BS: Unite Against Terror

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 10:08 AM

What category does that put you in, 10.02?

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 10:02 AM

If patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, pseudo-leftism is now the first. A typical pseudo disdains the past yet perpetuates it at every turn by addiction to their ideological dogma; whilst the mirror image of the pseudo, the typical rightist or reformist perpetuates the present by ignoring it, at least our typical rightist is consistent, i.e. he doesn't pretend to effect a feel of futurity while conserving attitudes and values essential to keep things just as they are; Mssr
Pseudo does just that; hypocrites who are moving forward into the past and want to take the rest of us with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Redhorse at work
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:36 AM

Maybe Im missing the point. A petition against terrorism that isn't going to be submitted to anyone. So who is it petitioning?

Its only purpose appears to be to allow the signers to bathe in the smug glow of their own self-regard.

And no, although I am against terrorism (since if I'm in favour of any type of violence I'm hardly going to call it terrorism) I won't be signing

sometimes I despair of Mudcatters

nick

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:35 AM

"Useful idiot" is a logical contradiction, and it was popularized quite a bit during the McCarthy era in the USA, a Communist witchhunt. Joe McCarthy was himself a fascist. His general approach...innuendo, false accusation, libel, and destruction of the careers of decent people...all of these were tactics that have been used in various totalitarian systems, such as Stalin's Russia. Fortunately, McCarthy did not succeed in taking it quite as far as Joe Stalin did or a few million Americans would have died in internment camps on their own land.

(Stalin was a fascist too...masquerading as a socialist. Socialists can easily be fascists if they are so inclined. So can capitalists. Fascists seek total power by any means, legal or illegal, and they are willing to kill plenty of people to get it.)

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:35 AM

Whoops that was me, sorry MoH

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:34 AM

Littlehawk you brought up matters of history so the fact still remains that, unless you are of the First Nation, you are taking advantage of an indigenous people that your forbears subjugated. Yes I know it's nonsense but so is blaming everything that happened a long time ago on todays politicians.

War is bad
When anyone does it (provided that they started it)

Britain declared war on Germany, not the other way round, did we do something wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:26 AM

Ake said
We must drain the swamp of grievances in the Middle East over the policies of Mr Bush and Mr Blair

Times today, Mr Blair has just received his second highest poll rating ever and there is a growing movement to persaude him not to stand down.

I may be a lone voice here but in the real world it appears not: guess which is the more important!

Have a nice day
Shakey
Opposing terrorist sympathisers and useful idiots everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:26 AM

I'm in Canada because I was born here, Shakey. ;-) I think of myself as human, not British. I think of other people as human too, and that is why I am inclined to treat them decently, and as equals. I have not invaded anyone.

War is bad
When anyone does it (provided that they started it). (it's a failure to communicate effectively)
Blowing up civilians is wrong no matter who does it.
And it is not justified because you are really unhappy about something...

Nobody is unhappy about democracy, except for the odd politician who wants total control of his society.

Jews are humans, exactly like other humans, and they would do well to focus on the similarities rather than the differences between themselves and other humans. Ditto for Palestinians. One's humanity is a far more significant matter than one's superficial cultural label.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:18 AM

But if they truly had a multi-personality disorder would there actually be just one of them. Just wondering.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:16 AM

All those GUESTs evidently agree on big thing. Don't use a name or a label. Or perhaps it's multi-personality disorder, and there's just one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:14 AM

All those GUESTs evidently agree on the thing. Don't use a name or a label. Or perhaps it's multi-personality disorder, and there's just one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 07:18 AM

That was clever. Shouldn't you be at school?

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 07:07 AM

piss off

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 06:56 AM

War is bad
When Americans do it.
Blowing up civilians is understandable
As long as you're really, really unhappy about something
Like poverty
Or democracy
Or women driving cars
Or homosexuals breathing
Or Jews existing.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 05:54 AM

A bit gnomic that last one...

Well MoH,as I'm sure you know gnomic has several meanings, as you have left it conveniently open I'll choose one of them.

expressing what is generally or universally true

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 05:47 AM

When the British romped all over Africa in the 1800's, for instance, massacring Native tribes with fast-firing Martini rifles...they were committing terrorism.

I think things have moved on a touch since. But if you want to stick with it, I believe the British also invaded what is now Canada, so what the hell are you still there for, get out, give it back to it's rightful owners.

Grow up

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 05:37 AM

A bit gnomic that last one...

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 05:34 AM

moronic anti-Americanism, school-playground pacifism and outright fascist sympathising.

There are those who, by their equivocation, effectively regard such victims as "legitimate targets" in their idiot's war against "imperialism".

Western apologists continue to do Jihadists' PR


Take your pick LittleHawk

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:29 AM

Why not just "Unite Against Evil"? I'm surprised that the White House has not come up with that slogan, as it is one that would persuade and encourage almost any violent faction imaginable to add their support to the cause (of killing "bad" people). They did come up with an "Axis of Evil", though, and that's pretty close.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:20 AM

Why does this remind me of old-ime politicos in the US who took a firm stand opposing the Johnstown Flood? Unite against tsunamis?

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:09 AM

Hmmm. Well, yeah. My wish for us all is that we live in freedom, peace, and mutual respect. That requires tolerance and it requires a measure of social justice too. That starts at home, not on the other guy's territory.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 11:33 PM

It's Chicago's Bughouse Square all over again! I love it.

But there was always wisdom in that lovely ranting, and there is much logic here as wello. Once again: What will happen is what will be. - And what will be is what will happen!!---

The strong will prevail. Hopefully, it will be the "good" strong-----and not the "bad" strong that makes the rules when the chaos quiets some.

Here is a paraphrase of Alan Sherman:

God rest ye merry gentlemen---let nothing you dismay,
Dis May has been a rotten month--so what more can I say?
Let's hope next May is better, and good things will come your way,
And you won't have a feeling of dis-may---next May.

Or whenever...

My wish for us all is that we escape the worst of the fire and the flying debris.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 11:23 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 11:05 PM

Uh-huh. About that smart. Well, like I said, who isn't against terrorism? Anyone being terrorized is against it, aren't they? Only problem is, they only think it's terrorism when it's done TO them or their chosen friends, not when it's done BY them or their chosen friends. All deliberate aggressions on other people and all attempts to cow other people into yielding their way of life to yours are terrorism. The number one proponents OF terrorism are and always have been national governments, and their mechanism for practicing it is warfare...economic warfare, diplomatic warfare, and full scale military warfare. Their common objective: material gain.

When the British romped all over Africa in the 1800's, for instance, massacring Native tribes with fast-firing Martini rifles...they were committing terrorism. Ask the Natives about it. They were certainly terrified. When the USA bombs people with B-52s the same thing is happening. Terrorism. For the USA to declare a "War On Terrorism" is as ironical as Stalin declaring a "War on Totalitarianism" would have been. It's a major case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,clint keller
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 10:07 PM

Years ago someone gave me a handsome brochure which spoke against world hunger.

He asked for money to support the cause.

I asked him where the money went.

He said it went to print more brochures and like publicity to raise hunger awareness.

None for food, directly or indirectly?

No, he said, they were Uniting People Against Hunger.

This petition's not even as smart as the Hunger Awareness movement. It's about as effective as that yellow magnetic ribbon stuck on the butt of your car.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:56 PM

MoH
Well of course you are entitled to your own interpretation of what isn't actually there, ie appears to implicitly approve , all I can say in defence is that I didn't read it that way and there is a large, and growing, group of people who didn't either. I'm sure you know some of the names on the site and imagination would have to be stretched to the limit to think of them as war-mongers.

---

By the way Carol I noticed that you had 4 posts in a row, I must have dozed off, anyway my response of That was pretty good. was to your jibe at me at 25 Jul 05 - 06:35 PM It ocurred to me that you thought it was a reply to one of the others. Nope, I respect a good jibe.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:36 PM

My sticking point is the expression "...are worth defending with all our strength", which in the context of this manifesto, and in the absence of any kind of qualification, appears to implicitly approve activities which are essentially terrorist in nature.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:05 PM

And if you believe that I believe the French should have resisted the Allied invasion in '44, you are entirely (and, I think, deliberately) missing my point, Greg. ;-)

Mind you, there were a very small number of French nationals (as well as Dutch, Norwegian, Danish, Czech, and other nationals in Nazi-invaded lands) who joined the SS and helped the Germans fight the Allies during WWII. You can look it up in the histories of the SS formations. They were nonconformists of their time, I suppose, and it proves that every side can find some people who will back it during a war, even among the invaded.

No, Greg, I do not think the French should have resisted a relief force sent into their country to throw out an already present foreign invader. Hardly. Why would I think that? Why would anyone?

Do not, in attempting to win an argument, stoop to absurd reasoning...it's an unworthy debating technique.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:45 PM

There is only one shakey but I have several machines only one of which has the cookie.

And I was serious about the wiki, it's a wonderful project, I assume you know that anyone can contribute, of course I'll be checking and editing it later :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:41 PM

That was pretty good.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:38 PM

*Shakey*

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:37 PM

But if that's you, Sakey, and you are serious about a truce, I accept.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:35 PM

I haven't a clue what this means, but I have a feeling I will soon.

No, I think I'll just leave you in the dark. You seem to be quite happy there.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:31 PM

syndicalist corporatism

I haven't a clue what this means, but I have a feeling I will soon.

<truce>
Isn't the wiki wonderful, by the way Carol I do hope you're a contributor, if not you probably should be
</truce>

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:19 PM

Useful Idiot (more from Wikipedia)

"In political jargon, the term "useful idiot" was used during the Cold War by certain anticommunists to describe communists in western countries (particularly in the United States). The implication of the insult was that the communist in question was naive, and that he or she was being cynically used by the Soviet Union or another Communist state, thus unwittingly being a traitor to his or her home country.

The term is sometimes claimed to have been coined by Vladimir Lenin to describe those western reporters and travellers who would endorse the Soviet Union and its policies in the West. This story is apocryphal, since no reference to a communist being called a "useful idiot" was made in the United States until 1948, and not until decades later would the attempts to attribute the phrase to Lenin be made. Lenin never wrote it in any published document, no one has ever claimed to have heard him say it, and it also contradicts almost every document Lenin wrote and every speech he made in reference to the Comintern."

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: greg stephens
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:07 PM

On a side issue, is "useful idiots" really a phrase developed by American cold war propagandists? If so, they've succeeded with me, because I've alway believed it as being a phrase of Lenin's. So, was the Lenin attribution planted by the CIA or something?
   And, Little Hawk, do you really in all seriousness believe the French should have resisted the Allied invasion of Normandy in 1944? Because if you do, I think you're completely barmy. But that is what you've just argued for.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:01 PM

Looks about right to me, Shakey. Perhaps you can tell me in what way the people you are calling "islamofascists" are engaging in "syndicalist corporatism".

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Piers
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:51 PM

The organisers of this petition are pro-war bloggers and pundits and some of the people behind 'Labour Friends of Iraq' - the suicide bomber are terrorists but shock and awe isn't brigade, the same old lot who go around accusing anyone who does not support the invasion/occupation of Iraq of supporting terrorists - 'if you are not with us you are against us'. Their selective condemnation of some terrorism is indicative of the position of the organisers. It also states no prescription for action just to being against terrorism, as if this is some revelation. But what to do about it?

Its political significance is likely to be zilch. The statement indicates that this terrorism is due to extremist Islamists and nothing to do with competition between Western capitalist backing 'democracy' and the arabian capitalists (like Osama Bin Laden) and aspirant capitalists that command Al Queada over the oil booty. This is the basis of the 6 points and why wouldn't I sign it.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:45 PM

All from the wicki

Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life

Modern colloquial usage of the word has extended the definition of the terms fascism and neofascism to refer to any totalitarian worldview regardless of its political ideology, although scholars frown on this.

    * exalts the nation, (and sometimes the race or culture) above the individual, with the state apparatus being supreme.
    * stresses loyalty to a single leader.
    * uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition.
    * engages in severe economic and social regimentation.
    * engages in syndicalist corporatism.
    * implements totalitarian systems.



Which I belive is your favourite source, one that you believe is usually better than more biased ones.

Useless idiot indeed

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:43 PM

Screw this petition!

Upwards of 100,000 innocent Iragis have died to keep yer neighbors SUV's in gas and your corrupt politicans stealin' from the workling class....

Bush and Blair are the biggest terrorists in the world..

Bring me a petition that adresses their greed and lust for power at the cost of killin' innocent children, women and old folks and I'll be the first to sign on...

And, NO, I'm not apologizing fir no oone elses sins... Jus' trying to put things in perspective here...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:42 PM

My problem with it is that the lack of inclusion of a condemntation of state sponsored terrorism in the petition, combined with some of the other language in the petition, makes the petition itself vulnerable for use by governments specifically for the purpose of trying to justify state sponsored terrorism. I most emphatically do not want to help them do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:40 PM

Your response was predictable, anonymous one. Here is my explanation:

There is a time to fight. Several times, in fact, and here are some of them...

When you see someone attacking a woman, a child, an animal, or any innocent victim...stop them! Use whatever force is necessary. Resist? Hell, yes.

When a foreign army pours across your borders and a foreign airforce violates your skies...fight them. Hell, yes. As long as it is feasible to, fight them. If they are undefeatable, you have some choices in front of you...bide your time...fight a guerilla war against them...fight them from the shadows...or, if you choose, live with them for the time being (as millions of people did with the Romans, the British, the Nazis, the Japanese, and the Americans). Which of those options you choose will depend on your individual temperament, and the degree of your anger, I expect. It's up to you.

When someone physically attacks you for no good reason...fight him. Hell, yes.

When someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night...fight him. (if you feel up to it...I leave that to your own judgement).

When your own government puts storm troopers in the streets and violates the civil rights of many of your own citizens....fight them (if you are willing to risk the consequences...I leave that up to you).

I am in no way suggesting that one NOT defend oneself against a genuine attack BY someone else. I am suggesting that one not live by the philosophy and practice OF attack. The USA is forever preparing for its next target of opportunity, and those targets are always located in strategic territory...as regards oil, trade routes, and military considerations. The USA routinely terrorizes other countries, verbally threatens them, and attacks them on false premises (such as nonexistent WMD's). It promises democracy, but delivers puppet governments and dictatorships.

Those are not defence iniatives by the USA, they are attack iniatives. The US Department of Defence was not defending any Americans when it invaded Afghanistan or Iraq. 911 was an incident requiring police action on an international level, not military action. Al Queda is not a country, it is a secret organization. Secret organizations are fought by covert means...police action on an international basis...not by invading whole countries and subjugating them. To invade either Afghanistan or Iraq because of Al Queda was not a response which could conceivably yield the result which it sought...and the action was NOT taken to eliminate Al Queda...it was taken to secure strategic positions in regards to Caspian oil and Middle Eastern oil.

What does all that add up to? ATTACK. Attack for direct financial and strategic gain.

I am opposed to attack. I am not opposed to legitimate defence of a nation, a community, or an individual.

I regard the petition as intended to stir up more anger and paranoia in people who are already angry and afraid. That will not help anyone. Al Queda is probably happy to spread around similar petitions (from the opposite angle) to fire up the next generation of suicide bombers.

Everyone is against terrorism! Everyone. The only problem is, they don't call it terrorism when they are the ones doing it. They are blind to their own contributions in that regard.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:36 PM

Excuse me... 45 people.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:36 PM

I understand your reservations.
Would you refuse to sign am anti mugging petition because it wasn't also against social injustice. Sometimes there has to be no buts.

From your postings I wouldn't say that item 2 is your stumbling block but it sure as hell is for some here.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:36 PM

41 people using the word doesn't mean they know what it means. You have been using it, and you clearly don't.

Fascism is an economic system in which government and private corporations become essentially one and the same entity. That's not my own personal definition... it is the definition given by the people who created the system of fascism.

Useful idiots indeed...

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:27 PM

It's an odd sort of petition, more of a manifesto. It starts out as an article, and winds up with a series of points such as you might find in a petition. So in signing it you aren't just agreeing to those six points, you are agreeing to the preliminary article with its analysis which appears to exclude some of the most appalling types of terrorism in the present world.

I am wholly and unreservedly against all kinds of terrorism. In the last resort it seems to me that this manifesto is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:20 PM

And I think you need to take some time to learn the definition of "fascist".

Carol on the UAT site about 45 people give their reasons for signing, the word fascist appears 41 times.

I forgot, you're right the rest of the world is wrong.

PS don't bother google or wicki with this, Oh, but then you'd have nothing to say would you.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:14 PM

Ake, at least Carol is useful.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:05 PM

Well according to the front page all donations are being sent to a bomb relief fund, and while it says the London fund, I hope and believe it will be wider than that because that's the way we are here.

Where will it be sent, who knows, who cares. It's an affirmation that individuals can make, and helps us see that we're not alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Unite Against Terror
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:04 PM

Speaking on BBC News 24 at this moment, ex CIA operative Ben McGovern

"The figures speak for themselves, since the war, over 500 suicide bombs in Iraq....before the war, 0 suicide bombs .
We must drain the swamp of grievances in the Middle East over the policies of Mr Bush and Mr Blair.
This is the only way to keep our people safe"

Shove it!