Number one: I was asked toward the end of the previous thread about a conversation I had with Bill Jemas a couple years ago about writing about Marvel in public.
Now I don’t ordinarily discuss private phone calls without the permission of the other party, but Joe is choosing to make it public, so…uncomfortably…okay.
I wrote a column that was, as I recall, a response to Bill’s initial “retailer IQ” comments. Bill called and we had a conversation that I would characterize as polite and even friendly (although lord knows how it would be described now.) Bill said that if I ever had any questions about things he’d said, I should feel free to call him and ask him to clarify it or discuss it further.
I told him that it was a very generous offer, but here was the problem: “But I Digress” isn’t a news column (for the most part). It’s an observational column that expresses opinions about things that are out there in the public forums. Yes, I could pick up the phone and say, “Bill, what the hëll did you mean by that.” But if I did that, then I’d be morally obligated to contact, say, Todd McFarlane, next time he said something stupid, and ask what the hëll *he* was talking about before I commented on it. Or what if Paul Levitz said something that was so dumb it prompted comment. Should I call Paul before ragging on DC? Bill laughed and said, “No! Absolutely not! Feel free to go after Paul whenever you want!” (Again, I emphasize this was SAID IN JEST, so it doesn’t turn into “Bill Jemas told Peter David to trash Paul Levitz whenever possible.”)
By contrast, I told him that if someone contacted me and said, “I heard Bill Jemas said such and such,” and I felt it was newsworthy, I would absolutely, one hundred percent call him and ask him what was up with it. And if that conversation convinced me it wasn’t newsworthy or dubious, I’d kill the story, because investigative journalism isn’t really BID’s thing. But public statements were fair game for public replies.
And he said he understood and was cool with that.
And I’ve stuck with that agreement and understanding.
So…that’s the first thing
Second thing: I’m starting to like Joe Q’s thinking. He put forward a fairly logical progression: If my contention is that Marvel is hiring Second Age, Inc., which in turn loans out my services, then the credit page on “Captain Marvel” can be changed to read “by Second Age, Inc.”
By all means.
I don’t *think* Marvel’s under any obligation to put my name anywhere on the book. Heck, before Stan Lee started slapping credits on the splash pages, most stories were fairly anonymous. (Indeed, if I’m recalling correctly, DC thought the practice so gauche that they did a parody version of Stan called “Stan Brag”…before they eventually started running credits themselves, of course.)
One would think Marvel would *want* my name on the book, for the purpose of selling copies. But if Marvel wants to substitute the credit line “by Second Age, Inc.,” by all means, if it’ll make ’em happy, feel free. Listing corporations as authors isn’t unusual. Heck, how many times do you see legal material at the end of a movie that says, “For purpose of copyright, XYZ Corporation is the author of this film.” My novels such as “Sir Apropos of Nothing” and “Knight Life” are copyright Second Age, Inc.
In fact…somehow it would be appropriate. My very first published work for Marvel was a one page Fumetti that appeared on the inside back cover of the Marvel Fumetti Book. I submitted the idea to the editors, and somehow my name got separated from the text (how, I’ve no clue.) So when editorial went around trying to find out who wrote it, it never occurred to them to check in the sales office, which is where I was working at the time. The result? My first published Marvel work ran with a question mark next to the “written by” credit. So if CM winds up being my last published work for them, which it indeed might, this would bring it full circle.
Hmm. Considering the number of people asking why I’m still working for Marvel, perhaps a return to the question mark would be in order.
PAD
• 
Bill called and we had a conversation that I would characterize as polite and even friendly (although lord knows how it would be described now.) Bill said that if I ever had any questions about things he’d said, I should feel free to call him and ask him to clarify it or discuss it further.
….
And he said he understood and was cool with that.
Huh, that’s so weird. Very friendly, but a far cry from the way it is now. So where did the lines of communication to break down? Can’t have been the open letter, as that was prompted specifically by a lack of communication.
BTW, only the second portion of the post is showing up on the reply page for some reason.
Oh, never mind, it’s all showing up now.
I have to admit that I’m curious why you’re still around Marvel. If I’d been treated so unprofessionally, and dealt with hypocritically at times, I’d leave if I were in a position to go. If Captain Marvel is your last Marvel work, so be it. Hopefully, it won’t be your last Marvel work any time soon, though…
But, This isnt Bill saying this stuff. Its Joe. Maybe thats the difference.
I think the problem is that you are showing them up in a lie. They said that the retailers like their no reorder policy. After Heidi said that ‘most’ don’t they attacked her.
Now you are running that poll…They know must retailers dislike the policy, but they want to keep the lie alive.
Whats a Fumetti?
Fumetti is the Italian word for comic book. “Fumo” means smoke in the Italian, and the word “fumetti” derives from the fact that word balloons look like smoke coming from the characters’ mouths.
I’m not sure what a Marvel fumetto is, though.
In the U.S., “fumetti” is comics done with photographs rather than artwork. The term apparently came into relatively common American use in the 1950s, via Harvey Kurtzman’s HELP! magazine, but as transliterated words often do, it lost the niceties of case and gender.
Marvel Fumetti was a b&w comic published ages ago. The “fumetti” deal referred to the fact that it was actual pictures of actual people (Marvel editors and talent mostly), with word ballons and some uses of art added.
It was a fun comic, as I recall. I missed it when it first came out, but found it after years of $1 bin searching at cons. It’s worth looking for.
Hey PAD! This thing is getting bigger and bigger. I’m playing this web-based game where one of the creators do regular columns (usually on the game industry) and this week he posted his opinion on this matter with you and Joe.
This is the column.
And this is the thread talking about it (my comment is the third one!)
If you want to read it I’d love to hear your opinion on this but I’d understand if you’re not interested as it is quite a long column.
I hate to say that he does have a a point…
I still enjoy your work and please keep it up and don’t leave Captain Marvel over this!
He has a point, but it’s misplaced, because it ignores four fundamental aspects:
1) Joe and Bill set the tone of Marvel’s interaction with the public. A chest-thumping, WWF style. My initial “open letter” was written in that exact style. They set the example. I simply followed it. I do nothing that Joe and Bill don’t do. Furthermore, the columnist’s examples are not analogous because they’re all rooted in the concept of employees taking internal matters and complaining about them. That is 180 degrees from taking publicly voiced matters and commenting about them. Joe, by contrast, is taking private meetings and such and using them as attack fodder. I’ve never done that, and never will.
2) I write critical columns about Marvel specifically to *avoid* charges of conflict of interest. Because if all I wrote was praise (which I’ve done on any number of occasions), it can’t be taken seriously because lack of criticism would make it seem as if I were simply sucking up. The only way the column can possibly be taken seriously is if it’s even handed.
3) I’m not on staff at Marvel. The monies that are paid to my corporation don’t purchase loyalties. They purchase stories. Publishable stories, produced on a timely basis. That’s my sole obligation. I fulfill that. Not every Marvel creator can say that. One would think that would be the overriding concern.
4) Public complaints of employers in fact happen all the time. Professional sports. Movies. TV. Players complain about managers, actors about directors, directors about studios, writer/producers about networks. All the time. All. The Time. And questions of teams are never called in.
Thought for the day: There’s a fine line between a team and a gang.
PAD
It is interesting that you should mention the WWF, as they realize that controversy sells. They can’t sell wrestling in general as that, because wrestling in general doesn’t offend people way that gains it popularity, but they sell individual wrestlers that way. I had to wonder why you continue working for companies that seem so offensive to you, while you continue to publicly criticize them and their policies. I remembered that Mark Millar does that too, and he is insanely popular. However, despite the fact that he more or less called DC a bunch of censoring conservative bášŧárdš, he is working for them again, and on Superman no less! I think that despite his beliefs, he would write Bible Adventures if he thought it would increase his popularity.
Now, if he wrote for another, smaller and less evil, comic company, he would be considerably less popular, but his creative voice could be unleashed without editing whatsoever if he wished. He isn’t up for that, and I have to wonder why (and I think you know that I’d have a few opinions on why as well). Are you asking for the same reasoning to be applied to you? You can gain long term, lasting popularity by expressing your talent, and I think you have the talent for that, because I buy all the comics you write, but talent alone isn’t much when it comes to bringing in short term sales. You can gain short term popularity by being controversial, but it won’t work with intelligent, discerning readers. That is, it won’t work with people who will look up your comics 20 years from now.
Anyway, if you really do want popularity through controversy, it is more effective to offend individuals through bashing generalities. Not many people care about Quesada and Jemas, but much more people care about Marvel Comics. Criticizing Quesada and Jemas will keep you in their minds continually for some time, but bashing Marvel Comics as an evil greedy empire (and being intelligent enough to convince people it is true) ran by the evil Quesada and Jemas will be more effective. Concentrating on the short memory and low intelligence of the average person, you can work for Marvel while doing this, no matter how bad it gets. It just has to be justified by sales. This is why the WWF wrestlers can bash their “boss” while both he and they are popular personalities on the same TV show. He built up his popularity over the years, and it was easy for him to roleplay the evil, greedy boss. Individual wrestlers’ popularity is increased when they pull off roleplaying convincing vignettes with him. I mentioned roleplaying right? The people feeding off of controversy roleplay nearly constantly. That increases your popularity, and it increases the potential of Jemas and Quesada to fuel other writers’ popularity by getting into further “feuds” with them.
Myself, I’d just rather read good comics. I don’t care much about the state of the comics industry and the amount of money that writers bring in. That’s why I don’t read much that Millar writes, for instance. I don’t like his style on most of his stuff. 20 years from now, I’ll still be saying good stuff about your Captain Marvel and Supergirl. I won’t be praising the Authority all that much at that time. Surely by then, shock value will consist of comics that have real arms that reach out and kill people who show fear while reading them, and the shock value of words and paint will be old hat. Good writing, however, lasts forever and doesn’t need gimmicks.
Nexus, thanks for that link! I think every comic should be given the “Melany test.” I might actually suggest that to Friends of Lulu for the next convention where they have a booth.
Mr. David’s comments about public complaints about employers gets to one of the unanswered questions about this whole affair – Why hasn’t Mr. David been fired already?
In the examples given of movies, TV or professional sports, most of the time the person complaining is a big enough star that the employer can’t really do anything about it without cutting off their nose to spite their face.
In Mr. David’s case, while he’s one of the best writers in the business today, I don’t think firing him would have a major negative impact on Marvel (at least not when compared to the other things they’ve done).
So why does Mr. Quesada continue to play this back-and-forth game? My guess is he desperately wants to be just “one of the guys”, something that’s really impossible when you are the Editor-In-Chief of one of the country’s biggest comic publishers. Most E-I-C’s would have either ignored Mr. David, or fired him right away. That’s what “suits” do. Because Mr. Quesada doesn’t want to think of himself as a “suit” and doesn’t want others to see him that way, he’s trapped.
To me that explains why Mr. Quesada seems to be taking this so personally. Remember his initial response online to Mr. David’s original proposal? It read like someone who was hurt and wanted to hurt the other person in return. He reacted to it on a personal level, NOT as an editor-in-chief to one of his writers.
Mike
So essentially you are being offered a choice between doing the column at CBG or working at Marvel. You can’t really do a column about comics in America and not mention Marvel, or only mention Marvel in positive terms. I guess if that’s the way they want to do business, but it’s an unfortunate attitude. Essentially, Marvel is telling their employees they can’t engage in criticism.
One more point wrong on the FaitH column (I can’t seem to find where to post replies).
He wrote:”imagine Ebert & Ropert doing their weekly TV show, rating movies, while working for Fox or Universal. Would their employer be pleased with that?”
Well, since Ebert & Roeper’s program (and previously Siskel & Ebert) are produced by DISNEY, and they’ve often panned Disney/Touchstone films, their employer seems perfectly fine with that.
Nexus (from his opinion that he linked to): I know that Joe Q is now publicly attacking Peter too but you have to remember that it was Peter who started all of this with his open letter to Marvel over the price hike.
Luigi Novi: Except that Peter never attacked or insulted Joe. He simply voiced his reasoned objections to it, and suggested an alternative course of action to it.
rogerburks: I had to wonder why you continue working for companies that seem so offensive to you, while you continue to publicly criticize them and their policies.
Luigi Novi: Why is it considered a contradiction to criticize companies you work for? If one were to only work for companies that you bore absolutely no criticism for, you’d end up not working.
When I was growing up, during the heart of the Vietnam protests, there was a mindset which greeted many of the protestors. And that mindset was: Your country. Love it or leave it. There’s this warped notion that says that you cannot find one aspect of something objectionable while simultaneously being involved with another aspect of it.
Show of hands: Who is involved in a relationship with someone where they adore absolutely every single thing about that person? They have no habits that offend you. They say and do nothing that annoys you. There’s nothing you wouldn’t change about them if you could, not a blessed thing.
Anyone with their hands up, kindly pull the other one.
Now…CAN you change them, even if you really put your mind to it? Most of the time, the answer is no. So you do one of two things: You end the relationship. Or you stick it out and deal with the things you find objectionable as well as you can, and hope for the best.
I’m big on the latter approach. If Joe favors the former, will…not much I can do about it. But I won’t change my approach to suit someone else’s.
Does that answer it?
PAD
Just a counterpoint, PAD:
I work for a public company. I’m an employee, not a freelancer. In my employee handbook, there are strict guidelines against my talking to the media about my company without approval from our PR staff and my boss.
You’re in a different situation, to be sure, but the point is simply this: Joe Q’s not the only management guy who wants the people under him to stay quiet (or at the very least talk like Mark Millar, praising Marvel lavishly above all others).
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Marvel considers in the future putting a similar clause in its exclusive contracts for talent. And CrossGen seems to have similar clauses for its talent (see the current Mark Waid situation).
a couple of links that may be of interest to all
Who should be EIC if Sony buys Marvel
The Real U-Decide: Joe vs. PAD
Wow! Oh God! I just read Cap #4 like one minute ago and I am freaking out! Please don’t leave whatever happens please please please!
Whatever you gotta do – suck up, do backflips, bring Quemas coffee -please do it! I’ll help!
Shawn
And when I was on staff at Marvel, there were similar guidelines. You didn’t see me going around saying that Marvel was treating Jack Kirby shabbily while I had my 9 to 5 job, did you?
PAD
I’m gonna agree with Shawn. Leave Marvel if you want to(you might be happier and thats always good for anyone), but just finish this arc on Cap.Marvel for us!
Its so good it hurts.
Col
Hey, if you don’t like it leave. How hard can it be. Quit whining, complaining, and just leave. Marvel has new policies and if ya don’t like em then hit the highway. Your work is alright. You should have no problem getting a job somewhere else. Just quit moaning about it. Consider yourself lucky. Some other talented people cannot even get jobs anymore in the comic business.
I think the “love it or leave it” reply is a bit oversimplified. When I have a problem with something that my boss is doing, and I think it is possible to change it, I ask him about it personally. I do not make public comments about his policies. To do so without consulting him is insubordination. While you can validly say that Marvel is not your boss, I have to wonder what consitutes friendly behavior here. I don’t think we’re seeing that from either side right now. The Vietnam analogy is questionable, because you are not protesting something that you have a role in changing when you protest Marvel Comics, for the same reason that you can validly say that Marvel isn’t your boss. Protest is a form of objection to be used when more diplomatic objections fail. If you aren’t putting up a front here, then I would say that you are burning your bridges behind you. Furthermore, what degree of wrongs do you have a duty to right with such measures, and how far are you willing to go to revenge a personal slight? Myself, when I find such differences between myself and my employer (and I have), I go to work for someone else. It isn’t the same as leaving your country.
hmm. Seeing as how this conversation, like so many Internet conversations, is possibly doomed to failure through indirectness, let me clarify: You are saying, “Why should I leave Marvel? I have the right to say whatever I want!” My answer is, “Do you think you will feel fulfilled working for someone that you so clearly don’t like? I can’t. I don’t think you will either, unless you have a love affair with whining and complaining. That kind of interaction leaves people drained and frustrated. It isn’t for the best of either party, even if someone “wins.” “Winning” in this game is the same as making someone back off the proverbial narrow bridge. It is beginning to look like neither side can ignore their pride long enough to do so. The result: neither party gets what it wants.
This is primarily just to sort things out for myself, so please bear with me.
Marvel contracts PAD’s services to write stories about (in this case) Captain Marvel; therefore, he writes stories about Captain Marvel. Krauss Publications (in the form of Comic Buyer’s Guide) contracts his services to write an observational opinion column about the comics industry, so he writes ob-op columns about the industry (which includes Marvel).
Now Marvel (in the person of Joe Quesada) is saying that their contract with him should supercede the obligations of Krauss’s contract with him.
Are they right? Eh, I can’t say; I’m certainly no legal expert, and I don’t know the generalities or particulars of freelance contracting. All I know is, I feel like a child caught between two parents arguing, and it makes my heart sad.
Isn’t the phrase independent contractor used for most of Marvel’s writers? If he is an independent contractor then he should be able to comment on whatever he wants. He’s not an employee of Marvel. They pay for stories that they’ve contracted out to him. If he is not an independent contractor then how can he work for Marvel’s competition: DC and Dark Horse? Wouldn’t that be a conflict of interests? Which would also effect many other creators.
Joe’s case is flawed. He wants the benefits of having independent contractors but not the curses (for no better word coming to mind).
http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/oddball/enlarge.cgi?date=2001-06-11
and
http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/oddball/closeup.php?image=fumetti-photo.jpg
Look and learn
Ðámņ.
I love Marvel comics, like Mr. Quesada’s internet antics (for the most part) and know and appreciate the brilliant – unbelievable! – job he did with this company; I CERTAINLY like and appreciate your approach, Mr. David (as I understand it through this forum and BID). Fact is, I’m posting this HERE. I’m a fan.
It seems to me, though, that there’s some serious personal issues between you guys, and personally – no matter how great the job or how much fan support I got – I would NEVER work under these conditions, not for anyone. If Mr. Quesada feels he has the right to censor employees working in a medium relying on NOTHING but creativity and free thinking, citing some militaristic ‘with us or against us’ rubbish and using intimidation tactics, he’ll soon find himself with nobody to write Marvel books but has-been hacks who simply don’t give a šhìŧ anymore, and people who are so desperate to get into the business they’d put up with anything. I’m from Israel; I’ve lived under censorship and Spartan mentality my entire life and hope to never have to go back; I know that I, for one, would drastically cut my (considerable) Marvel orders if I thought that was the working atmosphere and creative philosophy there.
Except I don’t. It really seems Mr. Quesada has it in for you, Mr. David, wants you out, and so does his best to push all of your buttons.
Yours, and nobody else’s.
It’s a dámņ shame that this should happen with such a talented writer and excellent book (and not some drekk which shouldn’t even be published by some mediocre penner who should have never been hired. Lord knows we have enough of THAT crap being solicited to us as well); that there are things – personal considerations – which count more than month-in-month-out top grade quality product (that doesn’t even sell SO bad, really) in an industry fighting for survival; especially because if this isn’t a soap/WWF style publicity stunt, we will all probably be soon deprived of one of the finest books on the market, currently and in recent memory. It hurts, saddens and disappoints me, as a fan of the MAINSTREAM comic-book genre in general, and MARVEL SUPERHERO comics in particular, to see two extremely gifted people (that I truly LIKE, as much as one can without actually meeting them) wasting time and energy on petty squabbles instead of directing it to making more good comics together.
Ðámņ shame.
Mike: Hey, if you don’t like it leave. How hard can it be. Quit whining, complaining, and just leave. Marvel has new policies and if ya don’t like em then hit the highway. Your work is alright. You should have no problem getting a job somewhere else. Just quit moaning about it.
Luigi Novi: Bûllšhìŧ. I don’t recall Peter “whining,” “complaining,” “moaning,” or saying he didn’t “like” something about Marvel. What I do recall is him voicing his observations about various things in politics, entertainment and comics, about both Marvel and other companies, which included praise where he thought it deserved, and criticism where they thought it deserved. The idea that voicing legitimate and reasoned criticisms is “whining” or “moaning” is false.
Peter David wrote: <>
Oh yeah! Like THATS been working so well lately.
Peter David wrote: One would think Marvel would *want* my name on the book, for the purpose of selling
copies.
Oh yeah! Like THATS been working so well lately.
“Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph.”
-Haile Selassie
Dictators require that their subordinates remain uncritical in all circumstances, no matter what other considerations come to bear. When it happens in a corporate setting, we get cardboard-filler tacos or snake-oil pharmaceuticals or million-dollar hammers, or software that contains more bugs than lines of functional code, or worse.
In his capacity as “guy drawing paycheck from Marvel Entertainment”, Mr. David is obligated to not injure his employer. I haven’t seen any Marvel comics with his byline that in any way, directly or subtly, try to make Marvel-the-Corporation look bad.
But in his capacity as “guy drawing paycheck from Krauss Publications”, where he is not a representative of Marvel but of CBG, where in fact he’s contractually obligated to stand straight and speak the truth about all comic companies, he should say only nice things about one of three companies with whom he has an entirely separate contract? Did we learn NOTHING from the Olympic Ice Skating Scandal in Utah?
As for which contract legally supercedes which, U.S. courts frequently make this decision based upon which contract existed first. I suspect that Marvel’s contract with Second Age, Inc. was finalized some time after the Krauss-and-Second-Age contract. I could be mistaken.
Oh, and let’s do a far-more-hypothetical parallel to this “who attacked who” business. Mr. David could write in his column or his weblog: “Rissa opened with a quote by Haile Selassie, and I don’t see where that quote has a blasted thing to do with the rest of her website. What the hëll was she thinking?” In response, I could write, “If PAD doesn’t find the relativeness of that quote overwhelmingly obvious, then he is a great big fathead.” He didn’t attack me; he observed and provided his opinion on my doings. I’m the one who made an “attack”, and I’m the clear villain in this example, no matter WHAT others would think of his original statement. Joe Quesada is more eloquent and less reactionary, but threats and attacks are Bad Guy Tactics. No moral or legal high ground could possibly compensate for the essential wrongness of his behavior.
P.S.: Mr. David is not now, nor has he ever been, a fathead. Just in case I failed to make myself ludicrously clear.
Pad, since the topic seems to have died on you’re AOL site I’ll post this here. Not sure if you’ve seen it but on rec.arts.marvel Erik Larson came down on your side. Considering the history you two share, I thought his perspective was interesting. He said I could repost this and so I am.
Joe is right–in most jobs you DON’T bìŧçh about your bosses in a public forum
without the risk of getting canned.
The thing is–comics have never been “most jobs.”
I don’t think ANYBODY on ANY level in the comic book industry WANTS comics to
go away. ALL of us want comics to thrive and ALL of us have our opinions on WHY
they’re NOT doing as well as they should. Marvel has a lot of very scared
employees right now who are terrified at incurring the wrath of Bill or Joe.
These people don’t dare raise an opinion or say anything that contradicts their
bosses and the end result is an inbred group of nodding yes-men and higher ups
who feel they can do no wrong.
Look–Peter David LOVES COMICS. He WANTS Marvel to do well! But PART of
affecting change is voicing an opinion on what a person thinks is being done
wrong in addition to what is being done right. I’m as guilty as the next guy in
this and I’m sure the folks at Marvel have nothing but bad things to say about
me as well. But at the end of the day–I want the same thing that everybody
else does–a strong industry and a ton of comics that I can’t wait to read.
If we’re all being forced to keep our comments to ourselves–how can we expect
things to get any better? Are we all to nod and grin and sing the praises of
books we don’t like? Is THAT really the BEST THING for our industry as a whole?
A bunch of cowering yes-men?
I say thee nay!
NOBODY likes to hear that their hard efforts are falling short. Nobody LIKES to
be criticized. But LEARNING from your mistakes and HEARING that criticism is
the fastest way to learn and grow.
Bill and Joe could stand to do a little listening.
And a little growing.
Up, for example.
-Erik
Again, I don’t think focusing on the “whining” or criticisms is at all useful here. I don’t think anyone was bothered by that. I think the *tone* of the interactions clearly shows that neither side likes the other very much. Is it fun, fulfilling, or positive in any way to work with people who don’t like you? NO! Should one work with people that one dislikes? NO! That is the one and only point I want to convey.
To agree with some of the above comments, complaining has produced positive results at times. Harping (ie: complaining with an insulting tone) usually does not, unless the boss is a saint. Being right does not give you carte blanche to express your opinions in insulting or demeaning ways, no matter how stupid a particular wrong-headed person may be. To be demeaning or insulting, even in response to such tactics, is to act as if positive results cannot be obtained. If positive results cannot be obtained in my job, I get a BETTER job, because I can’t do good work in an atmosphere in which insults are frequent and apologies few.
So I joined the Quesada message board so I could watch the discussion going on over there. Apparently, I’m still not allowed to post, because I wasn’t able to vote in the Captain Marvel poll currently running (to say I was picking up all 6 issues).
This evening, when I tried to go back to the site, I discovered that my registration had been deleted. I suppose I should assume stupidity (like a program glitch) before assuming malice…
Mr. David, you’re certainly free to express whatever the Sam Hill you wish…but there’s an old saying about biting the hand that feeds you…
Pop Quiz on the Middle East (Revised)
Wednesday, January 08 2003 @ 06:13 AM GMT
“Q. Which country in the Middle East had its Prime Minister announce to his staff not to worry about what the United States says because ‘We control America?’..”
By James J. David
The original Middle East Pop Quiz was published by Charley Reese back on February 8, 1998. Since then, there have been many additions to the quiz which I have added. With many thanks to Charley Reese and hoping he makes a full recovery from his recent illness, I present the updated version.
Question: Which country alone in the Middle East has nuclear weapons?
Answer: Israel.
Q: Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and bars international inspections?
Answer: Israel.
Q: Which country in the Middle East seized the sovereign territory of other nations by military force and continues to occupy it in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions?
Answer: Israel.
Q: Which country in the Middle East routinely violates the international borders of another sovereign state with warplanes and artillery and naval gunfire?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What American ally in the Middle East has for years sent assassins into other countries to kill its political enemies (a practice sometimes called exporting terrorism)?
Answer: Israel.
Q: In which country in the Middle East have high-ranking military officers admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have acknowledged executing prisoners of war?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country in the Middle East created 762,000 refugees and refuses to allow them to return to their homes, farms and businesses?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to pay compensation to people whose land, bank accounts and businesses it confiscated?
Answer: Israel.
Q: In what country in the MiddleEast was a high-ranking United Nations diplomat assassinated?
Answer: Israel.
Q: In what country in the Middle East did theman who ordered the assassination of a high-ranking U.N. diplomat become prime minister?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country in the Middle East blew up an American diplomatic facility in Egypt and attacked a U.S. ship, the USS Liberty, in international waters, killing 34 and wounding 171 American sailors?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country in the Middle East employed a spy, Jonathan Pollard, to steal classified documents and then gave some of them to the Soviet Union?
Answer: Israel.
Q: What country at first denied any official connection to Pollard, then voted to make him a citizen and has continuously demanded that the American president grant Pollard a full pardon?
Answer: Israel.
Q. What Middle East country allows American Jewish murderers to flee to its country to escape punishment in the United States and refuses to extradite them once in their custody?
Answer: Israel
Q. What Middle East country preaches against hate yet builds a shrine and a memorial for a murderer who killed 29 Palestinians while they prayed in their Mosque?
Answer: Israel
Q: What country on Planet Earth has the second most powerful lobby in the United States, according to a recent Fortune magazine survey of Washington insiders?
Answer: Israel.
Q. Which country in the Middle East deliberately targeted a U.N. Refugee Camp in Qana, Lebanon and killed 103 innocent men, women, and especially children?
Answer: Israel
Q: Which country in the Middle East is in defiance of 69 United Nations Security Council resolutions and has been protected from 29 more by U.S. vetoes?
Answer: Israel.
Q. Which country in the Middle East receives more than one-thind of all U.S. aid yet is the 16th richest country in the world?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East receives U.S. weapons for free and then sells the technology to the Republic of China even at the objections of the U.S.?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East routinely insults the American people by having its Prime Minister address the United States Congress and lecturing them like children on why they have no right to reduce foreign aid?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East had its Prime Minister announce to his staff not to worry about what the United States says because ” We control America?”
Answer: Israel
Q. What country in the Middle East was cited by Amnesty International for demolishing more than 4000 innocent Palestinian homes as a means of ethnic cleansing.
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East has just recently used a weapon of mass destruction, a one-ton smart bomb, dropping it in the center of a highly populated area killing 15 civilians including 9 children?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East routinely kills young Palestinian children for no reason other than throwing stones at armored vehichles, bulldozers, or tanks?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East signed the Oslo Accords promising to halt any new Jewish Settlement construction, but instead, has built more than 270 new settlements since the signing?
Answer: Israel
Q. Which country in the Middle East has assassinated more than 100 political officials of its opponent in the last 2 years while killing hundreds of civilians in the process, including dozens of children?
Answer: Israel
Q.. Which country in the Middle East regularly violates the Geneva Convention by imposing collective punishment on entire towns, villages, and camps, for the acts of a few, and even goes as far as demolishing entire villages while people are still in their homes?
Answer: Israel
Q: What country in the Middle East is the United States threatening to attack because of fear that it may be a threat to us and to our allies?
Answer: Iraq
James J. David is a retired Brigadier General and a graduate of the U.S. Army’s Command and General Staff College, and the National Security Course, National Defense University, Washington DC. He served as a Company Commander with the 101st Airborne Division in the Republic of Vietnam in 1969 and 1970 and also served nearly 3 years of Army active duty in and around the Middle East from 1967-1969.)
Shane Douglas,
What, in the Most Holy Name of Allah, has any of that got to do with the Topic At Hand?
Roger Burke,
When you differentiate between “complaints” and “harping”, you make an emotionally-based judgement on the author’s intended semantical meaning of his words. Since this is all pure text, without voice-tone or body-language cues to provide additional context, any reader can only derive a certain amount of intended emotion from the words that were chosen.
You are, to be blunt, going beyond the data available in Mr. David’s relevant texts when you accuse him of an insulting tone: do you live in the same subculture that he does, and therefore know that the author’s subculture would unanimously find these voiceless words on paper to be insulting or inflammatory toward the other person OR toward the discussed actions? I’m going to surmise that you don’t, or you’d have figured out by now the importance of this difference between “complain about person” and “complain about thing”.
While we’re on the importance of understanding definitions:
According to the Dictionary at http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=harping , your “complain with an insulting tone” does not at all apply. Perhaps you mistyped, and meant http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=carp ?
Write what you mean, man, and while you’re at it, try to take for granted that a professional, published author of PAD’s caliber would have spent a lot of time and effort writing exactly what he meant, and a lot of people here have been pointing out that no word nor phrase has been aimed from Mr. David directly at the person of Mr. Quesada with a degrading definition in an American English dictionary. Mistakes are stupid. Sometimes publicly-printed comments are called stupid, or incomprehensible, or worse.
If you wish to continue claiming that Mr. David has made a clearly inflammatory comment about his contracted employer, then you ought to quote or point us at a clear example … one that I can’t make a strong case for you having read your own meaning where none necessarily was put there by the author.
Otherwise, I agree that you’ve made the point you were trying to make, and now a gentleman would find it appropriate to stop “talking or writing about it to an excessive or tedious degree” — especially in the environment of the online “home” for the subject of your http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nagging — and permit others to speak.
Alternatively: If you can’t say anything nice about the man whose hospitality (in the form of bandwidth and money) you’re using, Mr. Burke, then don’t say anything at all. Go make your own website, and pay for it yourself, and say it there.
Pop Quiz on the Middle East (Revised)
And this is relevant here because…….????????????
Jarissa, you are being rude. I have not prevented anyone else from commenting, and you once again illustrate my statement that being right in any particular point does not give you justification to express your opinions in any way you please. Proof of verbal quips from both sides of the PAD vs. JQ & BJ debate is abundant and obvious.
Abundant and obvious? I can find typed quips, yes; both men have the capacity to be witty. Yet I cannot locate any that are authored by Peter David and qualify as attacks upon Joe Quesada (as opposed to critiques of corporate policies and actions). If those are, in fact, abundant and obvious, show me.
By the way, being right doesn’t give me justification. The Bill of Rights, a section of the Constitution of the United States of America, foundation of the laws of the United States, gives me all the justification I need. Mr. David gives me a lovely opportunity to do so, and I am incredibly grateful to him for it. Your efforts to post in this Comments area alone five times over four days — with nary a one of your posts failing to tell Mr. David how to live his life and run his business — are what give me the motivation to stand up against a philosophical descendent of Mrs. Grundy and say, “Shame on you, you ill-mannered, honorless, nosy busybody.”
Now, if I in fact were setting out to be rude to you, Mr. Burke, I’d imply that you’re a member in any ultra-conservative “Do everything in your life exactly as we say, or we’ll slay you as an offense in the eyes of (the Lord/Allah/Discordia/Whomever)” religion that happened to spring to my mind. But I’m not going to say something like that, firstly because there’s not the hard evidence to support it, and secondly because that would be rude.
Maybe you, much as you accuse Mr. David and Mr. Quesada, cannot ignore your pride long enough to take an objective, emotionally neutral look at what I have said, and answer it without using such emotionally-laden words as “harping”, “insulting”, and “rude”. Maybe you do not even understand why I would want you to provide the evidence yourself that supports your position, rather than expect me to take your word for it or go hunting it down myself. Maybe you just need to have said the last word on the topic so that you can feel that no one has said you are wrong.
Unless you provide clear, word-for-word or even “go to this URL and read the nth sentence in the nth paragraph” examples of Mr. David’s offenses, I’m going to assume any further posts from you are just that: getting the last word in.
Pop Quiz on the Middle East (Revised)
And this is relevant here because…….????????????
Because there’s always room for more misinformation and half-truths, probably.
: /
Jarissa, given that you seem determined to start a fight, I’m abandoning this thread. I hope that Mr. David read my posts with more of an open mind.
In any fields, in EVERY fields most of the time an employee speak again the boss, his organisations and their policy it`s usualy a very big deal! You wouldn`t see Tom Cruise speaking against Warner Bros. or Erik Lindros speaking against his coach Bryan Trottier in public. If something like that would happen, it just wouldn`t stand. Lindros would be traded; Cruise, well, let`s just say he wouldn`t be welcome at Warner.
Now. It`s the internet so people feel like saying what they want. And i bet Peter, you questioned Marvel`s decision to raises the price because you cared about your comic Captain Marvel. Plus, after reading a lot of your columns, i realised that sometime you like to write stuff just for the sake of discussions and charing ideas.I understand that.
But bottom line, even though things are blurry for many reasons, one of the few i mentioned above…it was still speaking against the company you`re “working for”`s policies. Can you imagine the higher-ups at Marvel in office saying to themselves;”well, we have the raise of these books because they`re not profitable. We could cancel them, let`s keep them affloat for the fans”(although i`m not totaly naive to think that it was the whole reason behind it). But then you call them out on their inniative saying that it was wrong. Can you imagine the reaction? “What the Hëll?” Slap in the face. For one thing, it make them look bad and gives ammunitions to the their detractors. And while they feel they`re doing their best, one of the employee call them out and question that. Like anything in life, you need the support of the people you`re associated it because we are not sure if what we`re doing is right or wrong. We human beings do lack confidence like that. That`s why there`s groups and teams. In other times…tribes who fought the wild and the dark together.
So doing that, additionaly somehow in public was like a knife in the back to one of your own. Of course you didn`t see that way for many reasons, but the action you took couldn`t have been interpreted in any other ways.
WHy all these things happen?
Hello,
Please visit my website for more information:
link here.
Byebye