BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 06:10 AM

What baffles me is how stupid two intelligent groups are being. It must be obvious to the Palestinians that every suicide bombing arouses increased Israeli agression; it must be obvious to the Israelis that every state-sponsored invasion arouses increased suicide bombings.

Obviously the two sides' violence is feeding emotionally off each other's responses.

If they're not going to end up in a nuclear war - and I'm speaking literally here - both sides are going to have to realise that they must find agreement, compromise and respect for each other's needs.

The Palestinians need their own country - the Israelis came in and stole their land, after all! - and the Israelis also need theirs.

There could be advantages on both sides if they co-operated: the Israelis agreeing to

* *stop* building settlements

* withdraw from the land invaded in 1967, and help the Palestinians to set up a State of Palestine

* help the Palestinians with education and training and money, in the way that the Americans helped the Israelis when they were setting up their country

* respect the Palestinians' borders and culture

while the Palestinians agreed to

* *respect* the Israelis' borders of 1967

* respect and help the Jewish culture

* work to make Palestine as great a country as Israel

And so on. It can be done.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 05:56 AM

I take your point, Wolfgang, but here's where I disagree with you: I don't think human beings will ever submit willingly to repression. And that is what I was alluding to as being unchangable with my references to the baby and the road.

As far as my spelling is concerned, I know it's atrocious, but I'm afraid there is nothing inspired about it. I'm just a bad speller.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Wolfgang
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 05:37 AM

Carol, the pictures you use to describe the situation tell a lot about how you see it (and that's where I strongly disagree). In your pictures, Israel is likened to a man who has to change his behaviour to avoid further damage. The 'opposition' (a road, a small baby) cannot be expected by anybody to change its (her, his) behaviour. No move to change will ever come from that side.

McGrath's picture (a man in a hole) is similar in that respect: Any change of the situation has to come from a change in the behaviour of the man (Israel). Nobody in the right frame of mind should expect a hole to change its ways.

I do not see the deadlock so one-sided. Both sides are led by grown-up men (though it doesn't look so all of the time), both sides can do something that could lead to a change. I do not see the onus for a change only on Israel's side as your pictures seem to imply.

Yesterday, a group of 55 leading Palestinians made a plea for stopping the suicide bombings. I saw an interview with one of them. He said they had wanted to say that much more early but many of them are afraid to speak out for fear of being murdered as 'collaborators'.

Such an initiative gives me as much hope as Israelis speaking out loudly against the politics of settlements (without fear of being murdered for that, by the way).

Carol, your riteous indignation made me grin, for there is more truth in that misspelling than you may have meant. Much too often the indignation from supporters of both sides seems to be a mere rite to me, so that to call it 'riteous indignation' often hits the nail. To aks, as Doug does, where is your indignation about XY, why don't you speak out against..., is not helpful at all in such a discussion, as long as only the dead on one side are used to try to embarrass someone else.

Doug, as for the number of dead on both sides, there have been periods of days, even weeks in which more Israelis have been killed than Palestinians, but on the whole and on longer periods, listen to Carol (or read her lnks in other threads). She's right here without any doubt.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 04:14 AM

Let me correct part of my last post...

Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs were living in peace in the region... (etc.)

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 03:34 AM

Ok, DougR. Let me rephrase...

DougR, or anyone else, if you have any more questions or comments that you want to address to me, I'd appreciate it if you would put them in a PM instead of posting it here.

As I have said before, I condemn any attacks on innocent people on both sides of the conflict. But I will also say again, that I believe that if the government of Israel will correct what I believe to be a disasterous policy with regard to not only the Palestinians, but the whole region, the suicide bombings and killing of innocent civilians will stop.

Jews and Palestinians were living in peace in the region until the Palestinians started getting kicked out of their homes and villages in the early part of the 1900s, and a policy of brutal repression was begun against them by the founders of the state of Israel. The brutal repression has not stopped to this day. The situation in the middle east is not surprising when viewed in this light.

It's time for the Palestinians to be allowed to live like human beings. Just like we do. I don't think this is too much to ask.

And once again, it would relieve me greatly if I could now remove myself from this conversation with a clear conscience that I have contributed everything I have to offer on this thread.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 03:06 AM

This is an open forum, Carol, and therefore one is free to post whatever they think and believe. I see no reason to PM opinions. Jack may have satisfied you with his reply to my post, but I think his post makes little sense at all. Israel is a country. It was established by a world body that you liberals love to point to as the arbiter of all things civil (when it suits your purpose), the United Nations. There is no Palestinian state. There could be one, but the hoodlums running things over there don't really want one. They only want to kill Israelis, and erase from the face of the map the country the U.N. established. It is still a puzzelment to me that liberals, such as yourself, are so reluctant to condem the violence that the Palestinian terrorists are carrying out in Jerusalem and have vowed to continue.

A two year old child was killed today, as well as a five year old child. Does that mean nothing to my liberal friends? Obu, Bobbert, Carol C., McGrath, Jack the Sailor, what say?

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 02:18 AM

I think I'm going to try to remove myself from this conversation now. These threads give me anxiety attacks. DougR, or anyone else, if you have any more questions of comments that you want to address to me, I'd appreciate it if you would put them in a PM instead of posting it here.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 01:07 AM

Jack did a pretty good job of answering your question for me, DougR. I don't think I want to add too much else right now, except to say that if the Israelis want to live in peace with the Palestinians, they can. And as I have been able to show in some of the other threads, there have been many, many more Palestinians killed than Israeli Jews since the creation of the state of Israel. So where is your riteous indignation about that?

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Jun 02 - 12:54 AM

Doug, your perspective confuses me.

If the Israeli's or anyone else kicked you out of your home, Buldozed it and started building a "settlement" on it as if it were unoccupied, Wouldn't that be terrifying? I guess from your point of view, when terror is a biproduct it isn't terrorism.

If you were in the shoes of the Palestinians, YOU would be the terrorist.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 10:23 PM

How anyone could question who the real terrorists are is beyond me. That does not mean that I am anti-Palestinian! The Palestinian terrorists are hoodlum gangs that operate independent of the population. They are led, I believe, by Yassar Arafat. If he were truly a Palestenian leader, he would seek peaceful means to achieve a state. Instead, he and his terrorist thugs are bent on only one thing in my opinion: destroy Israel, and kill as many Israelis as possible, including innocent men women and children.

Carol, your comment that the news services only report Israeli deaths and not Palestenian deaths (or words to that effect) just boggles my mind. The news services, I think, would LOVE to report that Israeli forces killed 20, 30, 50, or more Palestinians. Look what they did when the Palestinian propaganda machine promoted the report that there was a massacre in Jenen(Sp). They had a media feeding frenzy, and as it turned out, there was no massacre at all.

Palestinian terrorists killed more civilians in the past two days than was killed in that action, and I ask again, where is the outrage those of you who consider yourselves to be liberals, about what has happend in Jerusalem the past two days?

If the news was reversed (Israeli forces killed almost 50 innocent Palestinians), you would be on it like flies on you know what.

DougR

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 09:27 PM

"Most of the attacks are occurring on territory that is recognized by most signatories of the U.N. as Israel proper."

But most of the attacks by Israeli forces are occurring in territory that is recognized by most signatories of the UN as being illegally occupied by Israel.

Arguing about legalities just means going round in circles, getting nowhere.

The fundamental first principle when you are stuck in a hole is stop digging it deeper. And if your friend is stuck in a hole the way to help is not by encouraging that friend to dig away more energetically, and providing nice shiny new spades.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 09:20 PM

robomatic, there has been quite a lot of discussion here in the Mudcat in recent months about what you are asserting in your post here. There has been quite a lot of very credible information presented that, at best, casts considerable doubt on your assertions. I'm not going to rehash those discussions here, but if you want to get a more balanced perspective on what's happening in the middle east, those discussions would be a good resource for you to check out.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: robomatic
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 09:02 PM

I think that people here are working off of existing agendas/ attitudes which then lead to their differing answers of 'who is the terrorist'. If you believe that Israel has the right to exist, then it follows that Israel has the right to defend itself. Most of the attacks are occurring on territory that is recognized by most signatories of the U.N. as Israel proper.

As to the 'right' of Palestinians to have their own country, which would be something new on the scene as the territory now comprising Israel has been 'occupied' by one or another power since biblical times, this has long been a matter which should be negotiated, rather than fought. The U.N. tried to partition the area in 1948 and a war instigated by the Arab nations resulted. Israel with or without the United States has sought negotiated settlements at various junctures, and been rebuffed out of hand.

This is a roundabout way of saying that we do not have a balance of terror. We have a nation state being attacked by interests who wish nothing less than its destruction. The act is the very message.

The title of this thread is pure bait.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 09:01 PM

I think the Palestinians have to be saved from themselves and from their leadership....I am very sympathetic to their overall situation, but would do what it takes to suppress the terrorism. And part of what it takes is occupation. The key question is by whom, and with what constraints on the behavior of the occupiers. People who are less involved in the whole mess must be the occupation force. You can have good security without harassment. Much of the occupation force must be female and a lot of the problems with a predominantly male force will be avoided. As well, women who must go through invasive or embarassing searches must have this done by other women, especially where there is a very traditional culture. I won't ask these women to do what I wouldn't do myself, so therefore, I will volunteer, as I have mentioned before.

mg

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 07:30 PM

"Somewhere along the way (a few posts up) the subject of who the terrorists are got diverted into a reference about the treatment of native americans." (Doug)

That was me, and it wasn't meant as a diversion. I think that a major reason why many Americans seem to have a different slant on the tragedy in the Holy Land probably relates to a perceived parallel with what happened in the settlement of America.

And that doesn't mean I think this thread is a place to discuss the ins and outs of what actually did happen in the conquest and settlement of America.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 07:20 PM

In an Arabic language Bible, Allah is what you would find where an English language Bible would have God.

My understanding is that Mohammed always said that the religion he was preaching was the same religion as that of Abraham and Isaac and so forth. And also the same as that of Jesus. Essentially he saw his mission as one of reformation and completion of a religious project that he believed had gone astray into Jewish tribalism, and Christian superstition.

I'm sure that many Muslims prefer to use the term Allah, because for them it is important to give a special place to the Arabic language. But their central belief is that there is no God but Allah.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:58 PM

Just because you haven't heard of the Israelis taking Palestinian lives in the past few days doesn't mean they didn't happen. That sort of information (how many Palestinians are killed by Israelis) doesn't seem get covered much in this part of the world. Although if there have been Palestinians killed by Israelis in the last few days, and I do some research on it and post some links about it, I'm sure somebody will accuse me of anti-semitism or having hidden agendas or something.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:51 PM

Why not, Fadac, that's your right!

Carol: I did not imply that I had a problem with the sites you provided, I just felt that a discussion of the mistreatmetn of the Native Americans would veer this thread a bit off subject. I think it would be a good subject for a separate thread though. As to whose relatives did whatever, I have no idea whether mine did or not. They were here in time to do so, but I have no idea.

Back to the subject: Carol, I don't believe it would be necessary for Israel to go on a killing rampage such as the one you suggest. All they have to do is continue to occupy the Palestinian areas they are taking over now. Two suicide bombers killed numerous Israelis (and perhaps several Palestinians) in Jerusalem over the past two days. How many Palenstinians have the Israelis killed over the past two days? I haven't read or heard of any. The Israelis are taking land, the Palestinians are taking lives. Which is the most important? And where is the outrage about people killing people usually voiced by those of you who consider yourselves to be liberals?

Who are the terriorists?

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,greg stephens
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:50 PM

On the names pf God subject, I just rung up my Afghan pal Azizi for a bit of background. He says he knows Muslims, Jews and Christians have the same God, and in his home language s of dariand Pashtun he uses the terms Allah(of Arabic origin) or "khouda" for all three.(cognate, as linguists say, with God, Dari and Pashtun are like English, German, Gaelic etc Indo-european languages, Arabic isnt).I asked ih e had a general word for a god, as "something to be worshipped, as opposed to Allah". He said he might use "khouda" in that sense,but not Allah. He might use the Arabic word maboud with that meaning, if discussing theology. He was a bit vague when I asked what word he would use to describe what a Hindu worshipped, say.First he said, "I would use the name of the thing, like Cow. I said they had a lot of Gods, cows were just sacred". Then he suggested bagwan, or possibly khouda. Then he came up with a real gem, and said that in the Bollywood movies he watches the Indians say "Upperwallah" for a god.At that point we had a laugh and moved onto to gossip. Just thought I'd share that with everybody. Azizi is very wise, especially about Americans and Osama and the minutiae of politics East of Suez, he is my big teacher.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:18 PM

Who's nitpicking now, greg?

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:15 PM

Oops Wolfgang. Sorry about misspelling your name.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Fadac
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:13 PM

I havn't been here for a while, but I thought I'd toss in my $0.02 worth.

A good example of how terrorism really works.

Where terrorism is really working is right here in the old US of A. After the tragic events of 9/11, Americans were jumping up and down to "Do Somethng". We know what happend then. Now some "reliable source" of that group only has to say something like, "We hate your American Hamburgers", then what? Tanks at MacDonalds? For a terrorist to be really successfull, they need a big reaction from little imput. I think they are just bringing stuff up to watch us jump through hoops.

Their laughing their butts off at us. All they have to do is say "Boo!" and we jump out of our skins.

I also think we need to (colectivly) calm down and do some serious thinking, before we give up every freedome we ever had, so the bad boogy man terrorist dosn't get us in our sleep.

It seems like what is desired (I have no idea by whom) that we should have heavy shutters on our windows, lock all the doors, hide in the dark, have the police portect us, there is nothing more secure that a self built prison.

Ok, I rambled a bit.

Best wishes to all

-Fadac

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,greg stephens
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:12 PM

Dont be too confident, Carol. lets assume Indian massacring started happening about 1500AD, and one generation per 25 years. That gives you anything up to a little over 2 million ancestors in the relevant period (hope I've got my maths right, its not my strong point).Are you sure you know where they all were, and what they were up to? Damn sure I don't, about mine.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 06:02 PM

No problem Greg. I'm sure some of my ancestors are guilty of something. Just not that.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 05:35 PM

Dont lets get nit-pickin about whose ancestors did what to the Indians. It would good if we all reflected that (a)some of our ancestors undoubtedly did it to others. (b) some of our ancestors undoubtedly had it done to them.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 05:23 PM

I liked Carol's picture: The Palestinians are as uncompromising and unable to reason as the bends of a road are.

Well, Wolfang, you're certainly entitled to interpret my words in whatever way you like, since I left them open to interpretation. However, when it comes to the question of being willing to compromise and reason, with Israel's track record in that regard, and considering the stance they are taking and sticking to like glue, I see no alternative for them but to kill all of the Palestinians in Israel and the Occupied Territories, or chase them out of the country.

But then they're going to have to deal with the other countries in the region that they are going to destabilize if they do that, so I guess that means they're going to have to kill an awful lot of Arabs in other countries as well. They might even have to use some of those nuclear weapons they've got before they feel completely secure.

DougR, I never get into spitting contests with you over anything. Being the scholar that you are, I have always assumed that you wanted to have a good grasp of the facts of any subject that is being discussed, and that is what I sought to provide for you in my last couple of posts.

By the way, it wasn't my ancestors who did that to the Indians. My ancestors weren't here then.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,greg stephens
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 03:55 PM

McGrath, in your posting about Allah and God you're are confusing the issue by using the wordGod in two different senses in consecutive sentences. yes, they are all the same God (in the sense of an omnipotent being, a deity or whatever). But "God" is also the name of that God as used by Christians. ie "Allah" and "God" are both names of the same God. And as other posters have pointed out, it is only common politeness to use whichever term is appropriate for the people you are talking about. It's also worth pointing out that the essential oneness of the three deities of these three religions may be familiar to educated adherents, but it is by no means so well known to the more rank-and-file adherents.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,YMF
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 03:19 PM

Please ignore the last line of my previous message. I rewrote it into the preceding paragraph.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,YMF
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 03:15 PM

McGrath of Harlow wrote:

Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians? It's the same God.

Essentially the same religion, more especially when it comes to Judaism and Islam.

"The same God?" Yes, that's true. However, using the term "Allah" when referring to God in an Islamic context is proper. When I studied the basics of Islam, from an Egyptian Muslim professor, at SUNY, that is what we taught to do.

I have studied basic Islam and Judaism in depth. I am a practicing Reconstructionist Jew. Despite some similarities, including aspects of kashruth/hallal, to suggest that they are "essentially the same religion," is to demonstrate a profound ignorance of both.

However to suggest that Judaism and Islam are "

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,YMF
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 03:03 PM

Another terrorist suicide bombing today in Jerusalem. At least seven Israelis murdered and at least another 35 seriously injured and maimed.

According to the Hezbollah's Al Manar television station in Lebabonon, credit for today's terrorist suicide boming is being claimed by the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a group that is part of Arafat's own Fatah group.

Who are the terrorists?

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 02:38 PM

Well, Danged, Dougie! Iz been reduced to "the writer". Now that's kind of mean spirited, ain't it? Nevermind. The point is well taken on the name or word one man uses for the higher spirit, supreme being or whatever term one can think of that doesn't make someone else want to blow you up fir using but this does not change, in "this writer's" opinion the existence of a single _______________ (fill in your own name) rather than two or more__________________'s.

Bobert.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 02:08 PM

Just reported: another suicide bomber in Jerusalem.

Who are the terrorists? Pretty clear to me.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 02:00 PM

I agree with your comments re God and Allah, Wolfgang. I believe that a Muslim would make the same point you did, and might believe that the writer was a bit arrogant when not differentiating between the Christian's God, and the Muslim's Allah.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 01:28 PM

I liked Carol's picture: The Palestinians are as uncompromising and unable to reason as the bends of a road are.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 12:57 PM

Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians?

I could be mistaken and it could be different in English and German, but the main reason I see for that use is politeness. German Muslims get very upset if one uses the word 'Gott' when 'Allah' is meant. They see it as a kind of Western arrogance expressed in language and don't feel taken serious.

May be next time Tony Blair just addresses Bertie Ahern in a letter as 'prime minister'. Basically the same thing is meant and spelling errors are less likely than with 'Taoiseach'.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 12:32 PM

Thank you, McGrath. I didn't think that the oneness aspect of God had to be explained but I reackon there are folks who think their God can beat up the other guy's God, which only demonstrates an absolute lack of Faith. And you are right in that a lot of folks hide behind religion as the go about justifying bad behavior...

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: GUEST,Ard Mhacha
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 12:20 PM

And all you UK catters may get an insight into state terrorism if they watch Panarama on BBC 1 to-night at 9pm. British security forces aided and abetted loyalist gunmen to "kill Catholics with impunity" the words of English police Inspector John Stevens. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 12:04 PM

Carol, I'm not going to get into a spitting contest with you over the treatment of Native Americans by those terrible Europeans (from whom both of us I assume are decended). Somewhere along the way (a few posts up) the subject of who the terrorists are got diverted into a reference about the treatment of native americans. If you want to start a new thread about their treatment, I'll check out your sources and we can go at it there.

There have been new developments in the Middle East since this thread started, and the subject of this thread is still very pertinent.

It appears to me that Israel's response to the latest suicide bombing is the beginning of what I prophsied months ago, and I repeat: the problems between Israel and the Palestinians will not be resolved until one has defeated the other.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 02:29 AM

Click here if you require some documentation. I found it with a Google search using the key words "Native American" + "Genocide".

For some legal definitions of Genocide as applied to indigenous peoples in the US and Canada, click here.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 12:59 AM

I think if you look at the numbers, DougR, what the European newcomers to the North American (and South American) continents did to the people who were already here could only be categorized as genocide.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 11:57 PM

Oh, come on Jack, "Slaughter?" The native peoples were not delt with fairly, that's true, and they experienced some slaughters, but there were also slaughters committed by them too! Not all of the native people were submissive to the palefaces you know. Or perhaps you don't. Geronimo tied up the whole Army of the west for years, and was never really defeated. The settlers deamonized the natives? Jack, I'm beginning you don't know much about western history.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 11:09 PM

Of couse the Jews are waiting for the Messiah. Jesus fulfilled the old testement prophecies. But the Jews didn't believe.

American settlement is a good parallel, The settlers justified the slaughter by deamonizing the Natives. Calling them pagans and savages.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 07:15 PM

Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians? It's the same God. Essentially the same religion, more especially when it comes to Judaism and Islam.

This conflict isn't about religion, any more than the wars in America between the settlers and the original inhabitants were about religion. It's about territory, with religion being used as a way of making what people do to other people seem right.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 07:06 PM

Right on Bobert, I sincerely hope everybody on mudcat votes Green!

The Palestinians don't believe they can do whatever they want and Allah won't come to smite their enemy? That includes sending suicide bombers in to Israel to kill innocent civilians too, I suppose. From accounts I read, the Palestenian terrorists think they are doing what they do with the blessings of Allah.

I can assure you, though, the Israelis are not looking to the Messiah for anything. I think maybe you have your religions a bit confused.

Christians believe in the Messiah (Jesus Christ) the Jews believe that the Messiah is yet to come.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 06:25 PM

Hey, the American ruling class gets richer from war and they got one of their store-bought guys right where they want him. Plus, they realize that voters (especially when not presented with the whole story...) tend not to change presidents in the middle of wars so they're going to have their boy keep the war hammer down until the American people wake up and vote out folks who are the henchmen of the ruling class. So on and on and on we go.

We need a fundamental change. CarolC is right. Keep doing the same stupid stuff expecting different results is collective insanity. And for anyone keeping score, God ain't on either side of this evil behavior and for those who think that God pulls all the levers and makes all this evil stuff happen, forget that fundamental crap. That is nothing but a cop out for folks who say they are of Faith one one hand and think blowing up folks is okay on the other. That dog don't hunt...

Think peace

Vote Green

Bobert

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 05:07 PM

DougR

They don't believe they can do whatever they want and still count on the Messiah to come and smite their enemys.

An more importantly they don't act that way.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: greg stephens
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 04:47 PM

God appears to be on both sides, very gung-holy too. That seems to be what is making the problem so intractable.What does happen when two omnipotent beings collide?

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 04:43 PM

And the Palestinians don't believe that Allah is on their side, Jack the Sailor?

Good post Barbara.

DougR

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 04:32 PM

I'm sure that there is little I can add to this discussion by way of arguement. I only say that I am against Israel's policies and actions toward the Palestinians. And I am neither anti-Jewish or a part of a third world conspiracy.

If the Israeli's wanted peace they would withdraw the settlements from the west bank and stop bulldozing houses. But they think that God is on their side and will step in before they really have to compromise. A lot of people here feel the same way. But I don't.

Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 02:54 PM

Terror feeds on terror. That doesn't ever make it justified, it just means that the attempt to justify it by claiming that it is a way of putting an end to terror just does not work, and is based on a lie.

The effect of terrorism is to entrench the terrorists in control on both sides. Consciously or not, the people who marshall terrorists on both sides are in alliance with each other, at the expense of the ordinary people who are their victims.