BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111

Subject: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST,leveller
Date: 03 May 02 - 07:01 PM

This thread was taking too long to open.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 04 May 02 - 12:48 AM

Sure. NOW you mention the Budgies. It won't wash LH. You are exposed to the world for what you truly are.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 02 - 01:03 PM

There is no way they can know how many people were killed in Janin until they look under the rubble.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 04 May 02 - 03:17 PM

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 May 02 - 03:49 PM

But without a proper investigation it's just a matter of rival media spin exercises by people on both sides who might know the facts or might not, and who might for various reasons be telling the truth or not.

If the truth is that numbers of dead are far lower than the initial estimates by the Israelis, then refusing to cooperate with and facilitate an independent investigation is a terrible own goal for Israel.

Some of the conditions laid down for allowing the investigation team in made some sense - but others would have made it completely impossible to carry out an adequate investigation, and it seems must have been added as a way of ensuring that there would not be an independent investigation.

One problem is that other countries consistently refuse to allow that kind of thing to happen when they come under suspicion. Countries like the UK, France, the USA, Russia... It isn't that Israel is being unusually obdurate in this affair, it's just living down to the level set by other countries. For those countries which have signed up to the new standing International Tribunal, such as the first two there, it is at least a step in the right direction in regard to such matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Charley Noble
Date: 04 May 02 - 08:33 PM

Let's see, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, eyeless, toothless people on both sides, except for a politician or two. I'm sure this would all make sense to some 3rd party from another galaxy.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 02 - 09:29 PM

I think most Palestinians would just be happy if they no longer had to live under an aparthied system. They keep saying that what they want is for Israel to abide by the Oslo accords.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 May 02 - 10:27 PM

Now look, troll, we haven't even touched on the subject of Hamsters, yet. No discussion of terrorism and rank prejudice can be complete without bringing in hamsters...

I have shared accomodation with several of the little, beady-eyed creatures over the years. I bet YOU won't even talk to them. So there! Eat birdseed, you heathen bigot!

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 05 May 02 - 01:29 AM

I know that you are aware that women and even children frequent this forum and yet you flaunt your degenerate enthusiasm for the outre' and bizzare.
To even HINT at the "H" word is to leave all sense of decency behind and enter the perverse realm of shredded newspaper snd exercise wheels.
FIE! I say FIE, Sirrah!
Have you NO shame?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 05 May 02 - 11:13 AM

I think it is offensive making stupid jokes when the basic subject is about people dying. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 May 02 - 12:11 PM

I imagine the idea is to defuse the tension, which is a good idea in itself. I think there are better ways of doing it.

Joking in the face of death and hardship can be a good way of coping with it better, for people who are themselves caught up in it anyway. I'm sure there are a fair number of jokes among the people in the Church of the Nativity. But I can't see it as quite so appropriate for lookers on.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 05 May 02 - 12:18 PM

then they can start a thread called silly animal jokes. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 May 02 - 01:55 PM

Well, mg, have you read the entire 2 threads from which this one arose, and seen my serious contributions to them? I eventually felt I had said all that I needed to say about this subject, and that to say more would not help anyone. The jokes are a sort of comment in light of all that has gone before. You have to look at the whole thing in context.

People's feelings have been very hot on this issue, and some people's feelings have probably been hurt by it.

I was in one sense attempting to defuse the tension that has built up here, and I was also making a certain satirical comment regarding these kind of debates...which become endless, and don't seem to result in anyone having a change of heart, but rather hardening their position.

I don't think this helps people.

We all believe in the essential human values: freedom, justice, mercy, kindness, brotherhood, love...

I guarantee it. We all do.

We also experience fear. It is when our fear gets the better of us that we turn to anger, hatred, bitterness, and vengeance.

Humour is something that can ease those feelings a bit and give us a fresh look at what unites us, rather than what divides us.

I consider troll and CarolC to both be friends of mine, and I believe that the things we have in common far outweigh those that divide us. I believe that about all people. The animal jokes were mostly for the benefit of people such as troll and CarolC who have been posting to these threads over and over again, and who are friends of mine.

I can understand that you might not get where I was coming from. I take the bloodshed in the Middle East just as seriously as you do, I can assure you.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 May 02 - 02:26 PM

That's how I understood the intent of Little Hawk - a way of trying to get the thread away from a quarrel that was escalating. And I noted that both Troll and CarolC, who'd been imnvolved in thta, took it that way.

But that long last thread is inaccessible to a lot of people, which means the context isn't there to explain why it's not as callous as it might look to someone coming to it cold.

I think there may still be some value in continuing this thread alongside the PEACE one, as an overflow for more stuff that wouldn't really be appropriate there. For a little longer anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 05 May 02 - 02:30 PM

LH, I almost never disagree with you about anything, but I'm going to disagree with you on one point, and it is this one...

these kind of debates...which become endless, and don't seem to result in anyone having a change of heart, but rather hardening their position.

I don't believe that this discussion is futile. I believe that people are learning things, and making adjustments to their thought processes when new information makes it necessary for them to do so. Some people are holding fast to their original positions, but I think that some people are not. Here in the US, we tend to know so little about what goes on in the middle east. These discussions are an opportunity for us to learn more.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 May 02 - 02:32 PM

Oh yeah, I guess it's too long for some people to load it at this point...

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 05 May 02 - 03:17 PM

I know no one means to make light of the tragedy. I don't think it is necessary to persuade anyone. I think it is necessary for people to be able to make their personal proclamations about what they see. It doesn't have to be consensus. It has to be safe and respectful of those sincerely trying to come up with solutions. The solutions are not going to come just from Colin Powell and Mary Robinson...they are going to come from all of us... mg

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: DougR
Date: 05 May 02 - 05:03 PM

"These discussions are an opportunity for us to learn more." I would agree that it offers us an opportunity to learn more of other's opinions. I am not confident that I at least, know more about the subject than I hear on TV or read in the newspapers. Still, it is interesting to exchange ideas with people who sometimes view things different than we do.

I think almost anyone who has been on the forum for any length of time understood what L.H. and Troll were up to. It happens all the time in serious BS threads.

Mg, I'm not sure what you mean when you write, "The solutions will not come from just Colin Powell and Mary Robinson ...they are going to come from all of us." Could you elaborate a bit more?

Dougr

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 05 May 02 - 05:16 PM

Well, I guess I can't speak for anyone else. But at least it's given me an opportunity to learn more. My understanding of the historical facts of the middle east and of the objectives and aims of both sides is probably about 500 times greater now than it was a month and a half ago.

And it's not just from paying attention to the media, although I have been doing that. Mostly it's from what I've learned doing my own research on-line, and that research was something I did because of points and issues raised in threads like this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 May 02 - 05:48 PM

Okay, Carol, I'll go along with that...it probably has made a contribution to some people's awareness.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 May 02 - 05:50 PM

"I am not confident that I at least, know more about the subject than I hear on TV or read in the newspapers."

Well, I know that I can get to know a lot more with the help of the internet than I ever would from TV and newspapers. You've got to take care to try to tell the difference between information and misinformation, but that applies to newspapers and TV.

And from what I have seen of the American media through the net and cable TV, the impression comes across that you are getting a very different picture of what is going on than you do from the mainstream press in England - and that is mostly (to say the least) papers which tend to be pretty sympathetic with Israel in general.

But then that's a subjective judgement - I don't read all the Engish papers by a long way, and my reading of the US papers is obviously still more limited, and the same goes for the US TV news bulletins I've seen.

And inevitably there is relevant information that gets squeezed out of all print or broadcast media in all countries, or that gets overlaid by what's happened since.

If we know a lot about a topic, and have strong opinions (which isn't by any means the same thing), it's likely that anything we read here will change them too much - definitely not the opiniuons, and very likely not the information contained in links.

But if we aren't too sure what we think, this is a good chance to help to sort out our ideas and extend what we know. And even if we don't change our views, it doesn't hurt to find out a few more facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 May 02 - 07:59 PM

And here are two links Carol posted in the PEACE thread which gives some very relevant information that certainly hasn't made it into any newspaper or media coverage that I have come across.

1. An article from a couple of years ago about The Palestine Center for Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation , based in Bethlehem.

2. A story about what happened to it when the IDF rolled into Bethlehem.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 05 May 02 - 11:55 PM

I have learned a lot from these threads; both about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and about myself. I have been forced to check my information; I have learned that some things that I accepted as historical facts were not, and that there were facts in favor of BOTH points of view of which I was not aware.
I look forward to more of the same in days to come.
As far as the humor thing goes, like DougR said, this is a common thing on the Forum. Someone sees something funny and comments on it. Sometimes others pick it up and run with it, and sometimes it dies a lonely single-post death. We are, for the most part, musicians, not political science majors, and know that you have to break the tension at times. I think that it was long overdue on this thread.
In fact the only thread that I can recall that didn't have humerous breaks in it was the 9/11 thread. I think we were all too stunned to make funnies although the Lord knows we could have used some.
So don't worry that we don't take things like the death of innocent non-combatents seriously, mg. We do. We're just not your average couch-potatoe types.
Thats why we're here instead of watching Survivor. Because we're all a little different and we react differently sometimes.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 May 02 - 01:57 AM

Exactly, troll. I gave up on TV about ten years ago at least, because I was tired of being a passive sponge for snippets of superficial sound bites slipped in between a repetitive barrage of advertising. The Internet allows us all to think, speak out, listen to each other and respond. It's a huge advance in human communications on this planet, and the most hopeful thing I have seen rise out of new technology yet. It is democratizing our access to information worldwide as has never been done before.

It has in many cases helped me to gain an honest measure of respect for people whom I do not necessarily agree with on some political thing too...because I get to know their many sides, rather than just seeing them just through the lens of a single issue.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 06 May 02 - 10:38 AM

Back on the subject at hand, I thought I'd post this piece as general info. I will refrain from commenting on this article by Fatma Abdallah Mahmoud, as I feel that it speaks for itself.
It is a sample of the anti-Jewish rhetoric coming from the Arab world and published in the Egyptian government daily Al-Akhbar and translated by the Middle East Media Research institute:

The Jews are accursed--the Jews of our time, those who preceded them and those who will come after them, if any Jews come after them.

With regard to the fraud of the Holocaust. . . . Many French studies have proven that this is no more than a fabrication, a lie, and a fraud!! That is, it is a "scenario" the plot of which was carefully tailored, using several faked photos completely unconnected to the truth. Yes, it is a film, no more and no less. Hitler himself, whom they accuse of Nazism, is in my eyes no more than a modest "pupil" in the world of murder and bloodshed. He is completely innocent of the charge of frying them in the hell of his false Holocaust!!

The entire matter, as many French and British scientists and researchers have proven, is nothing more than a huge Israeli plot aimed at extorting the German government in particular and the European countries in general. But I, personally and in light of this imaginary tale, complain to Hitler, even saying to him from the bottom of my heart, "If only you had done it, brother, if only it had really happened, so that the world could sigh in relief [without] their evil and sin."

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 May 02 - 01:02 PM

Well, Fatma Abdallah Mahmoud is what I would call a very disturbed man. Such people are worrisome indeed, and they exist on both sides of the Arab-Israeli quarrel.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 02 - 04:44 PM

Such people are worrisome indeed, and they exist on both sides of the Arab-Israeli quarrel.

It's true, LH. They do. And we see examples of it every day in the news coverage here in the US.

Here's an example of a mindset that I think could possibly be the cause of some of the fear and even anger among some of the non-Jewish people of the middle east.

5. That the Jewish people is bound together by common destiny, and that this imposes upon each one an obligation to love and rush to the aid of each and every other Jew; that the Jew has no permanent allies except his own people; that the Jew, Jewish problems come first; that we measure our responses by the yardstick; Is it good and right for the Jew?

http://www.csuohio.edu/tagar/jewish.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 02 - 04:49 PM

One more thing about my last post...

I think if there is ever going to be peace in the middle east, everyone is going to have to start thinking in terms of what is good and right for humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 02 - 05:34 PM

And the sort of practices described in this piece could explain some of the hatred that is being expressed toward Jews in Israel by Arabs...

http://www.balkanunity.org/mideast/english/zionism/pref.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: DougR
Date: 06 May 02 - 06:15 PM

Carol: your post of 4:44: That statement (5.)does not cause me to come unglued. EVERY country makes its decisions based on what is best for the people of that country. We may not always be in agreement with the leaders of the country about what is best, but I think that's the way it is.

If the Jews did not put their own interests first, who would? The same goes for the Palestinians. I think it would be diffucult to convince anyone that Arafat's decisions are based on what is best for humanity, nor is Sharon's.

The day when countries will make decision based on what is best for humanity is far into the future, and more likely will never happen.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 May 02 - 08:15 PM

That's pretty vile. You could find that sort of thing from lots of sources in Europe and America, especially from especially the same people who detest Muslims and Black people.

What is more unnerving is the idea this kind of thing being published in a mainstream publication, with the consequent implication that it is OK.

But this is what happens as conflicts generate and authorise extremism.

"Hitler is the natural and continuous product of a breed which from the dawn of history has been predatory and bellicose". It is in the innate evil of the "German ' character - the character of the German people as a whole - that the world's problem is to be found". That was written by a senior member of the British Government, Lord Vansittart, in a book produced by a respectable British publisher in 1942.

Crazy talk. But crazy talk like that gets an audience in crazy times.

As for Fatma Abdallah Mahmoud, whatever else he may be, he is no true friend of the people of Palestine. And they can't be blamed for what he wrote, any more than the people who suffered in the Blitz can be blamed for the kind of poison Lord Vansittart spewed out, which was in fact was very useful to the Nazis as propaganda. It helped hold people together to resist defeat which was presented as meaning total destruction of the German people.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: DonD
Date: 06 May 02 - 09:05 PM

Certainly we can't tar all Palestinians or all Arabs with the brush we would like to us on Fatma Abdullah nor all Israelis or Jews for the hateful things that get said against Arabs, Palestinians or Muslims.

But it's hard not to be upset and pessimistic for peace when the mutual antipathy is so deep. The current Atlantic Monthly has an article proposing that the atmosphere in Palestine has become so intense that the idea of suicide /murder bombing has become the end rather than the means.

It refers to polls (unidentified) that show support for suicide/murder bombing is 70-80%, far greater than the approval rate for Hamas, Hezbollah, Arafat, etc. If there is any questioning at all it's about the moral acceptibility of suicide under Islamic law, but certainly not of the desirability of murder.

The article's suggestion is that the only hope is for a complete separation of the two sides with an externally supervised buffer zone for long enough for the realities of life and nationhood to supplant the simplistic goal of destruction and killing.

BTW, when I read reports from anywhere I am always suspicious when there are inconsistencies. E.g. the report on the destruction of the Center for Resolution and Reconstruction in Bethlehem has Noah finally leaving his home after eight days to go collect his E-mails at the vandalized office, where the computer is a wreck. He then is besieged in his home again, but is not just idle; he's busy on his computer, sending E-mails to Canada and elsewhere. I believe much better when things make sense.

Not that I doubt that the IDF overdid their mission with unneeded loss of both property and lives, but they're young, angry, frightened, vengeful human beings, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 02 - 09:27 PM

I'm having some difficulty with that last post I made. When I posted it, I had only read the one page, and I checked the personal info on the guy who wrote it. I saw that he had worked with Bertrand Russel, and I saw a lot of documentation in his piece, so I figured he was a safe source. Now I've read some more of the stuff in the site, and I'm having difficulty figuring out if this guy is what he says he is, a promoter of peace, or if he's something else.

Does anyone know anything about this Schoenman guy?

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 May 02 - 09:30 PM

Fom my reading of that link about the destruction of the Peace Centre in Bethlemhem, I don't think there's any real indication of that inconsistency that makes DonD feel sceptical about it.

As I read it, Noah was sending out the emails at a time when Bethlehem was effectively under siege, but before the troops and tanks had come into the town. Then he kept his head down until the worst of the violence was over, like most people. Then he went into the Peace Centre with the aim of getting his emails, and found it had been wrecked. He was then able to get an email off telling about it, using some other computer he'd got access to, and a hotmail account. (Which is what all of us would do in the circumstances. Though maybe we'd post it on the Mudcat instead.)

I'm sure one of the factors leading to this kind of thing happening would have been as DonD says, young soldiers hyped up and frightened and angry. But from the systematic way that all kinds of offices, medical surgeries, educational facilities and so forth were trashed it seems to me pretty clear that there also was some kind of higher level policy involved.

If it really was all done against orders, there should be a good few court martials coming up. But I wouldn't hold my breath. Any more than when it happened like that in Northern Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 May 02 - 09:33 PM

Ralph Schoenman was active England with the anti-nuclear Committee of 100, and was employed by Betrand Russell for a time. And I wouldn't trust him one little bit, and nor would many people who worked with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 02 - 09:44 PM

Ok. Well, I guess everyone should ignore my post in which I included a link to his site.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 12:55 AM

I think I'm starting to go 'round the bend. Which means it's probably time for me to remove myself from this discussion. I leave it in the capable hands of the others who are carrying it on. Ta everybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 07 May 02 - 01:08 AM

I too did some checking on Schoenman and came up with some interesting things. For instance, he claims that the Council on Zionism conspired with Hitler to bring about the Holocaust. Nice guy.
He was closely associated with Bertram Russell for about 10 years before Russell totally repudiated him.
If I can make the clickys work, the following are some links on the man.

Hope this works.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 07 May 02 - 01:14 AM

Oh well....

karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/The_critics/Russell/ Private_memorandum_of_Russell.html - 48k

http://world.std.com/~camera/docs/cmr61/biglie.html

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/The_critics/Schoenman/Schoenman_bio.html

Guess you'll have to do it yourself.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 02:21 AM

Ok, here's part of why I feel like I'm starting to go 'round the bend. I really, really don't want to believe the stuff I read in Schoenman's site. That stuff is enough to drive anyone 'round the bend. But could someone please explain to me how he manages to support what he's saying with so much documentation? It's really disturbing me.

troll, this is all your fault (kidding, don't hit me). You suggested that people check out what Jews had to say about Zionism. I did a search on it, and Schoenman's site came up. I'll tell you something. The last few weeks have turned my life upside down. Everywhere I look, I find disturbing stuff that I never expected to find. Stuff I wasn't even looking for.

I could be doing a search for information about hairless gerbils and still run across something that twists my gut in a knot about the middle east.

I think we need for the Palestinians to be given a secure state of their own so that I can get on with my life and not feel like I'm going nutz.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 02:34 AM

Btw, troll, in my search, I found out that there are a lot of Jews who oppose Zionism. Doing a search on it doesn't clear anything up about it at all. It just gets more confusing.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 May 02 - 09:37 AM

So long ago I posted the last time, but I do want to follow up on what I wrote.

It's alright, Carol, and if you had the impression that I more often have corrected informations supporting the cause of the Palestinians that impression is true. Deep in my heart I have a pro Israel bias for several reasons but I don't want to go into that now.

As for the numbers, those statistics you cited very shortly after my last post in the last thread I find much more reliable than those on the first site and I am grateful for finding them this way.

They avoid most of the errors of the other site: They don't have overlapping categories without stating it, they present data not selectively and their numbers have no easy to spot inconsistencies. In addition to that they report how they have treated not easy to classify cases. All these details make this site look much more reliable for me.

However, I am still missing a bit like number of Palestinians killed by Palestinians for cooperation and who from they got their data. What I am missing most is an assessment how reliable their numbers are. Give and take 10% would be something else than give or take factor 2.

Having said that I have not yet seen a source I consider more reliable than the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 07 May 02 - 12:39 PM

Carol, people like Schoenman and masters at research. They utilize ONLY those portions of genuine documents that will aid their position and ignore the rest. Unless you go to the origional doc. and read all of it, you'll never know that you were, in essense, lied to.
A good example of this exists in the works of the Holocaust revisionists.There are around 5,000 documents (according to Skeptic) which seem to support the claim that (a) the Holocaust never happened, (b) it happened but was nowhere near as large as has been made out, or (c) the Zionists conspired with the Nazis to make it happen. There are other variations as well.
There are literally MILLIONS of documents that support the claim that the Holocaust DID happen, but if all you read is "The Hidden History Of Zionism" you'll never find out about them.
Regarding Schoenmans article which you linked us to, I noticed that he would talk about several actions where he quoted purported observers and then tell about something with no doc. and then back to the documented(?) actions. A case in point is the story about the two Arab kids being thrown from a helicopter. Zip doc.
In several articles that I read about Schoenman, people said that he would play fast and loose with the facts if he wanted to prove a point or defend a position. I could go on but you get the picture. He is not the most reliable of sources although he is an interesting writer.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 May 02 - 01:19 PM

And there a lot of them out there - twisting the truth on both sides in all kinds of issues. A lot of them work for governments, and are treated as reliable sources by people in the media.

The moral is that, while the internet puts us in touch with information it also puts us in touch with disinformation. But then that is not really any different from our situation when we read newspapers or watch TV, where the people controlling the media often have their own agenda.

With the Internet it's possible to dig around for ourselves, and check out the different sources. And, unlike journalists, we don't have to worry about whether the facts as they seem to fall are in line with the version expected from us by our employers.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 06:08 PM

troll, thanks for the explanation. I don't think you were suggesting in your post that I believe the Holocaust didn't happen. But to someone else who reads your post it could look like you were suggesting that. I have no doubts that the holocaust did happen and that it was just as horrific as people say it was.

But as McGrath pointed out, that denial thing goes both ways. I see the US government, the Israeli government, and the US media doing the same thing every single day. Take for instance that myth about Arafat walking away from the best offer he could possibly get at Camp David, or the idea that Israel didn't renege on the agreement it made in the Oslo accord

That's one of the reasons it's so difficult to know who to believe these days. We are being lied to every single day by just about everybody. All we can do is try to sift through the bullshit and try to work it out as we go along.

And I second what McGrath said about the internet. After I posted that piece by Schoenman, I was able to get input from others here about the guy's background so I could make a more informed dicision about whether or not I want to believe what he's saying. So I'm one of the people who think the internet can be a more effective way of getting good information as opposed to media spin.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST
Date: 07 May 02 - 10:05 PM

16 Jews were killed tonight by a Palestinian martyr in a zionist pool hall near Tel Aviv.

Congratulations to CarolC and all Mudcat friends of the great Palestinian martyrs.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 11:00 PM

Well, GUEST, tell Sharon to abide by the Oslo accords so the killing will stop on both sides (that means no more killing of either Jews or Palestinians). Or maybe he doesn't care if Jews die.

A lot of people, both Jews in Israel as well as other people in other places predicted that Sharon's policies would result in the deaths of a lot of people, including a lot of Jews. But he ignored them. And it happened exactly as predicted. So maybe you should be blaming Sharon for those 16 Jews that were killed tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: Troll
Date: 07 May 02 - 11:07 PM

Nope. Never meant to suggest any such thing. But you're right that someone could interpret my post that way. It's just that I hate to write "someone" or "a person" or " a less well informed reader" (which you are not, BTW) when a good old generic "you" will do.
One has to spend more of one's time writing disclaimers than one does on the subject at hand.

troll

BTW, don't feed the You-know-who.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 02 - 11:14 PM

You're right, troll. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111
From: GUEST
Date: 07 May 02 - 11:21 PM

CarolC,

You are an evil, despicable person. Whenever a murdering Palestinian terrorist kills another innocent civilian, I will think of you.

I hope the next time Islamic terrorists strike here in America, you or someone you love is not one of their victims.

MAY YOU ROT IN HELL WITH ARAFAT, HAMAS, SAADAM HUSSEIN, BIN LADEN and the rest of your friends.