 sj |
||
|
||
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? |
|
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... |
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 07 May 02 - 11:34 PM Sorry troll. I've got to do this.
GUEST, I don't see "Jews", or "Palestinians", or "Gentiles" (I don't like that word), or "Arabs", or any of those things. What I see is sparks of divinity espressing themselves in human form. That's all. And that makes all of them my most cherished relatives and loved ones. And it breaks my heart when any of them are killed. Any of them. The fact that I think Sharon and the Likud party are responsible for the way things have turned out in Israel and Palestine doesn't make me an evil person. It just means that I don't have the scales in my eyes preventing me from seeing reality that you have. All (or at least much) of this killing could have been prevented if Israel had abided by the Oslo accords instead of reneging on them when Nethanyahu took office. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 07 May 02 - 11:50 PM GUEST, thanks so much for your keen, penetrating analysis and incisive, witty, explaination of a most difficult subject. Your comments enrich the lives of all who hear them. If you would actually READ Carols posts, you would find that she is horrified over the deaths on BOTH sides and is no more in favor of suicide bombings than she is of any war related activity. Carol and I don't see eye to eye on the Middle-East but I would never accuse her of being in FAVOR of terrorism. Throughout all her posts has run the common thread that the killing of innocent non-combatants must stop. I agree. The only place we seem to DISAGREE is on how it should be done. Your post shows a surprising lack of knowledge about the wide variety of opinions expressed of this thread AND a real animosity toward anyone who dares to express an opinion that does not support YOUR opinion. Whatever the hell THAT is. So settle back, have a Coke and a smile, and shut up. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,macca Date: 08 May 02 - 06:44 AM Troll, spot on... CaroleC, as a guest on this thread who has followed the discussion with interest, I'm stunned that anyone could launch such a violent diatribe at you... or anyone. If any two people fail to agree about something, neither of them have any right to assault the other, either verbally or physically. They both have the same responsibility, and that is to find common ground so that the disagreement does not escalate into more serious conflict. At worst, just keep silent and pray for help. On behalf of the silent majority, my apologies. GUEST, think before you jump. Otherwise somebody else could be jumping on you. Hatred breeds hatred. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 May 02 - 07:40 AM Well, that's one way of making peace between people who have been quarrelling.
Saw the headlines in the paper today, and my heart fell. Sometimes it can be a good feeling to see that you were right in your predictions, but not this time.
"If you're in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 11:37 AM I just found a very interesting site. It's by a group called Jews for Justice in the Middle East. It looks pretty reputable as far as I can tell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,An Pluiméir Ceolmhar Date: 08 May 02 - 12:04 PM Thanks for that helpful reference, Carol, I've bookmarked it for further reading. And troll, good to see you see your recent posts, maybe we're inching towards that meeting of minds. One of the biggest problems of the internet is that anyone can put up any kind of rubbish on a site, and the trash appears to have the same validity as the serious material. The site which Carol refers to has extra legitimacy by virtue of being the product of a group of Jews (whose viewpoint, I suspect, doesn't get much of an airing in the mainstream US printed press), but even their efforts to enlighten the debate can be denigrated by people alleging that they are really either "self-hating Jews" (hard one to refute) or a bunch of Palestinians putting up disinformation. I swallowed the Israeli "Exodus" movie version of the history of the region for years, but only now am I beginning to see the period leading up to and immediately following 1948 as having possibly entailed some measure of so-called "ethnic cleansing". Can anyone recommend a published history from a source which might aspire to objectivity? Books aren't necessarily entirely credible either, but at least the author usually has to convince a publisher to produce them, so there's some degree of quality control which is lacking from the internet. Also I can take a book on holidays and read it on the beach! It was the realisation of the need to explore the history before coming to any understanding of the Northern Ireland problem which triggered a consuming interest in history which has been with me for over thirty years, and now I'm ready to branch into a greater understanding of the Middle East. Seeing the damage which naive, partisan accounts of history can cause, and its importance in many of the world's trouble spots, it seems to me that there is a case for prohibiting the teaching of history to anyone under the age of 16 and making it obligatory for everyone over that age... just a rumination, not a serious suggestion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 12:15 PM GUEST,An Pluiméir Ceolmhar, you can e-mail the organization that put out the booklet in that site. Maybe they can steer you in the direction of some of the kinds of books you're looking for. Here's their e-mail address... truth@cactus48.com |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 12:18 PM Also, here's their address in case anyone wants it...
Jews for Justice in The Middle East
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,An Pluiméir Ceolmhar Date: 08 May 02 - 12:29 PM Thanks, Carol, I'll follow that up.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Wolfgang Date: 08 May 02 - 12:52 PM I have read the chapter about the holocaust and am far from impressed by the 'Jews for Justice in the Middle East' impartialty. Most of it is compiled by selected citations from other sources. I have looked for that organisation on the web and have found nothing at all except a post box address. I could be wrong but to me it looks like a cover name for someone else. From what I have seen so far that organisation could be a single person (of any origin). The many many hits you get for that organisation (I have checked about twenty and then stopped) all seem to go to the same "The origins of the Middle East conflict" web-document. Curious Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 May 02 - 02:16 PM How big that group is is of course an interesting question, but it's not crucial. Maybe its just the two people who give their names, and whose photos are on the site. But it comes across as honest, and I note especially the links given to other Jewish peace groups, such as Not in my name. The section on the Holocaust - well, that doesn't set out to be an account of what happened, it's a collection of quotes, with two brief bits of editorial comment, indicating the basis on which the quote are selected. But there is no way in which this is any kind of Holocaust denial. It is material which can help people in reaching an opinion.
My feeling is that arguing about the past, and whether things could or should have been done differently, is often beside the point. People act as they feel forced to act in the circumstances in which they live, and very often that involves them in doing things which afterwards can be recognised as wrong.
To the extent that studying the past is a way of opening our eyes to the possibility that what we are doing in the present is also wrong, practically or morally, it's important to do so. But using the injustice of the past as a foundation on which to do further injustice to others can never be right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,LoopySanchez Date: 08 May 02 - 02:41 PM There are about 140 shooting conflicts going on in the world today. Radical Muslims are involved in 134 of them. Any questions? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 May 02 - 04:17 PM Now that's the kind of free floating totally unbdocumented statistic that means bugger all. How many shooting conflicts are there where Christians are involved?
The point is, there are lots and lots of Muslims around, just as there are lots and lots of Christians.
And presumably that dubious statistic would include the conflicts where it's mostl the Muslims who are under attack, such as the troubles in the former Yugoslavia.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: DougR Date: 08 May 02 - 05:54 PM Jews for Justice in the Middle East Berkely, California BERKLEY, CALIFORNIA???? Arghhhhhhhh! I'm with Wolfgang! I've never known any group,based in Berkley, California that could be considered even remotely unbiased!! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 May 02 - 06:03 PM Now that sounds a teeny little bit biassed to me... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Gareth Date: 08 May 02 - 07:01 PM Hmmmm ! I am in a cynical mood tonite. The all pupose song of Hate and Maryterdom (Sp)
" Not for them a judge and jury,
"Through the little streets of [Insert town of choice], With no appologies to the Barlycorns. Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 08:45 PM Loopy, on the Palestinian issue, your statement, even if it is correct, is not relevant. Most Palestinians are not radical Muslims. Their objective is simply to have their own self-governing state.
DougR and the rest who don't know if that site can be trusted, I have run across several sites giving the same or similar information. Most of them are by Jewish organizations. Some of the organizations who maintain these sites are rather strict Jewish sects. I chose the one I did because it doesn't represent any one sect. But this group is hardly the only one who is providing information of this sort.
Another resource that would be worthwhile checking out would be the words of the founding fathers of Zionism themselves. Do a google search on Jabotinsky, and read the stuff that he wrote himself.
I like what the Jews for Justice site suggests for people to do about it. They think that by getting real about the history of Israel, the situation there can be healed and both Israel and Palestine can release themselves from this death spiral they're in. And then they can both move forward in cooperation. Kind of like they're doing in South Africa. Personally, I can't imagine why anybody would object to that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 09:12 PM P.S. re: Jabotinsky - in particular, his piece "The Iron Wall" is worth checking out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mr Happy Date: 08 May 02 - 09:59 PM my [perh. simplistic] understanding of the reasons underlying the horrors in palestine/israel is that after ww2 ended the allies? needed somewhere to put displaced persons of the jewish faith who'd been victims of ethnic cleansing by the nazis. after some areas had been assessed for suitability [parts of s.america + australia], they settled on palestine as it's one of the areas mentioned in the bible as being 'the promised land' it doesn't seem to have been taken into consideration that this territory had been lived in [i don't say occupied] by arab people, of predominantly islam faith. but the region had been under occupation by members of the allies? [british] it was therefore less difficult to further disenfranchise a nation/a cultural group/ a religious community who already had been rendered substantially powerless, and introduce yet another alien regime, the 'israelis' don't make a mistake about where i'm coming from, i deplore racism in all its subtle and devious forms. however, it remains that the jewish dps were an embarrassment to the allies? [i'm putting a ? here because i don't believe they were ever friends, but a political compromise- so what's new?]so to light upon a territory where the existing inhabitants would be a pushover was a god?/allah/ send its a fact that the palestine arabs don't/ and haven't had a self determination homeland for over 50 years therefore its no wonder that they felt/feel resentment + bitterness + want to try to do something about it on the other side, the 'israelis' [i put this name in '' because even though they've been occupying this territory fo a long time, it wasn't their land, and for anyone to move into a new area and say its ours without a proper war or negotiation is all wrong] on the other side, the 'israelis' clearly are being murdered by 'terrorists/freedom fighters' and palestinians clearly are being murdered more in return please 'king of the world' whichever person is president of usa do something NOW!! and stop the murder of PEOPLE!! i want to cry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mr Happy Date: 08 May 02 - 09:59 PM my [perh. simplistic] understanding of the reasons underlying the horrors in palestine/israel is that after ww2 ended the allies? needed somewhere to put displaced persons of the jewish faith who'd been victims of ethnic cleansing by the nazis. after some areas had been assessed for suitability [parts of s.america + australia], they settled on palestine as it's one of the areas mentioned in the bible as being 'the promised land' it doesn't seem to have been taken into consideration that this territory had been lived in [i don't say occupied] by arab people, of predominantly islam faith. but the region had been under occupation by members of the allies? [british] it was therefore less difficult to further disenfranchise a nation/a cultural group/ a religious community who already had been rendered substantially powerless, and introduce yet another alien regime, the 'israelis' don't make a mistake about where i'm coming from, i deplore racism in all its subtle and devious forms. however, it remains that the jewish dps were an embarrassment to the allies? [i'm putting a ? here because i don't believe they were ever friends, but a political compromise- so what's new?]so to light upon a territory where the existing inhabitants would be a pushover was a god?/allah/ send its a fact that the palestine arabs don't/ and haven't had a self determination homeland for over 50 years therefore its no wonder that they felt/feel resentment + bitterness + want to try to do something about it on the other side, the 'israelis' [i put this name in '' because even though they've been occupying this territory fo a long time, it wasn't their land, and for anyone to move into a new area and say its ours without a proper war or negotiation is all wrong] on the other side, the 'israelis' clearly are being murdered by 'terrorists/freedom fighters' and palestinians clearly are being murdered more in return please 'king of the world' whichever person is president of usa do something NOW!! and stop the murder of PEOPLE!! i want to cry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 10:06 PM Read my links Happiness. The situation started long before WWII. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Bobert Date: 08 May 02 - 10:15 PM Happiness, CarolC, et al: Danged ol' hillbilly me has been under siege over at the "Conscription" thread holding down the Peace Alamo. Some of the things you folks are talking about here apply to that thread and viv versa. It's a matter of rising above military thinking to peaceful coexistence thinking, and then maybe actual peace. Right now, it's time for the ref to step in and tell the combabtants to "Break it up" and mean it. The US, which is the World's ref, refuses. King of the World (Bush) could make a few phones calls and get things on track toward resolution but he does not have the courage. His plan: "Well, we'll get around to this this summer sometime". Yeah right?!?!... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 08 May 02 - 10:22 PM We can all help. Contact people in the government and the media and let them know that we know the real poop and that they can't fool us any more. Tell them that we want the US to be accountable for our own culpability, and to correct the situation that we helped to create. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mr Happy Date: 08 May 02 - 10:24 PM bush is an [asshole! us][arsehole! uk] does he know where palestine is? or what day it is we are the murderers because we allow it to go on , what can we do? i'll make a new thread of this |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 08 May 02 - 10:47 PM "its a fact that the palestine arabs don't/ and haven't had a self determination homeland for over 50 years therefore its no wonder that they felt/feel resentment + bitterness + want to try to do something about it
on the other side, the 'israelis' [i put this name in '' because even though they've been occupying this territory fo a long time, it wasn't their land, and for anyone to move into a new area and say its ours without a proper war or negotiation is all wrong]" troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Bobert Date: 08 May 02 - 11:09 PM True enough, troll. But the world has watched decades of Arabs throwing rocks and getting US suppled bullets in return. Our lack of courage to step in has allowed the tensions and escalations of violence on both sides to escalate to a point where now the only way for these people to live within any proximity with one another will probably be a buffer zone (DMZ). Pretty lousy foriegn policy, I'd say. And the bad news? There's more Isreali/Palestinian situations on the planet that the US also thinks will just solve themselves. Yeah, right. Dream on.... Gonna take some different thinking. Real soon, or Hunior is going to find half a dozen little hot wars going on, which ain't gonna play too well to his isolationist foriegn policy... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 08 May 02 - 11:36 PM We have stopped the Israelis time and again from going in and doing major damage to groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Arafat assumed that this would be the case in the latest round. He was wrong. Sharon didn't listen to the US this time and Arafat wound up a prisoner in his own offices while Sharons IDF cleaned house (note: insensitive choice of words). As I see it, we have two choices. Either let them fight it out, winner take all with the strong chance of a nuclear war, or step in and impose peace, draw lines and say, "This side is yours and this side is yours. If either of you crosses into the others territory, we will blow the offender to kingdom come." And the Cubs will win the World Series. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mark Cohen Date: 08 May 02 - 11:45 PM Yeah, Bobert, but it will play real well to all his friends who are making huge piles of money selling arms to all these combatants. And that's the American way. Aloha, Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 08 May 02 - 11:54 PM Mark, Mark, Mark. You're to young to be so cynical. Actually, the big gunrunners right now are the countries of the former Soviet Union. Spare parts are a problem though and I don't believe they take MasterCard or Visa. The Chinese dabble in it a bit or so I hear. And, while we do sell weapons systems to whoever has the money, we always stress that the weapons must only be used to promote the fortunes of the Forces of Good. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Little Hawk Date: 09 May 02 - 12:17 AM The Forces of Good??? Who might they be? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Little Hawk Date: 09 May 02 - 12:48 AM And by the way, has anyone noticed that this thread is named Who Are the Terrorists - Part one hundred and eleven???!!! Now that would really be overdoing it a bit... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 09 May 02 - 01:32 AM The Forces of Good are our arms customers LH. That's why we are willing to sell them the weapons. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 May 02 - 06:48 AM I can't see how the fact that Palestine hasn't been an independent entity is relevant to anything. There are any number of countries all over the world that weren't independent entities until they won their independence. In fact I get the impression that outside of Europe there are relatively few existing countries with that kind of direct continuity.
How many countries in the Americas were independent countries within before they were established in the last couple of centuries?
What matters is whether the people have a shared history and a shared identity - and there is no doubt that at this time in history the Palestinians have that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,mg Date: 09 May 02 - 12:11 PM For a different perspective, that of the Christian Palestinians..Orthodox, Lutheran and others.. here is a web site..they send out periodic emails. It is not essentially political but of course it does go there. www.hcef.org. I think the lack of boundaries is the biggest problem. I don't think there was ever an intent to have boundaries and I think that is unacceptable. I don't know why they weren't imposed by the UN and I don't know why our assistance was not contingent on them. I think there was a hope that the inhabitants would just go away and more land would become available. I think there is probably at least a semi-official policy of harassment and intimidation, keeping in mind that this is a very well trained and armed military that we just shouldn't be hearing about these extensive abuses from..although maybe the people at the checkpoints are not in the main military or whatever..but I think they are...if abuse at the checkpoints was not to be tolerated, it would not happen. So I can only conclude that it is intentional. And I am very sympathetic to checkpoints etc. from a military point of view..I know they are necessary. But the behavior of those checking must be above board. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mr Happy Date: 09 May 02 - 06:22 PM troll i did say in the first line of my mail that i had a simplistic view of the reasons underlying the me conflict i've now read all the other mails, and though now i'm better informed, my intention is the same and i don't feel its simplistic,naiive, or unreal to wish for peace you've criticised some obvious bigots/ racists in this thread, but i don't think its very helpful to put down someone so callously when the gist of your own mails seems mostly along the same lines as mine the only positive outcome of your scathing comments to me was to shock me into finding out more about this issue |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 May 02 - 07:06 PM "The only positive outcome of your scathing comments to me was to shock me into finding out more about this issue"
Well, that's rather a good positive outcome, and I imagine the one that troll would have hoped to induce by his comment, which I'd call acerbic or something like that, rather than callous.
The thing is, this is quite a complicated issue. And a high proportion of the people who appear on TV explaining it and who write in the papers telling everyone what's what don't actually seem to know a great deal about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: DougR Date: 09 May 02 - 08:46 PM Troll: Now you've done it. Mostly I agree with you. I think you present a very balanced, but conservative, view of most things. Now, however, we part company. THE DIAMONDBACKS are going to repeat this year!!! :>) McGrath: good point you made with Happiness I think. Happiness: don't get upset. We are all friends here even though we don't agree on everything. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Little Hawk Date: 09 May 02 - 09:24 PM Ummmm...WHO are the Diamondbacks??? :-) One man's ignorance is another man's fascination, eh? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 May 02 - 09:28 PM A colloquial term for Stegasauruses perhaps? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 09 May 02 - 09:48 PM I THINK that they are some kind of group -a sports team perhaps- who are somehow associated with that section of the nation where Doug lives and he feels that they will " repeat this year!!! " I'm not quite sure what he means but I suppose we should humor him along. Doug, OH YEAH!!!? SEZ YOU!!! Happiness, don't take it to heart. You took the larger step and checked some things out on your own. If I had patiently fed you links and spooned information to you, you would learn only what I wanted you to. Now you can do your own research and make up your own mind. You may actually turn out to be a worthwhile contributor. One thing though; don't believe ANYTHING that anyone says here (even me!) until you have checked it out yourself and preferably from several sources. People DO slant their data on ocassion. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: DougR Date: 09 May 02 - 11:57 PM Not me! The Diamondbacks are going to win the World Series ...AGAIN! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 10 May 02 - 12:49 AM That's entirely possible. Hell, even a blind pig will find an acorn if he roots long enough. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mark Cohen Date: 10 May 02 - 01:30 AM Yes, but a diamondback is a snake, not a pig. And that should tell you something. (I'll let you know when I figure out what it is.) Besides, I have a warm spot in my heart for the Red Sox this year, if only to wonder how they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory THIS time! But what do I know...I grew up a Phillies fan! I also find it somewhat amusing that most of the people who are shouting so loudly about the need to give back stolen land are themselves reaping the benefits of living on stolen land. Oh, well, perspective is relative, isn't it? In the words of the late Shel Silverstein (which I once put to music--to make this a musical thread!): Thanksgiving dinner's sad and thankless Christmas dinner's dark and blue When you stop and try to see it From the turkey's point of view Sunday dinner isn't sunny Easter feasts are just bad luck When you see it from the viewpoint Of a chicken or a duck Oh how I once loved tuna salad Pork and lobster, lamb chops too Till I stopped and looked at dinner From the dinner's point of view Aloha, Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 02:08 AM I also find it somewhat amusing that most of the people who are shouting so loudly about the need to give back stolen land are themselves reaping the benefits of living on stolen land.
It's a hell of a thing, isn't it Mark? Maybe that's why the US supports Israel so strongly. We see so much of ourselves in the Israelis. And our history isn't so very different than theirs is it?
And yet we have a cult of independence here in the US in which we immortalize our patriots who coined phrases such as "Give me liberty or give me death". Maybe we're not so different from the suicide bombers either.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 04:48 AM It has been pointed out to me that my last sentence could be construed as including the 9/11 suicide hijackers. I was not including the 9/11 hijackers in that statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 May 02 - 08:12 AM From outside it does seem very much as if many Americans do seem to see what's going on in the Holy Land as analogous to what happened in the conquest and settlement of your own country.
Which is accurate enough. In terms of the injustice done to the native population, and of what is now called "ethnic cleansing", there are real analogies.
But all of us have things like that in our past. Probably all of us, if you go back far enough. They can't be undone retrospectively.
So it's right for people to feel "We've done things as bad as them and worse, and we are living on the proceeds", and recognisingh this should stop us pretending we have clean hands. But to jump from "We've done things like that" to "And therefore, it's all right for other people to do them" is a jump too far.
It's as if, when the British gave up slavery, this should have meant that they had no right or duty to try to stop the slave trade by ships from other countries. If anything the reverse is true - the country which had built up the slave trade had a special duty to try to stop it.
In the same way countries which have driven out native populations and settled their lands have had a major part to play in teaching others to do the same, and they have a particular responsibility for helping to bring an end to this shameful,period in human history. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Little Hawk Date: 10 May 02 - 08:28 AM Regarding the Diamondbacks...of course they will repeat! What sports team doesn't repeat (do something indistinguishable from what it has done on any given occasion in the past)? Take football, for example: all get up, all crash into each other, all fall down, all get up again...over and over and over... That's repetition. And, man, is it TEDIOUS to watch! :-) The same thing is happening in the Middle East, although with far more serious consequences, unfortunately... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 May 02 - 08:49 AM You should try watching the kinds of football where they use a round ball, Little Hawk. A bit more subtlety is involved. (Repetitive subtlety maybe, but then you can sayb that of music.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 10 May 02 - 10:33 AM Yeah, LH but football only runs for about six months. The Middle-East goes on and on. One would wish that the fans of your "round-ball football" (Soccer, Foosball et.al.?)exercised a little subtlety, Kevin. Maybe there wouldn't be so many country pubs with signs that say "No Football Coaches". N.B. for Americans; a "Coach" is a bus, not a teams strategic director. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST,Akala Date: 10 May 02 - 10:54 AM Until CarolC and her ilk give their homes back to the Native Americans, compensate them for more than 500 years of expolitation and genocide, and go back to where they or their ancestors came from, they they should shut their ignorant mouths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 10 May 02 - 11:31 AM Ignorance can be cured. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of ill manners or stupidity. I do not agree with CarolC's solutions but I try not to be rude about it; acerbic, sarcastic, even ironic, but NOT rude. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: DougR Date: 10 May 02 - 11:48 AM I think Mark and Carol are "reaching" pretty far with their analogies. McGrath too. The U.S. has been involved in just about every major conflict in memory. Our armed forces have fought on foreign soil and after it is all over, they come home. I suppose, following WW II the U. S. could have claimed portions of Europe as spoils of war, but we didn't. We did retain some Islands in the Pacific that were captured with a lot of American blood, but if memory serves correctly, I think they have all been returned to Japan. We may still occupy Wake Island and Guam, but I'm not sure. My point is, the U. S. is not a country that craves more territory. It does not go to war to claim more territory. Equating early America's fight for Independence from England with what is going on in the Middle East is to me, ludicrous. Carol, when you go to Hawaii, I'm confident you and Mark will have a wonderful time sitting on the beach feeling guilty about all the horrible things your country has done. If that becomes tiresome, try the Helicoptor ride on Kauai, it's spectacular! DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Troll Date: 10 May 02 - 12:05 PM Yes Doug, the US does maintain control over Wake Is. and Guam is a US Territory with representation in Washington. Its inhabitants are American Citizens with the same ststus as the US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and American Samoa. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 06:28 PM GUEST,Akala, none of what I have been saying has anything to do with giving land back to anyone. What I have been saying is that Israel should stop the ongoing process of continuing to take land away from the Palestinians. And I have been advocating that this Israelis stop the brutal, bloody, and murderous practices that they have been using to try to coerce the Palestinians into giving up the little bit of land they still have. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 06:39 PM DougR, you missaprehend the meaning of my analogy. I wasn't making an analogy between our war of independence from England. I was comparing what we did to the Native Americans to what Israel has done, and continues to do to the Palestinians.
And I'm not suggesting that anyone should feel guilty about it. But to the extent that the problem is ongoing in Israel, I am suggesting that we all speak out about it, and do whatever we can to help Israel move forward from this bloody part of its history. I think that's what most Israelis want as well. They just don't seem to be able to break out of the trap denial that they're stuck in.
It's a difficult thing to accomplish. In order to stop doing the things that have been causing the problems, they have to admit that they've been doing them. Can't stop doing something that you don't admit you're doing. Then, after they get real with themselves about it, they can say they're sorry and begin to help the Palestinians move forward out of the devastation in which they find themselves now because of the Israeli policies and practices. In other words, don't feel guilty. Just stop it, and get to work helping to correct the problem.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: DougR Date: 10 May 02 - 06:56 PM I was directing those remarks about the American Revolution to McGrath, Carol, not you. I took you to mean, when you said "our history is similar to Israel's" that the U. S. was an expansionist state by taking land gained from war. troll: thanks for reminding this feeble old brain that Guam is a Territory. I knew that, but my mind just went blank when I was typing that post. I thought we controlled Wake Island too, because I seem to recall our launching bombers from Wake during the Viet Nam war, but I wasn't sure Clinton didn't give it to someone during the last few hours of his presidency. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 07:03 PM Ok, DougR. I can see now how you would have seen the analogy that you did. My point with the suicide bombers is simply that we say we (Americans) love freedom. That we believe in freedom, and the equality of all people, that we believe in the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". We've enshrined these concepts in our civil religion here in the US.
What I was suggesting with that analogy was that those same concepts live in the hearts of many people. Not just Americans. We, as a people, have said that death is preferable to bondage. I think it's safe to say that we are not the only people who feel this way, and that it is the love of those concepts that drive the actions of the suicide bombers in Israel/Palestine. Is there a better way to gain one's liberty than by killing innocents? Probably. But are we only going to hold the Palestinians responsible for the deaths they have caused and not the Israelis? Israel is responsible for the deaths of many more innocent Palestinians than Palestinians are for the deaths of innocent Israelis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 07:04 PM Oops. Looks like we cross-posted, DougR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 10 May 02 - 09:41 PM One more thing. I note, from two or three posts directed at me in this thread, that my speaking out against the killing of innocent Palestinians has earned me the hatred of some people here in the forum. I can't see what anyone could hope to accomplish by hating me for wanting the killing of all innocent civilians to stop. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: Mr Happy Date: 10 May 02 - 09:58 PM in my naiive simplistic way, i support the aguments of carolc. the murders are still happening from+to both groups in this conflict do they all forget [away from the militarists] that its just ordinary people like themselves who are the victims no one can change what happened yesterday but everyone can change what happens today+tomorrow
i anticipate a lot of -tive shit |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 May 02 - 10:56 PM "The conquest and settlement of your own country" - no, I wasn't meaning the American revolution, I was meaning the process by which the settlers took over the continent, displacing the existing inhabitants.
As pointed out, the same thing has happened in the past of most peoples. It's just that it's a lot more recent in the case of Americans and their fellow settlers in Canada, Australia and other places. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: CarolC Date: 11 May 02 - 04:42 AM Just for some balance, maybe, here's what one Jewish organization has to say about their anti-Zionist position on religious and practical grounds. I'd post it as a link, but a lot of people don't seem to be reading the links. Maybe they won't read this either. But what the hell...
Once again the death toll mounts in the Holy Land.
Once again Zionist "doves" and "hawks" lock horns as to the proper response.
Is there any real alternative to the seeming never ending spiral of death and killing?
These are the questions which Jews of various persuasions are asking themselves today. Few and far between are those who believe that salvation lies in the camp of Brak or that of Sharon. A sense of being check mated has enveloped Zionism and with it those unfortunate souls who have allied themselves to it over the years.
In the paragraphs to follow we ask the reader to thoughtfully re-examine some of the current fashionable assumptions concerning the state of Israel and the Zionist movement.
We have cast our viewpoint in question and answer format in the dialogue between an enquiring mind (EM) and a traditional Torah sage (TTS).
EM -- Why is now, in particular, the time for a rethinking of old assumptions?
TTS – Frankly everyone is exhausted. The Israeli state has not delivered its promised goods. It is far from a safe haven for Jews. On the contrary it is in a perpetual situation of war and terror. Neither fighting nor peace negotiations seem to succeed. "Orthodox" pronouncements of devotion to further war no longer inspire.
EM – But isn't that because . . .
TTS – Yes, yes, I know. Not enough real fighting and war or not enough real concessions for peace. Listen, I said we would be going beyond the old clich?s not wallowing in them.
EM -- OK. What's your angle?
TTS – First mistake. It's not my angle.
EM – Whose is it?
TTS – It is the "angle" of the Jewish people since our exile began, namely, that we are homeless due to our sins and that only repentance and G-d's miraculous mercy can end exile. Not tanks and bombs. It seems that this is fairly clear today, don't you think?
EM – So, you're one of those ultra-Orthodox fanatics against the state of Israel?
TTS – Always beware of media stereotyping. When Zionism began it was opposed by the overwhelming majority of Torah leaders and rank and file observant Jews. It is only since 1948 that the strange hybrid of quasi - Zionism best exemplified by the Agudath Israel movement came into being. This position wanted all the results of Zionism, a state with wars and sovereignty but refused to participate in the killing and dying necessary. It demanded money and protection from a state it refused to defend. Zionists have justifiable despised this position.
EM – But that's the Charedi position? The ultra- Orthodox, isn't it?
TTS – Again, don't let the ill informed media think for you It is the Agudah position. Take the money and run. It is not the traditional view at all. The traditional view opposed Zionism. It regarded as vastly secondary who were the Zionists or how they ran their state. This traditional point of view is consistent and coherent. It refuses and has always refused state money and sees the real problem as the existence of the state itself.
EM – But the state protects them doesn't it?
TTS – Quite the contrary. The ancestors of those who adopt this view lived in large numbers in the Holy land long before Zionists arrived and provoked the native Muslim population. They lived at peace with their non - Jewish neighbors. It was after the immigration began, which sought political rule, that animosity started. So, Zionism has protected no one. At first it endangered the old Jewish inhabitants of the Holy Land. Then it endangered the millions who lived there. Finally, it has plunged into danger Jewry world wide and many others, including Americans anywhere around the world.
EM – The state is a reality. You can't wish it away. Today there is no alternative. It is protecting millions.
TTS – For 52 years, actually for 100 years, we have heard how, first we'll have to fight a bit, then Israel will be a safe haven for Jews. It hasn't happened. How many wars are needed? How many deaths till we say that too many people have died, until we are willing to admit that it was a lie, a horrible lie? A false guarantee that delivered the reverse of what it promised?
EM – So, what do you propose now?
TTS – First, let's get it clear that you are proposing nothing. You have no solution. All your solutions have been tried. Both war and peace have been attempted. For decades you have mocked our constant references to Talmudic statements which predict endless bloodshed as a punishment for seeking to prematurely end the exile. For a moment, just a moment pause and consider that everything we foretold has come true. Nothing you envisioned has. Maybe our Talmudic sages were right, after all?
EM – Again what is your plan?
TTS – Well, first we have to cleanse our minds and hearts of Zionist understandings of history. 1) We cannot shoot our way out of Divine punishment. 2) It is a grave sin to kill or be killed in order to establish pre-Messianic Jewish rule over the Holy Land. 3) The Israeli state in no way represents Jewry or Judaism. 4) Its "keeping" or "giving away" land has nothing to do with Jewry or Judaism. 5) Zionism – the arrogant usurpation of Divine Providence, must always fail, as foretold in Bible and Talmud and by Torah leaders over the centuries. 6) Jewish aggression against non –Jews is antithetical to our Torah mission.
EM – Your plan?
TTS – Our short term plan is to lesson somewhat the anti-Jewish sentiment which Zionism has created around the world and particularly in Islamic countries. We seek to inform the nations of the world that the dispossession of the Palestinians which exploded in 1948 but which had really been taking place since the turn of the century was wrong. And, that Torah Jewry had no part in this evil action. In general, we want to present an alternative to, so called, organized Jewry which forever wanders the globe seeking, in the true spirit of Zionism, to sew the seeds of hate against the nations.
EM – And long term?
TTS – We pray for a peaceful dismantling of the state.
EM – Is this realistic?
TTS – Is the current slavish devotion to Zionism realistic? Has it achieved anything except an endless body count and exacerbated anti-Semitism? The Almighty governs the affairs of men. Would all Jews see the evils of Zionism and then approach the Palestinian people in a spirit of reconciliation, with a sincere desire to relinquish control of the Holy Land the results would be surprisingly pleasant. In the meantime , though, our task is to disassociate ourselves from the heresy of Zionism and the evils it has perpetrated. By so doing we will sanctify the Creator's Name and restore the Torah dignity of the Jewish people.
EM – In the meantime it seems that not many are interested in your message?
TTS – First. Many have continued the original Torah true anti-Zionist belief system over the last century. They number in the hundreds of thousands. As far as the others are concerned there is a sense of total exhaustion. Half hearted efforts at peace accomplish nothing. The moral burden of the refugee question is overwhelming. The right offers only further war and terror and death in "defense" of the Holy Sites. Behind all the clich?s is the ever growing sense that Zionism is dead. It has failed utterly. With G-d's help this sense will harden into a clear realization. May this brief conversation serve as a signpost on that path back to truth. And may the Creator's mercies extend to all our people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part 111 From: GUEST Date: 11 May 02 - 12:16 PM 112 posts are too many. The thread continues here. |