring the book from the public eye, and we know that according to the freedom of information act, and the fact that we live in a democratic country, censoring information is, in most cases, ILLEGAL!!! Besides, everyone deserves a right to know! (Also, to those people who wants the book off the shelves, the more you hide the book, the more curious people are going to become and the more exposed the book will be to the public...*innocent whistling*...)

However, everything has 2 sides to it. I can understand why people want the book to be banned for they think that some children could get the wrong message from the book, and I admit, it is quite likely for someone to misinterpret a key concept within a book. Therefore, if this post offends anyone, I sincerely apologize.

OK, moving on! Next on our list is the topic of [United States: The World's Lagest Group of Peacekeepers, or Bullies?]. You see, America is the mose powerful nation on Earth, or a Superpower, if you will. It is currently engaged in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. on, what they said, are: "Peacekeeping missions to destroy terrorist organizations". However, how did these terrorist organizations start in the first place? You guessed it, it's with American companies taking their resources and giving almost nothing back to them, leaving their countries poor and in poverty. So really, the terrorists just want back what belonged to them in the first place and save their country. Is that such a bad thing? No, in my opinion, but the Americans don't seem to wish to negotiate peacefully! Instead, they started a war! That's not nice!

Also, the Americans need better soldiers that are more careful when engaging enemy forces! I say this because on July 12th, 2007, 2 U.S. Apache Helicopters in the Iraqi suburb in New Baghdad engaged about a dozen people using 30mm cannons. Now, some of these people had guns, but they were just engaging in peaceful conversation when hell rained on them. After the incident, a van came in to rescue whoever is still alive, but it was also blown up by the Apache helicopters, but luckily, the 2 children in the van were alive.

The U.S. military first claimed that all of them were anti-Iraqi forces or insurgents, but that's not true, as an anonymous personnel within the U.S. military leaked the video of the incident taken from the Apache helicopters onto WikiLeaks, which specializes in revealing confidential information to the public for it truly believes in the freedom of information as I do.

From the video, it was discovered that 2 Reuters news employee was killed in the incident and the pilots thought that the giant camera of 1 of the news reporters was a RPG, or a Rocket Propelled Grenade. (Seriously, they need better pilots who are actually not blood-thirsty and better eyesights....) Also, the U.S. military said that the pilots' actions were legal under the rules of engagement, but Wikileaks released the Rules of Engagement of 2006, 2007, and 2008, and the actions were in no way legal! This is madness! If the pilots can get away with killing more than a dozen innocent people, imagine what else they can do!

Here is the confidential video that was leaked onto the internet, with a shortened version that grasps the main idea in half the time of the full version (Something that Mr. Gould will like...) . However, if you have time and want to know the full story, go ahead and watch the full version!





Thanks for reading this segment of "Afternoon with Andrew"! See you next week

P.S.: "Afternoon with Andrew" has ran out of fundings and therefore, cancelled. The reason for our endorser's sudden decision to pull our fundings is unknown.... However, we do think it is government-related....

P.P.S. Some parts of said story is entirely fictional, and cannot be confused with reality, or there will be heavy consequences...