Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Truth inside Israel
Enclosed find the horrible news out of Israel as I received it yesterday morning from my friend, Dorothy of New Profile.
New Profile Movement for the Civil-ization of Israeli Society.
She posted her reaction five minutes after the event.
Just the day before we were writing personally to each other about how people protesting for the oppressed can become discouraged and feel "almost" as oppressed.
I post this because you should know, as all America should, and all the world should.. what REALLY happens in Israel and Gaza .....besides what we are fed on the news.
After Dorothy's response I have posted her two previous "news" entries as retrospective background, for missing the last couple of days or having only had the Major Networks.
That the American public is naive or ignorant I can rationalize on account of the allusion of the press formerly known as "free".
BUT I hold each and any Representative of mine accountable for what they have NOT said with regards to Human Rights issues and American funding of Israeli OFFENSIVES against Palestinians, Bedouins, Arab-Israelis and International Peace Workers especially in consideration of Rachel Corrie.
March 30 Colin Powell made this promise to Israel (AIPACA) of American money, even though we have no adequate heath care existing, except in promises.
POWELL: "I am very pleased that President Bush has included in his supplemental budget request that just went to Congress $1 billion in Foreign Military Financing funds to help Israel strengthen its military and civil defenses. And that's just for starters. The President is also asking for $9 billion in loan guarantees. These loan guarantees will help Israel deal with the economic costs arising from the conflict, and will help Israel to implement the critical economic and budgetary reforms it needs to get its economy back on track. And I am hopeful that Congress, with your encouragement will act quickly on this request."
Remarks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's Annual Policy Conference
Secretary Colin L. Powell Washington, DC March 31, 2003
AND HE DOESN'T MAKE REMARK OR MAKE INQUIRY INTO RACHEL CORRIE'S DEATH on March 16,2003 .
This from Dorothy OF New Profile:
Dear Friends,
Five minutes ago--at 5:35 PM--the radio announced a large explosion in a bus in central busy Jerusalem, on Jaffa Street. Now announced that there are 30 victims, among them dead.
THANK YOU DEAR SHARON, MOFAZ, YA'ALON. We appreciate your gift to us. Just when the Hamas was considering to return to talks with Abu Mazen, our wonderful leaders yesterday decided to exterminate one of the Hamas leaders. The attempt failed to kill him, killing instead a mother and her 3 year old daughter, and a third passer by--just people, or as some like to call it (e.g., G. Bush, Jr.) "collateral damage."
Not surprisingly, the intended victim, Aziz Rantisi, was furious and unwilling to continue talks, threatening, instead, to revenge. But even had he not threatened, we would have known, and all that was left for us Israelis to do after the attempted extermination was--as is usual in these cases--to wonder when, where, how many dead and injured we'd end up with!!!
And now the radio is quoting the government spokesmen or military spokesmen (which I don't know, and it doesn't matter since they are of one mind) that this is not the result of yesterday's attempted extermination, that the Palestinians are highly motivated and would have done this anyhow, or tried to. Maybe.
But that is not the direction that things were going prior to the attempted extermination, which certainly did nothing to help convince Hamas, et al to stop acts of violence.
Why should they, if the IOF does not?
Sorry if I sound angry, frustrated, and sad. But violence breeds violence, and Israel's leaders are violent men who know only violence. Dorothy
******
This is bits of other news from her and Decide if you think it worth noting and deserving a place in the news with regards to US reactions to the RoadMap. Also enclosed is the
Weekly Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
June 9, 2003 - Hear Palestine
At noon today, the Israeli army demolished 13 homes in Izbat Beit Hanoun, north of the Gaza Strip.
Armored bulldozers, backed by 20 tanks, invaded the area before embarking on a demolition campaign that razed all homes on the way to the home of Moussa Sahweil.
Sahweil was one of the three fighters who carried out a resistance operation yesterday against the Israeli military in Gaza, and which killed 4 Israeli soldiers.
The Israeli army besieged Sahweil's home and expelled the residents who had opened the home to receive condolences for the death of Sahweil. Israeli soldiers then planted the house with explosives and prevented the family from collecting their belongings.
In addition today, the Israeli army also destroyed electricity, water and telephone networks in most parts of Beit Hanoun.
The whole area is closed with more ditches and sand piles made in order to obstruct movement. A new military roadblock was also set up at the entrance of Beit Hanoun, on Salah al-Din road to prevent the residents from crossing. Israeli soldiers opened fire at ambulances attempting to cross.
Beit Hanoun has been besieged and subjected to a heavy military attack since May 15th of this year.
`Tawjihi' students in Beit Hanoun, which continues to be subjected to a vicious Israeli military attack, were unable to sit their exams today.
In Rafah, the Israeli army demolished last night and today a number of homes in al-Salam residential quarter. Abu Holi and al-Matahin military roadblocks on Salah al-Din Street are closed and students were unable to reach schools in oder to sit for final exams.
Tulkarem: Israeli Army Invades City and Deir Ghasyoun Village
Also this afternoon, 15 Israeli tanks and armored vehicles, supported by helicopters, invaded the Shweikeh suburb in Tulkarem and imposed a curfew on the residents.
Entrances to the suburb and roads leading to al-Sha'rawiya villages were completely closed.
Earlier today, 4 Palestinian residents were wounded when a speeding Israeli armored vehicle crashed into a minibus on the Tulkarem-al-Sha'rawiya.
The siege imposed on Tulkarem City was tightened even further by new military roadblocks set up at the northern, eastern and western entrances. Students were forced to take alternative routes to reach their schools.
An Israeli military force early this morning, invaded the Deir Ghasyoun Village, north of Tulkarem, and spread throughout its streets, alleyways and surrounding fields.
Two shops supplying agricultural products were broken into and vandalized and large quantities of their products were confiscated.
The shops belong to Jamil Abu Ali, the Mayor of the Village, and Mohammad Isma'il.
The bodies of those killed in Atil Village last Thursday continue to be held by the Israeli army.
Nablus: Ongoing Israeli Raids and Arrests
Last night and at dawn today, the Israeli army reinvaded the Balata refugee camp and closed all its entrances. A large number of homes were also raided in al- Dahiya, Al-Quds street and the surroundings of Balata refugee camp. At least 5 Palestinian residents were
arrested.
The Israeli army also carried out bulldozing activities in the surrounding areas of the 2 Askar refugee camps, east of the city. A tight military closure is being imposed on all the entrances to the city.
The villages of Azmout, Deir Hatab and Beit Forik continue to be placed under tight military siege. Last night 2 residents were physically attacked by Israeli soldiers in the area. One suffered from fractures and was admitted into the hospital.
Heavy Israeli military presence was also reported around Asira al-Shamaliya and Zawata Village, which was subjected to home raids and military attacks last night.
Also at dawn today, the Israeli occupation army invaded the Al-Ubeidiya town, east of Bethlehem, and arrested 14 of its residents during a campaign of Palestinian house raids.
Hebron: Home Demolished; Conclusive Military Curfew
The Israeli army demolished an ancient home today in the Old City of Hebron and, amidst intense and random fire, imposed a wider military curfew to include the majority of residential areas in the city.
Since yesterday, the Israeli army imposed a tight military siege around the Old City and at 4:00 am blew up a home in the quarter located near the al-Birahimi mosque.
The home belonged to the al-Harbawi family and the Israeli army claims that the 2 men who killed an Israeli soldier yesterday evening found refuge in the house. Several adjacent homes were damaged as a result, since homes in the Old City are very close to one another.
A number of relatives of the resistance fighters Alaa al-Nakhouri (22 years old) and Walid Ubeido (20 years old), who were killed yesterday evening in armed confrontations with Israeli soldiers, were arrested today. The two bodies continue to be held by the occupation army.
In the meantime, the Israeli army continues to carryout a campaign of home raids in various residential areas in the city. Provocative measures were practiced against the residents during searches. Many were forced out of their homes. Witnesses reported that Israeli soldiers in some
cases used explosives to blow up the front doors of homes before raiding them. Many reported furniture being destroyed.
********************
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights
Weekly Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories
29 May - 4 June, 2003
- 6 Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli
forces
- 1 of the victims was assassinated by Israeli forces in Khan
Yunis
- Israeli forces conducted a series of incursions into
Palestinian areas
- 17 houses were completely or partially destroyed and more than
80 donums of agricultural land were razed in the Gaza Strip
- Indiscriminate shelling of Palestinian residential areas
continued
- Israel continues its campaign of retaliation against the
families of wanted Palestinians and those who allegedly carried
out armed attacks against Israeli targets, resulting the
destruction of 4 houses
- More Palestinians were arrested
- Continued siege on Palestinian communities and all roads in
the West Bank were closed
Despite statements made by Israeli government officials on
efforts made to ease the situation for Palestinians as a
prerequisite to the implementation of the Road Map, Israeli
occupying forces have continued to conduct illegal actions and human rights violations against Palestinian civilians, including collective punishment, shelling of and incursions into Palestinian areas, house demolitions and agricultural land leveling. This week 29 May - 4 June 2003, 6 Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli occupying forces.
This week, Israeli occupying forces conducted a series of
incursions into Palestinian areas in the Gaza Strip, during
which they demolished a number of Palestinian houses and razedlarge areas of agricultural land. Israeli forces conducted 5 incursions into the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah and its refugee camp, during which they totally destroyed 5 Palestinian houses and 11 others partially and razed 19 donums of agricultural land. Israeli forces also razed more than 45 donums of Palestinian agricultural land in the southeast of Gaza City.
In Khan Yunis, Israeli forces conducted 3 incursions into the
southeast and east of the town, during which they demolished a Palestinian house and razed 21 donums of agricultural land.
For the third consecutive week, Israeli forces have been
positioned at the entrances of the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanoun, imposing a strict siege on the area. They have seized a number of Palestinian houses in the area and
transformed them into military locations, from which they fired at Palestinian civilians.
In a continuation of the policy of extra-judicial assassination officially adopted by the Israeli political and military establishments against Palestinian political and field activists of the Intifada, this week, Israeli occupying forces assassinated an allegedly wanted Hamas activist in al-Qarara village, east of Khan Yunis. Israeli forces fired at the victim in his house and fired at him again when his neighbors attempted to evacuate him to hospital.
This week, in a number of cases of willful killing, Israeli
occupying forces shot dead 3 Palestinians, including a member of the Palestinian National Security Force. Three other
Palestinians succumbed to wounds they had previously sustained by Israeli forces.
In a violation of international humanitarian law, which
prohibits collective punishment, Israeli forces took retaliatory measures against families of Palestinians who have carried out attacks against Israeli targets in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and those wanted by Israeli forces. In this context, they destroyed 4 houses in the West Bank.
Israeli occupying forces continue to maintain a total siege on the OPT. They have isolated Palestinian communities from one another and have partitioned the Gaza Strip into three separate zones, restricting the movement of people and goods. They have also maintained curfews on some areas in the West Bank. Israeli occupying a uthorities have also prevented Palestinians aged 16-35 from traveling abroad and Palestinians traveling through Rafah Terminal at the Egyptian border have faced difficulties due to Israeli restrictions.
***********
This is just a small sampling of the neglected news.
Dorothy predicted two months ago, based upon a military radio program that each group of international Peace workers would be systematically removed...and then the focus would be on them.
I used to joke that I would not work for them (New Profile)because they do not have an office...and a corner window. Now I understand it to be a good thing that they do not..because, as dedicated to peace as they are, it would be in jeopardy.
Make Inquiry and May Truth Prevail.
Mary La Rosa
"Peace is the Presence of Justice" ~ Martin Luther King
She posted her reaction five minutes after the event.
Just the day before we were writing personally to each other about how people protesting for the oppressed can become discouraged and feel "almost" as oppressed.
I post this because you should know, as all America should, and all the world should.. what REALLY happens in Israel and Gaza .....besides what we are fed on the news.
After Dorothy's response I have posted her two previous "news" entries as retrospective background, for missing the last couple of days or having only had the Major Networks.
That the American public is naive or ignorant I can rationalize on account of the allusion of the press formerly known as "free".
BUT I hold each and any Representative of mine accountable for what they have NOT said with regards to Human Rights issues and American funding of Israeli OFFENSIVES against Palestinians, Bedouins, Arab-Israelis and International Peace Workers especially in consideration of Rachel Corrie.
March 30 Colin Powell made this promise to Israel (AIPACA) of American money, even though we have no adequate heath care existing, except in promises.
POWELL: "I am very pleased that President Bush has included in his supplemental budget request that just went to Congress $1 billion in Foreign Military Financing funds to help Israel strengthen its military and civil defenses. And that's just for starters. The President is also asking for $9 billion in loan guarantees. These loan guarantees will help Israel deal with the economic costs arising from the conflict, and will help Israel to implement the critical economic and budgetary reforms it needs to get its economy back on track. And I am hopeful that Congress, with your encouragement will act quickly on this request."
Remarks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's Annual Policy Conference
Secretary Colin L. Powell Washington, DC March 31, 2003
AND HE DOESN'T MAKE REMARK OR MAKE INQUIRY INTO RACHEL CORRIE'S DEATH on March 16,2003 .
This from Dorothy OF New Profile:
Dear Friends,
Five minutes ago--at 5:35 PM--the radio announced a large explosion in a bus in central busy Jerusalem, on Jaffa Street. Now announced that there are 30 victims, among them dead.
THANK YOU DEAR SHARON, MOFAZ, YA'ALON. We appreciate your gift to us. Just when the Hamas was considering to return to talks with Abu Mazen, our wonderful leaders yesterday decided to exterminate one of the Hamas leaders. The attempt failed to kill him, killing instead a mother and her 3 year old daughter, and a third passer by--just people, or as some like to call it (e.g., G. Bush, Jr.) "collateral damage."
Not surprisingly, the intended victim, Aziz Rantisi, was furious and unwilling to continue talks, threatening, instead, to revenge. But even had he not threatened, we would have known, and all that was left for us Israelis to do after the attempted extermination was--as is usual in these cases--to wonder when, where, how many dead and injured we'd end up with!!!
And now the radio is quoting the government spokesmen or military spokesmen (which I don't know, and it doesn't matter since they are of one mind) that this is not the result of yesterday's attempted extermination, that the Palestinians are highly motivated and would have done this anyhow, or tried to. Maybe.
But that is not the direction that things were going prior to the attempted extermination, which certainly did nothing to help convince Hamas, et al to stop acts of violence.
Why should they, if the IOF does not?
Sorry if I sound angry, frustrated, and sad. But violence breeds violence, and Israel's leaders are violent men who know only violence. Dorothy
******
This is bits of other news from her and Decide if you think it worth noting and deserving a place in the news with regards to US reactions to the RoadMap. Also enclosed is the
Weekly Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
June 9, 2003 - Hear Palestine
At noon today, the Israeli army demolished 13 homes in Izbat Beit Hanoun, north of the Gaza Strip.
Armored bulldozers, backed by 20 tanks, invaded the area before embarking on a demolition campaign that razed all homes on the way to the home of Moussa Sahweil.
Sahweil was one of the three fighters who carried out a resistance operation yesterday against the Israeli military in Gaza, and which killed 4 Israeli soldiers.
The Israeli army besieged Sahweil's home and expelled the residents who had opened the home to receive condolences for the death of Sahweil. Israeli soldiers then planted the house with explosives and prevented the family from collecting their belongings.
In addition today, the Israeli army also destroyed electricity, water and telephone networks in most parts of Beit Hanoun.
The whole area is closed with more ditches and sand piles made in order to obstruct movement. A new military roadblock was also set up at the entrance of Beit Hanoun, on Salah al-Din road to prevent the residents from crossing. Israeli soldiers opened fire at ambulances attempting to cross.
Beit Hanoun has been besieged and subjected to a heavy military attack since May 15th of this year.
`Tawjihi' students in Beit Hanoun, which continues to be subjected to a vicious Israeli military attack, were unable to sit their exams today.
In Rafah, the Israeli army demolished last night and today a number of homes in al-Salam residential quarter. Abu Holi and al-Matahin military roadblocks on Salah al-Din Street are closed and students were unable to reach schools in oder to sit for final exams.
Tulkarem: Israeli Army Invades City and Deir Ghasyoun Village
Also this afternoon, 15 Israeli tanks and armored vehicles, supported by helicopters, invaded the Shweikeh suburb in Tulkarem and imposed a curfew on the residents.
Entrances to the suburb and roads leading to al-Sha'rawiya villages were completely closed.
Earlier today, 4 Palestinian residents were wounded when a speeding Israeli armored vehicle crashed into a minibus on the Tulkarem-al-Sha'rawiya.
The siege imposed on Tulkarem City was tightened even further by new military roadblocks set up at the northern, eastern and western entrances. Students were forced to take alternative routes to reach their schools.
An Israeli military force early this morning, invaded the Deir Ghasyoun Village, north of Tulkarem, and spread throughout its streets, alleyways and surrounding fields.
Two shops supplying agricultural products were broken into and vandalized and large quantities of their products were confiscated.
The shops belong to Jamil Abu Ali, the Mayor of the Village, and Mohammad Isma'il.
The bodies of those killed in Atil Village last Thursday continue to be held by the Israeli army.
Nablus: Ongoing Israeli Raids and Arrests
Last night and at dawn today, the Israeli army reinvaded the Balata refugee camp and closed all its entrances. A large number of homes were also raided in al- Dahiya, Al-Quds street and the surroundings of Balata refugee camp. At least 5 Palestinian residents were
arrested.
The Israeli army also carried out bulldozing activities in the surrounding areas of the 2 Askar refugee camps, east of the city. A tight military closure is being imposed on all the entrances to the city.
The villages of Azmout, Deir Hatab and Beit Forik continue to be placed under tight military siege. Last night 2 residents were physically attacked by Israeli soldiers in the area. One suffered from fractures and was admitted into the hospital.
Heavy Israeli military presence was also reported around Asira al-Shamaliya and Zawata Village, which was subjected to home raids and military attacks last night.
Also at dawn today, the Israeli occupation army invaded the Al-Ubeidiya town, east of Bethlehem, and arrested 14 of its residents during a campaign of Palestinian house raids.
Hebron: Home Demolished; Conclusive Military Curfew
The Israeli army demolished an ancient home today in the Old City of Hebron and, amidst intense and random fire, imposed a wider military curfew to include the majority of residential areas in the city.
Since yesterday, the Israeli army imposed a tight military siege around the Old City and at 4:00 am blew up a home in the quarter located near the al-Birahimi mosque.
The home belonged to the al-Harbawi family and the Israeli army claims that the 2 men who killed an Israeli soldier yesterday evening found refuge in the house. Several adjacent homes were damaged as a result, since homes in the Old City are very close to one another.
A number of relatives of the resistance fighters Alaa al-Nakhouri (22 years old) and Walid Ubeido (20 years old), who were killed yesterday evening in armed confrontations with Israeli soldiers, were arrested today. The two bodies continue to be held by the occupation army.
In the meantime, the Israeli army continues to carryout a campaign of home raids in various residential areas in the city. Provocative measures were practiced against the residents during searches. Many were forced out of their homes. Witnesses reported that Israeli soldiers in some
cases used explosives to blow up the front doors of homes before raiding them. Many reported furniture being destroyed.
********************
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights
Weekly Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories
29 May - 4 June, 2003
- 6 Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli
forces
- 1 of the victims was assassinated by Israeli forces in Khan
Yunis
- Israeli forces conducted a series of incursions into
Palestinian areas
- 17 houses were completely or partially destroyed and more than
80 donums of agricultural land were razed in the Gaza Strip
- Indiscriminate shelling of Palestinian residential areas
continued
- Israel continues its campaign of retaliation against the
families of wanted Palestinians and those who allegedly carried
out armed attacks against Israeli targets, resulting the
destruction of 4 houses
- More Palestinians were arrested
- Continued siege on Palestinian communities and all roads in
the West Bank were closed
Despite statements made by Israeli government officials on
efforts made to ease the situation for Palestinians as a
prerequisite to the implementation of the Road Map, Israeli
occupying forces have continued to conduct illegal actions and human rights violations against Palestinian civilians, including collective punishment, shelling of and incursions into Palestinian areas, house demolitions and agricultural land leveling. This week 29 May - 4 June 2003, 6 Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli occupying forces.
This week, Israeli occupying forces conducted a series of
incursions into Palestinian areas in the Gaza Strip, during
which they demolished a number of Palestinian houses and razedlarge areas of agricultural land. Israeli forces conducted 5 incursions into the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah and its refugee camp, during which they totally destroyed 5 Palestinian houses and 11 others partially and razed 19 donums of agricultural land. Israeli forces also razed more than 45 donums of Palestinian agricultural land in the southeast of Gaza City.
In Khan Yunis, Israeli forces conducted 3 incursions into the
southeast and east of the town, during which they demolished a Palestinian house and razed 21 donums of agricultural land.
For the third consecutive week, Israeli forces have been
positioned at the entrances of the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanoun, imposing a strict siege on the area. They have seized a number of Palestinian houses in the area and
transformed them into military locations, from which they fired at Palestinian civilians.
In a continuation of the policy of extra-judicial assassination officially adopted by the Israeli political and military establishments against Palestinian political and field activists of the Intifada, this week, Israeli occupying forces assassinated an allegedly wanted Hamas activist in al-Qarara village, east of Khan Yunis. Israeli forces fired at the victim in his house and fired at him again when his neighbors attempted to evacuate him to hospital.
This week, in a number of cases of willful killing, Israeli
occupying forces shot dead 3 Palestinians, including a member of the Palestinian National Security Force. Three other
Palestinians succumbed to wounds they had previously sustained by Israeli forces.
In a violation of international humanitarian law, which
prohibits collective punishment, Israeli forces took retaliatory measures against families of Palestinians who have carried out attacks against Israeli targets in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and those wanted by Israeli forces. In this context, they destroyed 4 houses in the West Bank.
Israeli occupying forces continue to maintain a total siege on the OPT. They have isolated Palestinian communities from one another and have partitioned the Gaza Strip into three separate zones, restricting the movement of people and goods. They have also maintained curfews on some areas in the West Bank. Israeli occupying a uthorities have also prevented Palestinians aged 16-35 from traveling abroad and Palestinians traveling through Rafah Terminal at the Egyptian border have faced difficulties due to Israeli restrictions.
***********
This is just a small sampling of the neglected news.
Dorothy predicted two months ago, based upon a military radio program that each group of international Peace workers would be systematically removed...and then the focus would be on them.
I used to joke that I would not work for them (New Profile)because they do not have an office...and a corner window. Now I understand it to be a good thing that they do not..because, as dedicated to peace as they are, it would be in jeopardy.
Make Inquiry and May Truth Prevail.
Mary La Rosa
"Peace is the Presence of Justice" ~ Martin Luther King
For more information:
http://Blackhouse.blogspot.com
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
This is a timely and very informative article. It gives us an insight as to what is happening right now in this conflict by people living through it.
I'd suggest that anyone and everyone on this board who is always yelling at those of us who have a problem with Israel and its army read this. You might learn something.
I'd suggest that anyone and everyone on this board who is always yelling at those of us who have a problem with Israel and its army read this. You might learn something.
It's all unproven propaganda. Some might be true. Some might not. But it's cute that you and the other anti-israel people automatically believe virtually 100% of anti-israel stuff that random people write up.
Remember what Holocaust survivor HENRY SIEGMAN (Senior Fellow and Director, U.S./Middle East Project, Mideast Dept. of the Council of Foreign Relations) said (reposted from, so-called, "anti-Semitism on SF-IMC" thread) :
SIEGMAN'S REMARKS on the American PBS-TV Charlie Rose Show on the midnight broadcast (Aug 22/23, 2002; transcripts and videotape available)--*DEVASTATINGLY CRITICAL* OF THE SHARON GOVERNMENT!:
Among other things, SIEGMAN said:
(CAPS ADDED FOR EMPHASIS)
- that the SHARON government was cynically and *PURPOSELY* *PROVOKING* "MARTYR/SUICIDE BOMBINGS";
- that the SHARON military itself was TARGETING AND ATTACKING INNOCENT CIVILIANS;
- that the SHARON government was ISSUING DEMANDS it *knew* NO PALESTINIAN LEADER COULD EVER ACCEPT;
- and that the SHARON government was OPPOSED TO A PALESTINIAN STATE *UNDER ANY CONDITIONS*.
Siegman further said that the crisis (Israel's military invasion and campaigns) in Israel’s Occupied Territories (in cities or towns like Jenin, etc.):
- WAS **NOT** really ISRAEL'S WAR AGAINST TERRORISM;
- that it was ISRAEL'S WAR TO hang onto and ANNEX THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES;
- that it was ISRAEL'S WAR TO AVOID DISMANTLING THE SETTLEMENTS;
- and ISRAEL'S WAR TO *PREVENT* *ANY* PROCESS TOWARDS PEACE !
'nuff said?
SIEGMAN'S REMARKS on the American PBS-TV Charlie Rose Show on the midnight broadcast (Aug 22/23, 2002; transcripts and videotape available)--*DEVASTATINGLY CRITICAL* OF THE SHARON GOVERNMENT!:
Among other things, SIEGMAN said:
(CAPS ADDED FOR EMPHASIS)
- that the SHARON government was cynically and *PURPOSELY* *PROVOKING* "MARTYR/SUICIDE BOMBINGS";
- that the SHARON military itself was TARGETING AND ATTACKING INNOCENT CIVILIANS;
- that the SHARON government was ISSUING DEMANDS it *knew* NO PALESTINIAN LEADER COULD EVER ACCEPT;
- and that the SHARON government was OPPOSED TO A PALESTINIAN STATE *UNDER ANY CONDITIONS*.
Siegman further said that the crisis (Israel's military invasion and campaigns) in Israel’s Occupied Territories (in cities or towns like Jenin, etc.):
- WAS **NOT** really ISRAEL'S WAR AGAINST TERRORISM;
- that it was ISRAEL'S WAR TO hang onto and ANNEX THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES;
- that it was ISRAEL'S WAR TO AVOID DISMANTLING THE SETTLEMENTS;
- and ISRAEL'S WAR TO *PREVENT* *ANY* PROCESS TOWARDS PEACE !
'nuff said?
Everything JA said is Correct and that is why the only Solution to this horrific problem is to go ahead and Set the Border of this New Palestinian State NOW...
For Details on how this can be done:
CLICK HERE > http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1618616.php
The manner in which the Road Map is set up at this time will likely fail simply because we do not give the Palestinian Peaple a reason to have Hope...
For Details on how this can be done:
CLICK HERE > http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1618616.php
The manner in which the Road Map is set up at this time will likely fail simply because we do not give the Palestinian Peaple a reason to have Hope...
Isn't Israels economy in trouble due to the intefadah?
if it continues for another 100 years or so surely that cant be good for israel.
So I dont understand the logic behind Israel not wanting peace at all.
Unless it is projecting of the extreme palistinian position which is "drive them into the sea and it will all be allright"
What is more logical is the psoition you will hear most people tell you about.
that israel doesnt believe arafat and co can deliver on peace and even if they could they dont trust them to keep the peace. therefore they dont see them as bringing anything to the negotiating table except the threat of death.
If they will never stop then israel wil just give up shut down its boarders and raid terrorist centres as needed.
But I can explain why people whould say that israel "just hates peace" it is because they want to paint a picture of israel as evil.
if it continues for another 100 years or so surely that cant be good for israel.
So I dont understand the logic behind Israel not wanting peace at all.
Unless it is projecting of the extreme palistinian position which is "drive them into the sea and it will all be allright"
What is more logical is the psoition you will hear most people tell you about.
that israel doesnt believe arafat and co can deliver on peace and even if they could they dont trust them to keep the peace. therefore they dont see them as bringing anything to the negotiating table except the threat of death.
If they will never stop then israel wil just give up shut down its boarders and raid terrorist centres as needed.
But I can explain why people whould say that israel "just hates peace" it is because they want to paint a picture of israel as evil.
Scottie > "Isn't Israels economy in trouble due to the intefadah? if it continues for another 100 years or so surely that cant be good for israel. So I dont understand the logic behind Israel not wanting peace at all."
Response:
Israel claims that "it made the desert bloom"--another PR propaganda line. But ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY! The American taxpayer makes the Israeli desert (or illegal settlement lawns) bloom (that and stolen water from Palestinian villages). As I have said before, Israel represents the largest partial transfer, i.e. receipt, of wealth from one country (the U.S.) to another in *all* of world history! Approximately 4.5 million Israeli Jews, in a state approximately the size of New Jersey, gets more foreign aid from the U.S. than an *entire* continent of approximately *780* million Africans!
Anytime Israel gets into trouble, or needs something, it sends the U.S. govt--American taxpayers!--the bill. In Addition, the bonds that Israel floats (on) in the U.S. market are guaranteed by the U.S. govt; when Israel defaults on these bonds, the U.S. govt extends them and/or the American taxpayer pays the bill. The Israeli economy used to typically run high double-digit -- or over even **100%** -- inflation!! *Who* do you think covered the cost of that inflation!?
When Israel wants money to resettle Russian immigrants (who may have *never* thought of themselves as Jewish, and may only be somewhat remotely Jewish), Israel sends the U.S. the bill. So, Israel gets a housing program for Russian immigrants at the expense of that for poor African Americans citizens.
To agree to stay out of the first U.S.-Iraq war, Israel demanded money from the U.S.
Loss of tourism in Israel due to its avoidance/destruction of any viable *JUST* peace plan/settlement [Israel and Sharon will never miss an opportunity to *destroy* an opportunity -- (a take-off on Israel's well-used PR quip against Arafat/PLO)], Israel will just send the U.S. govt--the American taxpayer!--the bill for loss of tourism, especially Israeli tax, revenues. The *nerve*! Nothing is beneath Israel's shame--or chutzpah!
High unemployment in Israel?--the U.S. is sent the bill.
Internationally illegal settlement expansion in Israel?--the American taxpayer gets the bill.
Israel signs a lop-sided (in its favor) "peace" agreement (Camp David, Madrid, Oslo, etc.)?--Israel says to the U.S. govt, taxpayer, you must *pay* us *extra* to sign.
The 2nd U.S.-Iraq war was, probably like the first, more Israel's war than the U.S.'s war (i.e., Israel stood to benefit *more*), pushed by Zionist neocons in the U.S. adminstration. But we fight Israel's war and *STILL* pay Israel for whatever expenses/losses it might have incurred in civil defense or additional tourism losses.
There are plenty of other examples where Israel just passes on the cost of oppression to the American taxpayer. (Watch the news and observe for yourself this pattern.)
So, while Israel's economy is suffering, the people/politicians at the top are doing just fine: from what I understand, income polarization in Israel has been steadily expanding, in somewhat marked degrees--the rich there, too, often financially corrupt too (like the almost mafia-like financial scandals of Sharon & Co.), are getting richer and the poor/poorer/lessers are getting poorer.
But, U.S. aid enables Israel to maintain its great military machine (and to keep the rich happy)--otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians. As of now, as long as the U.S. economy can guarantee Israel's economy, U.S. aid to Israel is more than secure.
Israel is like the very spoiled teenage nephew of a rich Uncle (Sam). The Uncle may *occasionally* *lightly* scold his nephew for bad behavior (or pretend to scold his misbehaving nephew) for public show, but he always sends his misbehaving nephew plenty of money.
Scottie > "Unless it is projecting of the extreme palistinian position which is 'drive them into the sea and it will all be allright' "
Response: You mean, as opposed to Israel driving the Palestinians into the desert for the past 60 years?
Response:
Israel claims that "it made the desert bloom"--another PR propaganda line. But ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY! The American taxpayer makes the Israeli desert (or illegal settlement lawns) bloom (that and stolen water from Palestinian villages). As I have said before, Israel represents the largest partial transfer, i.e. receipt, of wealth from one country (the U.S.) to another in *all* of world history! Approximately 4.5 million Israeli Jews, in a state approximately the size of New Jersey, gets more foreign aid from the U.S. than an *entire* continent of approximately *780* million Africans!
Anytime Israel gets into trouble, or needs something, it sends the U.S. govt--American taxpayers!--the bill. In Addition, the bonds that Israel floats (on) in the U.S. market are guaranteed by the U.S. govt; when Israel defaults on these bonds, the U.S. govt extends them and/or the American taxpayer pays the bill. The Israeli economy used to typically run high double-digit -- or over even **100%** -- inflation!! *Who* do you think covered the cost of that inflation!?
When Israel wants money to resettle Russian immigrants (who may have *never* thought of themselves as Jewish, and may only be somewhat remotely Jewish), Israel sends the U.S. the bill. So, Israel gets a housing program for Russian immigrants at the expense of that for poor African Americans citizens.
To agree to stay out of the first U.S.-Iraq war, Israel demanded money from the U.S.
Loss of tourism in Israel due to its avoidance/destruction of any viable *JUST* peace plan/settlement [Israel and Sharon will never miss an opportunity to *destroy* an opportunity -- (a take-off on Israel's well-used PR quip against Arafat/PLO)], Israel will just send the U.S. govt--the American taxpayer!--the bill for loss of tourism, especially Israeli tax, revenues. The *nerve*! Nothing is beneath Israel's shame--or chutzpah!
High unemployment in Israel?--the U.S. is sent the bill.
Internationally illegal settlement expansion in Israel?--the American taxpayer gets the bill.
Israel signs a lop-sided (in its favor) "peace" agreement (Camp David, Madrid, Oslo, etc.)?--Israel says to the U.S. govt, taxpayer, you must *pay* us *extra* to sign.
The 2nd U.S.-Iraq war was, probably like the first, more Israel's war than the U.S.'s war (i.e., Israel stood to benefit *more*), pushed by Zionist neocons in the U.S. adminstration. But we fight Israel's war and *STILL* pay Israel for whatever expenses/losses it might have incurred in civil defense or additional tourism losses.
There are plenty of other examples where Israel just passes on the cost of oppression to the American taxpayer. (Watch the news and observe for yourself this pattern.)
So, while Israel's economy is suffering, the people/politicians at the top are doing just fine: from what I understand, income polarization in Israel has been steadily expanding, in somewhat marked degrees--the rich there, too, often financially corrupt too (like the almost mafia-like financial scandals of Sharon & Co.), are getting richer and the poor/poorer/lessers are getting poorer.
But, U.S. aid enables Israel to maintain its great military machine (and to keep the rich happy)--otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians. As of now, as long as the U.S. economy can guarantee Israel's economy, U.S. aid to Israel is more than secure.
Israel is like the very spoiled teenage nephew of a rich Uncle (Sam). The Uncle may *occasionally* *lightly* scold his nephew for bad behavior (or pretend to scold his misbehaving nephew) for public show, but he always sends his misbehaving nephew plenty of money.
Scottie > "Unless it is projecting of the extreme palistinian position which is 'drive them into the sea and it will all be allright' "
Response: You mean, as opposed to Israel driving the Palestinians into the desert for the past 60 years?
" Response: You mean, as opposed to Israel driving the Palestinians into the desert for the past 60 years? "
You see then the options as one or the other?
t ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY!
- from what I hear Israel isnt afloat at all. neither is the PA(palistinian authority) which recieves all sorts of foreign support. So it looks like this intefadah is your solution in action..
Oh I see the confusion PA stands for Palistinian Arafat! that would explain why he is about as rich as the rest of his country put together.
"otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians."
- Do you think that the Israeli government (particularly the parts that support the settlers) actually believe that hamas is "negotiating" with them? Do you think that they trust hamas and think that offering territory to the PLO will prevent terrorism? sure maybe you believe it I might even think it is possible. but they DONT.
Just like you dont believe that the Israeli government is interested in peace can't you understand that there are people on the other side who believe that the palistinians are not interested in peace. As a result your solutio0n wont work at all.
To put it more clearly -->
Now would a colapsing economy due to an attack cause
A) more compromising (you call it realistic) negotiations
or
B) an increasingly powerful strike against your enemy.
Look at history. has Israel become more conservative or more liberal since the intefadah began?
Has US become more liberal since terrorism hurt it and its economy?
Did US become more neutral when it was hit by the Japaneese at pearl harbour?
You have made the fatal mistake of assuming that A is the natural response when Israel and all countries like Israel ALWAYS choose B.
Especially when the enemy is actually weak and just "pretending" to be strong by picking a fight.
The US for example was aware that Japan was trying to encourage the US to make peace Japan would probably have left the US alone if the US had offered them a peace treaty. but the didnt offer Japan a peace treaty dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either.
You see then the options as one or the other?
t ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY!
- from what I hear Israel isnt afloat at all. neither is the PA(palistinian authority) which recieves all sorts of foreign support. So it looks like this intefadah is your solution in action..
Oh I see the confusion PA stands for Palistinian Arafat! that would explain why he is about as rich as the rest of his country put together.
"otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians."
- Do you think that the Israeli government (particularly the parts that support the settlers) actually believe that hamas is "negotiating" with them? Do you think that they trust hamas and think that offering territory to the PLO will prevent terrorism? sure maybe you believe it I might even think it is possible. but they DONT.
Just like you dont believe that the Israeli government is interested in peace can't you understand that there are people on the other side who believe that the palistinians are not interested in peace. As a result your solutio0n wont work at all.
To put it more clearly -->
Now would a colapsing economy due to an attack cause
A) more compromising (you call it realistic) negotiations
or
B) an increasingly powerful strike against your enemy.
Look at history. has Israel become more conservative or more liberal since the intefadah began?
Has US become more liberal since terrorism hurt it and its economy?
Did US become more neutral when it was hit by the Japaneese at pearl harbour?
You have made the fatal mistake of assuming that A is the natural response when Israel and all countries like Israel ALWAYS choose B.
Especially when the enemy is actually weak and just "pretending" to be strong by picking a fight.
The US for example was aware that Japan was trying to encourage the US to make peace Japan would probably have left the US alone if the US had offered them a peace treaty. but the didnt offer Japan a peace treaty dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either.
The Palestinian want to drive Israel into the Sea......
Israel wants to drive the Palestinian into the Desert....
Sounds like the Road Map is Working?????
Possible Solution:
For there to be Peace and for there to be a reason for the Palestinian People to stop their fight for Freedom:
We need a Palestinian State with Reasonable Border NOW...
Send in a Joint, U.S., U.N. Peace keeping Force to the West Bank and Gaza for the sole purpose of trying to avoid conflicts between the Palestinian and the settlers..
Then have the Biased (biased because they will always be on the side of the settlers) Israeli Military retreat to the pre 1967 Israeli Borders, They can then concentrate their effort on guarding this Border..
(MAHMOUD ABBAS HAS SAID MORE THEN ONCE THAT HE WANTS U.S. OBSERVERS THERE, THAT IS THE ONLY WAY, THAT THE TRUTH OF WHAT IS REALLY OCCURRING WILL BE BELIEVED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.)
Example of a possible solution:
SET THE BORDERS BACK TO 1967...
In return the Refugees have no Right of Return inside the 1967 Israeli Borders..
The Refugees can be helped to settle somewhere in the new Palestinian State..
The Settlements are now part of Palestine...
If the some 300,000 Israeli Settlers living in Palestine do not like living there they can move to Israel...
If the 1,000,000 or so Palestinians who now live in Israel do not like living in Israel they can move to Palestine...
If 1,000,000 or so Palestinians can live in Israel, then some 300,000 Israeli Settlers can live in Palestine if they choose to stay..
If you take Israel, West Bank and Gaza, West Bank and Gaza is only 22% of the total area in Question, This small amount is not too much to ask for millions of Palestinians who must have their freedom to have a peaceful life.
If this solution was implemented there is a good chance the so called terrorist (seen as freedom fighters by the oppressed Palestinian People) would stop their fight, if not they would be very foolish because then Israel would have a just cause to fight back and the U.S. would have a just cause to help Israel fight back.
Otherwise we will continue to have:
Israel: We have to confiscate Palestinian land and demolish Palestinian homes because there are suicide bombers???
Palestine: We have to defend ourselves because Israel is slowly confiscating all our land and demolishing our homes. We have no military to defend ourselves and our land. If we do nothing, we will soon have nothing at all???
The era of colonization is past,. We can not expect to oppress millions of Palestinian People and still have peace.
West Bank and Gaza are only 22% of what is today Israel, West Bank and Gaza.
PLEASE LOOK AT THE MAP IN THE FOLLOWING WEB PAGE:
The Orange areas are Israeli settlements in the already small 22% that is West Bank and Gaza. What kind of carved up mess will the Palestinian State be unless a solution like the above mentioned one.
CLICK HERE > http://mondediplo.com/maps/IMG/artoff3260.jpg
Israel wants to drive the Palestinian into the Desert....
Sounds like the Road Map is Working?????
Possible Solution:
For there to be Peace and for there to be a reason for the Palestinian People to stop their fight for Freedom:
We need a Palestinian State with Reasonable Border NOW...
Send in a Joint, U.S., U.N. Peace keeping Force to the West Bank and Gaza for the sole purpose of trying to avoid conflicts between the Palestinian and the settlers..
Then have the Biased (biased because they will always be on the side of the settlers) Israeli Military retreat to the pre 1967 Israeli Borders, They can then concentrate their effort on guarding this Border..
(MAHMOUD ABBAS HAS SAID MORE THEN ONCE THAT HE WANTS U.S. OBSERVERS THERE, THAT IS THE ONLY WAY, THAT THE TRUTH OF WHAT IS REALLY OCCURRING WILL BE BELIEVED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.)
Example of a possible solution:
SET THE BORDERS BACK TO 1967...
In return the Refugees have no Right of Return inside the 1967 Israeli Borders..
The Refugees can be helped to settle somewhere in the new Palestinian State..
The Settlements are now part of Palestine...
If the some 300,000 Israeli Settlers living in Palestine do not like living there they can move to Israel...
If the 1,000,000 or so Palestinians who now live in Israel do not like living in Israel they can move to Palestine...
If 1,000,000 or so Palestinians can live in Israel, then some 300,000 Israeli Settlers can live in Palestine if they choose to stay..
If you take Israel, West Bank and Gaza, West Bank and Gaza is only 22% of the total area in Question, This small amount is not too much to ask for millions of Palestinians who must have their freedom to have a peaceful life.
If this solution was implemented there is a good chance the so called terrorist (seen as freedom fighters by the oppressed Palestinian People) would stop their fight, if not they would be very foolish because then Israel would have a just cause to fight back and the U.S. would have a just cause to help Israel fight back.
Otherwise we will continue to have:
Israel: We have to confiscate Palestinian land and demolish Palestinian homes because there are suicide bombers???
Palestine: We have to defend ourselves because Israel is slowly confiscating all our land and demolishing our homes. We have no military to defend ourselves and our land. If we do nothing, we will soon have nothing at all???
The era of colonization is past,. We can not expect to oppress millions of Palestinian People and still have peace.
West Bank and Gaza are only 22% of what is today Israel, West Bank and Gaza.
PLEASE LOOK AT THE MAP IN THE FOLLOWING WEB PAGE:
The Orange areas are Israeli settlements in the already small 22% that is West Bank and Gaza. What kind of carved up mess will the Palestinian State be unless a solution like the above mentioned one.
CLICK HERE > http://mondediplo.com/maps/IMG/artoff3260.jpg
Every time I look at your map, Angel, I am so totally horrified, and very afraid for the people of Palestine who want to live in their own state.
Has anyone else even bothered to look at this map? If so, has anyone appreciated what leaving those "settlements" as is means?
Has anyone else even bothered to look at this map? If so, has anyone appreciated what leaving those "settlements" as is means?
your very horror is based on a racist ideology where people judge that each individual state should be racially pure and that some races have rights to own land that others do not.
While it may be a fact of life that peace in the middle east depends on ethnic cleansing that makes it no less abhorent.
In an ideal world it would not matter where the settlers were or where the boarder was because no one would want to attack them they would have no need to defend themselves The palistinians would not care if they were ruled by jews or palistinians and the jews would not care if there was a palistinian state on their boarder because it would pose no threat to them.
While it may be a fact of life that peace in the middle east depends on ethnic cleansing that makes it no less abhorent.
In an ideal world it would not matter where the settlers were or where the boarder was because no one would want to attack them they would have no need to defend themselves The palistinians would not care if they were ruled by jews or palistinians and the jews would not care if there was a palistinian state on their boarder because it would pose no threat to them.
What in the hell do you mean "peace in the middle east depends on ethnic cleansing"? Explain that little outrageous remark, will you?
I was refering to you more than me.
YOU said you found it depressing that there are jewish settlements in palistinian terrotories.
that means jews are living in palestine. Now why is that a problem? It should make no difference at all whether the are jews or not or if they decide to live on on a mountain in palestine a village in russia or somwhere deep in israel.
Your solution and the arab solution is that the jews should be "removed". Surely that is "ethnic cleansing" and nothing you say about how they got there changes the fact that you are removing jews from an area because they are jews.
Anyway have the jewish all "stolen" the land that they are on? surely some of them purchaced it or acquired it through some form of negotiation.
I dont know if there are or arent but there may well also be arabs from syria (for example) who are occupying land possibly living close to other syrians in a group but that isnt the criteria you are using to pick who should be thrown out.
YOU said you found it depressing that there are jewish settlements in palistinian terrotories.
that means jews are living in palestine. Now why is that a problem? It should make no difference at all whether the are jews or not or if they decide to live on on a mountain in palestine a village in russia or somwhere deep in israel.
Your solution and the arab solution is that the jews should be "removed". Surely that is "ethnic cleansing" and nothing you say about how they got there changes the fact that you are removing jews from an area because they are jews.
Anyway have the jewish all "stolen" the land that they are on? surely some of them purchaced it or acquired it through some form of negotiation.
I dont know if there are or arent but there may well also be arabs from syria (for example) who are occupying land possibly living close to other syrians in a group but that isnt the criteria you are using to pick who should be thrown out.
quote:
=====================================
It should make no difference at all whether the are jews or not or if they decide to live on on a mountain in palestine a village in russia or somwhere deep in israel.
=====================================
That would depend on wether the decision involved theft of land and displacement of the native inhabitants, or a peaceful negotiated cohabitation -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back."
~ Diary of Theodore Hertzl, founder of zionism, 1895
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- wouldn't you agree, Scottie?
=====================================
It should make no difference at all whether the are jews or not or if they decide to live on on a mountain in palestine a village in russia or somwhere deep in israel.
=====================================
That would depend on wether the decision involved theft of land and displacement of the native inhabitants, or a peaceful negotiated cohabitation -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back."
~ Diary of Theodore Hertzl, founder of zionism, 1895
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- wouldn't you agree, Scottie?
"You said you found it depressing that there were jewish settlements in Palestinian territories".
Actually I didn't say that at all. Read what I said.
Find out what "ethnic cleansing" is, will you?
There is a hell of a difference between obtaining land legally and stealing it.
I'm not about to go into the much repeated details here, Scottie, because if you are discussing a topic, you should know what it is about.
Driving people from their homes and lands so they can be taken over by someone else,, no matter which way you look at it, is evil. To continue doing it for decades is even more evil.
It's not as if Century 21 were negotiating sales here or anything, for God's sakes.
.
Actually I didn't say that at all. Read what I said.
Find out what "ethnic cleansing" is, will you?
There is a hell of a difference between obtaining land legally and stealing it.
I'm not about to go into the much repeated details here, Scottie, because if you are discussing a topic, you should know what it is about.
Driving people from their homes and lands so they can be taken over by someone else,, no matter which way you look at it, is evil. To continue doing it for decades is even more evil.
It's not as if Century 21 were negotiating sales here or anything, for God's sakes.
.
”JA”, by Scottie Monday June 16, 2003 at 02:02 AM:
" [JA] Response: You mean, as opposed to Israel driving the Palestinians into the desert for the past 60 years? "
[Scottie]: "You see then the options as one or the other? "
( = : latest JA response )
JA =*You’re* the one who jumped to the typical Israeli anti-Palestinian propaganda extreme. I just countered you. Can you figure out a just settlement short of that? So far, I haven’t seen you offer anything but propaganda lines.
JA: "ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY! "
Scottie: "-from what I hear Israel isnt afloat at all. neither is the PA(palistinian authority) which recieves all sorts of foreign support. So it looks like this intefadah is your solution in action.. "
JA =You’re boring me, Scottie. People who only have propaganda lines/responses *bore* me.
Scottie: "Oh I see the confusion PA stands for Palistinian Arafat! that would explain why he is about as rich as the rest of his country put together."
JA =I’m about to check out on you, Scottie. You’re a propaganda automaton. Are you capable of thought in any greater depth -- or is that it???
JA: "otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians."
Scottie: "Do you think that the Israeli government (particularly the parts that support the settlers) actually believe that hamas is "negotiating" with them? Do you think that they trust hamas and think that offering territory to the PLO will prevent terrorism? sure maybe you believe it I might even think it is possible. but they DONT."
JA =Well, you ought to know, Zionist, since Israel--too clever by half, as the British say--once politically and financially supported Hamas (to sic on the PLO, as a way to *destroy* the PLO)! Well, the 'joke's' on Israel now, isn't it. Israel picked an Islamic fundamentalist organization to *support/finance/arm* over, by charter, a secular democratic organization (in spite of the Israel having a failed puppet in Arafat) to *negotiate* with! Now how *STOOOPID(!!!)* was *that*!? (The U.S. did this in Afghanistian.) As Kirk said to Kahn [Israel], "I laugh at 'the superior intellect'! "
Scottie: "Just like you dont believe that the Israeli government is interested in peace can't you understand that there are people on the other side who believe that the palistinians are not interested in peace. As a result your solutio0n wont work at all."
JA =Yeah, they are the same kind of people who didn’t believe that Nelson Mandela and Apartheid black South Africans were interested in peace. They also were Europeans who were mightily afraid that the indigenous people might do to them, what the Europeans had been doing, respectively, to the millions of indigenous people for decades and generations. It's called "consciousness of guilt".
Scottie: " To put it more clearly -->
Now would a colapsing economy due to an attack cause
A) more compromising (you call it realistic) negotiations
or
B) an increasingly powerful strike against your enemy. "
JA =Hmmm... What did it cause in Apartheid South Africa? I *wonder*. And what did it cause when armed colonial resistance in Africa caused a drain on the British economy? Ever hear, for example, of the Mau-Mau? And what did it cause the French to do in its colonies, when rebellions eventually became a drain on the French economy? And what did it cause the U.S. to do, when even the corporate elite finally said that the Vietnam war was costing not only a steadily increasing political price, but also a serious drain on the economy? Hmmm...
=But, gee, if I were your rich Uncle Sam and I kept giving you money no matter how you acted, or if your rich Uncle Sam cut his allowance to you as a threat that you better start to straighten up and stop going on drunken hoo-rides (especially if you were less and less able to make a proper living on your own, as a result of your errant/wild behavior), might you start to straighten up a little so you could keep your toys (like your fancy cars and oceanside condo) or would you be totally nihilistic and continue hoo-riding (wild actin' up) all over town?
Scottie: Look at history. has Israel become more conservative or more liberal since the intefadah began?
JA =Now, Scottie: *WHAT* started the 2nd Intifada? Sharon wanting to go pray? (Actually, not even *that* started the 2nd Intifada. It was Israeli troops shooting on unarmed *CIVILIANS* the day or so afterwards! (You might call it "the Israeli Sharpeville Massacre". It looked like a scene straight out of Apartheid South Africa, with the Apartheid South African army firing on unarmed protesters.)
=Israel has become more conservative regardless of the Intifadah; that’s why there *was* one. About a *decade* ago, Israel kicked the totally nonviolent Palestinian Awad, "the Palestinian MLK"(!), out of the country, back in the late ‘80’s or early ‘90’s. Peace is 'not', so to speak, especially from Sharon's point of view, in Israel's interest as long as it believes it has the decided upper hand and the immense financial and military backing of the world's only military superpower.
Scottie: "Has US become more liberal since terrorism hurt it and its economy?"
JA =Scottie, your questions are very unsophisticated. Almost childlike.
=The U.S. *likes* terrorism--to the extent it can manipulate and use it. Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld hit the ***JACKPOT(!!!)***when 9-11 happened. 9-11 played directly into the U.S.'s hands -- and Israel's too! Many believe that they (the U.S. or Israel or both!) let it happen. Whatever the truth, I *don't* believe the govt's story--and you would be quite stupid if you did. There are *numerous* war precendents for this in even modern history.
=But, aside from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *before* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world).
Scottie: "Did US become more neutral when it was hit by the Japaneese at pearl harbour?"
JA =See above, re childlike questions. Many believe that the govt let Pearl Harbor happen (with the most critical U.S. ships out to sea, after a virtual act of war, from Japan's point of view--the U.S. cutting off oil to Japan, after cutting off other raw materials, like metals).
=[Now, if this sounds too incredible to you, what do you think the U.S. would do if its major oil supplies were cut off from a foreign country? Wait to die an industrial death? It would find a reason to go to war. Henry Kissinger said that we would go *directly* to war. Can you figure that out, Scottie?]
=But, be that as it may or not be (the U.S. laying itself open to an initial attack), any political, sequential and circumstantial analysis of events leading up to the attacks on the Philippines and Pearl Harbor would have *easily* predicted at least one of them. As it was, *BOTH* events occurred.
Scottie: You have made the fatal mistake of assuming that A is the natural response when Israel and all countries like Israel ALWAYS choose B.
JA =The fatal mistake in your analysis (you obviously don't have a strong historical analysis) is that they always choose B -- no matter whether they are facing someone peaceful or violent -- because that’s how brutal oppressive colonialist regimes operate.
=But at least the person willing to fight back has a chance to stop them -- especially if there is no peaceful option, like just asking pioneer Zionist terrorists and militias, and avowed racist Zionist leaders, or later the state of Israel to *please* stop the systematic mass population invasion of Palestine [in a way no other country in the world would accept, *certainly* *not* the U.S.], *please* stop systematically buying up property from absentee landlords and kicking Palestinians off (with racial restrictions that they can’t buy/lease any back), otherwise, to *please* stop dispossessing the Palestinians, to *please* stop forcing Palestinians to give up their homes and livelihoods, to *please* stop pushing or militarily (as Israeli historian Benny Morris stated) driving Palestinians off and confiscating their land and preventing them from returning, and to *please* stop your Palestinian village demonstration massacres (like Dier Yassin), *please* stop forcing Palestinians to give up. Scottie, do you think that "*please*" would have worked with the Zionists?
Scottie: "Especially when the enemy is actually weak and just "pretending" to be strong by picking a fight."
JA =Yet another meaningless comment. You’re full of those. Was Hezbollah weak yet pretending to be strong? Was the ANC weak, yet pretending to be strong? Etc.
Scottie: "The US for example was aware that Japan was trying to encourage the US to make peace Japan would probably have left the US alone if the US had offered them a peace treaty. but the didnt offer Japan a peace treaty dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either."
JA =See my comment above (about meaningless comments). Many believe the US allowed this to happen. But, whether that’s true or false, it’s widely known that FDR wanted to have an excuse to get into the war to help England. Aside from that, a *CORRECT*--*not flawed*--analysis would yield that the U.S. and Japan had too many conflicts going on (like both wanting colonies in Japan’s region of the world and both wanting to militarily control the Pacific--the U.S. *all* of it) for the eventual likelihood of war to be avoided. WWII, like WWI, was essentially an inter-imperialists war.
=As far as your slimey-ass, typical Zionist way of debating -- i.e. putting words into others/my mouth, or deeds at my hands for which I am not responsible (and as Siegman said above, it is *Israel* which is more responsible for suicide bombers), about “dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either”, that’s what modern European colonialists have always said about the resistance of indigenous people all over the world (most recently in apartheid South Africa, and before that all over Africa and Asia): “We (the European imperialists or settler-colonists) [ironically] won’t give into violence! We swear, we’ll never give in!”
=Well, the sun used to never set on the British empire, and now the British barely get the sun in London. Vietnamese violence in Vietnam drove the Americans out. The ANC struggle, which included armed struggle, defeated Apartheid in South Africa. Hezbollah drove the Israelis out of Lebanon. Even bin Laden has driven the U.S.--“We won’t give into terrorism”--out of Saudi Arabia.
=One by one, all the European powers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) all swore they would never give in, in the 3rd World. Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. What does history predict? In the meantime, what you should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.”
=Now, Scottie, no mas, no mas! This took longer than I realized--or it just *seeemed* *real* long--and I just don't have time to be *tediously* bored (not even just *bored*) like this. (I see more of your 'handiwork' below your last response to me.) I'll hand you off to someone with more patience for your level of analysis here--or lack thereof. No mas!
*Aye*, Scottie,... You've got a *problem*...
" [JA] Response: You mean, as opposed to Israel driving the Palestinians into the desert for the past 60 years? "
[Scottie]: "You see then the options as one or the other? "
( = : latest JA response )
JA =*You’re* the one who jumped to the typical Israeli anti-Palestinian propaganda extreme. I just countered you. Can you figure out a just settlement short of that? So far, I haven’t seen you offer anything but propaganda lines.
JA: "ISRAEL SITS AFLOAT ON NOT A SEA OF OIL, BUT A *SEA* OF U.S. MONEY! "
Scottie: "-from what I hear Israel isnt afloat at all. neither is the PA(palistinian authority) which recieves all sorts of foreign support. So it looks like this intefadah is your solution in action.. "
JA =You’re boring me, Scottie. People who only have propaganda lines/responses *bore* me.
Scottie: "Oh I see the confusion PA stands for Palistinian Arafat! that would explain why he is about as rich as the rest of his country put together."
JA =I’m about to check out on you, Scottie. You’re a propaganda automaton. Are you capable of thought in any greater depth -- or is that it???
JA: "otherwise the very cost of Israel's own intransigence would eventually lead to an internal circular pressure to engage in more realistic negotiations, and a more just settlement, with the Palestinians."
Scottie: "Do you think that the Israeli government (particularly the parts that support the settlers) actually believe that hamas is "negotiating" with them? Do you think that they trust hamas and think that offering territory to the PLO will prevent terrorism? sure maybe you believe it I might even think it is possible. but they DONT."
JA =Well, you ought to know, Zionist, since Israel--too clever by half, as the British say--once politically and financially supported Hamas (to sic on the PLO, as a way to *destroy* the PLO)! Well, the 'joke's' on Israel now, isn't it. Israel picked an Islamic fundamentalist organization to *support/finance/arm* over, by charter, a secular democratic organization (in spite of the Israel having a failed puppet in Arafat) to *negotiate* with! Now how *STOOOPID(!!!)* was *that*!? (The U.S. did this in Afghanistian.) As Kirk said to Kahn [Israel], "I laugh at 'the superior intellect'! "
Scottie: "Just like you dont believe that the Israeli government is interested in peace can't you understand that there are people on the other side who believe that the palistinians are not interested in peace. As a result your solutio0n wont work at all."
JA =Yeah, they are the same kind of people who didn’t believe that Nelson Mandela and Apartheid black South Africans were interested in peace. They also were Europeans who were mightily afraid that the indigenous people might do to them, what the Europeans had been doing, respectively, to the millions of indigenous people for decades and generations. It's called "consciousness of guilt".
Scottie: " To put it more clearly -->
Now would a colapsing economy due to an attack cause
A) more compromising (you call it realistic) negotiations
or
B) an increasingly powerful strike against your enemy. "
JA =Hmmm... What did it cause in Apartheid South Africa? I *wonder*. And what did it cause when armed colonial resistance in Africa caused a drain on the British economy? Ever hear, for example, of the Mau-Mau? And what did it cause the French to do in its colonies, when rebellions eventually became a drain on the French economy? And what did it cause the U.S. to do, when even the corporate elite finally said that the Vietnam war was costing not only a steadily increasing political price, but also a serious drain on the economy? Hmmm...
=But, gee, if I were your rich Uncle Sam and I kept giving you money no matter how you acted, or if your rich Uncle Sam cut his allowance to you as a threat that you better start to straighten up and stop going on drunken hoo-rides (especially if you were less and less able to make a proper living on your own, as a result of your errant/wild behavior), might you start to straighten up a little so you could keep your toys (like your fancy cars and oceanside condo) or would you be totally nihilistic and continue hoo-riding (wild actin' up) all over town?
Scottie: Look at history. has Israel become more conservative or more liberal since the intefadah began?
JA =Now, Scottie: *WHAT* started the 2nd Intifada? Sharon wanting to go pray? (Actually, not even *that* started the 2nd Intifada. It was Israeli troops shooting on unarmed *CIVILIANS* the day or so afterwards! (You might call it "the Israeli Sharpeville Massacre". It looked like a scene straight out of Apartheid South Africa, with the Apartheid South African army firing on unarmed protesters.)
=Israel has become more conservative regardless of the Intifadah; that’s why there *was* one. About a *decade* ago, Israel kicked the totally nonviolent Palestinian Awad, "the Palestinian MLK"(!), out of the country, back in the late ‘80’s or early ‘90’s. Peace is 'not', so to speak, especially from Sharon's point of view, in Israel's interest as long as it believes it has the decided upper hand and the immense financial and military backing of the world's only military superpower.
Scottie: "Has US become more liberal since terrorism hurt it and its economy?"
JA =Scottie, your questions are very unsophisticated. Almost childlike.
=The U.S. *likes* terrorism--to the extent it can manipulate and use it. Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld hit the ***JACKPOT(!!!)***when 9-11 happened. 9-11 played directly into the U.S.'s hands -- and Israel's too! Many believe that they (the U.S. or Israel or both!) let it happen. Whatever the truth, I *don't* believe the govt's story--and you would be quite stupid if you did. There are *numerous* war precendents for this in even modern history.
=But, aside from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *before* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world).
Scottie: "Did US become more neutral when it was hit by the Japaneese at pearl harbour?"
JA =See above, re childlike questions. Many believe that the govt let Pearl Harbor happen (with the most critical U.S. ships out to sea, after a virtual act of war, from Japan's point of view--the U.S. cutting off oil to Japan, after cutting off other raw materials, like metals).
=[Now, if this sounds too incredible to you, what do you think the U.S. would do if its major oil supplies were cut off from a foreign country? Wait to die an industrial death? It would find a reason to go to war. Henry Kissinger said that we would go *directly* to war. Can you figure that out, Scottie?]
=But, be that as it may or not be (the U.S. laying itself open to an initial attack), any political, sequential and circumstantial analysis of events leading up to the attacks on the Philippines and Pearl Harbor would have *easily* predicted at least one of them. As it was, *BOTH* events occurred.
Scottie: You have made the fatal mistake of assuming that A is the natural response when Israel and all countries like Israel ALWAYS choose B.
JA =The fatal mistake in your analysis (you obviously don't have a strong historical analysis) is that they always choose B -- no matter whether they are facing someone peaceful or violent -- because that’s how brutal oppressive colonialist regimes operate.
=But at least the person willing to fight back has a chance to stop them -- especially if there is no peaceful option, like just asking pioneer Zionist terrorists and militias, and avowed racist Zionist leaders, or later the state of Israel to *please* stop the systematic mass population invasion of Palestine [in a way no other country in the world would accept, *certainly* *not* the U.S.], *please* stop systematically buying up property from absentee landlords and kicking Palestinians off (with racial restrictions that they can’t buy/lease any back), otherwise, to *please* stop dispossessing the Palestinians, to *please* stop forcing Palestinians to give up their homes and livelihoods, to *please* stop pushing or militarily (as Israeli historian Benny Morris stated) driving Palestinians off and confiscating their land and preventing them from returning, and to *please* stop your Palestinian village demonstration massacres (like Dier Yassin), *please* stop forcing Palestinians to give up. Scottie, do you think that "*please*" would have worked with the Zionists?
Scottie: "Especially when the enemy is actually weak and just "pretending" to be strong by picking a fight."
JA =Yet another meaningless comment. You’re full of those. Was Hezbollah weak yet pretending to be strong? Was the ANC weak, yet pretending to be strong? Etc.
Scottie: "The US for example was aware that Japan was trying to encourage the US to make peace Japan would probably have left the US alone if the US had offered them a peace treaty. but the didnt offer Japan a peace treaty dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either."
JA =See my comment above (about meaningless comments). Many believe the US allowed this to happen. But, whether that’s true or false, it’s widely known that FDR wanted to have an excuse to get into the war to help England. Aside from that, a *CORRECT*--*not flawed*--analysis would yield that the U.S. and Japan had too many conflicts going on (like both wanting colonies in Japan’s region of the world and both wanting to militarily control the Pacific--the U.S. *all* of it) for the eventual likelihood of war to be avoided. WWII, like WWI, was essentially an inter-imperialists war.
=As far as your slimey-ass, typical Zionist way of debating -- i.e. putting words into others/my mouth, or deeds at my hands for which I am not responsible (and as Siegman said above, it is *Israel* which is more responsible for suicide bombers), about “dont be surprised if no one else gives in to your suicide bombing strategy either”, that’s what modern European colonialists have always said about the resistance of indigenous people all over the world (most recently in apartheid South Africa, and before that all over Africa and Asia): “We (the European imperialists or settler-colonists) [ironically] won’t give into violence! We swear, we’ll never give in!”
=Well, the sun used to never set on the British empire, and now the British barely get the sun in London. Vietnamese violence in Vietnam drove the Americans out. The ANC struggle, which included armed struggle, defeated Apartheid in South Africa. Hezbollah drove the Israelis out of Lebanon. Even bin Laden has driven the U.S.--“We won’t give into terrorism”--out of Saudi Arabia.
=One by one, all the European powers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) all swore they would never give in, in the 3rd World. Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. What does history predict? In the meantime, what you should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.”
=Now, Scottie, no mas, no mas! This took longer than I realized--or it just *seeemed* *real* long--and I just don't have time to be *tediously* bored (not even just *bored*) like this. (I see more of your 'handiwork' below your last response to me.) I'll hand you off to someone with more patience for your level of analysis here--or lack thereof. No mas!
*Aye*, Scottie,... You've got a *problem*...
Theodore
- herzel is not my hero and as far as britain vs the jews around WWII is concerned I am firmly behind the british for the same reasons I support israel against the palistinians now.
Angie
ethnic cleansing - is cleansing an area of an ethnicity.
point out why that is not relevant?
There is a hell of a difference between obtaining land legally and stealing it.
did they steal it? YES it is possible to buy land even in palestine. To jsutify singiling them out on moral grounds you should be able to prove A) that they "stole it" and did not "buy it" and B) that there are no other groups who also stole land
- herzel is not my hero and as far as britain vs the jews around WWII is concerned I am firmly behind the british for the same reasons I support israel against the palistinians now.
Angie
ethnic cleansing - is cleansing an area of an ethnicity.
point out why that is not relevant?
There is a hell of a difference between obtaining land legally and stealing it.
did they steal it? YES it is possible to buy land even in palestine. To jsutify singiling them out on moral grounds you should be able to prove A) that they "stole it" and did not "buy it" and B) that there are no other groups who also stole land
Funny how people like to ignore facts and history.
The ottoman empire controlled the "palestinian territory" for hundreds and hundreds of years. They won it in war.
The British then controlled the "palestinian territory." They won control in war.
In the 1948 war of arab countries against israel, Jordan and Egypt controlled the "palestinian territory." They took control of it in war, and didn't get go. They didn't create a palestinian state, either.
In 1967, Israel won the "palestinian territory" (west bank, etc.) in war.
ISRAEL is the first entity to actually be making it possible for palestinians who actually live in the territories to form their own state and run it themselves. Their demand all this time has been that palestinians stop attacking, and agree to recognize that israel should exist in peace.
ISRAEL won control of the land the same way that everyone else did, and ISRAEL is the one actually offering them some sort of temporary, and then permanent, state, in exchange for peace.
Yet, you stupid idiots want to ignore history and say that "israel stole the land?"
WELCOME TO PLANET EARTH, you ignorant fools. Read how half the countries on this planet were formed.
RELATIVE TO OTHERS, israel is being GENEROUS in offering their jerky neighbors anything at all. And if you disagree, STUDY PLANET EARTH these last few hundred years and educate your stupid selves.
When hamas and islamic jihad are dead, or disbanded, and israel isn't being attacked anymore, and the intifada ends, and normal civilized people are in control of the palestinians, then the palestinians will get their state. Not before.
P.S. 80% of "historic palestine" as it existed for hundreds and hundreds of years was taken away in the early 1900's and turned into JORDAN.
Does Israel do some jerky stuff? Of course. What country hasn't? That doesn't change the facts and the big picture. That as long as crazed murderous lunatics (hamas) are powerful in the palestinian world, there won't be a palestine. And when they aren't around anymore, or can be controlled somehow and/or kept the hell out of israel, then israel can grant land control and a temporary-leading-to-permanent palestinian state.
Now, be good students and figure out how to incorporate actual HISTORY AND BALANCE into your opinions. If that's possible. Thanks.
The ottoman empire controlled the "palestinian territory" for hundreds and hundreds of years. They won it in war.
The British then controlled the "palestinian territory." They won control in war.
In the 1948 war of arab countries against israel, Jordan and Egypt controlled the "palestinian territory." They took control of it in war, and didn't get go. They didn't create a palestinian state, either.
In 1967, Israel won the "palestinian territory" (west bank, etc.) in war.
ISRAEL is the first entity to actually be making it possible for palestinians who actually live in the territories to form their own state and run it themselves. Their demand all this time has been that palestinians stop attacking, and agree to recognize that israel should exist in peace.
ISRAEL won control of the land the same way that everyone else did, and ISRAEL is the one actually offering them some sort of temporary, and then permanent, state, in exchange for peace.
Yet, you stupid idiots want to ignore history and say that "israel stole the land?"
WELCOME TO PLANET EARTH, you ignorant fools. Read how half the countries on this planet were formed.
RELATIVE TO OTHERS, israel is being GENEROUS in offering their jerky neighbors anything at all. And if you disagree, STUDY PLANET EARTH these last few hundred years and educate your stupid selves.
When hamas and islamic jihad are dead, or disbanded, and israel isn't being attacked anymore, and the intifada ends, and normal civilized people are in control of the palestinians, then the palestinians will get their state. Not before.
P.S. 80% of "historic palestine" as it existed for hundreds and hundreds of years was taken away in the early 1900's and turned into JORDAN.
Does Israel do some jerky stuff? Of course. What country hasn't? That doesn't change the facts and the big picture. That as long as crazed murderous lunatics (hamas) are powerful in the palestinian world, there won't be a palestine. And when they aren't around anymore, or can be controlled somehow and/or kept the hell out of israel, then israel can grant land control and a temporary-leading-to-permanent palestinian state.
Now, be good students and figure out how to incorporate actual HISTORY AND BALANCE into your opinions. If that's possible. Thanks.
Scottie: " You have made the fatal mistake of assuming that A [compromise/negotiations] is the natural response when Israel and all countries like Israel ALWAYS choose B [an increasingly powerful striking back]. "
[CORRECTION (see below): --AT FIRST(!)'-- ]
JA =The fatal mistake in your analysis (you obviously don't have a strong historical analysis) is that they always --AT FIRST(!)!-- choose B -- no matter whether they are facing someone peaceful or violent -- because that’s how brutal oppressive colonialist regimes operate.
[CORRECTION (see below): --AT FIRST(!)'-- ]
JA =The fatal mistake in your analysis (you obviously don't have a strong historical analysis) is that they always --AT FIRST(!)!-- choose B -- no matter whether they are facing someone peaceful or violent -- because that’s how brutal oppressive colonialist regimes operate.
If you read the above Comments by ANGEL, you would see that the Borders should be set back to 1967, The Settlement become part of Palestine. The Majority of people in Israel are Jewish even though there are some 1.3 million Palestinian living inside the Borders of Israel. The some 300,000 Jewish people living inside the new Palestinian State would be living under Palestinian Law, If they do not like living in the New State of Palestine they can choose to move to Israel.
If 1.3 million Palestinian can live in Israel, 300,000 Israelis can live in Palestine. The U.S. has every nationality imaginable. Even the Palestinians are both Muslim and Christian.
In any case to have PEACE we need a Palestinan State with reasonable borders NOW.....
Details:
CLICK HERE > http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1618616.php
If 1.3 million Palestinian can live in Israel, 300,000 Israelis can live in Palestine. The U.S. has every nationality imaginable. Even the Palestinians are both Muslim and Christian.
In any case to have PEACE we need a Palestinan State with reasonable borders NOW.....
Details:
CLICK HERE > http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1618616.php
" So far, I haven’t seen you offer anything but propaganda lines."
Huh? Ill take ANGEL's settlement thats fine.. Infact I dont care any settlement is ok but if your idea of where the settlement should be is too far to one side particularly against the jews (who have the power) then it jsut wont work.
there are two ways of looking at it "morraly" and "practically"
morraly I believe there is no issue. a race cannot own land.
Practically speaking then we can discard who is "in the right" and just find a solution that will result in the least amount of hatred and killing.
"You’re boring me, Scottie. People who only have propaganda lines/responses *bore* me."
That isnt a response is it?
I appologise for being flippant in the second part but you are too.
"JA =Well, you ought to know, Zionist"
geezzz I am not a zionist except in as far as i supoort the continued existance of a state that currently exists.
" Well, the 'joke's' on Israel now, isn't it. "
- there is no point taking revenge on a group of people for somthing their country is supposed to have done have you not learned from WWI???
JA =Yeah, they are the same kind of people who didn’t believe that Nelson Mandela and Apartheid black South Africans were interested in peace.
the black s in south africa obviously won their trust because the whites surrendered power as opposed to having it ripped from them. why dont you encourage the arabs to win that trust?
"JA =Hmmm... What did it cause in Apartheid South Africa? "
"South africa did not collapse under pressure from the blacks or from foreign countries. It decided that apatheid was wrong. Similarly with colonialism although streching their military forces speed up the process."
JA =Now, Scottie: *WHAT* started the 2nd Intifada?
" jsut like the good friday massacare where the IRA encouraged violence in order to start a "intefadah""
"Israel has become more conservative regardless of the Intifadah."
They started the intefadah and then they made the election unwinnible for the liberals in israel. Everyone knew that even during the election. I cant see how you could have missed it.
" Peace is 'not', so to speak, especially from Sharon's point of view, in Israel's interest."
-What middle east are you looking at? You also think that september 11 and the stock market crash were "in US's interest".
- maybe I have to talk simple and use small words to talk to you.
" Many believe that the govt let Pearl Harbor happen "
- And you call me childlike? you have the critical thinking abilities of an amoeba if you consider those people worth talking to here. Fortunatly the vast majority of sane people have already written you off by now.
Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk. Do you know the vietnam war? did they need pearl harbour to start that war?
Stop making a fool out of yourself.
"But at least the person willing to fight back has a chance to stop them. "
You have defined the israelis as people who are unreasonable and impossible to negotiate with. if that is true what you are talking about is a nith korea like situation. You can plan your revolts all day and night against nth korea and foreign countries can put sanctions on them but your revolution just isnt going to happen.
If you consider them to be moral people who dont really want to be in israel then you have a british colonies situation but the problem there is that the jews are no longer your evil opponants for demonizing.
Your WWII argument is nonsense. You are suggesting that people choose strategically to fight everyone at the same time.
"As far as your slimey-ass, typical Zionist way of debating -- i.e. putting words into others/my mouth, or deeds at my hands for which I am not responsible"
- haha tell that to a ZIONIST! It is classic when you accuse me of doing somthing that you are doing with your own accusation.
"Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. "
Every state was created out of conquest and occupation. every state is evidence of rebelion being supressed.
Funny lays out the detail of this in relatin to palestine but the same is true everywhere.
Huh? Ill take ANGEL's settlement thats fine.. Infact I dont care any settlement is ok but if your idea of where the settlement should be is too far to one side particularly against the jews (who have the power) then it jsut wont work.
there are two ways of looking at it "morraly" and "practically"
morraly I believe there is no issue. a race cannot own land.
Practically speaking then we can discard who is "in the right" and just find a solution that will result in the least amount of hatred and killing.
"You’re boring me, Scottie. People who only have propaganda lines/responses *bore* me."
That isnt a response is it?
I appologise for being flippant in the second part but you are too.
"JA =Well, you ought to know, Zionist"
geezzz I am not a zionist except in as far as i supoort the continued existance of a state that currently exists.
" Well, the 'joke's' on Israel now, isn't it. "
- there is no point taking revenge on a group of people for somthing their country is supposed to have done have you not learned from WWI???
JA =Yeah, they are the same kind of people who didn’t believe that Nelson Mandela and Apartheid black South Africans were interested in peace.
the black s in south africa obviously won their trust because the whites surrendered power as opposed to having it ripped from them. why dont you encourage the arabs to win that trust?
"JA =Hmmm... What did it cause in Apartheid South Africa? "
"South africa did not collapse under pressure from the blacks or from foreign countries. It decided that apatheid was wrong. Similarly with colonialism although streching their military forces speed up the process."
JA =Now, Scottie: *WHAT* started the 2nd Intifada?
" jsut like the good friday massacare where the IRA encouraged violence in order to start a "intefadah""
"Israel has become more conservative regardless of the Intifadah."
They started the intefadah and then they made the election unwinnible for the liberals in israel. Everyone knew that even during the election. I cant see how you could have missed it.
" Peace is 'not', so to speak, especially from Sharon's point of view, in Israel's interest."
-What middle east are you looking at? You also think that september 11 and the stock market crash were "in US's interest".
- maybe I have to talk simple and use small words to talk to you.
" Many believe that the govt let Pearl Harbor happen "
- And you call me childlike? you have the critical thinking abilities of an amoeba if you consider those people worth talking to here. Fortunatly the vast majority of sane people have already written you off by now.
Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk. Do you know the vietnam war? did they need pearl harbour to start that war?
Stop making a fool out of yourself.
"But at least the person willing to fight back has a chance to stop them. "
You have defined the israelis as people who are unreasonable and impossible to negotiate with. if that is true what you are talking about is a nith korea like situation. You can plan your revolts all day and night against nth korea and foreign countries can put sanctions on them but your revolution just isnt going to happen.
If you consider them to be moral people who dont really want to be in israel then you have a british colonies situation but the problem there is that the jews are no longer your evil opponants for demonizing.
Your WWII argument is nonsense. You are suggesting that people choose strategically to fight everyone at the same time.
"As far as your slimey-ass, typical Zionist way of debating -- i.e. putting words into others/my mouth, or deeds at my hands for which I am not responsible"
- haha tell that to a ZIONIST! It is classic when you accuse me of doing somthing that you are doing with your own accusation.
"Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. "
Every state was created out of conquest and occupation. every state is evidence of rebelion being supressed.
Funny lays out the detail of this in relatin to palestine but the same is true everywhere.
JA you are obviously an idiot since you dont listen to the people with whom you are talking you just imagine they are "zionist agents" and spew forth your propoganda.
Anyway.
If you win freedom by terrorism you just get terrorists as your dictators. maybe they have the same skin colour as you but what does that matter?
So JA is Mubabe your hero? the man driving back the legacy of the white man by destroying his countries farms?
Anyway.
If you win freedom by terrorism you just get terrorists as your dictators. maybe they have the same skin colour as you but what does that matter?
So JA is Mubabe your hero? the man driving back the legacy of the white man by destroying his countries farms?
Funny, by Funny Tuesday June 17, 2003 at 07:15 PM:
"ISRAEL won control of the land the same way that everyone else did [through conquest]"
So, then the Jews--"God's Chosen People"--are no morally better than anyone else?
By that expedient morality, what is your problem with Hitler? Ethnic groups have been attacked, conquered, ethnically cleansed and/or attempted exterminated all throughout human history. By that expedient morality, then stop going on and on about the Jewish Holocaust -- certainly not the only holocaust in history *or* in modern times. By that expedient morality get Ellie Wiesel--who is a hypocrite anyway--off of TV, always pretending to be a Jewish Gandhian figure. By that expedient morality, Jews are just part of the ebb and flow of violence in human existence. Then, 'Get over it'! Is that what you purport?
You can't have it *both* ways: you (Zionist Jews) can't rightfully claim to be the tragic victims of a great moral injustice in Europe and then say that "that's life" when you perpetrate what others rightfully claim to be a great moral injustice, too, elsewhere, at your (Zionist) hands. *Whoever* had national jurisdiction over Palestine, the indigenous people (the Palestinian Arabs) living there had and *have* a moral right not to be mass/systematically dispossessed, killed, driven off from their homes by military force and/or ethnically cleansed.
(By the way, partitioned Israel was never attacked in 1948. I don't think that Partitioned Israel or '67 Israel has *ever* been attacked by an Arab army itself. But Israel has actually attacked other countries (often using pretexts subsequently revealed to be phony) and gone on several offensive wars--especially and notoriously the '56 war--in every war but one, the '73 War. The '73 war was a war where Egypt and Syria attempted to reclaim land conquered by Israel. Egypt eventually did reclaim the Sinai through subsequent negotiations to finally resolve its participation the '73 war.)
"ISRAEL won control of the land the same way that everyone else did [through conquest]"
So, then the Jews--"God's Chosen People"--are no morally better than anyone else?
By that expedient morality, what is your problem with Hitler? Ethnic groups have been attacked, conquered, ethnically cleansed and/or attempted exterminated all throughout human history. By that expedient morality, then stop going on and on about the Jewish Holocaust -- certainly not the only holocaust in history *or* in modern times. By that expedient morality get Ellie Wiesel--who is a hypocrite anyway--off of TV, always pretending to be a Jewish Gandhian figure. By that expedient morality, Jews are just part of the ebb and flow of violence in human existence. Then, 'Get over it'! Is that what you purport?
You can't have it *both* ways: you (Zionist Jews) can't rightfully claim to be the tragic victims of a great moral injustice in Europe and then say that "that's life" when you perpetrate what others rightfully claim to be a great moral injustice, too, elsewhere, at your (Zionist) hands. *Whoever* had national jurisdiction over Palestine, the indigenous people (the Palestinian Arabs) living there had and *have* a moral right not to be mass/systematically dispossessed, killed, driven off from their homes by military force and/or ethnically cleansed.
(By the way, partitioned Israel was never attacked in 1948. I don't think that Partitioned Israel or '67 Israel has *ever* been attacked by an Arab army itself. But Israel has actually attacked other countries (often using pretexts subsequently revealed to be phony) and gone on several offensive wars--especially and notoriously the '56 war--in every war but one, the '73 War. The '73 war was a war where Egypt and Syria attempted to reclaim land conquered by Israel. Egypt eventually did reclaim the Sinai through subsequent negotiations to finally resolve its participation the '73 war.)
JA follows the logic of weakness makes right.
(a ridiculous concept which authorizes perpetual war.)
" By that expedient morality, what is your problem with Hitler" (I presume you mean the NAZI to make your point make sense)
Nice of you to bring up that comparison. We HAVE gotten over the nazi. do you see us bagging germany for its work in WWII? I am also not asking for my ancestoral land back as rightful as my claim may be. I dont know if any of the jews are but if they are I would certainly oppose just giving it back to them (there will be other people living there now).
Nice to see your "arabs have every reason to attack israel but they never have.. er except once but that didn't count.." logic...
wouldnt it be convenient for you if the arab states were these saintly bodies. and yet surely even you must admit that their governments are somewhat repressive reigemes with limited human rights some racist policies etc. Do you really think a group of states like that can be as pure and innocent as you make out?
If this board was a microcosm of reality I could negotiate with angie i could negotiate with dove ANGEL etc etc.
On the israel side it would be easy enough to negotiate with most of the peope I have met here.
We could easily sit down at a table and find a solution (at least in stages) JA on the other hand together with a couple of other people here would probably would go to the meeting throw a big fit for the cameras and go away to plan a suicide bombing. In the end he would probably be shot in the head after he killed a couple of people who had nothing to do with the meeting.
you have reasonable people on one side reasonable poeple on the otherside and in the end someone starts running around saying killing people is good if it helps my cause that goes and ruins it for everyone.
the moderates who lean towards them dont want to kill them because they are fighting on their behalf (no matter how misguidedly) but they cant offer peace because their extremist friends are the ones fighting the war.
(a ridiculous concept which authorizes perpetual war.)
" By that expedient morality, what is your problem with Hitler" (I presume you mean the NAZI to make your point make sense)
Nice of you to bring up that comparison. We HAVE gotten over the nazi. do you see us bagging germany for its work in WWII? I am also not asking for my ancestoral land back as rightful as my claim may be. I dont know if any of the jews are but if they are I would certainly oppose just giving it back to them (there will be other people living there now).
Nice to see your "arabs have every reason to attack israel but they never have.. er except once but that didn't count.." logic...
wouldnt it be convenient for you if the arab states were these saintly bodies. and yet surely even you must admit that their governments are somewhat repressive reigemes with limited human rights some racist policies etc. Do you really think a group of states like that can be as pure and innocent as you make out?
If this board was a microcosm of reality I could negotiate with angie i could negotiate with dove ANGEL etc etc.
On the israel side it would be easy enough to negotiate with most of the peope I have met here.
We could easily sit down at a table and find a solution (at least in stages) JA on the other hand together with a couple of other people here would probably would go to the meeting throw a big fit for the cameras and go away to plan a suicide bombing. In the end he would probably be shot in the head after he killed a couple of people who had nothing to do with the meeting.
you have reasonable people on one side reasonable poeple on the otherside and in the end someone starts running around saying killing people is good if it helps my cause that goes and ruins it for everyone.
the moderates who lean towards them dont want to kill them because they are fighting on their behalf (no matter how misguidedly) but they cant offer peace because their extremist friends are the ones fighting the war.
Scottie, when I don't really have a whole lot of extra time to be bothered with the likes of the simpllistic analysis you displayed in your earlier post responding to me, then excuse me, I just pick one or two critical points that can easily be shown to be factually/historically incorrect in your last post to me. I will now do so with you.
Scottie: "So JA is Mubabe your hero?"
Yeah! I've got a **BIG** picture of him on my living room wall! [I'm laughing at you. Hahaha!]
Scottie: "Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk. Do you know the vietnam war? did they need pearl harbour to start that war? Stop making a fool out of yourself. "
JA: Now, I *like* this point, because you accuse me of "making a fool out of [my-]self. So, I will here make a fool out of you (I *couldn't* resist!):
"Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked..."
Now, do *you* know that Vietnam War? That's *exactly* what the Gulf of Tonkin pretext in Vietnam was all about: the U.S. military (navy) *planning* and *hoping* to get its ships attacked in Vietnam's Gulf of Tonkin by the only ships North Vietnam had -- coastal light patrol boats. When Pres. Johnson *claimed* the ships were attacked, he used it to push "the Gulf of Tonkin War Resolution" through Congress, authorizing the President to go to all-out (as much as could be, domestically, politically tolerated), open war (tho not officially declared a war). Johnson used this war resolution to send a half-million American men into Vietnam.
"...would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk."
You mean, like the U.S. military that spent approximately 575 **BILLION** dollars on the Vietnam War, lost 60,000 troops (killed and MIA) and many many more casualties, lost even B-52 strategic heavy bombers in raids over North Vietnam, and lots of other combat aircraft, and ultimately lost the war and, internationally, political face? Is *that* the kind of "smart" you are talking about? By the way, in case you don't know, North Vietnam did not have a deep ocean navy, so it couldn't sink "a whole lot of [U.S.] ships". WWII Japan was a technologically advanced, industrial nation with a fully-developed military machine.
As for 9-11, the bust of the hyper-hyped internet economy (and, to a lesser extent, major domestic financial scandals) had a whole lot more to do with a hit on the U.S. economy and the precipitous fall in the stock market than 9-11 did. In fact, 9-11 was a jackpot, not only for Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, and Sharon, but also for the U.S. military-industrial complex, financially, too.--and the people in the Bush administration with corporate ties to those industries.
No, actually: *I* didn't make a *fool* out of you; *you* did!
Scottie: "So JA is Mubabe your hero?"
Yeah! I've got a **BIG** picture of him on my living room wall! [I'm laughing at you. Hahaha!]
Scottie: "Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk. Do you know the vietnam war? did they need pearl harbour to start that war? Stop making a fool out of yourself. "
JA: Now, I *like* this point, because you accuse me of "making a fool out of [my-]self. So, I will here make a fool out of you (I *couldn't* resist!):
"Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to have themselves attacked..."
Now, do *you* know that Vietnam War? That's *exactly* what the Gulf of Tonkin pretext in Vietnam was all about: the U.S. military (navy) *planning* and *hoping* to get its ships attacked in Vietnam's Gulf of Tonkin by the only ships North Vietnam had -- coastal light patrol boats. When Pres. Johnson *claimed* the ships were attacked, he used it to push "the Gulf of Tonkin War Resolution" through Congress, authorizing the President to go to all-out (as much as could be, domestically, politically tolerated), open war (tho not officially declared a war). Johnson used this war resolution to send a half-million American men into Vietnam.
"...would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didnt get a whole lot of their ships sunk."
You mean, like the U.S. military that spent approximately 575 **BILLION** dollars on the Vietnam War, lost 60,000 troops (killed and MIA) and many many more casualties, lost even B-52 strategic heavy bombers in raids over North Vietnam, and lots of other combat aircraft, and ultimately lost the war and, internationally, political face? Is *that* the kind of "smart" you are talking about? By the way, in case you don't know, North Vietnam did not have a deep ocean navy, so it couldn't sink "a whole lot of [U.S.] ships". WWII Japan was a technologically advanced, industrial nation with a fully-developed military machine.
As for 9-11, the bust of the hyper-hyped internet economy (and, to a lesser extent, major domestic financial scandals) had a whole lot more to do with a hit on the U.S. economy and the precipitous fall in the stock market than 9-11 did. In fact, 9-11 was a jackpot, not only for Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, and Sharon, but also for the U.S. military-industrial complex, financially, too.--and the people in the Bush administration with corporate ties to those industries.
No, actually: *I* didn't make a *fool* out of you; *you* did!
A UNIFIED SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OR GENDER.
(Or, possibly, two states based on the same principle above.)
WHAT'S WRONG WITH *THAT*?
THE SAME THING THAT JEWS WOULD RIGHTFULLY DEMAND IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY.
ANYTHING LESS IS HYPOCRISY.
(Or, possibly, two states based on the same principle above.)
WHAT'S WRONG WITH *THAT*?
THE SAME THING THAT JEWS WOULD RIGHTFULLY DEMAND IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY.
ANYTHING LESS IS HYPOCRISY.
Scottie,
I don't know if you are Israeli--you might be, since your English is not fluent (but better than my Hebrew).
Scottie: "We HAVE gotten over the nazi."
Just in case you don't know what goes on in the U.S. media, it seems that almost every week or two, lately, we have some documentary or movie or talk show guests on American TV about the Nazis and the Jews: every variation and historical and human interest story you can think of. I feel like Zionist Jews are crassly exploiting even the tragic suffering of their own people for political propaganda purposes. There is *NOTHING* on American TV about the Palestinians--except on the evening news, as either killing or being killed.
Virtually everything (99.999%) about Jews in Israel on American TV is positive--and virtually everything on American TV about Palestinians is racistly negative. I always say that, "playing on white-American racism, Palestinians can be *accused* of *every* atrocity and Israelis can be *excused* from *any* atrocity." Palestinians are portrayed the way indigenous people (including Native Americans) everywhere were portrayed by imperialist/colonialist history and media: not as a real people, not as a people having a culture, or intelligence, or education, or lives, or hopes, or dreams, or just claims--only as problems and obstacles. If anyone talks about the just claims--to *any* degree--of the Palestinians on American tv, they get cut off (usually), threatened, or harassed. I think you talked about "extremists on both sides" in Israel. American TV news, pundit shows, and popular TV reinforces nothing but Jewish (Zionist) extremism here, too, regarding Israel. American TV says that the Israelis are all right, and the Palestinians are all wrong. It causes American political Jews to not really work to bring about peace in Israel/Palestine, but only conquest. If you have any sincerity in you (despite your simplistic analyses), you will work to change that media portrayal, if you really are against extremists on both sides.
(I told a good Palestinian friend of mine that when he gives public lectures, he should always list himself as "*Dr.* Hatem Bazian", because many Americans--due to racist stereotypes of Palestinains--don't even know that a Palestinian *can* have an advanced university education, *can* have advanced degrees, and *can* be a doctor!)
Scottie: "do you see us bagging germany for its work in WWII?"
I don't quite understand your language usage immediately above, but *read* the book, if you can get it (in Israel?), "The Holocaust Industry", by Professor Norman Finkelstein.
I don't know if you are Israeli--you might be, since your English is not fluent (but better than my Hebrew).
Scottie: "We HAVE gotten over the nazi."
Just in case you don't know what goes on in the U.S. media, it seems that almost every week or two, lately, we have some documentary or movie or talk show guests on American TV about the Nazis and the Jews: every variation and historical and human interest story you can think of. I feel like Zionist Jews are crassly exploiting even the tragic suffering of their own people for political propaganda purposes. There is *NOTHING* on American TV about the Palestinians--except on the evening news, as either killing or being killed.
Virtually everything (99.999%) about Jews in Israel on American TV is positive--and virtually everything on American TV about Palestinians is racistly negative. I always say that, "playing on white-American racism, Palestinians can be *accused* of *every* atrocity and Israelis can be *excused* from *any* atrocity." Palestinians are portrayed the way indigenous people (including Native Americans) everywhere were portrayed by imperialist/colonialist history and media: not as a real people, not as a people having a culture, or intelligence, or education, or lives, or hopes, or dreams, or just claims--only as problems and obstacles. If anyone talks about the just claims--to *any* degree--of the Palestinians on American tv, they get cut off (usually), threatened, or harassed. I think you talked about "extremists on both sides" in Israel. American TV news, pundit shows, and popular TV reinforces nothing but Jewish (Zionist) extremism here, too, regarding Israel. American TV says that the Israelis are all right, and the Palestinians are all wrong. It causes American political Jews to not really work to bring about peace in Israel/Palestine, but only conquest. If you have any sincerity in you (despite your simplistic analyses), you will work to change that media portrayal, if you really are against extremists on both sides.
(I told a good Palestinian friend of mine that when he gives public lectures, he should always list himself as "*Dr.* Hatem Bazian", because many Americans--due to racist stereotypes of Palestinains--don't even know that a Palestinian *can* have an advanced university education, *can* have advanced degrees, and *can* be a doctor!)
Scottie: "do you see us bagging germany for its work in WWII?"
I don't quite understand your language usage immediately above, but *read* the book, if you can get it (in Israel?), "The Holocaust Industry", by Professor Norman Finkelstein.
"Wouldn't it be convenient for you if the arab states were those saintly bodies, and yet surely even you must admit that their governments are somewhat repressive with limited human rights", etc., etc.
And which country is supplying funding to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? The US.
So what does it care about a "repressive regime"? As long as they are busy doing their "oh, yes, master" bit to the US, they are "our great friends". Human rights are not a factor apparently.
And which country is supplying funding to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? The US.
So what does it care about a "repressive regime"? As long as they are busy doing their "oh, yes, master" bit to the US, they are "our great friends". Human rights are not a factor apparently.
You said above, and I quote:
"JA , on the other hand, together with a couple of other people here, would probably go to a meetting, throw a big fit for the cameras, and go away to plan a suicide bombing". (NOTE: The punctuation is mine)
What kind of an outrageous comment is that? Accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing is a mindless and cruel accusation, and I'm very ashamed that you would make such an unfair and unwarranted remark.
JA has a lot more intelligence, Scottie, than most people who comment on this board, and I would suggest, perhaps, you pay attention to what he says and learn something therefrom. I know I certainly have.
"JA , on the other hand, together with a couple of other people here, would probably go to a meetting, throw a big fit for the cameras, and go away to plan a suicide bombing". (NOTE: The punctuation is mine)
What kind of an outrageous comment is that? Accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing is a mindless and cruel accusation, and I'm very ashamed that you would make such an unfair and unwarranted remark.
JA has a lot more intelligence, Scottie, than most people who comment on this board, and I would suggest, perhaps, you pay attention to what he says and learn something therefrom. I know I certainly have.
The U.S. supports *every* country in the world, in one way or another. You must be a fool (or think everyone else a fool) to point to dictatorships (a majority of countries in this world) and say, "See! America supports dictatorships!" We are not to blame for what people do in their own countries, simply by virtue of our economic power. What would happen to the world economy if America embargoed every dictatorship in the world? If you come up with a good answer to that question, I suggest you run for public office.
Meanwhile, you are fitting into the indymedia pro-war movement quite nicely.
Meanwhile, you are fitting into the indymedia pro-war movement quite nicely.
The reference in Scottie's remarks were to "arab" states.
Hence my reply. I named three of the obvious ones.
You have a problem with that? A purely rhetorical question, of course.
Hence my reply. I named three of the obvious ones.
You have a problem with that? A purely rhetorical question, of course.
Hey Scottie, JA,Angie. I mean no offense to you Scottie, but I do like the way JA and Angie think. JA that was great what you said about Ellie Wiesel. The funny thing is I had read several of his books and enjoyed them. Things change and people grow in wisdom. It is great reading what you and Angie say, and Scottie your voice is always there too.
Here is what I think will happen to the Israeli/Palestinian problem. Eventually there will be a semblance of peace. However long, my guess is as good as yours. But suddenly as in 9-11 suddenly Israel will be dealt a death blow by those whom she has oppressed and extorted money from.
Slan Abhaile!
Here is what I think will happen to the Israeli/Palestinian problem. Eventually there will be a semblance of peace. However long, my guess is as good as yours. But suddenly as in 9-11 suddenly Israel will be dealt a death blow by those whom she has oppressed and extorted money from.
Slan Abhaile!
but maybe rather than a swift death blow, perhaps a situation like the forcing of S. Africa to end apartheid and set up a Truth & Reconciliation Committee to oversee the transformation from a racist Jewish state of Israel to a truly secular, completely democratic state of Palestine-Israel with completely equal rights for all regardless of religion, race or sex, including for all the 5 million Palestinian refugees who have the right to return according to UN Resolutions, International Law and world opinion. It is their inalienable human right to return also to their ancestral homeland as equals.
I only have a moment, but that's all this will take.
(I was just briefly checking in to see if Scottie had anything more to say.)
by laugh at the dying Wednesday June 18, 2003 at 08:20 AM:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Are you on *crack*, "lad"!!?
What a ridiculous statement!
And you have the *nerve* to call angie (or anyone else) of being a fool?
(Well, I guess you *are* on *crack*, so your mind is all messed up anyway.)
Did the U.S. support all those democratic govts in the 3rd World that it has overthrown?
In the Middle East, did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Mossadeq in Iran that the U.S. overthrew in 1953?
Does the U.S. support Castro's govt in Cuba? Or has it been trying to economically destroy (or support Miami Cuban exiles' invasion, once, or terrorism in) it for the last 40+ years?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Salvador Allende, which a U.S.-led coup overthrew on SEPT 11, 1973, LEADING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 30,000 PEOPLE!! ?-- A DATE WHERE CHILEANS ALSO COMMEMORATE THEIR LOST LIVES.
Does the U.S. support the democratic govt of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela whose attempted anti-democratic coup the U.S. (im)morally supported?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Aristide in Haiti? -- or did the U.S. try to crush democracy in Haiti since its existence as the first self-liberated African slave state in history and support the most brutal dictatorships there.
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Lamumba, which it overthrew, in the Congo? -- or the decades-long brutal dicatorship that followed.
Did the U.S. support North Vietnam or the democratic elections that were supposed to happen during the dictatorial Diem regime in South Vietnam?
Does the U.S. support China?
Does the U.S. support North Korea?
Does the U.S. support Kaddafi's Libya?
Does the U.S. support Algeria?
Did the U.S. support democracy in Angola?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Nicaragua, when it illegally mined its harbor -- and subsequently lost in the World Court, when the Nicaraguans sued there?
Did the U.S. support East Timor when genocide was being commited in it by Indonesia?
The list can go on and on.
Has the U.S. *ever* in its entire history *ever* directly militarily intervened in *any* state in the developing world for the purposes of establishing or supporting a democracy? If so, *NAME* one.
I won't even bother with the other ridiculous statements you made "lad" (that's about the level of your intelligence), as you clearly have your head up your ass.
In the meantime, GET OFF THE PIPE!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re Scottie accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing...
This instance, Angie, is where I just ignore people like Scottie. (But, Scottie, how would *you* have liked me to accuse you of going off to kill stone-throwing 12-year olds or their mothers at home, or going off to plan collective punishment Palestinian house demolitions?)
(I was just briefly checking in to see if Scottie had anything more to say.)
by laugh at the dying Wednesday June 18, 2003 at 08:20 AM:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Are you on *crack*, "lad"!!?
What a ridiculous statement!
And you have the *nerve* to call angie (or anyone else) of being a fool?
(Well, I guess you *are* on *crack*, so your mind is all messed up anyway.)
Did the U.S. support all those democratic govts in the 3rd World that it has overthrown?
In the Middle East, did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Mossadeq in Iran that the U.S. overthrew in 1953?
Does the U.S. support Castro's govt in Cuba? Or has it been trying to economically destroy (or support Miami Cuban exiles' invasion, once, or terrorism in) it for the last 40+ years?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Salvador Allende, which a U.S.-led coup overthrew on SEPT 11, 1973, LEADING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 30,000 PEOPLE!! ?-- A DATE WHERE CHILEANS ALSO COMMEMORATE THEIR LOST LIVES.
Does the U.S. support the democratic govt of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela whose attempted anti-democratic coup the U.S. (im)morally supported?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Aristide in Haiti? -- or did the U.S. try to crush democracy in Haiti since its existence as the first self-liberated African slave state in history and support the most brutal dictatorships there.
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Lamumba, which it overthrew, in the Congo? -- or the decades-long brutal dicatorship that followed.
Did the U.S. support North Vietnam or the democratic elections that were supposed to happen during the dictatorial Diem regime in South Vietnam?
Does the U.S. support China?
Does the U.S. support North Korea?
Does the U.S. support Kaddafi's Libya?
Does the U.S. support Algeria?
Did the U.S. support democracy in Angola?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Nicaragua, when it illegally mined its harbor -- and subsequently lost in the World Court, when the Nicaraguans sued there?
Did the U.S. support East Timor when genocide was being commited in it by Indonesia?
The list can go on and on.
Has the U.S. *ever* in its entire history *ever* directly militarily intervened in *any* state in the developing world for the purposes of establishing or supporting a democracy? If so, *NAME* one.
I won't even bother with the other ridiculous statements you made "lad" (that's about the level of your intelligence), as you clearly have your head up your ass.
In the meantime, GET OFF THE PIPE!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re Scottie accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing...
This instance, Angie, is where I just ignore people like Scottie. (But, Scottie, how would *you* have liked me to accuse you of going off to kill stone-throwing 12-year olds or their mothers at home, or going off to plan collective punishment Palestinian house demolitions?)
"New Profile Movement for the Civil-ization of Arab Society"
Now, that would be a useful movement!
So let me get this straight, Israel surives on a sea of US money, ($3 Billion) while Eygpt, at $2 Billion does what?
Now, that would be a useful movement!
So let me get this straight, Israel surives on a sea of US money, ($3 Billion) while Eygpt, at $2 Billion does what?
U.S. supports China with a huge trade deficit, yes. Do the words "Most favored nation status" mean anything to you?
U.S. supported N. Korea with free aid until they came public with their nuclear weapons program. We are still offering aid in negotiations to halt that program
Libya? Settle the Pan Am case, and they're back in free trade with us. Then they can buy the same cropdusters Saddam used to deliver chemical weapons.
Stop smoking that indymedia propaganda.
Has the U.S. ever militarily intervened to establish democracy? Ask Germany and Japan. Ask Kosovo, Bosnia, Taiwan, S. Korea. Or was that about oil too?
U.S. also supports, in one way or another, every democracy in the world. Does that make us a force for democracy? Yes, it does.
The U.S. has been the only superpower since 1989. Is there more or less individual freedom in the world since then?
Feel free to disagree.
U.S. supported N. Korea with free aid until they came public with their nuclear weapons program. We are still offering aid in negotiations to halt that program
Libya? Settle the Pan Am case, and they're back in free trade with us. Then they can buy the same cropdusters Saddam used to deliver chemical weapons.
Stop smoking that indymedia propaganda.
Has the U.S. ever militarily intervened to establish democracy? Ask Germany and Japan. Ask Kosovo, Bosnia, Taiwan, S. Korea. Or was that about oil too?
U.S. also supports, in one way or another, every democracy in the world. Does that make us a force for democracy? Yes, it does.
The U.S. has been the only superpower since 1989. Is there more or less individual freedom in the world since then?
Feel free to disagree.
"Yeah! I've got a **BIG** picture of him on my living room wall! "
-your sarcasm is too close to reality
Now, do *you* know that Vietnam War?
- If you were not an idiot you would have realised that was EXACTLY what I was refering to. the gulf of token did not cust the US ANYTHING. Personaly I doubt it was a evil plot like you think but if it was it was a much beter way to do it than the pearl harbour way.
You mean, like the U.S. military that spent approximately 575 **BILLION** dollars on the Vietnam War,
- your argument is irrelevant we are talking about how you start the war. not the war itself.
By the way, in case you don't know, North Vietnam did not have a deep ocean navy, so it couldn't sink "a whole lot of [U.S.] ships".
- and you see that as a disadvantage to the US?haha you are a fool indeed.
As for 9-11, the bust of the hyper-hyped internet economy had a whole lot more to do with a hit on the U.S. economy
- Are you saying that 9-11 helped the economy? surely not. and if it didnt then your point is again irrelevant. stop trying to distract us.
A UNIFIED SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OR GENDER.
- Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
anything less than THAT is hypocracy. but you are going to have to accept hypocracy because the world isnt ready for my solution yet.
I feel like Zionist Jews are crassly exploiting even the tragic suffering
- it is a major piece of history. but I for one dont interpret that as having any implication at all.
There is *NOTHING* on American TV about the Palestinians.
As i said WWII was a big thing.
Virtually everything (99.999%) about Jews in Israel on American TV is positive--and virtually everything on American TV about Palestinians is racistly negative.
- I am sure it apppears that way to you because you are so "anti israel" just like the people who claim media bias because they are biased
you will work to change that media portrayal, if you really are against extremists on both sides.
- of course but you have another problem if the arab media or hte european media is biased against the jews. the US is not the be all and end all.
(I told a good Palestinian friend of mine that when he gives public lectures, he should always list himself as "*Dr.* Hatem Bazian", because many Americans--due to racist stereotypes of Palestinains--don't even know that a Palestinian *can* have an advanced university education, *can* have advanced degrees, and *can* be a doctor!)
- your own fear of racism perpetuates racism.
u see us bagging germany for its work in WWII?"
It means we dont attack germany over WWII . I certainly dont anyway if someone else does then I oppose them also.
And which country is supplying funding to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? The US.
- that doesnt have any implication on the debate here though. the point is are they saintly or not?
What kind of an outrageous comment is that? Accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing is a mindless and cruel accusation
JA said they had an obligation to fight in the way that they do. I understand that you defend him because he is being an extreemist to support your cause but that crosses the line. He has effectively said that he is the equivilent of a hamas member who beats up palistinians for not "opposing israel enough"
JA has a lot more intelligence, Scottie,
- intelligence maybe, but hitler was also intelligent.
Eventually there will be a semblance of peace. However long, my guess is as good as yours. But suddenly as in 9-11 suddenly Israel will be dealt a death blow by those whom she has oppressed and extorted money from.
- take your peace then. since you have that card under your sleve why dont you just take the damn peace.
Re Scottie accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing...
- I have already pointed out why I think you crossed the line. I have never said anything like that. If you can suggest I have then go look for it. even when I said you might get shot in the head I didnt even say that as somthing that "should happen" jsut somthing that probably would.
-your sarcasm is too close to reality
Now, do *you* know that Vietnam War?
- If you were not an idiot you would have realised that was EXACTLY what I was refering to. the gulf of token did not cust the US ANYTHING. Personaly I doubt it was a evil plot like you think but if it was it was a much beter way to do it than the pearl harbour way.
You mean, like the U.S. military that spent approximately 575 **BILLION** dollars on the Vietnam War,
- your argument is irrelevant we are talking about how you start the war. not the war itself.
By the way, in case you don't know, North Vietnam did not have a deep ocean navy, so it couldn't sink "a whole lot of [U.S.] ships".
- and you see that as a disadvantage to the US?haha you are a fool indeed.
As for 9-11, the bust of the hyper-hyped internet economy had a whole lot more to do with a hit on the U.S. economy
- Are you saying that 9-11 helped the economy? surely not. and if it didnt then your point is again irrelevant. stop trying to distract us.
A UNIFIED SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OR GENDER.
- Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
anything less than THAT is hypocracy. but you are going to have to accept hypocracy because the world isnt ready for my solution yet.
I feel like Zionist Jews are crassly exploiting even the tragic suffering
- it is a major piece of history. but I for one dont interpret that as having any implication at all.
There is *NOTHING* on American TV about the Palestinians.
As i said WWII was a big thing.
Virtually everything (99.999%) about Jews in Israel on American TV is positive--and virtually everything on American TV about Palestinians is racistly negative.
- I am sure it apppears that way to you because you are so "anti israel" just like the people who claim media bias because they are biased
you will work to change that media portrayal, if you really are against extremists on both sides.
- of course but you have another problem if the arab media or hte european media is biased against the jews. the US is not the be all and end all.
(I told a good Palestinian friend of mine that when he gives public lectures, he should always list himself as "*Dr.* Hatem Bazian", because many Americans--due to racist stereotypes of Palestinains--don't even know that a Palestinian *can* have an advanced university education, *can* have advanced degrees, and *can* be a doctor!)
- your own fear of racism perpetuates racism.
u see us bagging germany for its work in WWII?"
It means we dont attack germany over WWII . I certainly dont anyway if someone else does then I oppose them also.
And which country is supplying funding to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? The US.
- that doesnt have any implication on the debate here though. the point is are they saintly or not?
What kind of an outrageous comment is that? Accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing is a mindless and cruel accusation
JA said they had an obligation to fight in the way that they do. I understand that you defend him because he is being an extreemist to support your cause but that crosses the line. He has effectively said that he is the equivilent of a hamas member who beats up palistinians for not "opposing israel enough"
JA has a lot more intelligence, Scottie,
- intelligence maybe, but hitler was also intelligent.
Eventually there will be a semblance of peace. However long, my guess is as good as yours. But suddenly as in 9-11 suddenly Israel will be dealt a death blow by those whom she has oppressed and extorted money from.
- take your peace then. since you have that card under your sleve why dont you just take the damn peace.
Re Scottie accusing JA of going off to plan a suicide bombing...
- I have already pointed out why I think you crossed the line. I have never said anything like that. If you can suggest I have then go look for it. even when I said you might get shot in the head I didnt even say that as somthing that "should happen" jsut somthing that probably would.
If there is a dispute between two groups there are 2 workable solutions
one is total victoory to one side this is what JA and brian advocate... total victory for one side usually the weak side.
the other is a negotiated solution which is what most of us advocate.
Brian and JA and some of the israelis solutions of total
victory has the advantage of having a "final solution aspect to it " but do we want to go there?
It is the equivilent of us saying. lets just nuke iran and nth korea accept all the loss of life on both sides and then we wont have any more problems. Or israel saying "lets just get rid of all of the arabs". if you find those things abhorent then you should also find Brian and JA's solutions abhorent.
who is "in the wrong" according to your morals is irrelevant because the victor always thinks the other guy is in the wrong.. maybe they were .....
one is total victoory to one side this is what JA and brian advocate... total victory for one side usually the weak side.
the other is a negotiated solution which is what most of us advocate.
Brian and JA and some of the israelis solutions of total
victory has the advantage of having a "final solution aspect to it " but do we want to go there?
It is the equivilent of us saying. lets just nuke iran and nth korea accept all the loss of life on both sides and then we wont have any more problems. Or israel saying "lets just get rid of all of the arabs". if you find those things abhorent then you should also find Brian and JA's solutions abhorent.
who is "in the wrong" according to your morals is irrelevant because the victor always thinks the other guy is in the wrong.. maybe they were .....
Scottie, I didn't say that is what I supported, but I said that is what I thought would happen. It may take years, but 1 billion Moslems are not to stay asleep forever.
Remember, this is just a forum for discussion and ideas,nothing here is permanent.
Remember, this is just a forum for discussion and ideas,nothing here is permanent.
You see angie etc.
you people have a debate with me or other poeple saying that the palistinians should and are negotiating in good faith. You use this to justify why they are in the right
meanwhile JA argues that they shouldn't negotiate in good faith even if they are at the moment.
Brian who is not sure about his own opinion (or just doesnt want to state it clearly) argues that even if they are negotiating in good faith they will eventually break their own promises if they make a deal.
you people have a debate with me or other poeple saying that the palistinians should and are negotiating in good faith. You use this to justify why they are in the right
meanwhile JA argues that they shouldn't negotiate in good faith even if they are at the moment.
Brian who is not sure about his own opinion (or just doesnt want to state it clearly) argues that even if they are negotiating in good faith they will eventually break their own promises if they make a deal.
the point here is not that they negotiate in good faith and then you return THEIR stolen territories.
Despit that, even if the don't negotiate in good faith... you must return THEIR territories.
When you stole THEIR land, did you steal it in "good faith"?
Despit that, even if the don't negotiate in good faith... you must return THEIR territories.
When you stole THEIR land, did you steal it in "good faith"?
So you too are saying that they are not and should not negotiate in good faith?
just want to make it clear what your position is.
A to how your average israeli views your points
1)What is "stolen" or "right" is a matter of opinion. Should the turks reclaim palestine because it was "stolen" from them? If not why not?
since you are not the "oracle of all truth" you will have a hard time convincing anyone other than yourselves that your interpretation of ownership and right is correct.
2) Attempted murder is a worse crime than theft anyway.
Therefore I suggest negotiation unless you really want to play might makes right.
If you want to play might makes right thenI guess we cannot stop you. But then stop lying to us, everyone can take their gloves off and get it all sorted.
just want to make it clear what your position is.
A to how your average israeli views your points
1)What is "stolen" or "right" is a matter of opinion. Should the turks reclaim palestine because it was "stolen" from them? If not why not?
since you are not the "oracle of all truth" you will have a hard time convincing anyone other than yourselves that your interpretation of ownership and right is correct.
2) Attempted murder is a worse crime than theft anyway.
Therefore I suggest negotiation unless you really want to play might makes right.
If you want to play might makes right thenI guess we cannot stop you. But then stop lying to us, everyone can take their gloves off and get it all sorted.
by laugh at the dying Wednesday June 18, 2003 at 08:20 AM:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Let's hear what the poor "lad" (short for "laughing at the dying") has to say again:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Let's try that one more time to see if we heard the poor "lad" correctly:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
One *final* time... Let's see how big a *FFFOOOLLL* the poor "lad" is:
"THE U.S. SUPPORTS *EVERY* COUNTRY IN THE WORLD"
YYYEP...!!! He's still on *CRACK*!!!
Now that we've rubbed "lad"'s nose in his own shit good and well...
Let me repeat: And you--"lad"--have the *nerve* to call angie (or anyone else) a fool...!?
Now, before "lad", with his feeble 'intelligence', responded to a few **SELECTIVE** countries that he thought he had a chance on, let's look at my original list to see what countries he *IGNORED*!!
This is the logical fallacy of "lad" selecting only those countries that he *thought* could support his *IDIOTIC* claim and conveniently *IGNORING* those that *DON'T*. But, you see, if I can name just *ONE* country that the U.S. does *NOT* support, then that logically *FALSIFIES* "lad"'s *IDIOTIC* claim!
You should have left your lost argument alone, "lad". Now *I* --or rather *YOU* -- get to make a *FOOL* of *YOURSELF* ***AGAIN***!!!
FROM MY ORIGINAL LIST:
Did the U.S. support all those democratic govts in the 3rd World that it has overthrown?
In the Middle East, did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Mossadeq in Iran that the U.S. overthrew in 1953?
Does the U.S. support Castro's govt in Cuba? Or has it been trying to economically destroy (or support Miami Cuban exiles' invasion, once, or terrorism in) it for the last 40+ years?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Salvador Allende in Chile, which a U.S.-led coup overthrew on SEPT 11, 1973, LEADING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 30,000 PEOPLE!! ?-- A DATE WHERE CHILEANS ALSO COMMEMORATE THEIR LOST LIVES.
Does the U.S. support the democratic govt of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela whose attempted anti-democratic coup the U.S. (im)morally supported?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Lamumba, which it overthrew, in the Congo? -- or the decades-long brutal dictatorship that followed.
Did the U.S. support North Vietnam or the democratic elections that were supposed to happen during the dictatorial Diem regime in South Vietnam?
Does the U.S. support Algeria?
Did the U.S. support democracy in Angola? (WHO, INCIDENTALLY, WITH CUBA'S HELP, DEFEATED THE APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICAN ARMY IN ANGOLA.)
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Nicaragua, when it illegally mined its harbor -- and subsequently lost in the World Court, when the Nicaraguans sued there?
Did the U.S. support East Timor when genocide was being committed in it by Indonesia? (INDONESIA--WHO THE U.S. ALLIED ITSELF TO, EVEN DURING INDONESIA'S GENOCIDE IN EAST TIMOR!)
Let me throw another one in that I neglected to mention before (even though we won't hold "lad" responsible for countering this one, since it was not in his original homework question):
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala, which the U.S. overthrew?
Alas..., so many democratic govts, so little time for the U.S. to overthrow!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, let's see the ones the *IDIOT* "lad" didn't ignore:
Does the U.S. support Kaddafi's Libya?
**OOOPS!** POOR "lad" ALREADY *ADMITS* THAT THE U.S. DOESN'T SUPPORT LIBYA!!
SO!! POOR "lad" HAS ALREADY CONCEDED AND ***LOST*** HIS ***IDIOTIC*** CLAIM!!!
Does the U.S. support North Korea?
***OOOPS, AGAIN*** !! **AND NOW** POOR "lad" ADMITS *TOO* THAT THE U.S. DOESN'T SUPPORT N. KOREA EITHER!!
SO!! POOR "lad" HAS ALREADY CONCEDED AND ***LOST*** HIS ***IDIOTIC*** CLAIM!!! **TWICE**!!
BUT! LET'S *CONTINUE* TO RUB HIS NOSE IN HIS OWN SHIT!!! ***JUST FOR FUN!!!*** :
Now, let's take IDIOT lad's China argument:
lad: "U.S. supports China with a huge trade deficit, yes. Do the words "Most favored nation status" mean anything to you?"
JA response: Trade with China is not “support.” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too. That’s an *IDIOTIC* (oh, how I *love* typing that word about "lad"!) definition of "support", but to be expected from someone like him.
Next!:
lad: "U.S. supported N. Korea with free aid ***UNTIL*** they came public with their nuclear weapons program. We are still offering aid in negotiations to halt that program."
JA respone: Ooops! There's that operative word: ***UNTIL*** ! That means the U.S. is *NOT* supporting North Korea, doesn't it?
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now. Anyway, the U.S. was, only VERY RECENTLY and VERY MINIMALLY --"UNTIL"..., as you say -- giving so-called "humanitarian aid" to try to gain/trade certain political *concessions*. And now, the U.S. is/was talking about *bombing* North Korea -- but Kim Jong-il said, "Brrring it onnn...!!", and the U.S. backed down.
Now, I give a couple of dollars to certain homeless women when I see them. This hardly counts as my "supporting" them--except for them to get a bite to eat (or to add to contributions from others for a meal/room somewhere) every now and then when I see them. And at least I don't expect anything in trade from them. (Otherwise, for all I know, they might be giving my contribution to some controlling, abusive man around the corner.)
Next!:
lad: [Are you sure it doesn't stand for "lazy and dum"?] "Libya? Settle the Pan Am case, and they're back in free trade with us."
JA response: Nope! Nothing going to Libya, so you had to resort to speculation about the future. Were we supporting Kaddafi when we tried to bomb and assassinate him and killed his wife(?) and children?
Next!:
Oh, I forgot there is *NO* more!
I notice you--lad--haven’t mentioned any of the other countries I listed. I wonder why...??? Could it be because they don’t support your argument?
Naaaaah... You wouldn’t be so **COWARDLY**--*TOO*--as to duck the issues, would you???
NOW, LET'S LET "lad" MAKE OF A *FOOL* OF HIMSELF SOMEMORE!
LET'S **RRREALLY(!)** RUB HIS NOSE IN IT! (THIS IS *SO* FUN!!):
lad: "Has the U.S. ever militarily intervened to establish democracy? Ask Germany and Japan."
WHOOPS!! HE'S *FAILED* ON READING COMPREHENSION!!! THE QUESTION *WAS*:
JA: "Has the U.S. *ever* in its entire history *ever* directly militarily intervened in *any* state in * IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD * for the purposes of establishing or supporting a democracy? If so, *NAME* one."
WWII GERMANY AND JAPAN * WERE **NOT** DEVELOPING COUNTRIES * -- THEY WERE ADVANCED, INDUSTRIAL NATIONS WITH A FULLY DEVELOPED MILITARY MACHINE !!
And the U.S. did **NOT** intervene in Germany or Japan for the **PURPOSE** of establishing a democracy. The U.S. went to war against Japan because Japan *ATTACKED* us. Did you ever hear about Pearl Harbor, "lad"??? The U.S. then declared war on Japan. Then Germany, Japan's ally, declared war on the U.S.! The U.S. fought with its primary allies Britain, the USSR, and the Free French resistance, de Gaulle. The U.S. didn't enter the war for over two years after it started! (Next you'll be saying that the U.S. fought Germany to free the Jews!)
And the only reason we supported the establishment of democracies in those countries afterwards was because the Cold War was beginning and both of those conquered but well-educated and industrialized countries were perfect recruiting grounds for communist support. We allowed democracy in order to undercut any pent-up resentment among the populace that could have resulted in Marxist activities. Also, the U.S. was rebuilding two of its, once, major trading partners. (That's what the Marshal Plan was all about too.)
Next!:
lad: "Ask Kosovo, Bosnia, Taiwan, S. Korea. Or was that about oil too?"
Hmmm.... Now, were any of *THOSE* countries on my list? -- or did the *IDIOT* (oh, l *love* typing that) "lad" *add* those countries. Trying to refute examples/arguments I did *NOT* make is called *A LOGICAL FALLACY* laddie! But then you do not know what *logic* is, so how could you know what a *fallacy* is, laddie?
LET'S **RRREALLY(!)** RUB HIS NOSE IN SOME **MORE** OF HIS OWN SHIT!! (THIS IS *SO* FUN!):
lad: "South Korea"
JA response: The U.S. *didn't* support democracy in South Korea--an innocent victim of Japan. The U.S. offered to divided Korea with the USSR and installed and supported a, nominal, *40*-year dictatorship in South Korea! Syngman Rhee was the first and most famous dictator supported by the U.S., who had murdered his rivals and presided over virtual genocide in certain parts of the country (such as the Cheju Island Massacre and the Kwangju Massacre). Later, the country was run by a series of military strongmen who slaughtered thousands -- again, all with the support of the U.S.. During all this time, the Korean military was under the *direct* operational control of the U.S. govt. The South Korean military could move no significant troops without U.S. approval. It was only after the population rose up during the mid-80’s, led by the university students, and **FORCED** a change to democracy, that the country became democratic -- a democratic change that was achieved * WITH NO HELP WHATSOEVER FROM THE U.S. *, which had in fact propped up the military regimes. SO, *NOW*, WHAT YOU GOT TA SAY...???
lad: "Taiwan"
JA response: And ***WHEN(?)***, exactly, did the U.S. militarily intervene in Taiwan??? Which, by the way, was a repressive dictatorship until the 1980’s. (We protected Taiwan, but only because it was useful as a threat against a rival -- China.) NOW, DON’T SLITHER AWAY! ***ANSWER*** THE QUESTION !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOW, SO YOU DON'T ***SLITHER*** AWAY FROM THE ***QUESTION***, I ASK YOU ***AGAIN***: ***WHEN***, EXACTLY, DID THE U.S. INTERVENE MILITARILY IN TAIWAN ?????
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
lad: "Kosovo, Bosnia...Or was that about oil too?"
JA response: As for Kosovo and the rest of the Balkans, guess where ****OIL***pipelines to Europe travel through?
Afghanistan (didn't you forget to mention this?)
A * model of democracy * after how long since the U.S. bombed that country??? And the U.S. is still paying off warlords not to kill our handpicked puppet, who controls hardly more than Kabul. And women there are no more meaningfully free than they were before. The U.S. hasn't even *begun* to rebuild the country.
Iraq:
What do you think the U.S. will say if the Iraqis refuse to let the U.S. impose its puppet regime, and if the Iraqis *democratically* say -- in a democratic govt of their *own* choosing -- "No, we want the U.S. out; and we want the U.S. to stop confiscating our oil and giving contracts to American oil, and other, corporations. *We* will decide who gets contracts to [supposedly] rebuild our country. In fact, *we* decide what we *want* rebuilt."
laddie: "The U.S. has been the only superpower since 1989. Is there more or less individual freedom in the world since then?"
JA response: Is there more or less freedom in the world since 1989? Well, I’d say I had a *lot* more constitutional rights before, than now! Have you heard about the so-called "Patriot Act"??? And now Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft et al want to pass "Patriot Act II"!! Search and seizure rights have been eroded. The govt can search your home without even telling you. The govt can listen in to your private conversations with your attorney. The govt can have secret charges that you can't see and try you in secret courts. People can be whisked away by federal agents without notice and "disappeared", like in Pinochet's Chile. The govt disrupts peaceful demonstrations in places like NYC. You can even have your American citizenship revoked by the govt. Over 1,000 Arab/Muslim immigrants have been detained -- without a *SINGLE* connection to terrorism having been established. This is just the shortest list of rights we no longer have. Amnesty Int'l just released a report heavily criticizing the U.S.. Nelson Mandela said that the U.S. is a threat to world peace.
NOW, HAVE OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES BEEN *INCREASED* OR *DECREASED* SINCE 9-11???
The U.S. went around the world strong-arming or bribing every weak country to support it in the war against Iraq. Is *that* "democracy" in action? And at the rate things are going -- with the U.S. believing it has to answer to no one in the world -- unless the U.S. is stopped or impeded, there will be a lot less freedom around the entire world as the New World Order kicks into high gear.
HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR NOSE RUBBED IN YOUR OWN SHIT !?
lad: "Stop smoking that indymedia propaganda."
GET OFF THE PIPE !!
ANYTIME YOU EVEN *THINK* YOU CAN BEAT ME IN AN ARGUMENT "laddie", YOU BETTER WAKE YO' ASS UP AND **APOLOGIZE** -- OR YOU'LL GET YET **ANOTHER** HEAD WHOOPIN'!!!
NOW..., WHAT *YOU* GOT TA SAY? -- ***FOOOLLL*!!!
(After *that* whoopin' -- and embarrassment -- you're going to have to come up with a new moniker? Come back ***anytime*** for another ass whoopin' !!! )
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Let's hear what the poor "lad" (short for "laughing at the dying") has to say again:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
Let's try that one more time to see if we heard the poor "lad" correctly:
"The U.S. supports *every* country in the world..."
One *final* time... Let's see how big a *FFFOOOLLL* the poor "lad" is:
"THE U.S. SUPPORTS *EVERY* COUNTRY IN THE WORLD"
YYYEP...!!! He's still on *CRACK*!!!
Now that we've rubbed "lad"'s nose in his own shit good and well...
Let me repeat: And you--"lad"--have the *nerve* to call angie (or anyone else) a fool...!?
Now, before "lad", with his feeble 'intelligence', responded to a few **SELECTIVE** countries that he thought he had a chance on, let's look at my original list to see what countries he *IGNORED*!!
This is the logical fallacy of "lad" selecting only those countries that he *thought* could support his *IDIOTIC* claim and conveniently *IGNORING* those that *DON'T*. But, you see, if I can name just *ONE* country that the U.S. does *NOT* support, then that logically *FALSIFIES* "lad"'s *IDIOTIC* claim!
You should have left your lost argument alone, "lad". Now *I* --or rather *YOU* -- get to make a *FOOL* of *YOURSELF* ***AGAIN***!!!
FROM MY ORIGINAL LIST:
Did the U.S. support all those democratic govts in the 3rd World that it has overthrown?
In the Middle East, did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Mossadeq in Iran that the U.S. overthrew in 1953?
Does the U.S. support Castro's govt in Cuba? Or has it been trying to economically destroy (or support Miami Cuban exiles' invasion, once, or terrorism in) it for the last 40+ years?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Salvador Allende in Chile, which a U.S.-led coup overthrew on SEPT 11, 1973, LEADING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 30,000 PEOPLE!! ?-- A DATE WHERE CHILEANS ALSO COMMEMORATE THEIR LOST LIVES.
Does the U.S. support the democratic govt of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela whose attempted anti-democratic coup the U.S. (im)morally supported?
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Lamumba, which it overthrew, in the Congo? -- or the decades-long brutal dictatorship that followed.
Did the U.S. support North Vietnam or the democratic elections that were supposed to happen during the dictatorial Diem regime in South Vietnam?
Does the U.S. support Algeria?
Did the U.S. support democracy in Angola? (WHO, INCIDENTALLY, WITH CUBA'S HELP, DEFEATED THE APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICAN ARMY IN ANGOLA.)
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Nicaragua, when it illegally mined its harbor -- and subsequently lost in the World Court, when the Nicaraguans sued there?
Did the U.S. support East Timor when genocide was being committed in it by Indonesia? (INDONESIA--WHO THE U.S. ALLIED ITSELF TO, EVEN DURING INDONESIA'S GENOCIDE IN EAST TIMOR!)
Let me throw another one in that I neglected to mention before (even though we won't hold "lad" responsible for countering this one, since it was not in his original homework question):
Did the U.S. support the democratic govt of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala, which the U.S. overthrew?
Alas..., so many democratic govts, so little time for the U.S. to overthrow!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, let's see the ones the *IDIOT* "lad" didn't ignore:
Does the U.S. support Kaddafi's Libya?
**OOOPS!** POOR "lad" ALREADY *ADMITS* THAT THE U.S. DOESN'T SUPPORT LIBYA!!
SO!! POOR "lad" HAS ALREADY CONCEDED AND ***LOST*** HIS ***IDIOTIC*** CLAIM!!!
Does the U.S. support North Korea?
***OOOPS, AGAIN*** !! **AND NOW** POOR "lad" ADMITS *TOO* THAT THE U.S. DOESN'T SUPPORT N. KOREA EITHER!!
SO!! POOR "lad" HAS ALREADY CONCEDED AND ***LOST*** HIS ***IDIOTIC*** CLAIM!!! **TWICE**!!
BUT! LET'S *CONTINUE* TO RUB HIS NOSE IN HIS OWN SHIT!!! ***JUST FOR FUN!!!*** :
Now, let's take IDIOT lad's China argument:
lad: "U.S. supports China with a huge trade deficit, yes. Do the words "Most favored nation status" mean anything to you?"
JA response: Trade with China is not “support.” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too. That’s an *IDIOTIC* (oh, how I *love* typing that word about "lad"!) definition of "support", but to be expected from someone like him.
Next!:
lad: "U.S. supported N. Korea with free aid ***UNTIL*** they came public with their nuclear weapons program. We are still offering aid in negotiations to halt that program."
JA respone: Ooops! There's that operative word: ***UNTIL*** ! That means the U.S. is *NOT* supporting North Korea, doesn't it?
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now. Anyway, the U.S. was, only VERY RECENTLY and VERY MINIMALLY --"UNTIL"..., as you say -- giving so-called "humanitarian aid" to try to gain/trade certain political *concessions*. And now, the U.S. is/was talking about *bombing* North Korea -- but Kim Jong-il said, "Brrring it onnn...!!", and the U.S. backed down.
Now, I give a couple of dollars to certain homeless women when I see them. This hardly counts as my "supporting" them--except for them to get a bite to eat (or to add to contributions from others for a meal/room somewhere) every now and then when I see them. And at least I don't expect anything in trade from them. (Otherwise, for all I know, they might be giving my contribution to some controlling, abusive man around the corner.)
Next!:
lad: [Are you sure it doesn't stand for "lazy and dum"?] "Libya? Settle the Pan Am case, and they're back in free trade with us."
JA response: Nope! Nothing going to Libya, so you had to resort to speculation about the future. Were we supporting Kaddafi when we tried to bomb and assassinate him and killed his wife(?) and children?
Next!:
Oh, I forgot there is *NO* more!
I notice you--lad--haven’t mentioned any of the other countries I listed. I wonder why...??? Could it be because they don’t support your argument?
Naaaaah... You wouldn’t be so **COWARDLY**--*TOO*--as to duck the issues, would you???
NOW, LET'S LET "lad" MAKE OF A *FOOL* OF HIMSELF SOMEMORE!
LET'S **RRREALLY(!)** RUB HIS NOSE IN IT! (THIS IS *SO* FUN!!):
lad: "Has the U.S. ever militarily intervened to establish democracy? Ask Germany and Japan."
WHOOPS!! HE'S *FAILED* ON READING COMPREHENSION!!! THE QUESTION *WAS*:
JA: "Has the U.S. *ever* in its entire history *ever* directly militarily intervened in *any* state in * IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD * for the purposes of establishing or supporting a democracy? If so, *NAME* one."
WWII GERMANY AND JAPAN * WERE **NOT** DEVELOPING COUNTRIES * -- THEY WERE ADVANCED, INDUSTRIAL NATIONS WITH A FULLY DEVELOPED MILITARY MACHINE !!
And the U.S. did **NOT** intervene in Germany or Japan for the **PURPOSE** of establishing a democracy. The U.S. went to war against Japan because Japan *ATTACKED* us. Did you ever hear about Pearl Harbor, "lad"??? The U.S. then declared war on Japan. Then Germany, Japan's ally, declared war on the U.S.! The U.S. fought with its primary allies Britain, the USSR, and the Free French resistance, de Gaulle. The U.S. didn't enter the war for over two years after it started! (Next you'll be saying that the U.S. fought Germany to free the Jews!)
And the only reason we supported the establishment of democracies in those countries afterwards was because the Cold War was beginning and both of those conquered but well-educated and industrialized countries were perfect recruiting grounds for communist support. We allowed democracy in order to undercut any pent-up resentment among the populace that could have resulted in Marxist activities. Also, the U.S. was rebuilding two of its, once, major trading partners. (That's what the Marshal Plan was all about too.)
Next!:
lad: "Ask Kosovo, Bosnia, Taiwan, S. Korea. Or was that about oil too?"
Hmmm.... Now, were any of *THOSE* countries on my list? -- or did the *IDIOT* (oh, l *love* typing that) "lad" *add* those countries. Trying to refute examples/arguments I did *NOT* make is called *A LOGICAL FALLACY* laddie! But then you do not know what *logic* is, so how could you know what a *fallacy* is, laddie?
LET'S **RRREALLY(!)** RUB HIS NOSE IN SOME **MORE** OF HIS OWN SHIT!! (THIS IS *SO* FUN!):
lad: "South Korea"
JA response: The U.S. *didn't* support democracy in South Korea--an innocent victim of Japan. The U.S. offered to divided Korea with the USSR and installed and supported a, nominal, *40*-year dictatorship in South Korea! Syngman Rhee was the first and most famous dictator supported by the U.S., who had murdered his rivals and presided over virtual genocide in certain parts of the country (such as the Cheju Island Massacre and the Kwangju Massacre). Later, the country was run by a series of military strongmen who slaughtered thousands -- again, all with the support of the U.S.. During all this time, the Korean military was under the *direct* operational control of the U.S. govt. The South Korean military could move no significant troops without U.S. approval. It was only after the population rose up during the mid-80’s, led by the university students, and **FORCED** a change to democracy, that the country became democratic -- a democratic change that was achieved * WITH NO HELP WHATSOEVER FROM THE U.S. *, which had in fact propped up the military regimes. SO, *NOW*, WHAT YOU GOT TA SAY...???
lad: "Taiwan"
JA response: And ***WHEN(?)***, exactly, did the U.S. militarily intervene in Taiwan??? Which, by the way, was a repressive dictatorship until the 1980’s. (We protected Taiwan, but only because it was useful as a threat against a rival -- China.) NOW, DON’T SLITHER AWAY! ***ANSWER*** THE QUESTION !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOW, SO YOU DON'T ***SLITHER*** AWAY FROM THE ***QUESTION***, I ASK YOU ***AGAIN***: ***WHEN***, EXACTLY, DID THE U.S. INTERVENE MILITARILY IN TAIWAN ?????
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
lad: "Kosovo, Bosnia...Or was that about oil too?"
JA response: As for Kosovo and the rest of the Balkans, guess where ****OIL***pipelines to Europe travel through?
Afghanistan (didn't you forget to mention this?)
A * model of democracy * after how long since the U.S. bombed that country??? And the U.S. is still paying off warlords not to kill our handpicked puppet, who controls hardly more than Kabul. And women there are no more meaningfully free than they were before. The U.S. hasn't even *begun* to rebuild the country.
Iraq:
What do you think the U.S. will say if the Iraqis refuse to let the U.S. impose its puppet regime, and if the Iraqis *democratically* say -- in a democratic govt of their *own* choosing -- "No, we want the U.S. out; and we want the U.S. to stop confiscating our oil and giving contracts to American oil, and other, corporations. *We* will decide who gets contracts to [supposedly] rebuild our country. In fact, *we* decide what we *want* rebuilt."
laddie: "The U.S. has been the only superpower since 1989. Is there more or less individual freedom in the world since then?"
JA response: Is there more or less freedom in the world since 1989? Well, I’d say I had a *lot* more constitutional rights before, than now! Have you heard about the so-called "Patriot Act"??? And now Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft et al want to pass "Patriot Act II"!! Search and seizure rights have been eroded. The govt can search your home without even telling you. The govt can listen in to your private conversations with your attorney. The govt can have secret charges that you can't see and try you in secret courts. People can be whisked away by federal agents without notice and "disappeared", like in Pinochet's Chile. The govt disrupts peaceful demonstrations in places like NYC. You can even have your American citizenship revoked by the govt. Over 1,000 Arab/Muslim immigrants have been detained -- without a *SINGLE* connection to terrorism having been established. This is just the shortest list of rights we no longer have. Amnesty Int'l just released a report heavily criticizing the U.S.. Nelson Mandela said that the U.S. is a threat to world peace.
NOW, HAVE OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES BEEN *INCREASED* OR *DECREASED* SINCE 9-11???
The U.S. went around the world strong-arming or bribing every weak country to support it in the war against Iraq. Is *that* "democracy" in action? And at the rate things are going -- with the U.S. believing it has to answer to no one in the world -- unless the U.S. is stopped or impeded, there will be a lot less freedom around the entire world as the New World Order kicks into high gear.
HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR NOSE RUBBED IN YOUR OWN SHIT !?
lad: "Stop smoking that indymedia propaganda."
GET OFF THE PIPE !!
ANYTIME YOU EVEN *THINK* YOU CAN BEAT ME IN AN ARGUMENT "laddie", YOU BETTER WAKE YO' ASS UP AND **APOLOGIZE** -- OR YOU'LL GET YET **ANOTHER** HEAD WHOOPIN'!!!
NOW..., WHAT *YOU* GOT TA SAY? -- ***FOOOLLL*!!!
(After *that* whoopin' -- and embarrassment -- you're going to have to come up with a new moniker? Come back ***anytime*** for another ass whoopin' !!! )
JA: "Yeah! I've got a **BIG** picture of him on my living room wall! "
Scottie -your sarcasm is too close to reality
JA: I'm *telling* you, it's *TRUE*!! Hahaha!
S. -the gulf of token... Personaly I doubt it was a evil plot like you think
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today. *LEARN* something besides propaganda lines. This point is hardly even debated/argued anymore in the U.S. today. It's pretty much settled knowledge.
S. -- your argument is irrelevant we are talking about how you start the war. not the war itself.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not. It's an interesting analysis, but I don't especially care what the conclusion is. It is undeniable that the U.S. had every reason to expect Japan to attack it somewhere once the U.S. cut off oil to Japan. Now, the U.S. couldn't readily go to war against an advanced industrialized nation (with the huge loss of American life and the great sacrifices of war) if a couple of light U.S. ships were attacked, having (hypothetically) sailed into Japanese waters in the first place. But, the U.S. *could* go to war, that the U.S. thought would be a walk in the park, against a tiny little country, over a minor/questionable incident.
But let's see what the Project for a New American Century said (look it up on the net): it said (paraphrased) that for the U.S. to engage in wars for military domination of the world and loss of civil liberties at home "a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required. LOOK IT UP!!!
Now, *MY* point was to respond to your issue of the SMARTS of [arrogant] people in govt--especially when it comes to issues of ARROGANT, RACIST, MILITARIST WARS. I was responding to what Vietnam hugely cost us and the 'brilliant' men (with guided missiles and misguided minds, as MLK said) who brought us the Vietnam war.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response from the Palestinians when he went up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray'. He promised that what turned out to be the 2nd Intifada would be over in a week or two -- a month tops! He keeps promising every month that he will crush the 2nd Intifada in *another* month. And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
Now--at the beginning of the 2nd Intifada--I asked Barbara Lubin--the anti-Zionist Jewish-American director of The Middle East Children's Alliance--just *HOW LONG* it would take Israelis to realize that Sharon was not going to bring peace and was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone--AND HOW MANY ISRAELIS WILL *DIE* BEFORE ISRAELIS (SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--AND THEY KNOW THAT) REALIZE THAT SHARON'S PLAN WILL *NOT* WORK!? YOU ISRAELIS *STILL* HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT. YOU ISRAELIS KEEP THINKING "JUST *ONE* MORE WEEK AND THOSE PALESTINIANS WILL COME CRAWLING AND BEGGING TO US." HAS IT HAPPENED?
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY* FOR ALL PEOPLE IN PALESTINE !!! IN THE MEANTIME, YOU (ISRAEL) ONCE SUPPORTED THE VERY ORGANIZATION THAT IS CARRYING OUT SO-CALLED SUICIDE/MARTYR BOMBINGS. NOW, HOW *STOOOPID* ARE ALL YOU ISRAELIS !!!
NOW, I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE VIETNAM WAR, SO LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING. THE LEADER OF NORTH VIETNAM, HO CHI MINH, SAID THAT HE *KNEW* THAT THE U.S. WAS A MILITARILY MUCH MORE POWERFUL COUNTRY, SO THAT HE KNEW THAT MANY MORE VIETNAMESE WOULD HAVE TO DIE THAN AMERICANS IN THE LIBERATION OF VIETNAM. HE SAID THAT HE *KNEW* THAT WHITE-AMERICANS VALUED THEIR LIVES MORE THAN THEY EVER VALUED VIETNAMESE LIVES. SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
THE PALESTINIANS KNOW THAT ISRAEL WILL KILL MORE OF THEM, BUT THEY ARE BETTING THAT ONE DAY ISRAELIS WILL TIRE OF LOSING THEIR "MORE VALUABLE" LIVES -- JUST AS ISRAELIS TIRED OF IT IN LEBANON. ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT ISRAEL MOVED ITS CAPITAL TO JERUSALEM -- AND NOW JERUSALEM IS THE LAST PLACE MOST ISRAELIS (INSIDE ISRAEL) WOULD WANT TO BE. IRONIC, THAT JERUSALEM IS PROBABLY THE MOST TENSE CITY IN ISRAEL. HOW ENJOYABLE IS JERUSALEM *NOW*, YOUR CAPITAL CITY? YYYEP! THAT WAS REALLY INTELLIGENT PLANNING.
NOW -- *HERE'S* THE I.Q. TEST -- IF YOU ISRAELIS COULD TURN BACK THE CALENDAR, WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE OR WHATEVER WAS IN HIS UNDERSIZED BRAIN AND HIS OVERSIZED BODY?
S. -- Are you saying that 9-11 helped the economy?
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said. Go back and *READ* it.
JA: "A UNIFIED SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OR GENDER."
S. - Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
JA: Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious -- and I told you that such lines of yours *BORRRE* me -- I WILL *TAKE LEAVE* of you.
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor. One day there will be a geopolitical shift regarding Israel. And Zionists will not have much of the good will or political sympathy of the world's people.
If Zionist Jews longed for "their land" after 2,000 years, how do you think Palestinians will long for their land after only 50 years -- or 30 years -- or 10 years -- or *last* year -- whenever their land, collectively and individually, that they can specifically identify (unlike Jews from 2,000 years ago), was last taken?
Zionists are just replaying the old fallacious historical story and game of racial ethnic conquest and subjugation -- and expecting different results. Doing/Perpetuating the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the sign, as they say, of insanity. As I said before, you Israelis have tried everything but equality, democracy and dignity for all. That is the *best* security and the *best* way to social tranquility.
JA (repost) =" One by one, all the European powers and settlers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) in the 3rd World all *SWORE* that they would ***NEVER*** give in! [Apartheid whites even said that, unlike Israeli Jews, white South Africans had no American/Western suburbs to go back to.] Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. What does history **predict**? In the meantime, what you (Scottie) should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, * “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.” * "
Scottie -your sarcasm is too close to reality
JA: I'm *telling* you, it's *TRUE*!! Hahaha!
S. -the gulf of token... Personaly I doubt it was a evil plot like you think
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today. *LEARN* something besides propaganda lines. This point is hardly even debated/argued anymore in the U.S. today. It's pretty much settled knowledge.
S. -- your argument is irrelevant we are talking about how you start the war. not the war itself.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not. It's an interesting analysis, but I don't especially care what the conclusion is. It is undeniable that the U.S. had every reason to expect Japan to attack it somewhere once the U.S. cut off oil to Japan. Now, the U.S. couldn't readily go to war against an advanced industrialized nation (with the huge loss of American life and the great sacrifices of war) if a couple of light U.S. ships were attacked, having (hypothetically) sailed into Japanese waters in the first place. But, the U.S. *could* go to war, that the U.S. thought would be a walk in the park, against a tiny little country, over a minor/questionable incident.
But let's see what the Project for a New American Century said (look it up on the net): it said (paraphrased) that for the U.S. to engage in wars for military domination of the world and loss of civil liberties at home "a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required. LOOK IT UP!!!
Now, *MY* point was to respond to your issue of the SMARTS of [arrogant] people in govt--especially when it comes to issues of ARROGANT, RACIST, MILITARIST WARS. I was responding to what Vietnam hugely cost us and the 'brilliant' men (with guided missiles and misguided minds, as MLK said) who brought us the Vietnam war.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response from the Palestinians when he went up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray'. He promised that what turned out to be the 2nd Intifada would be over in a week or two -- a month tops! He keeps promising every month that he will crush the 2nd Intifada in *another* month. And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
Now--at the beginning of the 2nd Intifada--I asked Barbara Lubin--the anti-Zionist Jewish-American director of The Middle East Children's Alliance--just *HOW LONG* it would take Israelis to realize that Sharon was not going to bring peace and was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone--AND HOW MANY ISRAELIS WILL *DIE* BEFORE ISRAELIS (SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--AND THEY KNOW THAT) REALIZE THAT SHARON'S PLAN WILL *NOT* WORK!? YOU ISRAELIS *STILL* HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT. YOU ISRAELIS KEEP THINKING "JUST *ONE* MORE WEEK AND THOSE PALESTINIANS WILL COME CRAWLING AND BEGGING TO US." HAS IT HAPPENED?
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY* FOR ALL PEOPLE IN PALESTINE !!! IN THE MEANTIME, YOU (ISRAEL) ONCE SUPPORTED THE VERY ORGANIZATION THAT IS CARRYING OUT SO-CALLED SUICIDE/MARTYR BOMBINGS. NOW, HOW *STOOOPID* ARE ALL YOU ISRAELIS !!!
NOW, I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE VIETNAM WAR, SO LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING. THE LEADER OF NORTH VIETNAM, HO CHI MINH, SAID THAT HE *KNEW* THAT THE U.S. WAS A MILITARILY MUCH MORE POWERFUL COUNTRY, SO THAT HE KNEW THAT MANY MORE VIETNAMESE WOULD HAVE TO DIE THAN AMERICANS IN THE LIBERATION OF VIETNAM. HE SAID THAT HE *KNEW* THAT WHITE-AMERICANS VALUED THEIR LIVES MORE THAN THEY EVER VALUED VIETNAMESE LIVES. SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
THE PALESTINIANS KNOW THAT ISRAEL WILL KILL MORE OF THEM, BUT THEY ARE BETTING THAT ONE DAY ISRAELIS WILL TIRE OF LOSING THEIR "MORE VALUABLE" LIVES -- JUST AS ISRAELIS TIRED OF IT IN LEBANON. ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT ISRAEL MOVED ITS CAPITAL TO JERUSALEM -- AND NOW JERUSALEM IS THE LAST PLACE MOST ISRAELIS (INSIDE ISRAEL) WOULD WANT TO BE. IRONIC, THAT JERUSALEM IS PROBABLY THE MOST TENSE CITY IN ISRAEL. HOW ENJOYABLE IS JERUSALEM *NOW*, YOUR CAPITAL CITY? YYYEP! THAT WAS REALLY INTELLIGENT PLANNING.
NOW -- *HERE'S* THE I.Q. TEST -- IF YOU ISRAELIS COULD TURN BACK THE CALENDAR, WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE OR WHATEVER WAS IN HIS UNDERSIZED BRAIN AND HIS OVERSIZED BODY?
S. -- Are you saying that 9-11 helped the economy?
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said. Go back and *READ* it.
JA: "A UNIFIED SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OR GENDER."
S. - Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
JA: Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious -- and I told you that such lines of yours *BORRRE* me -- I WILL *TAKE LEAVE* of you.
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor. One day there will be a geopolitical shift regarding Israel. And Zionists will not have much of the good will or political sympathy of the world's people.
If Zionist Jews longed for "their land" after 2,000 years, how do you think Palestinians will long for their land after only 50 years -- or 30 years -- or 10 years -- or *last* year -- whenever their land, collectively and individually, that they can specifically identify (unlike Jews from 2,000 years ago), was last taken?
Zionists are just replaying the old fallacious historical story and game of racial ethnic conquest and subjugation -- and expecting different results. Doing/Perpetuating the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the sign, as they say, of insanity. As I said before, you Israelis have tried everything but equality, democracy and dignity for all. That is the *best* security and the *best* way to social tranquility.
JA (repost) =" One by one, all the European powers and settlers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) in the 3rd World all *SWORE* that they would ***NEVER*** give in! [Apartheid whites even said that, unlike Israeli Jews, white South Africans had no American/Western suburbs to go back to.] Israel is the last state of its kind in the world. What does history **predict**? In the meantime, what you (Scottie) should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, * “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.” * "
Is Scottie another one of our institutionalized right-wing friends who's got nothing better to do but say idiotic statements like "- I am sure it apppears that way to you because you are so 'anti israel'"?
I guess we're all hallucinating when we see that Israel - a state, not a 'terrorist,' or a 'terror organization,' but a state with a consulate in SF, with all the trappings of a civil government, etc. - is firing missiles into densely populated urban areas to 'assassinate' people?
I've sort of been wondering why most nations don't just fire missiles into neighborhoods that have gotten out of hand. How about East Oakland? Afterall, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too? Or maybe that town in Michigan where they're rioting - take them out with a couple of hits from an Apache. That'll solve things once and for all! I never knew a Democracy could be so flexible! It's great that Israel is out there making it alright to gun down kids who throw rocks, and to take out entire buildings with suspected 'terrorists.' Soon, it'll be coming to all "democracies,' maybe your neighborhood too, Scottie!
And if anyone didn't like it, and criticized America, we'd say they were just so 'anti-American' that it was obvious they would never listen to reason. Then blast them out of existance. Afterall, since laws don't matter anymore (they only apply to one side, you know), there'd be no problem.
I guess we're all hallucinating when we see that Israel - a state, not a 'terrorist,' or a 'terror organization,' but a state with a consulate in SF, with all the trappings of a civil government, etc. - is firing missiles into densely populated urban areas to 'assassinate' people?
I've sort of been wondering why most nations don't just fire missiles into neighborhoods that have gotten out of hand. How about East Oakland? Afterall, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too? Or maybe that town in Michigan where they're rioting - take them out with a couple of hits from an Apache. That'll solve things once and for all! I never knew a Democracy could be so flexible! It's great that Israel is out there making it alright to gun down kids who throw rocks, and to take out entire buildings with suspected 'terrorists.' Soon, it'll be coming to all "democracies,' maybe your neighborhood too, Scottie!
And if anyone didn't like it, and criticized America, we'd say they were just so 'anti-American' that it was obvious they would never listen to reason. Then blast them out of existance. Afterall, since laws don't matter anymore (they only apply to one side, you know), there'd be no problem.
RE: Scottie, a right-wing zionist
by fred Thursday June 19, 2003 at 08:49 AM .
EXCELLENT POST!
(I'm even saving it on my computer to share with and email to others!)
by fred Thursday June 19, 2003 at 08:49 AM .
EXCELLENT POST!
(I'm even saving it on my computer to share with and email to others!)
I've been reading your posts above to Scottie and "laugh at the dying". Excellent! Simply excellent!
And, Fred, you sure deserve the proverbial pat on the back! Wonderful piece! JA's not the only one who's saved it!
More when I get a moment. Cheers!
And, Fred, you sure deserve the proverbial pat on the back! Wonderful piece! JA's not the only one who's saved it!
More when I get a moment. Cheers!
"As long as hamas and islamic jihad and other sick groups continue to try to kill every israeli jew they can, israel will continue to attempt to get rid of members of those groups."
So tell me Fred, since about 50 people have died this year from gunshots in Oakland (in which 90% of the time the police say it's 'gang related'), shouldn't Oakland be also trying to 'get rid of those groups?' What's stopping the city from putting an end to that violence with . . . well, simply, more violence?
Is killing Israeli Jews different from killing African Americans in Oakland? Why should one type of killing mean that entire buildings can get blown up, that houses can get flattened, that famiy members to the 'criminal' can also be murdered (by accident, of course), while another type of killing is dealt with through a legal system? The killing in Oakland isn't getting any better, but more and more people are getting on board to try to stop it, community groups, victims families, churches.
What do you think Oaklanders would do if Jerry Brown decided that the way to stop the murders was to start killing entire families and knocking down their houses?
For one thing, Jerry wouldn't get relected. Oh, but that's right, the Palestinians don't have a say in electing Sharon, do they. SO I guess it would be more like Willie sending missiles from SF. Anyway, you get the point. Responding to violence with more violence may work sometimes, but it's not what a Democracy is about, and in the long run, it won't work unless you commit genocide. And then you can't really say you have a Democracy, then, can you.
So tell me Fred, since about 50 people have died this year from gunshots in Oakland (in which 90% of the time the police say it's 'gang related'), shouldn't Oakland be also trying to 'get rid of those groups?' What's stopping the city from putting an end to that violence with . . . well, simply, more violence?
Is killing Israeli Jews different from killing African Americans in Oakland? Why should one type of killing mean that entire buildings can get blown up, that houses can get flattened, that famiy members to the 'criminal' can also be murdered (by accident, of course), while another type of killing is dealt with through a legal system? The killing in Oakland isn't getting any better, but more and more people are getting on board to try to stop it, community groups, victims families, churches.
What do you think Oaklanders would do if Jerry Brown decided that the way to stop the murders was to start killing entire families and knocking down their houses?
For one thing, Jerry wouldn't get relected. Oh, but that's right, the Palestinians don't have a say in electing Sharon, do they. SO I guess it would be more like Willie sending missiles from SF. Anyway, you get the point. Responding to violence with more violence may work sometimes, but it's not what a Democracy is about, and in the long run, it won't work unless you commit genocide. And then you can't really say you have a Democracy, then, can you.
So tell me 'ugh.'
If the residence of Oakland fired assault rifles, rockets, and grenades at every policeman who tried to enter into the city, what would they do then?
Tanks and missiles would quickly become an option, that's what.
Despite what Angie says about the Palestinians being "Unarmed," Palestinian Gaza has more military-class assault rifles per capita than just about anywhere in the world.
Your comparison is idotic, at best.
Angie, it's disturbing to see you're keeping your spirits up in regards to this horrific subject.
Tanks and missiles would quickly become an option, that's what.
Despite what Angie says about the Palestinians being "Unarmed," Palestinian Gaza has more military-class assault rifles per capita than just about anywhere in the world.
Your comparison is idotic, at best.
Angie, it's disturbing to see you're keeping your spirits up in regards to this horrific subject.
A brief comment to say I've seen your post and duly noted same. When I have a free moment in the next day or so I will respond - or not. However, right now I must go back to work. Cheers, etc., etc.
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
Syria out of Lebanon
India out of Kashmir
Russia out of Chechnya
Russia out of Kuril Islands
Taiwan out of Chinese territory
Spain out of Basque
Turkey out of Cypress
Denmark out of Greenland
China out of Tibet
Georgia out of Abkhasia
Indonesia out of West Papua
England out of Northern Ireland
Congo out of Zaire
Syria out of Lebanon
India out of Kashmir
Russia out of Chechnya
Russia out of Kuril Islands
Taiwan out of Chinese territory
Spain out of Basque
Turkey out of Cypress
Denmark out of Greenland
China out of Tibet
Georgia out of Abkhasia
Indonesia out of West Papua
England out of Northern Ireland
Congo out of Zaire
Yo! "laughing at the dying"...!
You responded to *Fred*...!
Dont' you have *anything* to say to *me*?
Don't leave *me* out...!
(I'm surprised that "lad" has the nerve to show his moniker around here again. I guess that such stupidity ***CAN'T*** be embarrassed!)
You responded to *Fred*...!
Dont' you have *anything* to say to *me*?
Don't leave *me* out...!
(I'm surprised that "lad" has the nerve to show his moniker around here again. I guess that such stupidity ***CAN'T*** be embarrassed!)
All right Scottie, quick you had better devour this before it ends up being deleted.
My opinion on the so called Israelis is this: 1) They are a bunch of blood thirsty morally degraded people who are of Eastern European extraction. Very few of these people are actually semitic. Oh and by the way, they did not speak Hebrew 2000 years ago, they spoke Aramaic or Syriac. Put that in your pipe.2) These people are not the allies of the United States. They steal our technology(read Seeds of Fire and Gideons Spies by Gordon Thomas. They sell our technology to the Chinese . Does this sound like an ally to you? 3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948. Just do a google search it will turn up.4) They treat the Palestinians like they are sub-human. They take their land, bulldoze their homes, cut off their water, put up check points so they spend hours trying to go to work. The Palestinians are becoming the slaves of the Israelis. Where are the voices of the Jesse Jacksons? Jesse done got his money and he be fine!Ignorant and blind propagandized Americans wonder why the Palestinians decide to do a suicide bombing. Why did Geronimo jump of the cliff? These are desparate people who have lost everything. WHy not take some of the oppressors with them. They cerrtainly are not cowards.4) These Eastern European jews(it is a religion, not a race)just like Southern Baptists) treat the Palestinians like they claim the Germans treated them. Isn't it ironic though, the Germans let the International Red Cross in, while the blessed Israelis don't. Are you wounded from a gunshot from an IDF sniper? Tough crap, die Palestinian dog. 5) And to all of you intellectuals, did you know that the word Allah is Aramaic for God? What language did Christ speak? I will give you a hint, it starts with Ara and ends in maic. Not Hebrew, get it through your thick skulls of mush.Blind leaders of the blind.. No offense is aimed at you Scottie, but this is what I believe. I will be happy when judgement comes to these killers. They never change, just get worse . The lies always continue and gullible Americans devour the lies. You really can't separate the US from Israel. Take away the protection of the US. see how long the children of Baal survive.
Maybe I had too much of Peets coffee. Whew!
Slan Abhaile! Cheers
My opinion on the so called Israelis is this: 1) They are a bunch of blood thirsty morally degraded people who are of Eastern European extraction. Very few of these people are actually semitic. Oh and by the way, they did not speak Hebrew 2000 years ago, they spoke Aramaic or Syriac. Put that in your pipe.2) These people are not the allies of the United States. They steal our technology(read Seeds of Fire and Gideons Spies by Gordon Thomas. They sell our technology to the Chinese . Does this sound like an ally to you? 3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948. Just do a google search it will turn up.4) They treat the Palestinians like they are sub-human. They take their land, bulldoze their homes, cut off their water, put up check points so they spend hours trying to go to work. The Palestinians are becoming the slaves of the Israelis. Where are the voices of the Jesse Jacksons? Jesse done got his money and he be fine!Ignorant and blind propagandized Americans wonder why the Palestinians decide to do a suicide bombing. Why did Geronimo jump of the cliff? These are desparate people who have lost everything. WHy not take some of the oppressors with them. They cerrtainly are not cowards.4) These Eastern European jews(it is a religion, not a race)just like Southern Baptists) treat the Palestinians like they claim the Germans treated them. Isn't it ironic though, the Germans let the International Red Cross in, while the blessed Israelis don't. Are you wounded from a gunshot from an IDF sniper? Tough crap, die Palestinian dog. 5) And to all of you intellectuals, did you know that the word Allah is Aramaic for God? What language did Christ speak? I will give you a hint, it starts with Ara and ends in maic. Not Hebrew, get it through your thick skulls of mush.Blind leaders of the blind.. No offense is aimed at you Scottie, but this is what I believe. I will be happy when judgement comes to these killers. They never change, just get worse . The lies always continue and gullible Americans devour the lies. You really can't separate the US from Israel. Take away the protection of the US. see how long the children of Baal survive.
Maybe I had too much of Peets coffee. Whew!
Slan Abhaile! Cheers
Brian, did your parents ever teach you right from wrong? good and evil..... I guess not. What you just said was probably quoted from the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" But here is a suggestion. Since all Israelis are evil, do me a favor. Go on an ISM trip, go to Gaza, ask to get to a HAMAS leaders home. Once there, tell him that you are a Jew, from America, and you are gay. See how he will respond to you. IF u make it out alive, write and tell me all about it.
Don't waste your brain cells. You might need them for a good headache! None of that came out of the protocols of the learned elders of Zion.
Tom, is it right to be gay? You really asked Brian a rather absurd thing to do. Did your parents teach you good from evil? Is it good to be gay in a muslim environment? Come on, don't be rediculous.
"If the residence of Oakland fired assault rifles, rockets, and grenades at every policeman who tried to enter into the city, what would they do then?"
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police. Would Oaklanders fire weapons if, say, the army of a foreign nation who was occupying, knocking down houses, and murdering residents of the city, were to enter the city in full on military gear (after having destroyed the Oakland City Hall and effectively dismantled the police department itself)? Well, that's a good question. You don't really have a police force anymore, so do laws matter? And let's see, you've got around 60% unemployment. Wow, picture Oakland with 60% unemployment and a foreign country's army entering the city every week or so . . .
And notice, the US doesn't actually handle things that way (most of the time) on their own territory. Afterall, we need to maintain at least the illusion of a democracy.
"Tanks and missiles would quickly become an option, that's what."
Yes, like in Iraq? When you forcibly enter the space of another country, even an adjacent country, and take homes, occupy, take jobs, assassinate, fill with military, etc., then you have a huge potential for violence. Gee, wonder why the Iraqis are so angry? They must be crazy.
When Israel ends the occupation, then some semblance of peace can begin. To expect the party who is *being* occupied to *begin* the peace process, is ridiculous.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police. Would Oaklanders fire weapons if, say, the army of a foreign nation who was occupying, knocking down houses, and murdering residents of the city, were to enter the city in full on military gear (after having destroyed the Oakland City Hall and effectively dismantled the police department itself)? Well, that's a good question. You don't really have a police force anymore, so do laws matter? And let's see, you've got around 60% unemployment. Wow, picture Oakland with 60% unemployment and a foreign country's army entering the city every week or so . . .
And notice, the US doesn't actually handle things that way (most of the time) on their own territory. Afterall, we need to maintain at least the illusion of a democracy.
"Tanks and missiles would quickly become an option, that's what."
Yes, like in Iraq? When you forcibly enter the space of another country, even an adjacent country, and take homes, occupy, take jobs, assassinate, fill with military, etc., then you have a huge potential for violence. Gee, wonder why the Iraqis are so angry? They must be crazy.
When Israel ends the occupation, then some semblance of peace can begin. To expect the party who is *being* occupied to *begin* the peace process, is ridiculous.
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction and can use them with legal immunity and the Israelis are for all intents and purposes defenseless/
Scottie
"If you want to play might makes right thenI guess we cannot stop you. But then stop lying to us, everyone can take their gloves off and get it all sorted".
Scottie
"If you want to play might makes right thenI guess we cannot stop you. But then stop lying to us, everyone can take their gloves off and get it all sorted".
the protocols of the leders of zion, are an accurate description of everything that has taken place in the last century,,, to this current date.
None of you, I bet, read it... and you simply parrot what the ADL wishes for you to parrot...
The Protocols of Zion are not a "Jewish" conspiracy. The protoclos are a capitalist conspiracy victimising all of us, including Jews to achieve their sinister goal of world domination.
Hey, they conquered all of the continents except for the Middle east.
Read it before they succeed in conquering the far east too!
None of you, I bet, read it... and you simply parrot what the ADL wishes for you to parrot...
The Protocols of Zion are not a "Jewish" conspiracy. The protoclos are a capitalist conspiracy victimising all of us, including Jews to achieve their sinister goal of world domination.
Hey, they conquered all of the continents except for the Middle east.
Read it before they succeed in conquering the far east too!
here is a nice title to excite you guys
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
here is a nice title to excite you guys
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
here is a nice title to excite you guys
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
Anyway...
JA - If you define the words you will always find that whatever you say is true.
Since your whole post was an attempt to insult lad the most important thing to define is "idiot"
What is an "idiot and who do you put in that group?"
If you cannot define it then it is just a mindless ad hominem attack and therefore meaningless.
As to the rest of it your debate is over the definition of support.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=support
It is easy to see how trade might be considered support under
5) To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities. Even if they are paying for those things
Or maybe he is just allot more sophisticated than you and using the definition
8) To endure; tolerate.
I would go further to say that 8 are always the definition (the all inclusive definition) in the sense that inaction is an action in itself.
However lads main point was that you could pick a country you don’t like and you will almost certainly be able to also find a way in which the US has both supported it and opposed it (by trade or espionage or something)
Your snapshots of reality therefore do not tell the story.
Ill leave it up to lad to point out how you could be considered wrong on all of your points.
Except for a starter here…
"JA response: Trade with China is not “support."
” By that definition, *any* country, regardless of the type of govt, that trades with the U.S. is supporting us, too."
Yes trade is mutual support. You obviously did not do economics 101. But the particular point he was making was that they have "most favored nation status, not least favored nation. They are setting up more favorable than required terms.
So, the U.S. was *supporting* the strict communist govt of North Korea? I didn't realize the U.S. was supporting communism now.
- well “in a sense” yes they are. Just like your “in a sense” they opposed east Timor.
-
"this hardly counts as me supporting them"
by the same token then you don’t oppose Israel because you haven’t killed more than 100 of them. What you have done so far hard ly counts as “opposing them” eh?
RE Vietnam toinken
JA: Pick up a history book when you go out today.
- Read a book yourself. sure there MAY not have been any missiles but there was not a conspiracy either.
JA --Personally, I don't care whether the U.S. let Japan attack Pearl Harbor itself or not.
- then you are off topic. Also you started an argument where you admit you cannot sufficiently defend your own point of view.
"a Pearl Harbor" kind of incident would be required.
- that was stated in the context of "a matter of fact" because PNAC is not the government. If there was a great enemy (lets say for example If Satan became ruler of china or some other strange scenario) In order to convince members of government to take action the threat of war would need to be imminent. The point was the same point that osama and the nth Vietnamese leader of old said.- the USA has become soft and without a pearl harbour it will remain soft. That is your own point.
Well, Sharon ***provoked*** a response.
- you argue that Palestinians just do things mindlessly and that Israelis always plan. you are insulting the Palestinians. There are Palestinians who plan strategies just as much as the Israelis do. Worse yet you are saying that the Palestinians fell into a trap designed to make Sharon win the next election even though any old “idiot” (JA for example) can tell that it is obviously a strategy by Sharon to win the next election.
And you Israelis are still going along with this stupid, militant Jew.
- I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat.
was not going to end the 2nd Intifada through a brutal military force alone
- hmm no offense to Sharon but his "brutal military force" is pretty damn pathetic. It’s like poking a bear with a stick. basically he has to either do it properly or not at all. Im hoping not at all but if JA represents the average Palestinians perspective then who knows.
- Of course morally speaking the continuation of the problem must be worse than the “brutal military force itself”.
--SINCE YOU ALL OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE ABOUT PALESTINIAN LIVES--
"you are the one who wants the intefadah and think it "has to happen". I just want it to stop.
YOU ZIONISTS HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING BUT *EQUALITY* AND NON-SEMI-THEOCRATIC, SECULAR *DEMOCRACY* AND *DIGNITY*
-They have tried that to an extent and they are offering it. However if they do it like you want (with right of return etc) then they fear they will get Zimbabwe but worse. That is a reasonable fear.
SO, HE SAID THAT HE WAS PREPARED TO HAVE *15* VIETNAMESE KILLED FOR EVERY AMERICAN VIETNAMESE KILLED.
you aren’t dealing with Americans here .. you are dealing with Israeli Jews. They also ARE the majority in Israel now.
WOULD YOU LET MACHO SHARON SWAGGER UP TO AL-AQSA MOSQUE AGAIN TO PROVE THAT HE OWNED AND CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN PALESTINE
-stop him from going to a religious site? on what grounds? But if you mean for purely practical reasons then go back in time and have the package deal. You can go back and assassinate all the people who made a pest of themselves in the next few years including Arafat.
JA: I said what I said. And your squiggly fallacy won't change what I said.
- You said nonsense. so it is not surprising that people might want you to clarify it. The fact that you don’t implies that you cant.
JA: "Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious"
Scott - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? because you only have room in your head for Zionists and JA's?? “the one government” is the only solution to war. It is also the only fair solution to taxation trade and lots of other issues (otherwise there is a freeloader incentive). Surely you can appreciate that?
The geopolitical situation will not always be in Israel's favor.
- there are many ways they could resolve that. Surrender is only one.
What does history **predict**?
-A victory to the terrorists = independent state
-A victory to the government = a district within a state
if you only count states you will come to your conclusion if you count districts you will come to mine.
obvious examples are parts of china.. also how long will Taiwan be independent of china? I know a lot of taiwaneese who view being part of china as being a long term inevitability.
After, if Israel is a Democracy, and it can do it, why not us too?
We do. you know the police? those boys in blue? You’re not paying attention are you?
They enforce law and order. Just like the IDF tries to enforce law and order. The thing you have a problem with it is that it is Israeli law. Of course I could start complaining about having US law enforced upon me when I visit the USA.
Which brings me to the next point…..
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!!!
USA out of my front garden!
No more taxes for me!
(but I'll have the free trade agreement thanks)
Actually the Northern Ireland one is more like end the occupation of me and my two neighbors houses
sure they want to remain part of this country but damn it Im taking them with me!!!
3) We have given the chosen people of Israel 97$billion since 1948.
- I don’t have a big problem with the US if it wants to stop funding Israel (you might want a referendum on that though). personally I would be mighty reluctant to fund anyone with my money unless I was damn sure they were my allies
-
As to the rest.. yup they should probably delete it.
I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police.
- er is that because you are blind? Sometimes it is hamas (yes they fight sometimes) etc etc and the PLO isn’t exactly a model for good policing.
Mua
Scottie, lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction
1) Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" anyway.
2) Oh yes nuclear and bio and chemical war between two super powers ahah you really want that? If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself doesn’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
Scottie, suggested the following 'might is right' game:
"If you want to play might makes right then I guess we cannot stop you. But then stop lying to us, so everyone can take off their gloves and get it all sorted".
Until the following was suggested:
"lets play "might is right" on a condition that the Palestinian people are armed with the most advanced weapons of mass destruction and the Israelis are defenseless..."
To which he responded by saying:
"Fortunately no one cares about your conditions. and I DONT WANT to play "might is right" ...".
And then he added a veiled threat in the following "mutual assured destruction scenario"
Scottie:
If you start a nuclear war having 200 nukes yourself it don’t make you any less dead when their 200 nukes hit you.
So, you see that Scottie the Zionist is threatning a nuclear war if his chosen people were to be targetted.
His fanaticism is exposed for all to witness, and it is evident that the only threat to democracy, is the Zionist entity and its cronies.
Scottie, changed his mind about the 'might is right' plot, after one suggested he be unarmed and the other party be fully armed.
he withdrew his suggestion of using force and opted on diplomacy, as the right option.
He is the perfect example, why Israel must be de- armed, because unless they have the might they will not come to negotiating table "in good faith", and instead will remain a ticking bo...b to the entire continent.+
So, you see that Scottie the Zionist is threatning a nuclear war if his chosen people were to be targetted.
- they arent my chosen people (except in as far as the jews USED to be christians chosen people). The point about nuclear war is that turning a little war into a BIG war doesnt help anyone lest of all the people who are going to get killed by it.
take WWII for example... if we had stoped hitler at the rhine land would not germany and germans have been ALOT better off than having to face a full world war as well as the sort of ethnic cleansing that followed? inagine if germany had been nuclear and had a good delivery system (according to you that would have been "fairer"). some of you americans would have been eating radioactive waste.
Dont make an idiot of yourself.
"Scottie, changed his mind about the 'might is right' plot, after one suggested he be unarmed and the other party be fully armed."
NO I didnt. I dont want to do might is right but....
If you can disarm israel and rearm palistinians then you will have alot of credibility on the "might is right" scale. but you cant do it. so your are just making up a fantasy world. Infact If you COULD do that then I would take your threat seriously and deal with you differently. bust since you cant Ill just dismiss you as a moron.
- they arent my chosen people (except in as far as the jews USED to be christians chosen people). The point about nuclear war is that turning a little war into a BIG war doesnt help anyone lest of all the people who are going to get killed by it.
take WWII for example... if we had stoped hitler at the rhine land would not germany and germans have been ALOT better off than having to face a full world war as well as the sort of ethnic cleansing that followed? inagine if germany had been nuclear and had a good delivery system (according to you that would have been "fairer"). some of you americans would have been eating radioactive waste.
Dont make an idiot of yourself.
"Scottie, changed his mind about the 'might is right' plot, after one suggested he be unarmed and the other party be fully armed."
NO I didnt. I dont want to do might is right but....
If you can disarm israel and rearm palistinians then you will have alot of credibility on the "might is right" scale. but you cant do it. so your are just making up a fantasy world. Infact If you COULD do that then I would take your threat seriously and deal with you differently. bust since you cant Ill just dismiss you as a moron.
How Scottie works:
quote:
========================
However if they [Palestinians] do it like you
want (with right of return etc) then they fear....
========================
RE: Am I a zionist? prove it.
by Scottie Thursday June 19, 2003 at 07:05 PM .
JA Response:
Scottie, I already said that you *BORE* me.
Why would you want to continue to debate with someone you bore?
Why would you want to continue to debate with someone who has concluded that you are *NOT* to be taken intellectually serious?
Remember (Scottie, learn from history -- not to *repeat* it !!, June 19, 2003 at 08:06 AM; right before my final 4 paragraphs) ?:
" S. - Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
JA: Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious -- and I told you that such lines of yours *BORRRE* me -- I WILL *TAKE LEAVE* of you. "
Since you are apparently *NOT* a native speaker (or fluent speaker) of English, you are *NOT* qualified or competent to debate the English language or usage with me. So, I will *NOT* waste my time do so with you. But, let me give you *one* clue to take with you: all definitions are not equivalent or interchangeable. Different definitions for one word are usually *CONTEXTUAL*. "Sanction" can mean (a) official approval, or (b) official coercion -- one grants you permission and the other denies you permission for an action, almost opposites, depending on *CONTEXT*.
I will not debate English linguistics or economics with you, as you are not competent in either.
I will not debate the Gulf of Tonkin incident or the Vietnam War with you: if you want to stay *STUPID*, then *GO AHEAD*!!!
But, since I did *so* enjoy not only *calling*, but first *DEMONSTRATING* "laughing at the dying"'s, "lad"'s, *IDIOCY*, let me tell you what the word "IDIOT(IC)" means (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary):
- " a feebleminded person" -- that's *lad*!!
- "a silly or foolish person" -- that's *lad* too!! Syn. see *FOOL*
- "showing complete lack of thought or common sense" -- and *that's* *lad* too!!
Because -- as lad implicitly admitted himself -- anyone who would say that the U.S. supports *every* country is demonstrably, factually wrong to the point of being--what?--an *IDIOT* !!!
Now, if you (or lad) want to inflate the meaning of "support" to the point of logical and lexical meaninglessness, then go ahead -- but go do it with someone else. If lad wants to debate the English language with me, then maybe I might indulge his continuing *IDIOCY* just to make ***FUN(!!!)*** of him somemore [ ***HOW 'BOUT IT, LADDIE!? *** *SHOW SCOTTIE THAT YOU 'KNOW' WHAT YOU'RE TALKIN' ABOUT ! ], but *you* are just *NOT* qualified to debate English.
Your acontextual conflating of at least *EIGHT* different definitions of one word shows that you are *STUPID*:
- slow of mind -- that's *lad* !
- lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *lad* too !!
- lacking interest or point -- ALSO A DEFINITION OF *BORING*! -- that's *YOU*
Now, why don't you leave it to *lad* to see if he wants to take me on again -- and get *another* head whoopin'!
...
I'm not debating Pearl Harbor with you. Because you *TOO*, like lad, *FAIL* reading comprehension. Go back up this webpage and *SEE* what I wrote: the "conspiracy theory" on Pearl Harbor was *NOT* one I said was *mine* or one I said *I* ascribe too. It is a *factual* matter that the issue of the attack on Pearl Harbor is one that has been debated in the U.S. (you can probably find the history of the controversy on the internet -- do your own work). As for your point about someone being "smart" enough to avoid it, govts do make miscalculations.
Thru whatever means Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the success of it was apparently a miscalulation by the U.S.. But, Tojo/Yamamoto said that even with the brilliant success against Pearl Harbor the industrial might of the U.S. could recover from it. It was not Japan's expectation to conquer and occupy the nation itself of the U.S., but to knock out its Pacific fleet long enough for Japan to secure its conquests, and thus its empire, in the East Pacific rim nations.
Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss? --Of did you guys *intend* to provoke the 2nd Intifada, *unlike the first*, bringing a non-ending series of suicide bombings upon yourselves, demolish the economically important tourist industry, scare away foreign investments, ruin the economy, skyrocket unemployment, and generally make life in Israel either tense or emotionally miserable for the people who count (Jews)? THESE ARE *RHETORICAL QUESTIONS -- I'D BE PLEASED IF YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO RESPOND. THEIR MERIT STANDS FOR ITSELF.
Re: the PNAC and its stated 'need' for a "Pearl Harbor". Look up OPERATION NORTHWOODS on the internet. That might respond to *your* interpretation. Otherwise, I don't need *you* to make my point. I will make my *own* point.
" - you argue that ..."
Again, I don't need *you* to make my arguments (especially when you falsify them -- is that standard practice among Zionists in Israel?). I will make my *own* arguments.
By the way, it's *Sharon* that's the *INSULT* -- to Palestinians, to Israeli Jews, and to Israel. This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for??? You even insult *yourselves*!! You Israelis have a culturally self-hating *SOCIOPATH* for a leader who literally said that he doesn't care what the world thinks of Jews, who said that the answer to anti-Semitism is to be more like the Nazis and, also according to Israel Shamir, Sharon said that he (Sharon, paraphrased) "admires the Palestinians more than, generally, the Jews, because at least the Palestinians fight back, unlike the Nazi-era Jews, when they face ethnic cleansing or partial genocide"!! In *civilized* societies and among *morally evolved* people, someone like Sharon is called *A MADMAN*!!!
S. " - I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat. "
YOUR BRILLIANCE *UNDER*WHELMS ME !!!
S. " -stop him [Sharon] from going to a religious [Al-Aqsa] site? on what grounds? "
YOUR STUPIDITY *OVER*WHELMS ME !!!
S. " - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? "
Look above in my previous post and *READ* where I said I would take leave of you.
What does history **predict**?
S. " -A victory to the terrorists = independent state "
Well, that's how Zionists (terrorists: Begin, Shamir, etc.) incepted Israel.
Gandhi called Zionism in Palestine "a crime against humanity." Go look it up: "The Jews in Palestine, 1938".
Let's see what history predicts next.
(MLK said, "What goes around, comes around." So far he's right.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
JA (repost) =" ONE BY ONE, *ALL* the European powers and settlers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) in the 3rd World all *SWORE* that they would ***NEVER*** give in!!! [Apartheid whites even said that, unlike 'half' the Israeli Jews, white South Africans had no American/Western suburbs to go back to.] ISRAEL is THE *LAST* STATE OF ITS KIND in the world. WHAT DOES HISTORY **PREDICT** !? In the meantime, what you (Scottie) should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, * “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.” * "
by Scottie Thursday June 19, 2003 at 07:05 PM .
JA Response:
Scottie, I already said that you *BORE* me.
Why would you want to continue to debate with someone you bore?
Why would you want to continue to debate with someone who has concluded that you are *NOT* to be taken intellectually serious?
Remember (Scottie, learn from history -- not to *repeat* it !!, June 19, 2003 at 08:06 AM; right before my final 4 paragraphs) ?:
" S. - Sure I agree. I propose it extends from the tip of spain eastwards to canada. Deal?
JA: Since you are *NOT* intellectually serious -- and I told you that such lines of yours *BORRRE* me -- I WILL *TAKE LEAVE* of you. "
Since you are apparently *NOT* a native speaker (or fluent speaker) of English, you are *NOT* qualified or competent to debate the English language or usage with me. So, I will *NOT* waste my time do so with you. But, let me give you *one* clue to take with you: all definitions are not equivalent or interchangeable. Different definitions for one word are usually *CONTEXTUAL*. "Sanction" can mean (a) official approval, or (b) official coercion -- one grants you permission and the other denies you permission for an action, almost opposites, depending on *CONTEXT*.
I will not debate English linguistics or economics with you, as you are not competent in either.
I will not debate the Gulf of Tonkin incident or the Vietnam War with you: if you want to stay *STUPID*, then *GO AHEAD*!!!
But, since I did *so* enjoy not only *calling*, but first *DEMONSTRATING* "laughing at the dying"'s, "lad"'s, *IDIOCY*, let me tell you what the word "IDIOT(IC)" means (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary):
- " a feebleminded person" -- that's *lad*!!
- "a silly or foolish person" -- that's *lad* too!! Syn. see *FOOL*
- "showing complete lack of thought or common sense" -- and *that's* *lad* too!!
Because -- as lad implicitly admitted himself -- anyone who would say that the U.S. supports *every* country is demonstrably, factually wrong to the point of being--what?--an *IDIOT* !!!
Now, if you (or lad) want to inflate the meaning of "support" to the point of logical and lexical meaninglessness, then go ahead -- but go do it with someone else. If lad wants to debate the English language with me, then maybe I might indulge his continuing *IDIOCY* just to make ***FUN(!!!)*** of him somemore [ ***HOW 'BOUT IT, LADDIE!? *** *SHOW SCOTTIE THAT YOU 'KNOW' WHAT YOU'RE TALKIN' ABOUT ! ], but *you* are just *NOT* qualified to debate English.
Your acontextual conflating of at least *EIGHT* different definitions of one word shows that you are *STUPID*:
- slow of mind -- that's *lad* !
- lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *lad* too !!
- lacking interest or point -- ALSO A DEFINITION OF *BORING*! -- that's *YOU*
Now, why don't you leave it to *lad* to see if he wants to take me on again -- and get *another* head whoopin'!
...
I'm not debating Pearl Harbor with you. Because you *TOO*, like lad, *FAIL* reading comprehension. Go back up this webpage and *SEE* what I wrote: the "conspiracy theory" on Pearl Harbor was *NOT* one I said was *mine* or one I said *I* ascribe too. It is a *factual* matter that the issue of the attack on Pearl Harbor is one that has been debated in the U.S. (you can probably find the history of the controversy on the internet -- do your own work). As for your point about someone being "smart" enough to avoid it, govts do make miscalculations.
Thru whatever means Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the success of it was apparently a miscalulation by the U.S.. But, Tojo/Yamamoto said that even with the brilliant success against Pearl Harbor the industrial might of the U.S. could recover from it. It was not Japan's expectation to conquer and occupy the nation itself of the U.S., but to knock out its Pacific fleet long enough for Japan to secure its conquests, and thus its empire, in the East Pacific rim nations.
Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss? --Of did you guys *intend* to provoke the 2nd Intifada, *unlike the first*, bringing a non-ending series of suicide bombings upon yourselves, demolish the economically important tourist industry, scare away foreign investments, ruin the economy, skyrocket unemployment, and generally make life in Israel either tense or emotionally miserable for the people who count (Jews)? THESE ARE *RHETORICAL QUESTIONS -- I'D BE PLEASED IF YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO RESPOND. THEIR MERIT STANDS FOR ITSELF.
Re: the PNAC and its stated 'need' for a "Pearl Harbor". Look up OPERATION NORTHWOODS on the internet. That might respond to *your* interpretation. Otherwise, I don't need *you* to make my point. I will make my *own* point.
" - you argue that ..."
Again, I don't need *you* to make my arguments (especially when you falsify them -- is that standard practice among Zionists in Israel?). I will make my *own* arguments.
By the way, it's *Sharon* that's the *INSULT* -- to Palestinians, to Israeli Jews, and to Israel. This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for??? You even insult *yourselves*!! You Israelis have a culturally self-hating *SOCIOPATH* for a leader who literally said that he doesn't care what the world thinks of Jews, who said that the answer to anti-Semitism is to be more like the Nazis and, also according to Israel Shamir, Sharon said that he (Sharon, paraphrased) "admires the Palestinians more than, generally, the Jews, because at least the Palestinians fight back, unlike the Nazi-era Jews, when they face ethnic cleansing or partial genocide"!! In *civilized* societies and among *morally evolved* people, someone like Sharon is called *A MADMAN*!!!
S. " - I wouldn’t vote for Sharon if I were in Israel. Unless he was standing against someone like Arafat. "
YOUR BRILLIANCE *UNDER*WHELMS ME !!!
S. " -stop him [Sharon] from going to a religious [Al-Aqsa] site? on what grounds? "
YOUR STUPIDITY *OVER*WHELMS ME !!!
S. " - I am as serious as you are. Why do you not think so? "
Look above in my previous post and *READ* where I said I would take leave of you.
What does history **predict**?
S. " -A victory to the terrorists = independent state "
Well, that's how Zionists (terrorists: Begin, Shamir, etc.) incepted Israel.
Gandhi called Zionism in Palestine "a crime against humanity." Go look it up: "The Jews in Palestine, 1938".
Let's see what history predicts next.
(MLK said, "What goes around, comes around." So far he's right.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
JA (repost) =" ONE BY ONE, *ALL* the European powers and settlers (whether colonialists or settler-colonialists) in the 3rd World all *SWORE* that they would ***NEVER*** give in!!! [Apartheid whites even said that, unlike 'half' the Israeli Jews, white South Africans had no American/Western suburbs to go back to.] ISRAEL is THE *LAST* STATE OF ITS KIND in the world. WHAT DOES HISTORY **PREDICT** !? In the meantime, what you (Scottie) should have said, until a just settlement is reached, is, * “Don’t be surprised if more Israelis are killed.” * "
Just wanted to say, "Hi" !
Time for me to be off to sleep! I only have to work a half-day 'tomorrow', Fri, so I only have to be half-awake!
I hope that you have had a chance to listen to KPFA's "Flashpoints" program with Dennis Bernstein (an anti-Zionist Jewish-American whose relatives include some line of prominent rabbis).
Today, Dennis had Anne Gwynne--who I know from Berkeley--reporting again from the Occupied Territories. She's a *remarkably* *courageous* woman! She was even once shot in the leg by Israeli soldiers and she *still* stays there as an ISM (Palestinian Int'l Solidarity Movement) human rights worker. This grandmotherly woman in her 60's! She's *AMAZING*!!!
The ISM is having a "Freedom Summer" program in Palestine. This is patterned after the "Freedom Summer" bus riders (many of whom were white college students from the North) who went down to the South, during "Jim Crow" segregation, to help protect and register Blacks to vote. This was especially when it was dangerous for Blacks in small Southern towns to organize voter registrations themselves.
Can you imagine having to do this in a so-called "democracy"!? But, when you think about it, for the *majority* of the history of the United States, a so-called "DEMOCRACY", the *majority* of the people (women and Blacks, and of course Native Americans) who were living within the borders of the U.S. could *NOT* vote!! White women not until 1920/1922 and Blacks were not *guaranteed* the right to vote until 1965!!!
Don't forget, you can catch "Flashpoints" (the program of record on Palesine) Mon-Fri, 5:00-6:00pm (Berkeley time) on an audio link at http://www.kpfa.org or on a 24-hour audio archive at KPFA sister station's KFCF website at http://www.kfcf.org
I also look forward to letting you know the next time *I'm* interviewed on KPFA.
Also, you should go to http://www.blackcommentator.com and see the response to my Bell Hooks article in this week's issue (under EmailBox) by the editors. They really like my article! It *is* gratifying that they found it so socially useful!
One of these days we have to find a safe (from the Zionist crazies) way of trading email addresses, so that just in case I'm ever out to Montreal/Toronto or Newfoundland(!) -- or *wherever* -- we can meet and get together for dinner! --Or just in case you're ever in the San Francisco Bay Area, the most beautiful urban area in the U.S. (except maybe for Seattle, but we get better weather, in the East Bay, and it's more culturally diverse).
Take care!
Nighty-night!
Time for me to be off to sleep! I only have to work a half-day 'tomorrow', Fri, so I only have to be half-awake!
I hope that you have had a chance to listen to KPFA's "Flashpoints" program with Dennis Bernstein (an anti-Zionist Jewish-American whose relatives include some line of prominent rabbis).
Today, Dennis had Anne Gwynne--who I know from Berkeley--reporting again from the Occupied Territories. She's a *remarkably* *courageous* woman! She was even once shot in the leg by Israeli soldiers and she *still* stays there as an ISM (Palestinian Int'l Solidarity Movement) human rights worker. This grandmotherly woman in her 60's! She's *AMAZING*!!!
The ISM is having a "Freedom Summer" program in Palestine. This is patterned after the "Freedom Summer" bus riders (many of whom were white college students from the North) who went down to the South, during "Jim Crow" segregation, to help protect and register Blacks to vote. This was especially when it was dangerous for Blacks in small Southern towns to organize voter registrations themselves.
Can you imagine having to do this in a so-called "democracy"!? But, when you think about it, for the *majority* of the history of the United States, a so-called "DEMOCRACY", the *majority* of the people (women and Blacks, and of course Native Americans) who were living within the borders of the U.S. could *NOT* vote!! White women not until 1920/1922 and Blacks were not *guaranteed* the right to vote until 1965!!!
Don't forget, you can catch "Flashpoints" (the program of record on Palesine) Mon-Fri, 5:00-6:00pm (Berkeley time) on an audio link at http://www.kpfa.org or on a 24-hour audio archive at KPFA sister station's KFCF website at http://www.kfcf.org
I also look forward to letting you know the next time *I'm* interviewed on KPFA.
Also, you should go to http://www.blackcommentator.com and see the response to my Bell Hooks article in this week's issue (under EmailBox) by the editors. They really like my article! It *is* gratifying that they found it so socially useful!
One of these days we have to find a safe (from the Zionist crazies) way of trading email addresses, so that just in case I'm ever out to Montreal/Toronto or Newfoundland(!) -- or *wherever* -- we can meet and get together for dinner! --Or just in case you're ever in the San Francisco Bay Area, the most beautiful urban area in the U.S. (except maybe for Seattle, but we get better weather, in the East Bay, and it's more culturally diverse).
Take care!
Nighty-night!
" Theodore
"Implicit Racism of Scottie""
You have to be a little more explicit with your points because that one made no sense.
JA
"Scottie, I already said that you *BORE* me."
Then why ARE you debating?
Probably because your above quote is yet another in a series of lies.
"Since you are apparently *NOT* a native speaker (or fluent speaker) of English, you are *NOT* qualified or competent to debate the English language or usage with me. "
- Right is right no matter who says it. You seem to have a implicitly racist view of the world but since we are debating a word that "lad" used quite frankly he is the final authority on what it means and whether you were mistaken or not is YOUR problem.
"I will not debate English linguistics or economics with you, as you are not competent in either."
- Hmm not competent in economics ermm haha haha ermm.. OK you go on believing that. As to the lingusistics your debating with the dictionary not me.
- " a feebleminded person" - "a silly or foolish person" --
- "showing complete lack of thought or common sense"
None of that objectively defines who gets placed in that catagory so they dont justify you at all. do you want to say people who have IQ below 80? or people who make incorect statements more often than not or people who rely upon external support to continue living beyond the immediate future? There are lots you could go for but I think you have chosen "people I dont like"
give me a reason to believe otherwise if you want.
" the "conspiracy theory" on Pearl Harbor was *NOT* one I said was *mine* or one I said *I* ascribe too."
- You offered it up as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. The fact that you did not commit to it is comendible.
" As for your point about someone being "smart" enough to avoid it, govts do make miscalculations."
- I am jsut pointing out the contradiction in your own logic.
"Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss?"
- No he just wanted to win the election. and he did. No mis-calculation on his part. Nothing to do with me or most israelis.
"Again, I don't need *you* to make my arguments"
-Sometimes you make arguments with the here is my argument but I wont commit to it so I can duck in cover when it gets shot down" tactic. I imagine that would work well against you as you keep on shooting at facist zionist shadows while people are debating you.
"This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for???"
- everyone votes more right when the mosquito bites them. jews - palistinians americans. anyone.
" You even insult *yourselves*!! "
- II didnt, but I dont see why I would have a problem with that. Why do you find the concept strange I thought you hated your own government and maybe race.
"Look above in my previous post and *READ* where I said I would take leave of you."
- you said nonsense. Go to your room have a little think and come back when you have something serious to say.
"Gandhi called Zionism in Palestine "a crime against humanity." Go look it up: "The Jews in Palestine, 1938"."
- why would I care what he said? I used to flat with a indian guy who said "ghandi was an idiot he screwed india by struggling against the english."
Well thats what he thought.
His form of protest was better than that of arafat's though. I expect my flatmate would agree.
"Implicit Racism of Scottie""
You have to be a little more explicit with your points because that one made no sense.
JA
"Scottie, I already said that you *BORE* me."
Then why ARE you debating?
Probably because your above quote is yet another in a series of lies.
"Since you are apparently *NOT* a native speaker (or fluent speaker) of English, you are *NOT* qualified or competent to debate the English language or usage with me. "
- Right is right no matter who says it. You seem to have a implicitly racist view of the world but since we are debating a word that "lad" used quite frankly he is the final authority on what it means and whether you were mistaken or not is YOUR problem.
"I will not debate English linguistics or economics with you, as you are not competent in either."
- Hmm not competent in economics ermm haha haha ermm.. OK you go on believing that. As to the lingusistics your debating with the dictionary not me.
- " a feebleminded person" - "a silly or foolish person" --
- "showing complete lack of thought or common sense"
None of that objectively defines who gets placed in that catagory so they dont justify you at all. do you want to say people who have IQ below 80? or people who make incorect statements more often than not or people who rely upon external support to continue living beyond the immediate future? There are lots you could go for but I think you have chosen "people I dont like"
give me a reason to believe otherwise if you want.
" the "conspiracy theory" on Pearl Harbor was *NOT* one I said was *mine* or one I said *I* ascribe too."
- You offered it up as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. The fact that you did not commit to it is comendible.
" As for your point about someone being "smart" enough to avoid it, govts do make miscalculations."
- I am jsut pointing out the contradiction in your own logic.
"Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss?"
- No he just wanted to win the election. and he did. No mis-calculation on his part. Nothing to do with me or most israelis.
"Again, I don't need *you* to make my arguments"
-Sometimes you make arguments with the here is my argument but I wont commit to it so I can duck in cover when it gets shot down" tactic. I imagine that would work well against you as you keep on shooting at facist zionist shadows while people are debating you.
"This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for???"
- everyone votes more right when the mosquito bites them. jews - palistinians americans. anyone.
" You even insult *yourselves*!! "
- II didnt, but I dont see why I would have a problem with that. Why do you find the concept strange I thought you hated your own government and maybe race.
"Look above in my previous post and *READ* where I said I would take leave of you."
- you said nonsense. Go to your room have a little think and come back when you have something serious to say.
"Gandhi called Zionism in Palestine "a crime against humanity." Go look it up: "The Jews in Palestine, 1938"."
- why would I care what he said? I used to flat with a indian guy who said "ghandi was an idiot he screwed india by struggling against the english."
Well thats what he thought.
His form of protest was better than that of arafat's though. I expect my flatmate would agree.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
double standard
n.
A set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to one than to another, [eg] the granting of greater sexual freedom to men than to women.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=double standard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a)
People who categorize themselves as Jewish for ETHNIC, CULTURAL or RELIGIOUS reasons - even if they convert - have a deity "covenented" and State legislated "birth-right" to "return"- after a TWO THOUSAND YEAR absence!
Baruch Goldstein was born in the U.S. and exploited his "birthright" to "return".
You know about Baruch - don't you Scottie?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
b)
But people who categorize themselves as Palestinians for ETHNIC or CULTURAL reasons are expected to forfeit their right to return to the land they had stolen from them little more than 50 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
double standards
n.
A set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to [chosen ones].
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=double standard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
double standard
n.
A set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to one than to another, [eg] the granting of greater sexual freedom to men than to women.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=double standard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a)
People who categorize themselves as Jewish for ETHNIC, CULTURAL or RELIGIOUS reasons - even if they convert - have a deity "covenented" and State legislated "birth-right" to "return"- after a TWO THOUSAND YEAR absence!
Baruch Goldstein was born in the U.S. and exploited his "birthright" to "return".
You know about Baruch - don't you Scottie?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
b)
But people who categorize themselves as Palestinians for ETHNIC or CULTURAL reasons are expected to forfeit their right to return to the land they had stolen from them little more than 50 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
double standards
n.
A set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to [chosen ones].
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=double standard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"I haven't heard of Palestinians firing weapons at Palestinian police."
Then you haven't been paying attention.
This has happened already, when the PA tried to arrest people who blew up civilian buses. They have shot at Palestinian police when the police tried to live up to their end of the Oslo accords. It happened, its a fact. Hamas will kill anyone who tries to disarm their illegal army.
When the PA tries to disarm Hamas (as required by the road map), you'll see plenty of shooting.
Then you haven't been paying attention.
This has happened already, when the PA tried to arrest people who blew up civilian buses. They have shot at Palestinian police when the police tried to live up to their end of the Oslo accords. It happened, its a fact. Hamas will kill anyone who tries to disarm their illegal army.
When the PA tries to disarm Hamas (as required by the road map), you'll see plenty of shooting.
Yes, Hamas, created by Israel, is an extremist group, and that wasn't what I was talking about. I don't hear about civilians shooting at Palestinian police to the point of them needing to use tanks, etc.
And murdering 5 civilians for every 1 extremist group member through 'assassinations' isn't what a Democracy is about.
And murdering 5 civilians for every 1 extremist group member through 'assassinations' isn't what a Democracy is about.
Sure, Israel "created" Hamas. Now I wonder why I've been wasting my time talking with a mindless propaganda drone.
Killing five civilians for every one militant is a damn sight better than the Palestinian record.
Go play with your suicide belt.
Killing five civilians for every one militant is a damn sight better than the Palestinian record.
Go play with your suicide belt.
Yo Scottie!
Your continued desire to debate with someone who finds you *boring* and lacking intellectual seriousness--as I demonstrated above with a *specific* reference to your clearly *hyperbolically evasive* statement gives me an opportunity to correct a thought (I was late at nite when I typed it and thus easily confused you with "laughing at the dying":
" Your acontextual conflating of at least *EIGHT* different definitions of one word shows that you are *STUPID*:
- slow of mind -- that's *YOU* !
- lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *YOU* too !!
- lacking interest or point -- and *that's* *YOU* *too* !! -- ALSO A DEFINITION OF *BORING*! -- that's *also* **YOU**
Now, why don't you leave it to *lad* to see if he wants to take me on again -- and get *another* head whoopin'! "
... THERE! CORRECTED!
Scottie: "but since we are debating a word that "lad" used quite frankly he is the final authority on what it means and whether you were mistaken or not"
JA: THEN LET **LAD** DECIDE IF HE WANTS TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER INTELLECTUAL HEAD WHOOPIN' BY ME !! *OKAY*???
AS YOU WILL **NOTE** HE'S OBVIOUSLY HAD HIS HEAD WHOOPED ENOUGH BY ME, AND HAS MOVED ON TO OTHER PEOPLE -- STILL NOT TOO EMBARRASSED, THOUGH -- AFTER GETTIN' *WHOOPED* -- TO SHOW HIS MONIKER HERE AGAIN.
Scottie: "There are lots [definitions of stupid] you could go for but I think you have chosen "people I dont like" "
JA: People I don't like: BORING, STUPID !! (SEE DEFINITION) OKAY?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Scottie: "- No he [Sharon] just wanted to win the election. and he did. No mis-calculation on his part. NOTHING TO DO WITH MOST ISRAELIS. " [CAPS, mine.]
(2) Scottie: " - EVERYONE VOTES more right when the mosquito bites them. " [CAPS, mine.]
Scottie: " - I am jsut pointing out the contradiction in your own logic. "
JA: **NOPE!!!* NO logical **CONTRADICTION** between (1) and (2), now is there!!???
I'm not suprised, but I did *NOT* hear that Sharon was a totalitarian dictator of a military coup in Israel.
That's *STUPID*: slow of mind -- that's *YOU* ! ; lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *YOU* too!
So, Israelis are willing to suffer all the things I pointed out in my post above, where Sharon marched up to Al-Aqsa, so Sharon can win the elections. THAT'S ***STUPID*** TOO!! ARE YOU ISRAELIS SO GENERALLY ***STUPID***???
JA (repost) : " Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss? --Of did you guys *intend* to provoke the 2nd Intifada, *unlike the first*, bringing a non-ending series of suicide bombings upon yourselves, demolish the economically important tourist industry, scare away foreign investments, ruin the economy, skyrocket unemployment, and generally make life in Israel either tense or emotionally miserable for the people who count (Jews)? THESE ARE *RHETORICAL QUESTIONS -- I'D BE PLEASED IF YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO RESPOND. THEIR MERIT STANDS FOR ITSELF. "
JA (repost): " By the way, it's *Sharon* that's the *INSULT* -- to Palestinians, to Israeli Jews, and to Israel. This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for??? You even insult *yourselves*!! You Israelis have a culturally self-hating *SOCIOPATH* for a leader who literally said that he doesn't care what the world thinks of Jews, who said that the answer to anti-Semitism is to be more like the Nazis and, also according to Israel Shamir, Sharon said that he (Sharon, paraphrased) "admires the Palestinians more than, generally, the Jews, because at least the Palestinians fight back, unlike the Nazi-era Jews, when they face ethnic cleansing or partial genocide"!! In *civilized* societies and among *morally evolved* people, someone like Sharon is called *A MADMAN*!!! "
JA: [SHAKING MY HEAD] So, a member of your family could *NEEDLESSLY* die, so that Sharon can provoke the Palestinians and get re-elected??? [RHETORICAL QUESTION.] Now, does that sound *STUPID*!??? [R.Q.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - You offered it up [a debatable theory] as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. "
JA: Typical pattern of Zionists wanting to latch onto something tangential -- it's an old Zionist tactic called "changing the subject" -- and avoiding the essentail answer to your *OWN* question. Go back up there and *READ*. I'm *not* doing the work for you. And I'm not teaching you *READING COMPREHENSION* -- that's something your mother or your teachers should have done.
JA (repost): "=But, ASIDE from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *BEFORE* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world). "
I *FACTUALLY* pointed out the existence of a controversial theory among "MANY". There is also the theory that the universe is exanding, and any relevant discussion of our solar system might point that out, tangentially. I neither "approve" or "disapprove" of the theory that the universe is either expanding or contracting. LEARN TO READ!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - everyone votes more right when the mosquito bites them. "
JA: Like with Mahmoud Abbas? I didn't realize that he was to the right of Arafat. Then why isn't Israel blaming every subsequent bombings on *him*?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - why would I care what he [Gandhi] said? I used to flat with a indian guy who said "ghandi was an idiot he screwed india by struggling against the english...His [Gandhi's] form of protest was better than that of arafat's though. " "
JA: And *that's* the guy--he was even your flatmate(!)--you're quoting!? He *preferred* India--his own country--under foreign domination!? I guess you *approve* of his opinion.
THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* (who killed British policemen and even UN personnel, as well as assassinated a British foreign service minister, as well as bombed hotels, police stations, and administrative buildings, and, of course, massacred Palestinians)--STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"???
>>> THAT'S THE ***ONLY*** QUESTION I WANT YOU TO ANSWER !!! (ZIONIST HYPOCRITE!!) <<<
OH, YOU *LIKE* NONVIOLENT PROTESTS WHEN IT'S PEOPLE *YOU* ARE OPPRESSING!
WELL, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I ALREADY POINTED OUT THAT ISRAEL KICKED AWAD, "THE PALESTINIAN MLK", *OUT* OF THE COUNTRY!!
AND ISRAEL HAS EXPELLED, SHOT, AND *KILLED* NONVIOLENT PALESTINIAN PROTESTERS BEFORE (AND EVEN ISM HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS--OR WERE THEY "TERRORISTS" TOO???).
AND WHEN PALESTINIAN ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HAMAS *HAVE* GONE FOR SHARON'S SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME WITHOUT AN ATTACK -- NOT ONLY HIS "SEVEN DAYS", BUT UP TO A MONTH WITHOUT ATTACKS! -- SHARON DECIDED TO ASSASSINATE SOMEONE OR GO BOMB SOME CIVILIANS!! (Sharon/Israel never misses an opportunity to *destroy* an opportunity.)
SO NOW THAT ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HAMAS HAVE *MET* SHARON'S *PRIOR* STIPULATIONS, SHARON NOW SAYS THAT PALESTINIANS MUST GO **FOREVER** WITHOUT ARMED RESISTANCE ATTACKS. IN OTHER WORDS, PALESTINIANS MUST LAY DOWN AND GIVE UP, WHILE ISRAEL CONTINUES THE VIOLENCE OF THE OCCUPATION.
THIS IS WHAT NELSON MANDELA -- WHO PROCLAIMED BEFORE AMERICAN AUDIENCES OF TENS OF THOUSANDS, "THE PALESTINIAN CAUSE IS *MY* CAUSE!" -- SAID ABOUT VIOLENCE IN THE ARMED STRUGGLE AGAINST SETTLER-COLONIAL DOMINATION AND OPPRESSION: "WE, IN THE ANC, WILL RENOUNCE VIOLENCE, WHEN *THE APARTHEID GOVERNMENT* RENOUNCES VIOLENCE!"
(Now, *can't* you find someone else to go bug? Someone you don't bore?)
Your continued desire to debate with someone who finds you *boring* and lacking intellectual seriousness--as I demonstrated above with a *specific* reference to your clearly *hyperbolically evasive* statement gives me an opportunity to correct a thought (I was late at nite when I typed it and thus easily confused you with "laughing at the dying":
" Your acontextual conflating of at least *EIGHT* different definitions of one word shows that you are *STUPID*:
- slow of mind -- that's *YOU* !
- lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *YOU* too !!
- lacking interest or point -- and *that's* *YOU* *too* !! -- ALSO A DEFINITION OF *BORING*! -- that's *also* **YOU**
Now, why don't you leave it to *lad* to see if he wants to take me on again -- and get *another* head whoopin'! "
... THERE! CORRECTED!
Scottie: "but since we are debating a word that "lad" used quite frankly he is the final authority on what it means and whether you were mistaken or not"
JA: THEN LET **LAD** DECIDE IF HE WANTS TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER INTELLECTUAL HEAD WHOOPIN' BY ME !! *OKAY*???
AS YOU WILL **NOTE** HE'S OBVIOUSLY HAD HIS HEAD WHOOPED ENOUGH BY ME, AND HAS MOVED ON TO OTHER PEOPLE -- STILL NOT TOO EMBARRASSED, THOUGH -- AFTER GETTIN' *WHOOPED* -- TO SHOW HIS MONIKER HERE AGAIN.
Scottie: "There are lots [definitions of stupid] you could go for but I think you have chosen "people I dont like" "
JA: People I don't like: BORING, STUPID !! (SEE DEFINITION) OKAY?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Scottie: "- No he [Sharon] just wanted to win the election. and he did. No mis-calculation on his part. NOTHING TO DO WITH MOST ISRAELIS. " [CAPS, mine.]
(2) Scottie: " - EVERYONE VOTES more right when the mosquito bites them. " [CAPS, mine.]
Scottie: " - I am jsut pointing out the contradiction in your own logic. "
JA: **NOPE!!!* NO logical **CONTRADICTION** between (1) and (2), now is there!!???
I'm not suprised, but I did *NOT* hear that Sharon was a totalitarian dictator of a military coup in Israel.
That's *STUPID*: slow of mind -- that's *YOU* ! ; lacking intelligence or reason -- that's *YOU* too!
So, Israelis are willing to suffer all the things I pointed out in my post above, where Sharon marched up to Al-Aqsa, so Sharon can win the elections. THAT'S ***STUPID*** TOO!! ARE YOU ISRAELIS SO GENERALLY ***STUPID***???
JA (repost) : " Do you believe that the leaders of Israel made a *miscalculation*, when they let Sharon march up to Al-Aqsa Mosque 'to pray' and show who's boss? --Of did you guys *intend* to provoke the 2nd Intifada, *unlike the first*, bringing a non-ending series of suicide bombings upon yourselves, demolish the economically important tourist industry, scare away foreign investments, ruin the economy, skyrocket unemployment, and generally make life in Israel either tense or emotionally miserable for the people who count (Jews)? THESE ARE *RHETORICAL QUESTIONS -- I'D BE PLEASED IF YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO RESPOND. THEIR MERIT STANDS FOR ITSELF. "
JA (repost): " By the way, it's *Sharon* that's the *INSULT* -- to Palestinians, to Israeli Jews, and to Israel. This is the guy you Israeli Jews *voted* for??? You even insult *yourselves*!! You Israelis have a culturally self-hating *SOCIOPATH* for a leader who literally said that he doesn't care what the world thinks of Jews, who said that the answer to anti-Semitism is to be more like the Nazis and, also according to Israel Shamir, Sharon said that he (Sharon, paraphrased) "admires the Palestinians more than, generally, the Jews, because at least the Palestinians fight back, unlike the Nazi-era Jews, when they face ethnic cleansing or partial genocide"!! In *civilized* societies and among *morally evolved* people, someone like Sharon is called *A MADMAN*!!! "
JA: [SHAKING MY HEAD] So, a member of your family could *NEEDLESSLY* die, so that Sharon can provoke the Palestinians and get re-elected??? [RHETORICAL QUESTION.] Now, does that sound *STUPID*!??? [R.Q.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - You offered it up [a debatable theory] as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. "
JA: Typical pattern of Zionists wanting to latch onto something tangential -- it's an old Zionist tactic called "changing the subject" -- and avoiding the essentail answer to your *OWN* question. Go back up there and *READ*. I'm *not* doing the work for you. And I'm not teaching you *READING COMPREHENSION* -- that's something your mother or your teachers should have done.
JA (repost): "=But, ASIDE from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *BEFORE* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world). "
I *FACTUALLY* pointed out the existence of a controversial theory among "MANY". There is also the theory that the universe is exanding, and any relevant discussion of our solar system might point that out, tangentially. I neither "approve" or "disapprove" of the theory that the universe is either expanding or contracting. LEARN TO READ!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - everyone votes more right when the mosquito bites them. "
JA: Like with Mahmoud Abbas? I didn't realize that he was to the right of Arafat. Then why isn't Israel blaming every subsequent bombings on *him*?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scottie: " - why would I care what he [Gandhi] said? I used to flat with a indian guy who said "ghandi was an idiot he screwed india by struggling against the english...His [Gandhi's] form of protest was better than that of arafat's though. " "
JA: And *that's* the guy--he was even your flatmate(!)--you're quoting!? He *preferred* India--his own country--under foreign domination!? I guess you *approve* of his opinion.
THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* (who killed British policemen and even UN personnel, as well as assassinated a British foreign service minister, as well as bombed hotels, police stations, and administrative buildings, and, of course, massacred Palestinians)--STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"???
>>> THAT'S THE ***ONLY*** QUESTION I WANT YOU TO ANSWER !!! (ZIONIST HYPOCRITE!!) <<<
OH, YOU *LIKE* NONVIOLENT PROTESTS WHEN IT'S PEOPLE *YOU* ARE OPPRESSING!
WELL, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I ALREADY POINTED OUT THAT ISRAEL KICKED AWAD, "THE PALESTINIAN MLK", *OUT* OF THE COUNTRY!!
AND ISRAEL HAS EXPELLED, SHOT, AND *KILLED* NONVIOLENT PALESTINIAN PROTESTERS BEFORE (AND EVEN ISM HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS--OR WERE THEY "TERRORISTS" TOO???).
AND WHEN PALESTINIAN ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HAMAS *HAVE* GONE FOR SHARON'S SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME WITHOUT AN ATTACK -- NOT ONLY HIS "SEVEN DAYS", BUT UP TO A MONTH WITHOUT ATTACKS! -- SHARON DECIDED TO ASSASSINATE SOMEONE OR GO BOMB SOME CIVILIANS!! (Sharon/Israel never misses an opportunity to *destroy* an opportunity.)
SO NOW THAT ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HAMAS HAVE *MET* SHARON'S *PRIOR* STIPULATIONS, SHARON NOW SAYS THAT PALESTINIANS MUST GO **FOREVER** WITHOUT ARMED RESISTANCE ATTACKS. IN OTHER WORDS, PALESTINIANS MUST LAY DOWN AND GIVE UP, WHILE ISRAEL CONTINUES THE VIOLENCE OF THE OCCUPATION.
THIS IS WHAT NELSON MANDELA -- WHO PROCLAIMED BEFORE AMERICAN AUDIENCES OF TENS OF THOUSANDS, "THE PALESTINIAN CAUSE IS *MY* CAUSE!" -- SAID ABOUT VIOLENCE IN THE ARMED STRUGGLE AGAINST SETTLER-COLONIAL DOMINATION AND OPPRESSION: "WE, IN THE ANC, WILL RENOUNCE VIOLENCE, WHEN *THE APARTHEID GOVERNMENT* RENOUNCES VIOLENCE!"
(Now, *can't* you find someone else to go bug? Someone you don't bore?)
Busy as I am I have to respond to your outrageous denial of Fred's post above. Fred is correct.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION:
"Beginning with the 1977 election of Likud founder, Menachem Begin as Prime Minister, Israel nutured the rise of the Islamic movement among the Palestinians, first in the Gaza Strip and to a limited degree in the West Bank.
Desparate to prevent Arafat's return under any peace accord and seeking to undermine his popularity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, a year later Israel allowed a 42 year old quadriplegic religious leader, Sheik Ahmad Yassin, to licence his humanitarian organizataion, later called Hamas".
The above (a brief excerpt) was taken from an article entitled "How Sharon and The Likud p[arty Nurtured the Rise of Hamas and Benefit from its Terrorism" by RAY HANANIA, a Chicago writer.
Additional information from the article points out that it wasn't until April 1994, following the slaughter of 29 Muslims (as they were praying) by mass murderer, Baruch Goldstein, that Hamas actually targeted civilians, and ran a car packed with explosives into a bus in Afula killing eight and injuring 50 others.
====================================================================================
The main objective of both Hamas and the Likud party is NO PEACE. You may state that Sharon has agreed to the so-called road map, but as Uri Avnery points out in one of his articles, no one should believe a word Sharon says anyway., which is obvious from his assassinations (attempted and successful) of Hamas leaders a few days following the departure of Bush to the US.
The Israeli army had helicopter gunboats drop missles on a crowded Gaza street, killing innocent people (in an effort to murder Hamas members) on Tuesday of last week, and on Wednesday Hamas did its retaliation bit, just as Sharon knew they would, by carrying out another suicide bombing.
The only major problem with all of this is that instead of condemning Israel and Hamas, the US can see nothing wrong with its beloved terrorist state. It's a mentality a lot of people on this board seem to have, most of them with very little knowledge of the real situation in this conflict..
Hamas is not the only impediment to peace. There was no Hamas until, as stated above, in the late 1970s, but there was no peace either.
It is now, just as it was for the past several years, an unspoken (or is it?) joint venture by the Likud party and Hamas, each with the same "no peace" mindset..
When Hamas stated they would cease their bombing if Sharon stopped the assassinations, Sharon's reply was more attacks and dire threats. That would have ruined war criminal, Sharon's, love of ranting about "terrorism", which, when you consider this thug's past, it is but to laugh in disbelief.
==================================================================================
PS Uri Avnery is probably a most credible source of info with respect to Sharon, having written about him extensively, and served in Government with him.
PSS To anyone reading this, please excuse the typing errors, if any. I haven't got time to check this right now.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION:
"Beginning with the 1977 election of Likud founder, Menachem Begin as Prime Minister, Israel nutured the rise of the Islamic movement among the Palestinians, first in the Gaza Strip and to a limited degree in the West Bank.
Desparate to prevent Arafat's return under any peace accord and seeking to undermine his popularity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, a year later Israel allowed a 42 year old quadriplegic religious leader, Sheik Ahmad Yassin, to licence his humanitarian organizataion, later called Hamas".
The above (a brief excerpt) was taken from an article entitled "How Sharon and The Likud p[arty Nurtured the Rise of Hamas and Benefit from its Terrorism" by RAY HANANIA, a Chicago writer.
Additional information from the article points out that it wasn't until April 1994, following the slaughter of 29 Muslims (as they were praying) by mass murderer, Baruch Goldstein, that Hamas actually targeted civilians, and ran a car packed with explosives into a bus in Afula killing eight and injuring 50 others.
====================================================================================
The main objective of both Hamas and the Likud party is NO PEACE. You may state that Sharon has agreed to the so-called road map, but as Uri Avnery points out in one of his articles, no one should believe a word Sharon says anyway., which is obvious from his assassinations (attempted and successful) of Hamas leaders a few days following the departure of Bush to the US.
The Israeli army had helicopter gunboats drop missles on a crowded Gaza street, killing innocent people (in an effort to murder Hamas members) on Tuesday of last week, and on Wednesday Hamas did its retaliation bit, just as Sharon knew they would, by carrying out another suicide bombing.
The only major problem with all of this is that instead of condemning Israel and Hamas, the US can see nothing wrong with its beloved terrorist state. It's a mentality a lot of people on this board seem to have, most of them with very little knowledge of the real situation in this conflict..
Hamas is not the only impediment to peace. There was no Hamas until, as stated above, in the late 1970s, but there was no peace either.
It is now, just as it was for the past several years, an unspoken (or is it?) joint venture by the Likud party and Hamas, each with the same "no peace" mindset..
When Hamas stated they would cease their bombing if Sharon stopped the assassinations, Sharon's reply was more attacks and dire threats. That would have ruined war criminal, Sharon's, love of ranting about "terrorism", which, when you consider this thug's past, it is but to laugh in disbelief.
==================================================================================
PS Uri Avnery is probably a most credible source of info with respect to Sharon, having written about him extensively, and served in Government with him.
PSS To anyone reading this, please excuse the typing errors, if any. I haven't got time to check this right now.
from "Hamas, what a joke"
by laugh at the dying Friday June 20, 2003 at 01:19 PM:
lad: " Sure, Israel "created" Hamas. "
JA: Israel initially supported Hamas to pit them against the PLO. I.e., Israel thought that they could get one Palestinian organization to go kill off *another* organization of Palestinians -- or for them to kill off each other. As I said before, the 'joke' is on Israel now. That's why Hamas is often referred to as "Israel's Frankenstein"!
lad: " Now I wonder why I've been wasting my time talking with a mindless propaganda drone. "
JA: When laddie *FINALLY* finds out, the 'joke' will be on him too! -- speaking of "propaganda *drones*".
NOW DO YOU KNOW WHY "lad" IS AN **IDIOT** !!!
(Hey, Scottie, may even *you* can inform "lad" of this!)
by laugh at the dying Friday June 20, 2003 at 01:19 PM:
lad: " Sure, Israel "created" Hamas. "
JA: Israel initially supported Hamas to pit them against the PLO. I.e., Israel thought that they could get one Palestinian organization to go kill off *another* organization of Palestinians -- or for them to kill off each other. As I said before, the 'joke' is on Israel now. That's why Hamas is often referred to as "Israel's Frankenstein"!
lad: " Now I wonder why I've been wasting my time talking with a mindless propaganda drone. "
JA: When laddie *FINALLY* finds out, the 'joke' will be on him too! -- speaking of "propaganda *drones*".
NOW DO YOU KNOW WHY "lad" IS AN **IDIOT** !!!
(Hey, Scottie, may even *you* can inform "lad" of this!)
WAS SO GLAD TO SEE A POST ADDRESSED TO ME!!!
Thanks!
I'm working virtually around the clock these past few days and this trend will continue until at least Sunday! It's my own fault, of course, having left everything to the last minute (and the last minute arrived Wednesday evening!)
I didn't notice the post to me until just now. I checked the last one there to see who "laugh at dying" was attacking this time, and when I saw his comments to "Fred", I was furious. If he (she) whoever wants to refute an assertion by "Fred" or anyone, why doesn't he do so with facts?
Anyway by the time I whipped off a response to him, I was in a fine rage indeed, and then I scrolled up and saw your posts, (that's telling them in fine fashion, she applauds!) including the one for me! Thanks, she grins!
It's now 8 p.m. here, the sun has (wouldn't you know it!) broke through the rain clouds of this p.m. I had to run over to the Court of Appeal, and it was raining so hard I could have swam the short distance down the hill. Now the sun shines forth!
I will drop you a much longer note later. I assume you've seen my wee notes to you in another thread???
Keep up the good fight here until I get caught up with work, at which time I'll be back here with a vengence (well, perhaps not quite that!)
I haven't seen the news nor heard it in the past two and a half days. Work/sleep/work/sleep. How is the IDF behaving (she asks with a huge guffaw!)
More, my friend,
Angie
Thanks!
I'm working virtually around the clock these past few days and this trend will continue until at least Sunday! It's my own fault, of course, having left everything to the last minute (and the last minute arrived Wednesday evening!)
I didn't notice the post to me until just now. I checked the last one there to see who "laugh at dying" was attacking this time, and when I saw his comments to "Fred", I was furious. If he (she) whoever wants to refute an assertion by "Fred" or anyone, why doesn't he do so with facts?
Anyway by the time I whipped off a response to him, I was in a fine rage indeed, and then I scrolled up and saw your posts, (that's telling them in fine fashion, she applauds!) including the one for me! Thanks, she grins!
It's now 8 p.m. here, the sun has (wouldn't you know it!) broke through the rain clouds of this p.m. I had to run over to the Court of Appeal, and it was raining so hard I could have swam the short distance down the hill. Now the sun shines forth!
I will drop you a much longer note later. I assume you've seen my wee notes to you in another thread???
Keep up the good fight here until I get caught up with work, at which time I'll be back here with a vengence (well, perhaps not quite that!)
I haven't seen the news nor heard it in the past two and a half days. Work/sleep/work/sleep. How is the IDF behaving (she asks with a huge guffaw!)
More, my friend,
Angie
"Baruch Goldstein was born in the U.S. and exploited his "birthright" to "return"."
- that argument holds about as much weight with me as the palistinians "right to return"
you can note that alot of jews might disagree with me we are allies of convenience in this argument.
laugh at the dying
Thanks for the details.
JA
"Your continued desire to debate with someone who finds you *boring* "
- hmm and yet you keep debating. your like the drug users who say "I can quit any time!" or "I dont even like it". Remember admitting you have a problem is the first step.
"JA: People I don't like: BORING, STUPID !! (SEE DEFINITION) OKAY?"
Exactly what I said. It means that you have misdefined the word "stupid" for example you dont like zionists and many other groups not all of whom can be "stupid" by any definition other than "people JA doesnt like".
" I am just pointing out the contradiction in your own logic. ""
- no contradiction. the point was intent. Now why didnt you pick that up? a little slow?
therefore the rest of your points are irrelevant. try reading again slowly and see if you can keep up.
"So, Israelis are willing to suffer all the things I pointed out in my post above, where Sharon marched up to Al-Aqsa, so Sharon can win the elections. "
Electing Sharon may have been the right thing to do in the circumstances. You are focusing on how important it is to teach sharon a lesson.. but think.. do the Israelis want to teach sharon a lesson for going there or do they want to teach the palistinians a lesson for starting an intefadah? They couldnt do both at the same time.
I think the second one was a bigger impact upon them. You might say there is a cause and effect but as long as the palistinians associate a man going to a mosque with starting an intefadah then the threat is always there whether someone started it by visiting a mosque or by doing somthing totally different.
"JA: [SHAKING MY HEAD] So, a member of your family could *NEEDLESSLY* die, so that Sharon can provoke the Palestinians and get re-elected??? [RHETORICAL QUESTION.] Now, does that sound *STUPID*!??? [R.Q.]"
- by the time the elections came he had ALREADY provoked them. more than that they were going to be provoked somehow eventually. The pot was on the boil already you know that that is the basis of your own philosophy as I understand it.
"JA: Typical pattern of Zionists wanting to latch onto something tangential"
haha and your "old tactic" is the "I have arguments but I dont believe in them that means you neverfind my straw man to attack it." Therefore you try to ague with the minimum argument that is core to your debate
"JA (repost): "=But, ASIDE from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *BEFORE* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world). ""
PNAC is nationalistic. they are effectively the nationalistic group in the US. you will find them in other countries too but they usually have a party and seats in parliment.
Whether I agree or not with the specifics pragmatic nationalistic governments such as singapore are usually the most sucessful. However PNAC is not "the government" and in the long run I believe the isolationists will win over the PNAC in the republican party. EVEN IF there is another big war. I neither approve nor disapprove of that.
"I neither "approve" or "disapprove" of the theory that the universe is either expanding or contracting."
- well I approve of it. If you dont then you either havent read much or you are putting more weight on some less credible scientists than I am. Or you take a different definition of "expand".
JA: Like with Mahmoud Abbas? I didn't realize that he was to the right of Arafat. Then why isn't Israel blaming every subsequent bombings on *him*?
- Israel is not a mosquito. more importantly the US is not a mosquito.
JA: And *that's* the guy--he was even your flatmate(!)--you're quoting!? He *preferred* India--his own country--under foreign domination!? I guess you *approve* of his opinion.
- you guess? putting words in my mouth eh? I am just saying HE said that . However think of it in this contect. if you are in the US you are ruled by a "foreign power" called "washington" or if you are in iran you are ruled by a foreign power called "Teran". It doesnt matter that somebody has arbitrarily defined these poeple to be "your people" because they have the same skin colour as you or somthing. I dont know personally ANY of my "rulers" and frankly I dont expect to.
You mindlesly accept assumptions that there is no sound reason to accept.
THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"???
- I dont care, there terrorism was also unacceptable.
>>> THAT'S THE ***ONLY*** QUESTION I WANT YOU TO ANSWER !!! (ZIONIST HYPOCRITE!!) <<<
- OK I answered it and showed I am not a hypocrite now since you hyped that as your big challenge you should stop being a hypocrite and stop supporting the palistinians.
"THIS IS WHAT NELSON MANDELA"
- I dont care about him either. the defeat of apatheid was a good thing but besides taht southafrica isnt in very good shape despite all of its resources. South africa has become like a nigeria with its corruption and crime. maybe in a few years it will be a zimbabwae. And aids? just ask the new primeminister about aids (evil plot by the white man eh?).
- that argument holds about as much weight with me as the palistinians "right to return"
you can note that alot of jews might disagree with me we are allies of convenience in this argument.
laugh at the dying
Thanks for the details.
JA
"Your continued desire to debate with someone who finds you *boring* "
- hmm and yet you keep debating. your like the drug users who say "I can quit any time!" or "I dont even like it". Remember admitting you have a problem is the first step.
"JA: People I don't like: BORING, STUPID !! (SEE DEFINITION) OKAY?"
Exactly what I said. It means that you have misdefined the word "stupid" for example you dont like zionists and many other groups not all of whom can be "stupid" by any definition other than "people JA doesnt like".
" I am just pointing out the contradiction in your own logic. ""
- no contradiction. the point was intent. Now why didnt you pick that up? a little slow?
therefore the rest of your points are irrelevant. try reading again slowly and see if you can keep up.
"So, Israelis are willing to suffer all the things I pointed out in my post above, where Sharon marched up to Al-Aqsa, so Sharon can win the elections. "
Electing Sharon may have been the right thing to do in the circumstances. You are focusing on how important it is to teach sharon a lesson.. but think.. do the Israelis want to teach sharon a lesson for going there or do they want to teach the palistinians a lesson for starting an intefadah? They couldnt do both at the same time.
I think the second one was a bigger impact upon them. You might say there is a cause and effect but as long as the palistinians associate a man going to a mosque with starting an intefadah then the threat is always there whether someone started it by visiting a mosque or by doing somthing totally different.
"JA: [SHAKING MY HEAD] So, a member of your family could *NEEDLESSLY* die, so that Sharon can provoke the Palestinians and get re-elected??? [RHETORICAL QUESTION.] Now, does that sound *STUPID*!??? [R.Q.]"
- by the time the elections came he had ALREADY provoked them. more than that they were going to be provoked somehow eventually. The pot was on the boil already you know that that is the basis of your own philosophy as I understand it.
"JA: Typical pattern of Zionists wanting to latch onto something tangential"
haha and your "old tactic" is the "I have arguments but I dont believe in them that means you neverfind my straw man to attack it." Therefore you try to ague with the minimum argument that is core to your debate
"JA (repost): "=But, ASIDE from "the conspiracy theories" analysis, the Project for a New American Century shows that the U.S. administration was quite politically (ultra)conservative and militarist oriented even *BEFORE* 9-11 happened. 9-11 was the spark this militarist project *SAID* would be needed to implement what had *ALREADY* been planned and *decided* (a U.S. militarist domination of the world). ""
PNAC is nationalistic. they are effectively the nationalistic group in the US. you will find them in other countries too but they usually have a party and seats in parliment.
Whether I agree or not with the specifics pragmatic nationalistic governments such as singapore are usually the most sucessful. However PNAC is not "the government" and in the long run I believe the isolationists will win over the PNAC in the republican party. EVEN IF there is another big war. I neither approve nor disapprove of that.
"I neither "approve" or "disapprove" of the theory that the universe is either expanding or contracting."
- well I approve of it. If you dont then you either havent read much or you are putting more weight on some less credible scientists than I am. Or you take a different definition of "expand".
JA: Like with Mahmoud Abbas? I didn't realize that he was to the right of Arafat. Then why isn't Israel blaming every subsequent bombings on *him*?
- Israel is not a mosquito. more importantly the US is not a mosquito.
JA: And *that's* the guy--he was even your flatmate(!)--you're quoting!? He *preferred* India--his own country--under foreign domination!? I guess you *approve* of his opinion.
- you guess? putting words in my mouth eh? I am just saying HE said that . However think of it in this contect. if you are in the US you are ruled by a "foreign power" called "washington" or if you are in iran you are ruled by a foreign power called "Teran". It doesnt matter that somebody has arbitrarily defined these poeple to be "your people" because they have the same skin colour as you or somthing. I dont know personally ANY of my "rulers" and frankly I dont expect to.
You mindlesly accept assumptions that there is no sound reason to accept.
THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"???
- I dont care, there terrorism was also unacceptable.
>>> THAT'S THE ***ONLY*** QUESTION I WANT YOU TO ANSWER !!! (ZIONIST HYPOCRITE!!) <<<
- OK I answered it and showed I am not a hypocrite now since you hyped that as your big challenge you should stop being a hypocrite and stop supporting the palistinians.
"THIS IS WHAT NELSON MANDELA"
- I dont care about him either. the defeat of apatheid was a good thing but besides taht southafrica isnt in very good shape despite all of its resources. South africa has become like a nigeria with its corruption and crime. maybe in a few years it will be a zimbabwae. And aids? just ask the new primeminister about aids (evil plot by the white man eh?).
Just because a man does one thing right doesnt make him a guru on everything just ask winston churchill the great war time leader and pretty average peace time leader.
Scottie: " Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to [SUPPORT, NUTURE, & FINANCE "A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION", HAMAS] like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didn't GET A WHOLE LOT OF THEIR [OWN PEOPLE KILLED !! ]. "
do you mean the lebaneese (etc) hamas leaders...
or do you mean yourself?
I dont think either of "your people" are getting killed
or do you mean yourself?
I dont think either of "your people" are getting killed
Scottie: " do you mean the lebaneese (etc) hamas leaders... "
JA: " Scottie: " Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to [SUPPORT, NUTURE, & FINANCE "A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION", HAMAS] like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didn't GET A WHOLE LOT OF THEIR [OWN PEOPLE --- ****ISRAELIS**** --- KILLED !! ]. "
(Maybe you *are* as *stupid* as "lad"! HaHaHaHaHa...!)
JA: " Scottie: " Anyone smart enough to be able to plan to [SUPPORT, NUTURE, & FINANCE "A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION", HAMAS] like that would also be smart enough to figure out a better way of doing it that didn't GET A WHOLE LOT OF THEIR [OWN PEOPLE --- ****ISRAELIS**** --- KILLED !! ]. "
(Maybe you *are* as *stupid* as "lad"! HaHaHaHaHa...!)
JA: " I guess you *approve* of his opinion. "
Scottie: " - you guess? putting words in my mouth eh? I am just saying HE said that ."
JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! : Scottie - "You offered it up as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. . The fact that you did not commit to it is comendible [word usage?]. " (People, by **SCOTTIE** Friday June 20, 2003 at 03:59 AM)
HaHaHaHaHa...!!
(It's getting almost as fun to mess with you as it was to mess with your friend "lad"! I noticed you had no effective response to YOUR BLOOPER CONTRADICTION about Sharon -- except to try to squiggle and wiggle and slither out of it!)
Scottie: "However PNAC is not "the government" "
JA: Ohhhh...., how *boring*.... Who do you think Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc., in the Bush administration represent? (I only responded to your **BORRRING** comeback so that you can't claim that I ducked it. Now you can put this on the list -- Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, English language, economics -- that I will *not* further discuss with you, since you are so uninformed about these issues that I am not going to *waste* my time debating them with you.)
Scottie: "if you are in the US you are ruled by a "foreign power" called "washington"... "
JA: WHAT THE *HELL* ARE YOU TALKIN' ABOUT...! ARE YOU SMOKIN' "lad"'s *CRACK PIPE* NOW !!??
HaHaHa...!!
(Hey: you can keep writing, after all -- if you're going to make me laugh like your boy "laddie" there!)
JA: "THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"??? "
Scottie: "- I dont care, there terrorism was also unacceptable. "
JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*! [Hey, angie! This is what Gwynne Dyer said that certain govts also do too, remember?] THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY -- AS HAVE OTHER *ISRAELI JEWS* (SOME OF WHOM I KNOW HERE IN THE BAY AREA!) -- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
Scottie: " [Sharon] had ALREADY provoked them. more than that they were going to be provoked [by him] somehow eventually. "
JA: *NOW* you're starting to see the picture! (Maybe you're not as *stupid* as "lad".)
Scottie: "as long as the palistinians associate a man going to a mosque with starting an intefadah "
JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
You don't care about Gandhi.
You don't care about Mandela.
Do you care about what Einstein said?
Scottie: " - you guess? putting words in my mouth eh? I am just saying HE said that ."
JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! : Scottie - "You offered it up as if to hint that you gave it some degree of approval. . The fact that you did not commit to it is comendible [word usage?]. " (People, by **SCOTTIE** Friday June 20, 2003 at 03:59 AM)
HaHaHaHaHa...!!
(It's getting almost as fun to mess with you as it was to mess with your friend "lad"! I noticed you had no effective response to YOUR BLOOPER CONTRADICTION about Sharon -- except to try to squiggle and wiggle and slither out of it!)
Scottie: "However PNAC is not "the government" "
JA: Ohhhh...., how *boring*.... Who do you think Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc., in the Bush administration represent? (I only responded to your **BORRRING** comeback so that you can't claim that I ducked it. Now you can put this on the list -- Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, English language, economics -- that I will *not* further discuss with you, since you are so uninformed about these issues that I am not going to *waste* my time debating them with you.)
Scottie: "if you are in the US you are ruled by a "foreign power" called "washington"... "
JA: WHAT THE *HELL* ARE YOU TALKIN' ABOUT...! ARE YOU SMOKIN' "lad"'s *CRACK PIPE* NOW !!??
HaHaHa...!!
(Hey: you can keep writing, after all -- if you're going to make me laugh like your boy "laddie" there!)
JA: "THEN *WHY* DIDN'T THE *ZIONISTS*--THEIR MILITIAS AND THEIR INTERNATIONALLY WANTED *TERRORISTS* STRUGGLE ***NONVIOLENTLY*** AGAINST "THE ENGLISH"??? "
Scottie: "- I dont care, there terrorism was also unacceptable. "
JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*! [Hey, angie! This is what Gwynne Dyer said that certain govts also do too, remember?] THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY -- AS HAVE OTHER *ISRAELI JEWS* (SOME OF WHOM I KNOW HERE IN THE BAY AREA!) -- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
Scottie: " [Sharon] had ALREADY provoked them. more than that they were going to be provoked [by him] somehow eventually. "
JA: *NOW* you're starting to see the picture! (Maybe you're not as *stupid* as "lad".)
Scottie: "as long as the palistinians associate a man going to a mosque with starting an intefadah "
JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
You don't care about Gandhi.
You don't care about Mandela.
Do you care about what Einstein said?
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=417162
[CAPS, *, by JA.]
FURY AS MPs COMPARE PALESTINIANS' TREATMENT TO NAZI GHETTOS !
By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent,
the Indepedent
20 June 2003
Two MPs caused outrage yesterday by COMPARING THE TREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS IN GAZA TO THE NAZI SEGREGATION OF JEWS IN THE WARSAW GHETTO.
Oona King, Labour MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, and Jenny Tonge, Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, who visited Gaza last week with the charity Christian Aid, said the situation was getting worse as the area in which the Palestinians live gets smaller.
Ms King, WHOSE MOTHER IS JEWISH, said: "NO GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE BEHAVING LIKE THAT - LEAST OF ALL A *JEWISH* GOVERNMENT! It's the same in nature but not extent. Palestinians are not being rounded up and put in gas chambers.
"WHAT MAKES IT SIMILAR IS WHAT HAPPENED TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN THAT TIME, which was the seizing of land, being forced from property, torture and bureaucracy - control used in a demeaning way over the smallest task. ON TOP OF THAT, BUILDING A WALL AROUND THEM, AND THAT IS *PRECISELY* WHAT THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT IS DOING."
Ms Tonge said: "You are almost getting a situation like the Warsaw ghetto - people can't get in or out. They can't work, they can't sell anything. There is this gradual squeeze."
But Lord Janner, the Labour peer and Vice-President of the World Jewish Congress, said it was wrong [ 'OF COURSE' ] to draw comparisons with the Nazi era. "Comparisons with the Warsaw ghetto is horrendously inappropriate and shows a sad lack of historical perspective," he said.
Yuri Dromi, of the Israel Democracy Institute, said: "Comparing someone in Gaza to the ghetto is really appalling. I think it is outrageous. THE WARSAW GHETTO WAS CREATED TO SUFFOCATE THE JEWS AND TO EXECUTE THEM." [ -- WELL *THAT* SOUNDS LIKE JUST WHAT THE ISRAEL IS DOING TO THE PALESTINIANS! -- ]
The MPs' comments came as Tony Blair held talks in London with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli finance minister, about the peace process and the state of Israel's economy.
[CAPS, *, by JA.]
FURY AS MPs COMPARE PALESTINIANS' TREATMENT TO NAZI GHETTOS !
By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent,
the Indepedent
20 June 2003
Two MPs caused outrage yesterday by COMPARING THE TREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS IN GAZA TO THE NAZI SEGREGATION OF JEWS IN THE WARSAW GHETTO.
Oona King, Labour MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, and Jenny Tonge, Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, who visited Gaza last week with the charity Christian Aid, said the situation was getting worse as the area in which the Palestinians live gets smaller.
Ms King, WHOSE MOTHER IS JEWISH, said: "NO GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE BEHAVING LIKE THAT - LEAST OF ALL A *JEWISH* GOVERNMENT! It's the same in nature but not extent. Palestinians are not being rounded up and put in gas chambers.
"WHAT MAKES IT SIMILAR IS WHAT HAPPENED TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN THAT TIME, which was the seizing of land, being forced from property, torture and bureaucracy - control used in a demeaning way over the smallest task. ON TOP OF THAT, BUILDING A WALL AROUND THEM, AND THAT IS *PRECISELY* WHAT THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT IS DOING."
Ms Tonge said: "You are almost getting a situation like the Warsaw ghetto - people can't get in or out. They can't work, they can't sell anything. There is this gradual squeeze."
But Lord Janner, the Labour peer and Vice-President of the World Jewish Congress, said it was wrong [ 'OF COURSE' ] to draw comparisons with the Nazi era. "Comparisons with the Warsaw ghetto is horrendously inappropriate and shows a sad lack of historical perspective," he said.
Yuri Dromi, of the Israel Democracy Institute, said: "Comparing someone in Gaza to the ghetto is really appalling. I think it is outrageous. THE WARSAW GHETTO WAS CREATED TO SUFFOCATE THE JEWS AND TO EXECUTE THEM." [ -- WELL *THAT* SOUNDS LIKE JUST WHAT THE ISRAEL IS DOING TO THE PALESTINIANS! -- ]
The MPs' comments came as Tony Blair held talks in London with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli finance minister, about the peace process and the state of Israel's economy.
quote:
=====================================
"I should much rather see a reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical considerations, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain."
- Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years, p263
==========================================
further:
=====================================
"...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor"
- Project for the New American Century, September 2000, p51
==========================================
Scottie: "that [right to "return" after 2000 years] argument holds about as much weight with me as the palistinians "right to return" [after 50 years] you can [b]note that a lot of jews might disagree with me[/b]" <---(due to religiously inspired double-standards, perhaps?)
Apart from practical considerations, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state...
-Albert Einstein
RE: Scottie: " do you mean the lebaneese (etc) hamas leaders... "
It is called sarcasm.. look it up in a book.
also I was pointing out that one needs to seek logic in your sttements where there is none to figure out what you mean.
JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! :
Yeap thanks for agreeing with me thats what I was aiming at. I was just baiting you.
JA: Ohhhh...., how *boring*.... Who do you think Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc., in the Bush administration represent?
- bush is an isolationist origionally not a PNAC. if he is "PNAC" as such now then that is only because most of the USA is PNAC in as far as they believe that fighting terrorism is somthing you do proactively. Go blame osama for being an evil PNAC agent I guess.
JA: WHAT THE *HELL* ARE YOU TALKIN' ABOUT...! ARE YOU SMOKIN' "lad"'s *CRACK PIPE* NOW !!??
- You seem a little stupid to understand a subtile point. The point is that I disregard your idea that there is a inherit differene between a government from a local person or a person who comes from further away. My neighbour for example would probably be much worse at governing my country than lets say bush. If USA decided to take another country in the world (for example cuba to pick a nice close country) as a 52nd state most probably it would be to the benifit of the people in that state. Having a local leader like castro for example doesnt mean he will be a good leader. besides he may "seem" local to spanish people in havana and seem rather remote to other people elsewhere..
You know what I mean and yet you dont deal with the issue. because you cant I presume.
JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*!
easy for me to say at any time. You are looking for hypocracy where there is none.
THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY --- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
- I dont want any part of hamas terrorism. So I dont want to support them, easy enough for you to understand?
JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
- are you laughing at yourself?
ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
the above statement is ok. There is nothing to argue with there but - Fortunatly they didnt do that.
It is called sarcasm.. look it up in a book.
also I was pointing out that one needs to seek logic in your sttements where there is none to figure out what you mean.
JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! :
Yeap thanks for agreeing with me thats what I was aiming at. I was just baiting you.
JA: Ohhhh...., how *boring*.... Who do you think Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc., in the Bush administration represent?
- bush is an isolationist origionally not a PNAC. if he is "PNAC" as such now then that is only because most of the USA is PNAC in as far as they believe that fighting terrorism is somthing you do proactively. Go blame osama for being an evil PNAC agent I guess.
JA: WHAT THE *HELL* ARE YOU TALKIN' ABOUT...! ARE YOU SMOKIN' "lad"'s *CRACK PIPE* NOW !!??
- You seem a little stupid to understand a subtile point. The point is that I disregard your idea that there is a inherit differene between a government from a local person or a person who comes from further away. My neighbour for example would probably be much worse at governing my country than lets say bush. If USA decided to take another country in the world (for example cuba to pick a nice close country) as a 52nd state most probably it would be to the benifit of the people in that state. Having a local leader like castro for example doesnt mean he will be a good leader. besides he may "seem" local to spanish people in havana and seem rather remote to other people elsewhere..
You know what I mean and yet you dont deal with the issue. because you cant I presume.
JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*!
easy for me to say at any time. You are looking for hypocracy where there is none.
THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY --- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
- I dont want any part of hamas terrorism. So I dont want to support them, easy enough for you to understand?
JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
- are you laughing at yourself?
ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
the above statement is ok. There is nothing to argue with there but - Fortunatly they didnt do that.
But showing pictures of one side's destruction in a discussion involving two sides which are killing eachother isn't really saying anything except 'these deaths matter, the others don't.'
Ref: Scottie Friday June 20, 2003 at 10:33 PM
" RE: Scottie: " do you mean the lebaneese (etc) hamas leaders... "
It is called sarcasm.. look it up in a book.
also I was pointing out that one needs to seek logic in your sttements where there is none to figure out what you mean. "
JA: You're just so wrapped up in yourself AND ZIONISTS' RACIST RELIGIO-ETHNOCENTRISM that you were just to **STUPID** to figure it out!!
" JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! :
Scottie: "Yeap thanks for agreeing with me thats what I was aiming at. I was just baiting you." "
JA: *'Surrrrrrre'*...!!
YOU WERE JUST **STOOOPID** AND FELL INTO YOUR OWN TRAP!!! IDIOT!!! *HAHAHAHAHA*!!!
Scottie: " - bush is an isolationist "
JA: Yyyyyeahhhh... We can *'tell'*. [What an idiot! Both of them.]
Scottie: "The point is ..."
JA: Blah, blah, blah... DO YOU *THINK* [OH, I FORGOT -- YOU *DON'T*] I *CARE*???
" JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*!
Scottie: "easy for me to say at any time. You are looking for hypocracy where there is none." "
JA: Yyyyyyeahhh..... , 'RRRRRRIGHT'......
" JA: THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY --- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
Scottie: " - I dont want any part of hamas terrorism. So I dont want to support them, easy enough for you to understand? "
JA: CAN YOU SPELL H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y ???
" JA: ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
Scottie: "the above statement is ok. There is nothing to argue with there but - Fortunatly they didnt do that." "
JA: Yyyyyeahhh... , 'RRRRRIGHT'.
Everybody and dey mama -- those who aren't Zionist -- can see what's going on in Palestine. And the only way you Zionists in the U.S. can stop people from saying so more publicly is to psychologically *TERRORIZE* people with your anti-Semite-baiting and *Zio-Nazi* tactcs here. Or to keep trying to *LIE* to people about the history of Zionism in Palestine. But now even your own historians (like Benny Morris) are revealing the truth. Even ole egotistical, crazy, and still *ZIONIST* Rabbi Michael Lerner now publicly admits: "In Palestine there was just one [leeettle] problem: someone *else* was, another people were, already living there.[!] "
You Zionists threaten journalists, politicians, professors and other academics, business people... --anyone you think you can *TERRORIZE* with illegal spying (as with anti-Zionist Jewish-American Jeffrey Blankfor), harassment, vandalism (as with the Middle East Children's Alliance in Berkeley), attempted bombings (as with those JDL Zionists who were caught by the FBI in Southern California), deaths threats (as I and others have gotten), email harassment, website attacks (al-Jazeera, peace groups, Palestinian human rights groups, personal websites, etc.), even physical attacks (like the crazy Zionist who attacked me near an ant-war rally in S.F., as I mentioned before, either above or in the "anti-Semitism at SF-IMC" thread), SHOOTING AND/OR KILLING JOURNALISTS IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES (we can *all* say "OCCUPIED", now that Sharon has finally admitted it, right, Scottie?), EVEN THE LITERAL PHYSICAL CRUSHING OR *MURDER* OF ISM HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS IN PALESTINE.
IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, THEN ZIONIST JEWS ARE SETTING THEMSELVES UP FOR A BIBLICAL MIGHTY *FALL*!!
Why even very nice people like *angie* are afraid to even say what *CITY*(!) she's in! Who do you think *she's* afraid of: Hamas!!? *NO*! CRAZY ZIONIST JEWS!!!
" JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
Scottie: " - are you laughing at yourself?" "
JA: YOU'RE TOO **SSSTOOOPID** TO REALIZE THAT I'M LAUGHING AT -- *HAVE* BEEN LAUGHING AT -- **YOU** !!
BUT *THANKS* FOR REPEATING A GOOD LINE OF MINE!! I *ENJOY* HEARING IT!! HAHAHA...!!
(Oh that Scottie cracks me up! If it weren't so sad.)
" RE: Scottie: " do you mean the lebaneese (etc) hamas leaders... "
It is called sarcasm.. look it up in a book.
also I was pointing out that one needs to seek logic in your sttements where there is none to figure out what you mean. "
JA: You're just so wrapped up in yourself AND ZIONISTS' RACIST RELIGIO-ETHNOCENTRISM that you were just to **STUPID** to figure it out!!
" JA: WELL, YOU **MENTIONNNED** *HIMMMM*...!! :
Scottie: "Yeap thanks for agreeing with me thats what I was aiming at. I was just baiting you." "
JA: *'Surrrrrrre'*...!!
YOU WERE JUST **STOOOPID** AND FELL INTO YOUR OWN TRAP!!! IDIOT!!! *HAHAHAHAHA*!!!
Scottie: " - bush is an isolationist "
JA: Yyyyyeahhhh... We can *'tell'*. [What an idiot! Both of them.]
Scottie: "The point is ..."
JA: Blah, blah, blah... DO YOU *THINK* [OH, I FORGOT -- YOU *DON'T*] I *CARE*???
" JA: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY *NOW*!
Scottie: "easy for me to say at any time. You are looking for hypocracy where there is none." "
JA: Yyyyyyeahhh..... , 'RRRRRRIGHT'......
" JA: THEN WHY DON'T YOU CONDEMN ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM TODAY!!?? WHY DON'T YOU SAY --- "IF THIS IS WHAT ZIONISM IS ABOUT, THEN I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF IT!"
Scottie: " - I dont want any part of hamas terrorism. So I dont want to support them, easy enough for you to understand? "
JA: CAN YOU SPELL H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y ???
" JA: ALBERT EINSTEIN: "It would be my greatest sadness to see Jews do to Palestinian Arabs, much of what Nazis did to Jews."
Scottie: "the above statement is ok. There is nothing to argue with there but - Fortunatly they didnt do that." "
JA: Yyyyyeahhh... , 'RRRRRIGHT'.
Everybody and dey mama -- those who aren't Zionist -- can see what's going on in Palestine. And the only way you Zionists in the U.S. can stop people from saying so more publicly is to psychologically *TERRORIZE* people with your anti-Semite-baiting and *Zio-Nazi* tactcs here. Or to keep trying to *LIE* to people about the history of Zionism in Palestine. But now even your own historians (like Benny Morris) are revealing the truth. Even ole egotistical, crazy, and still *ZIONIST* Rabbi Michael Lerner now publicly admits: "In Palestine there was just one [leeettle] problem: someone *else* was, another people were, already living there.[!] "
You Zionists threaten journalists, politicians, professors and other academics, business people... --anyone you think you can *TERRORIZE* with illegal spying (as with anti-Zionist Jewish-American Jeffrey Blankfor), harassment, vandalism (as with the Middle East Children's Alliance in Berkeley), attempted bombings (as with those JDL Zionists who were caught by the FBI in Southern California), deaths threats (as I and others have gotten), email harassment, website attacks (al-Jazeera, peace groups, Palestinian human rights groups, personal websites, etc.), even physical attacks (like the crazy Zionist who attacked me near an ant-war rally in S.F., as I mentioned before, either above or in the "anti-Semitism at SF-IMC" thread), SHOOTING AND/OR KILLING JOURNALISTS IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES (we can *all* say "OCCUPIED", now that Sharon has finally admitted it, right, Scottie?), EVEN THE LITERAL PHYSICAL CRUSHING OR *MURDER* OF ISM HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS IN PALESTINE.
IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, THEN ZIONIST JEWS ARE SETTING THEMSELVES UP FOR A BIBLICAL MIGHTY *FALL*!!
Why even very nice people like *angie* are afraid to even say what *CITY*(!) she's in! Who do you think *she's* afraid of: Hamas!!? *NO*! CRAZY ZIONIST JEWS!!!
" JA: I GUESS SHARON WENT UP THERE TO **PRAY** FOR THE INTIFADAH , HUH...!!??
HaHaHaHaHa...!!!
Scottie: " - are you laughing at yourself?" "
JA: YOU'RE TOO **SSSTOOOPID** TO REALIZE THAT I'M LAUGHING AT -- *HAVE* BEEN LAUGHING AT -- **YOU** !!
BUT *THANKS* FOR REPEATING A GOOD LINE OF MINE!! I *ENJOY* HEARING IT!! HAHAHA...!!
(Oh that Scottie cracks me up! If it weren't so sad.)
JA has officially moved into 5 year old debating tactics.
saying ohhh yeah well you are tooo to everything.
ahh I can feel his desperatin even from here.
We will just leave that to speak for itself.
As to the rest ..
" And the only way you Zionists in the U.S."
Your getting forgetful too. You seem to constantly want to pretend that people fit into a certain group because you have spent so many years training how to attack them and you cant get it into your head that you might not be talking to a jew a zionist (in the US) or a person who lives in israel.
Maybe your arguments that fill sentances with capitalized subjectivly defined words such as convince the other 5 year olds but the rest of us expect more substance in your debate.
At least give examples of how I am what you say I am... Oh no there arent any? aww too bad.
"deaths threats (as I and others have gotten), "
Hmm you have had a hard life JA but some of your arguments are effectivly calling for the deaths of their relitives. And you know not that it suprprises me but if you go to a peace rally and argue with them you get your placard stolen and stuff thrown at you as well as some idle threats. Hmm not very good peace protestors.
" website attacks (al-Jazeera, peace groups, Palestinian human rights groups, personal websites, etc.)"
- As far as i understand it there are vastly more liberal hackers than conservative hackers in terms of politically motivated attacks. I guess you only see your side because it isnt a problem until they attack you or your stuff
"IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, THEN ZIONIST JEWS ARE SETTING THEMSELVES UP FOR A BIBLICAL MIGHTY *FALL*!!"
- There are other things of importance besides the war when you are looking at the issue biblically. The war is no good for anyone but people still want to hasten it because they want to hasten the return of the messiah to earth.
"Why even very nice people like *angie* are afraid to even say what *CITY*(!) she's in! Who do you think *she's* afraid of: Hamas!!? *NO*! CRAZY ZIONIST JEWS!!!"
Hmm she could be afraid of hamas.. personally Im not afraid of the crazy zionist jews but Im a little worried about you.
"JA: I'M LAUGHING AT -- *HAVE* BEEN LAUGHING AT -- **YOU** !!"
- since you are making up your own straw men to argue with I would say you are mistaken. You are laughing at the apparent problems in points that you have made up.
saying ohhh yeah well you are tooo to everything.
ahh I can feel his desperatin even from here.
We will just leave that to speak for itself.
As to the rest ..
" And the only way you Zionists in the U.S."
Your getting forgetful too. You seem to constantly want to pretend that people fit into a certain group because you have spent so many years training how to attack them and you cant get it into your head that you might not be talking to a jew a zionist (in the US) or a person who lives in israel.
Maybe your arguments that fill sentances with capitalized subjectivly defined words such as convince the other 5 year olds but the rest of us expect more substance in your debate.
At least give examples of how I am what you say I am... Oh no there arent any? aww too bad.
"deaths threats (as I and others have gotten), "
Hmm you have had a hard life JA but some of your arguments are effectivly calling for the deaths of their relitives. And you know not that it suprprises me but if you go to a peace rally and argue with them you get your placard stolen and stuff thrown at you as well as some idle threats. Hmm not very good peace protestors.
" website attacks (al-Jazeera, peace groups, Palestinian human rights groups, personal websites, etc.)"
- As far as i understand it there are vastly more liberal hackers than conservative hackers in terms of politically motivated attacks. I guess you only see your side because it isnt a problem until they attack you or your stuff
"IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, THEN ZIONIST JEWS ARE SETTING THEMSELVES UP FOR A BIBLICAL MIGHTY *FALL*!!"
- There are other things of importance besides the war when you are looking at the issue biblically. The war is no good for anyone but people still want to hasten it because they want to hasten the return of the messiah to earth.
"Why even very nice people like *angie* are afraid to even say what *CITY*(!) she's in! Who do you think *she's* afraid of: Hamas!!? *NO*! CRAZY ZIONIST JEWS!!!"
Hmm she could be afraid of hamas.. personally Im not afraid of the crazy zionist jews but Im a little worried about you.
"JA: I'M LAUGHING AT -- *HAVE* BEEN LAUGHING AT -- **YOU** !!"
- since you are making up your own straw men to argue with I would say you are mistaken. You are laughing at the apparent problems in points that you have made up.
As for the truth being inside israel, if it is, it will be hidden under ample loads of obfuscation. I would like to know the real history of the seige at Jenin. Unlike the seige at Stalingrad, the enemy is almost defenceless. Why does anyone wonder at this? The hunter does not like his prey to have any advantage. That is why the US went after Iraq. 12 years of UN sanction and a great no fly zone. Almost like the Romulon neutral zone.
As to the hastening of the messiah, Israel had its' chance and they rejected him. They killed the prophets and the saints. Revelation 18:24 But it is the evangelical Christians who worship at the feet of those who call themselves jews but are of the synagogue of satan. These are the ones who think they will hasten the return of the messiah. Sudden destruction cometh.
As to the hastening of the messiah, Israel had its' chance and they rejected him. They killed the prophets and the saints. Revelation 18:24 But it is the evangelical Christians who worship at the feet of those who call themselves jews but are of the synagogue of satan. These are the ones who think they will hasten the return of the messiah. Sudden destruction cometh.
Scottie: "Hmm you have had a hard life JA but some of your arguments are effectivly calling for the deaths of their relitives. And you know not that it suprprises me but if you go to a peace rally and argue with them you get your placard stolen and stuff thrown at you as well as some idle threats. Hmm not very good peace protestors."
JA: Nope...! Nothing stolen.... I wasn't hurt...! I can take care of myself! ..."Idle threats" is right! And the crazy Zionist Jew attacker?--he got ARRESTED by the SFPD!!! Had him SULKING right there in handcuffs--LIKE THE *CRIMINAL* THAT HE WAS--CRAZY ZIONIST JEW HERE!!--for everyone passing by to see! HAHAHAHAHA...!
Scottie: "personally Im not afraid of the crazy zionist jews"
JA: THAT'S BECAUSE YOU *ARE* ONE!!!
HAHAHA...!
JA: Nope...! Nothing stolen.... I wasn't hurt...! I can take care of myself! ..."Idle threats" is right! And the crazy Zionist Jew attacker?--he got ARRESTED by the SFPD!!! Had him SULKING right there in handcuffs--LIKE THE *CRIMINAL* THAT HE WAS--CRAZY ZIONIST JEW HERE!!--for everyone passing by to see! HAHAHAHAHA...!
Scottie: "personally Im not afraid of the crazy zionist jews"
JA: THAT'S BECAUSE YOU *ARE* ONE!!!
HAHAHA...!
Speaking of stuff from the books
I jsut figured out how we can solve the problem of muslims and jews in the middle east.
This is what the PLA (and hamas) draw from their religion
" The final victory will come when the stone and the tree speak, saying, 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, a Jew is hiding behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews."
Now we all knoew about the first part (surely) but the second one gives us a back door so to speak. Gharqad is a sapling that grows in the Negev desert and apparently (according to my PLA source) some Jews plant it around their fields.
What we need is ALOT of Gharqad trees and lots of special irrigation to make sure they all grow ok. (and kill all the other trees and remove the rocks just in case).
http://memri.org/video/segment3_colonelnader.html
I jsut figured out how we can solve the problem of muslims and jews in the middle east.
This is what the PLA (and hamas) draw from their religion
" The final victory will come when the stone and the tree speak, saying, 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, a Jew is hiding behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews."
Now we all knoew about the first part (surely) but the second one gives us a back door so to speak. Gharqad is a sapling that grows in the Negev desert and apparently (according to my PLA source) some Jews plant it around their fields.
What we need is ALOT of Gharqad trees and lots of special irrigation to make sure they all grow ok. (and kill all the other trees and remove the rocks just in case).
http://memri.org/video/segment3_colonelnader.html
Want to know a little about the zionist misinformation organization that is "MEMRI":
Selective Memri
Brian Whitaker investigates whether the 'independent' media institute that translates the Arabic newspapers is quite what it seems
Monday August 12, 2002
For some time now, I have been receiving small gifts from a generous institute in the United States. The gifts are high-quality translations of articles from Arabic newspapers which the institute sends to me by email every few days, entirely free-of-charge.
The emails also go to politicians and academics, as well as to lots of other journalists. The stories they contain are usually interesting.
Whenever I get an email from the institute, several of my Guardian colleagues receive one too and regularly forward their copies to me - sometimes with a note suggesting that I might like to check out the story and write about it.
If the note happens to come from a more senior colleague, I'm left feeling that I really ought to write about it. One example last week was a couple of paragraphs translated by the institute, in which a former doctor in the Iraqi army claimed that Saddam Hussein had personally given orders to amputate the ears of military deserters.
The organisation that makes these translations and sends them out is the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri), based in Washington but with recently-opened offices in London, Berlin and Jerusalem.
Its work is subsidised by US taxpayers because as an "independent, non-partisan, non-profit" organisation, it has tax-deductible status under American law.
Memri's purpose, according to its website, is to bridge the language gap between the west - where few speak Arabic - and the Middle East, by "providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew media".
Despite these high-minded statements, several things make me uneasy whenever I'm asked to look at a story circulated by Memri. First of all, it's a rather mysterious organisation. Its website does not give the names of any people to contact, not even an office address.
The reason for this secrecy, according to a former employee, is that "they don't want suicide bombers walking through the door on Monday morning" (Washington Times, June 20).
This strikes me as a somewhat over-the-top precaution for an institute that simply wants to break down east-west language barriers.
The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease.
Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations told the Washington Times: "Memri's intent is to find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim world and disseminate them as widely as possible."
Memri might, of course, argue that it is seeking to encourage moderation by highlighting the blatant examples of intolerance and extremism. But if so, one would expect it - for the sake of non-partisanship - t o publicise extremist articles in the Hebrew media too.
Although Memri claims that it does provide translations from Hebrew media, I can't recall receiving any.
Evidence from Memri's website also casts doubt on its non-partisan status. Besides supporting liberal democracy, civil society, and the free market, the institute also emphasises "the continuing relevance of Zionism to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel".
That is what its website used to say, but the words about Zionism have now been deleted. The original page, however, can still be found in internet archives.
The reason for Memri's air of secrecy becomes clearer when we look at the people behind it. The co-founder and president of Memri, and the registered owner of its website, is an Israeli called Yigal Carmon.
Mr - or rather, Colonel - Carmon spent 22 years in Israeli military intelligence and later served as counter-terrorism adviser to two Israeli prime ministers, Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin.
Retrieving another now-deleted page from the archives of Memri's website also throws up a list of its staff. Of the six people named, three - including Col Carmon - are described as having worked for Israeli intelligence.
Among the other three, one served in the Israeli army's Northern Command Ordnance Corps, one has an academic background, and the sixth is a former stand-up comedian.
Col Carmon's co-founder at Memri is Meyrav Wurmser, who is also director of the centre for Middle East policy at the Indianapolis-based Hudson Institute, which bills itself as "America's premier source of applied research on enduring policy challenges".
The ubiquitous Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's defence policy board, recently joined Hudson's board of trustees.
Ms Wurmser is the author of an academic paper entitled Can Israel Survive Post-Zionism? in which she argues that leftwing Israeli intellectuals pose "more than a passing threat" to the state of Israel, undermining its soul and reducing its will for self-defence.
In addition, Ms Wurmser is a highly qualified, internationally recognised, inspiring and knowledgeable speaker on the Middle East whose presence would make any "event, radio or television show a unique one" - according to Benador Associates, a public relations company which touts her services.
Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations but there are other reasons to be concerned about its output.
The email it circulated last week about Saddam Hussein ordering people's ears to be cut off was an extract from a longer article in the pan-Arab newspaper, al-Hayat, by Adil Awadh who claimed to have first-hand knowledge of it.
It was the sort of tale about Iraqi brutality that newspapers would happily reprint without checking, especially in the current atmosphere of war fever. It may well be true, but it needs to be treated with a little circumspection.
Mr Awadh is not exactly an independent figure. He is, or at least was, a member of the Iraqi National Accord, an exiled Iraqi opposition group backed by the US - and neither al-Hayat nor Memri mentioned this.
Also, Mr Awadh's allegation first came to light some four years ago, when he had a strong personal reason for making it. According to a Washington Post report in 1998, the amputation claim formed part of his application for political asylum in the United States.
At the time, he was one of six Iraqis under arrest in the US as suspected terrorists or Iraqi intelligence agents, and he was trying to show that the Americans had made a mistake.
Earlier this year, Memri scored two significant propaganda successes against Saudi Arabia. The first was its translation of an article from al-Riyadh newspaper in which a columnist wrote that Jews use the blood of Christian or Muslim children in pastries for the Purim religious festival.
The writer, a university teacher, was apparently relying on an anti-semitic myth that dates back to the middle ages. What this demonstrated, more than anything, was the ignorance of many Arabs - even those highly educated - about Judaism and Israel, and their readiness to believe such ridiculous stories.
But Memri claimed al-Riyadh was a Saudi "government newspaper" - in fact it's privately owned - implying that the article had some form of official approval.
Al-Riyadh's editor said he had not seen the article before publication because he had been abroad. He apologised without hesitation and sacked his columnist, but by then the damage had been done.
Memri's next success came a month later when Saudi Arabia's ambassador to London wrote a poem entitled The Martyrs - about a young woman suicide bomber - which was published in al-Hayat newspaper.
Memri sent out translated extracts from the poem, which it described as "praising suicide bombers". Whether that was the poem's real message is a matter of interpretation. It could, perhaps more plausibly, be read as condemning the political ineffectiveness of Arab leaders, but Memri's interpretation was reported, almost without question, by the western media.
These incidents involving Saudi Arabia should not be viewed in isolation. They are part of building a case against the kingdom and persuading the United States to treat it as an enemy, rather than an ally.
It's a campaign that the Israeli government and American neo-conservatives have been pushing since early this year - one aspect of which was the bizarre anti-Saudi briefing at the Pentagon, hosted last month by Richard Perle.
To anyone who reads Arabic newspapers regularly, it should be obvious that the items highlighted by Memri are those that suit its agenda and are not representative of the newspapers' content as a whole.
The danger is that many of the senators, congressmen and "opinion formers" who don't read Arabic but receive Memri's emails may get the idea that these extreme examples are not only truly representative but also reflect the policies of Arab governments.
Memri's Col Carmon seems eager to encourage them in that belief. In Washington last April, in testimony to the House committee on international relations, he portrayed the Arab media as part of a wide-scale system of government-sponsored indoctrination.
"The controlled media of the Arab governments conveys hatred of the west, and in particular, of the United States," he said. "Prior to September 11, one could frequently find articles which openly supported, or even called for, terrorist attacks against the United States ...
"The United States is sometimes compared to Nazi Germany, President Bush to Hitler, Guantanamo to Auschwitz," he said.
In the case of the al-Jazeera satellite channel, he added, "the overwhelming majority of guests and callers are typically anti-American and anti-semitic".
Unfortunately, it is on the basis of such sweeping generalisations that much of American foreign policy is built these days.
As far as relations between the west and the Arab world are concerned, language is a barrier that perpetuates ignorance and can easily foster misunderstanding.
All it takes is a small but active group of Israelis to exploit that barrier for their own ends and start changing western perceptions of Arabs for the worse.
It is not difficult to see what Arabs might do to counter that. A group of Arab media companies could get together and publish translations of articles that more accurately reflect the content of their newspapers.
It would certainly not be beyond their means. But, as usual, they may prefer to sit back and grumble about the machinations of Israeli intelligence veterans.
FROM: http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html
- Typical zionist misinformation that people like Scottie use for propaganda to support the terrorist forces occupying Palestine. MEMRI replied to the article, but the bullshit they spouted does not answer the accusations. Read it at the above address.
- As to the final point made by this article, the Arabs should NOT do the same in my opinion. The zionists have to stoop to this level to defend their illegal occupation and brutality by pointing fingers at everyone else, highlighting the short comings of the Arabs while failing to accept that they are the ILLEGAL OCCUPIERS and the Palestinians are the long suffering OCCUPIED. Perhaps some zionists (some of whom spend their entire sad lives trying to discredit the Palestinian claim to their stolen land) should trawl through the shit that is zionist propaganda and rip it apart - we know its bullshit - the world is just starting to realise as the mass zionist media loses its grip and the internet allows people to learn the history without the zionist spin. There are zionist who want to deny you this right to information - to keep the zionist lies alive - people like the ADL and "Honest Reporting" (what a laugh!) ... Stop these zionists from censoring the truth ...
Selective Memri
Brian Whitaker investigates whether the 'independent' media institute that translates the Arabic newspapers is quite what it seems
Monday August 12, 2002
For some time now, I have been receiving small gifts from a generous institute in the United States. The gifts are high-quality translations of articles from Arabic newspapers which the institute sends to me by email every few days, entirely free-of-charge.
The emails also go to politicians and academics, as well as to lots of other journalists. The stories they contain are usually interesting.
Whenever I get an email from the institute, several of my Guardian colleagues receive one too and regularly forward their copies to me - sometimes with a note suggesting that I might like to check out the story and write about it.
If the note happens to come from a more senior colleague, I'm left feeling that I really ought to write about it. One example last week was a couple of paragraphs translated by the institute, in which a former doctor in the Iraqi army claimed that Saddam Hussein had personally given orders to amputate the ears of military deserters.
The organisation that makes these translations and sends them out is the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri), based in Washington but with recently-opened offices in London, Berlin and Jerusalem.
Its work is subsidised by US taxpayers because as an "independent, non-partisan, non-profit" organisation, it has tax-deductible status under American law.
Memri's purpose, according to its website, is to bridge the language gap between the west - where few speak Arabic - and the Middle East, by "providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew media".
Despite these high-minded statements, several things make me uneasy whenever I'm asked to look at a story circulated by Memri. First of all, it's a rather mysterious organisation. Its website does not give the names of any people to contact, not even an office address.
The reason for this secrecy, according to a former employee, is that "they don't want suicide bombers walking through the door on Monday morning" (Washington Times, June 20).
This strikes me as a somewhat over-the-top precaution for an institute that simply wants to break down east-west language barriers.
The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease.
Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations told the Washington Times: "Memri's intent is to find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim world and disseminate them as widely as possible."
Memri might, of course, argue that it is seeking to encourage moderation by highlighting the blatant examples of intolerance and extremism. But if so, one would expect it - for the sake of non-partisanship - t o publicise extremist articles in the Hebrew media too.
Although Memri claims that it does provide translations from Hebrew media, I can't recall receiving any.
Evidence from Memri's website also casts doubt on its non-partisan status. Besides supporting liberal democracy, civil society, and the free market, the institute also emphasises "the continuing relevance of Zionism to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel".
That is what its website used to say, but the words about Zionism have now been deleted. The original page, however, can still be found in internet archives.
The reason for Memri's air of secrecy becomes clearer when we look at the people behind it. The co-founder and president of Memri, and the registered owner of its website, is an Israeli called Yigal Carmon.
Mr - or rather, Colonel - Carmon spent 22 years in Israeli military intelligence and later served as counter-terrorism adviser to two Israeli prime ministers, Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin.
Retrieving another now-deleted page from the archives of Memri's website also throws up a list of its staff. Of the six people named, three - including Col Carmon - are described as having worked for Israeli intelligence.
Among the other three, one served in the Israeli army's Northern Command Ordnance Corps, one has an academic background, and the sixth is a former stand-up comedian.
Col Carmon's co-founder at Memri is Meyrav Wurmser, who is also director of the centre for Middle East policy at the Indianapolis-based Hudson Institute, which bills itself as "America's premier source of applied research on enduring policy challenges".
The ubiquitous Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's defence policy board, recently joined Hudson's board of trustees.
Ms Wurmser is the author of an academic paper entitled Can Israel Survive Post-Zionism? in which she argues that leftwing Israeli intellectuals pose "more than a passing threat" to the state of Israel, undermining its soul and reducing its will for self-defence.
In addition, Ms Wurmser is a highly qualified, internationally recognised, inspiring and knowledgeable speaker on the Middle East whose presence would make any "event, radio or television show a unique one" - according to Benador Associates, a public relations company which touts her services.
Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations but there are other reasons to be concerned about its output.
The email it circulated last week about Saddam Hussein ordering people's ears to be cut off was an extract from a longer article in the pan-Arab newspaper, al-Hayat, by Adil Awadh who claimed to have first-hand knowledge of it.
It was the sort of tale about Iraqi brutality that newspapers would happily reprint without checking, especially in the current atmosphere of war fever. It may well be true, but it needs to be treated with a little circumspection.
Mr Awadh is not exactly an independent figure. He is, or at least was, a member of the Iraqi National Accord, an exiled Iraqi opposition group backed by the US - and neither al-Hayat nor Memri mentioned this.
Also, Mr Awadh's allegation first came to light some four years ago, when he had a strong personal reason for making it. According to a Washington Post report in 1998, the amputation claim formed part of his application for political asylum in the United States.
At the time, he was one of six Iraqis under arrest in the US as suspected terrorists or Iraqi intelligence agents, and he was trying to show that the Americans had made a mistake.
Earlier this year, Memri scored two significant propaganda successes against Saudi Arabia. The first was its translation of an article from al-Riyadh newspaper in which a columnist wrote that Jews use the blood of Christian or Muslim children in pastries for the Purim religious festival.
The writer, a university teacher, was apparently relying on an anti-semitic myth that dates back to the middle ages. What this demonstrated, more than anything, was the ignorance of many Arabs - even those highly educated - about Judaism and Israel, and their readiness to believe such ridiculous stories.
But Memri claimed al-Riyadh was a Saudi "government newspaper" - in fact it's privately owned - implying that the article had some form of official approval.
Al-Riyadh's editor said he had not seen the article before publication because he had been abroad. He apologised without hesitation and sacked his columnist, but by then the damage had been done.
Memri's next success came a month later when Saudi Arabia's ambassador to London wrote a poem entitled The Martyrs - about a young woman suicide bomber - which was published in al-Hayat newspaper.
Memri sent out translated extracts from the poem, which it described as "praising suicide bombers". Whether that was the poem's real message is a matter of interpretation. It could, perhaps more plausibly, be read as condemning the political ineffectiveness of Arab leaders, but Memri's interpretation was reported, almost without question, by the western media.
These incidents involving Saudi Arabia should not be viewed in isolation. They are part of building a case against the kingdom and persuading the United States to treat it as an enemy, rather than an ally.
It's a campaign that the Israeli government and American neo-conservatives have been pushing since early this year - one aspect of which was the bizarre anti-Saudi briefing at the Pentagon, hosted last month by Richard Perle.
To anyone who reads Arabic newspapers regularly, it should be obvious that the items highlighted by Memri are those that suit its agenda and are not representative of the newspapers' content as a whole.
The danger is that many of the senators, congressmen and "opinion formers" who don't read Arabic but receive Memri's emails may get the idea that these extreme examples are not only truly representative but also reflect the policies of Arab governments.
Memri's Col Carmon seems eager to encourage them in that belief. In Washington last April, in testimony to the House committee on international relations, he portrayed the Arab media as part of a wide-scale system of government-sponsored indoctrination.
"The controlled media of the Arab governments conveys hatred of the west, and in particular, of the United States," he said. "Prior to September 11, one could frequently find articles which openly supported, or even called for, terrorist attacks against the United States ...
"The United States is sometimes compared to Nazi Germany, President Bush to Hitler, Guantanamo to Auschwitz," he said.
In the case of the al-Jazeera satellite channel, he added, "the overwhelming majority of guests and callers are typically anti-American and anti-semitic".
Unfortunately, it is on the basis of such sweeping generalisations that much of American foreign policy is built these days.
As far as relations between the west and the Arab world are concerned, language is a barrier that perpetuates ignorance and can easily foster misunderstanding.
All it takes is a small but active group of Israelis to exploit that barrier for their own ends and start changing western perceptions of Arabs for the worse.
It is not difficult to see what Arabs might do to counter that. A group of Arab media companies could get together and publish translations of articles that more accurately reflect the content of their newspapers.
It would certainly not be beyond their means. But, as usual, they may prefer to sit back and grumble about the machinations of Israeli intelligence veterans.
FROM: http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html
- Typical zionist misinformation that people like Scottie use for propaganda to support the terrorist forces occupying Palestine. MEMRI replied to the article, but the bullshit they spouted does not answer the accusations. Read it at the above address.
- As to the final point made by this article, the Arabs should NOT do the same in my opinion. The zionists have to stoop to this level to defend their illegal occupation and brutality by pointing fingers at everyone else, highlighting the short comings of the Arabs while failing to accept that they are the ILLEGAL OCCUPIERS and the Palestinians are the long suffering OCCUPIED. Perhaps some zionists (some of whom spend their entire sad lives trying to discredit the Palestinian claim to their stolen land) should trawl through the shit that is zionist propaganda and rip it apart - we know its bullshit - the world is just starting to realise as the mass zionist media loses its grip and the internet allows people to learn the history without the zionist spin. There are zionist who want to deny you this right to information - to keep the zionist lies alive - people like the ADL and "Honest Reporting" (what a laugh!) ... Stop these zionists from censoring the truth ...
I note on Saturday (yesterday) the Israeli army carried out another assassination of a Hamas leader.
Abdullah Kawasme was gunned down as he was exiting his automobile in Hebron.
Response from Colin Powell was predictable, "a cause for concern" he stated in what could only be likened to a slap on the wrist.
Where was his accusations of terrorism? Of murder? Where was the US government's so called concern for peace, justice, democracy, fair play? Its greatly misused word "freedom"?
It is simply outrageous that this terrorist state can kill at will, (using US weaponry), lie about it, and then be excused like a naughty child by a tolerant, amused parent. Hell, not!
However, according to Uri Avnery, Bush is a huge fan of Sharon. I quote a few paragraphs here from Avnery's 26 may 03 article entitled "Bush's Choice" which can be found at http.//http://www.avnery-news.co.il.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"George Bush worships Ariel Sharon. He would have liked to be exactly like him; not a combat dodger but a war hero; not Daddy's son but a self-made man; not the owner of a ranch for visitors but an authentic gentleman farmer who built his ranch with his own hands.
George, it seems, believes Arik. When Arik proclaims his readiness for "painful concessions" he believes him. When Arik announces his agreement to a Palestinian state, he believes him. When Arik seems ready to evacuate settlements and outposts, he believes him. When Arik promises to help Abu-Mazen, he believes him. He cannot imagine that Arik, his friend, his comrade, the upright soldier, will look him in the eye and lie through his teeth.
But Ariel Sharon has no friends, and never had. He has no comrades, and never had. For Sharon, Bush is just another naive American there to be cheated for the sacred cause of Greater Israel.
Sharon would not dream of really dismantling outposts, freezing settlements, agree to borders even remotely resembling the pre-1967 Green Line.
As long as he is requested only words all is well. When actions are expected, both Bush and Sharon will face a hard choice".
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
I mentioned the above to show that anyone who believes Sharon is going to in any way allow a REAL Palestinian state is living in a fool's paradise. I still remember his speech to the Government back on Christmas Day of 2002 wherein he stated that he favoured " a totally unarmed Palestinian state with reduced borders", etc.
In other words, similar to a serfdom, still under the oppression and control of Israel.
Incidentally, as one would expect, Hamas has vowed revenge. This is what Sharon wants, of course. As long as Hamas is retaliating, he doesn't have to worry about dealing with any of the conditions of the Road Map.
So he continues to assassinate "militants" (where did that pathetic word come from -- ooops!
Forgot there for a moment! We're dealing with the Israeli propaganda machine again!). We'll see another suicide bomb now, then another Israeli missile attack, then another suicide bombing just like always.
And Hamas will be called "terrorists" while the Israeli killing machine will be the brave heroes saving its little state from harm. Can the people of Israel be this gullible?
Actually the people of Israel, we are told, are against these assassination attacks. But when did Sharon ever listen to anyone, much less the people he's supposed to be governing?
This road map is a big laugh. Bush needs to go into the next election as having a victory somewhere; Sharon wants an excuse to continue his state terrorism under the guise of pretending to agree with Bush.
Meanwhile Bush and Powell are wilfully blind (as they and former US presidents have been) to the atrocities Israel is carrying out on a daily basis.
I believe in a stand alone, true Palestinian state and nothing else but! No Israeli occupation, no curfews, no assassinations, no checkpoints, no re-routing of water, no destruction of olive and orange groves.
I want it to have full atonomy over its own people, have its own police and security personnel, and its own defined borders. Anything else is a complete sham!
Three more "militants" (another Israeli word for anyone it wishes to dispose of) were killed by tank fire in Gaza last night (Saturday), and tonight on BBC World there was Colin Powell denouncing Hamas and "other militant groups" and deftly skipping over the very real atrocities of his great friend, Israel.
The sheep of the world are out there listening to this bull and believing it.
It certainly tells those of us with a brain that lying by evasion, blaming the other side (in this case, as in all cases, the US and Israel blame Palesteinians) and blatant propaganda is alive and well with the supporters of this terrorist state.
Colin Powell would have won the respect of the world had he clearly and bluntly denounced Israel's practice of assassinations, of the fact that it was Israel's IDF who started this round of violence a few weeks ago, and that if the government didn't rein in its murderous thugs, all aid from the US would cease forthwith.
Instead he looked and sounded like a propaganda tool. And to think once upon a time there were those of us who actually thought he would make the world a better place. Not any more.
Oh, right. There's an election forthcoming!
Which is, of course, all well and good, but I'm relieved to know that there is a higher, much higher, power!
The sheep of the world are out there listening to this bull and believing it.
It certainly tells those of us with a brain that lying by evasion, blaming the other side (in this case, as in all cases, the US and Israel blame Palesteinians) and blatant propaganda is alive and well with the supporters of this terrorist state.
Colin Powell would have won the respect of the world had he clearly and bluntly denounced Israel's practice of assassinations, of the fact that it was Israel's IDF who started this round of violence a few weeks ago, and that if the government didn't rein in its murderous thugs, all aid from the US would cease forthwith.
Instead he looked and sounded like a propaganda tool. And to think once upon a time there were those of us who actually thought he would make the world a better place. Not any more.
Oh, right. There's an election forthcoming!
Which is, of course, all well and good, but I'm relieved to know that there is a higher, much higher, power!
.., by .. Wednesday June 18, 2003 at 12:13 PM: "So let me get this straight, Israel surives -- [ *FLOATS*! ! ] -- on a sea of U.S. money, ($3 Billion) while Eygpt, at $2 Billion does what?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee, Zionist propagandists don't even like to use a decent moniker. I guess that way they don't have to be held more personally accountable in any way for what they say.
The figure for Israel $3 BILLION, represents the *BASIC* MINIMAL AID package of approximately $1.8 BILLION in direct, basic military aid and $1.2 BILLION in direct, basic economic aid. But this figure does not include BILLIONS in other forms of U.S. aid, like BILLIONS foreign loan guarantees (some of which Israel has often defaulted on), other non-basic aid, secondary aid, indirect aid, other economic arrangements beneficial to Israel, etc. -- LOTS OF ECONOMIC SIDE AID OF WHICH THE U.S. PUBLIC ISN'T INFORMED.
THE ROUND FIGURE IS ACTUALLY FROM **$6-$10 BILLION** PER YEAR TO ISRAEL !!
(depending on how you add everything up, conservatively or more liberally)
This doesn't even count Israel always coming back to its rich Uncle (Sam) for expensive 'incidental' expenses, like, more for the Israeli economic recession, loss of tourism dollars, or cost of the Intifada, or the cost of brining in more (e.g., Russian) immigrants (or even "Peruvian Indian 'Jews'", etc.), or bribes for staying out of wars against Iraq, or cost of civil defense during wars with Iraq. Oh, there's always a way for Israel to hit up its rich Uncle for more money.
LET'S SEE:
THE JEWISH POPULATION OF ISRAEL IS ABOUT 5 MILLION.
(I only count the Jewish population because *that's* -- of course -- the only reason Israel is gets such *HUGE* U.S. foreign aid.)
THE AREA OF ISRAEL IS ABOUT 8,000 SQ.MI.
THE POPULATION OF EGYPT IS ABOUT *70* MILLION !
THE AREA OF EGYPT IS ABOUT *400,000*SQ.MI. !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO:
EGYPT HAS APPROXIMATELY *14* TIMES JEWISH THE POPULATION OF ISRAEL !!
and
EGYPT HAS APPROXIMATELY *50* TIMES THE AREA OF ISRAEL !!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISRAEL IS ABOUT THE SIZE OF NEW JERSEY.
EGYPT IS ABOUT *8.5* *TIMES* THE SIZE OF PENNSYLVANIA !!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISRAEL IS THE *LARGEST* RECIPIENT OF TOTAL U.S. FOREIGN AID PER YEAR !
Total U.S. yearly aid to Israel is approximately ONE-THIRD of the U.S. foreign aid budget, even though Israel comprises just .001% of the world's population and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes.
(Indeed, ISRAEL'S GNP is HIGHER THAN the *COMBINED* GNP of *EGYPT*+LEBANON+SYRIA+JORDAN+THE WEST BANK+GAZA.)
AND AS I HAVE POINTED OUT IN THE PAST U.S. AID TO ISRAEL REPRESENTS THE **LARGEST** PARTIAL TRANSFERENCE OF WEALTH FROM ONE COUNTRY TO ANOTHER IN ***ALL*** OF WORLD HISTORY !!!
AND ***FAR*** MORE TOTAL FOREIGN AID FROM ONE COUNTRY (here, the U.S.) TO ANOTHER COUNTRY (here, Israel) THAN ***ANY*** OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE POPULATION OF AFRICA IS ABOUT *780* MILLION PEOPLE !!
ISRAEL GETS MORE U.S. *TOTAL* FOREIGN AID THAT *ALL* OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CONTINENT OF AFRICA !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINCE 1949, U.S. TOTAL FOREIGN AID TO ISRAEL HAS BEEN ABOUT ***$100 BILLION*** !!!
THIS TOTAL AID HAS COST THE THE U.S. TAXPAYERS ABOUT ***150 BILLION** !!!
(2003 approx. estimated order of magnitude)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
( This doesn't include other much higher, and perhaps more SUBJECTIVE COSTS related to Israel like
- the 1973 OPEC Arab Oil Embargo against the U.S.;
- other U.S. military expenses to defend/support Israel's wars in Lebanon (like shelling Lebanon from a U.S. battle fleet or stationing marines there), Egypt, Syria, etc.;
- maintaining extra U.S. naval fleets presences;
- 9-11, where U.S. foreign policy, imperialism, "meddling", treatment and double standards in Middle Eastern countries related to Israel was one of bin Laden's primary grievances;
- and even the cost of the two U.S.-Iraq Wars, arguably fought for Israel as certainly one of the primary considerations (besides control of oil).
THESE COSTS INCLUDED 100's OF BILLIONS MORE! A CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR REPORT PUTS THE *GRAND* TOTAL ESTIMATE AT OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS !!!)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WE CAN BE SURE THAT IT HAS BEEN NO WHERE NEAR THAT FOR EGYPT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources:
The Christian Science Monitor, December 09, 2002
"Economist tallies swelling cost of Israel to US"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.htm
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
"A Conservative Total for U.S. Aid to Israel: $91 Billion—and Counting"
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/010201/0101015.html
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
"U.S Financial Aid To Israel: Figures, Facts, and Impact"
http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee, Zionist propagandists don't even like to use a decent moniker. I guess that way they don't have to be held more personally accountable in any way for what they say.
The figure for Israel $3 BILLION, represents the *BASIC* MINIMAL AID package of approximately $1.8 BILLION in direct, basic military aid and $1.2 BILLION in direct, basic economic aid. But this figure does not include BILLIONS in other forms of U.S. aid, like BILLIONS foreign loan guarantees (some of which Israel has often defaulted on), other non-basic aid, secondary aid, indirect aid, other economic arrangements beneficial to Israel, etc. -- LOTS OF ECONOMIC SIDE AID OF WHICH THE U.S. PUBLIC ISN'T INFORMED.
THE ROUND FIGURE IS ACTUALLY FROM **$6-$10 BILLION** PER YEAR TO ISRAEL !!
(depending on how you add everything up, conservatively or more liberally)
This doesn't even count Israel always coming back to its rich Uncle (Sam) for expensive 'incidental' expenses, like, more for the Israeli economic recession, loss of tourism dollars, or cost of the Intifada, or the cost of brining in more (e.g., Russian) immigrants (or even "Peruvian Indian 'Jews'", etc.), or bribes for staying out of wars against Iraq, or cost of civil defense during wars with Iraq. Oh, there's always a way for Israel to hit up its rich Uncle for more money.
LET'S SEE:
THE JEWISH POPULATION OF ISRAEL IS ABOUT 5 MILLION.
(I only count the Jewish population because *that's* -- of course -- the only reason Israel is gets such *HUGE* U.S. foreign aid.)
THE AREA OF ISRAEL IS ABOUT 8,000 SQ.MI.
THE POPULATION OF EGYPT IS ABOUT *70* MILLION !
THE AREA OF EGYPT IS ABOUT *400,000*SQ.MI. !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO:
EGYPT HAS APPROXIMATELY *14* TIMES JEWISH THE POPULATION OF ISRAEL !!
and
EGYPT HAS APPROXIMATELY *50* TIMES THE AREA OF ISRAEL !!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISRAEL IS ABOUT THE SIZE OF NEW JERSEY.
EGYPT IS ABOUT *8.5* *TIMES* THE SIZE OF PENNSYLVANIA !!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISRAEL IS THE *LARGEST* RECIPIENT OF TOTAL U.S. FOREIGN AID PER YEAR !
Total U.S. yearly aid to Israel is approximately ONE-THIRD of the U.S. foreign aid budget, even though Israel comprises just .001% of the world's population and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes.
(Indeed, ISRAEL'S GNP is HIGHER THAN the *COMBINED* GNP of *EGYPT*+LEBANON+SYRIA+JORDAN+THE WEST BANK+GAZA.)
AND AS I HAVE POINTED OUT IN THE PAST U.S. AID TO ISRAEL REPRESENTS THE **LARGEST** PARTIAL TRANSFERENCE OF WEALTH FROM ONE COUNTRY TO ANOTHER IN ***ALL*** OF WORLD HISTORY !!!
AND ***FAR*** MORE TOTAL FOREIGN AID FROM ONE COUNTRY (here, the U.S.) TO ANOTHER COUNTRY (here, Israel) THAN ***ANY*** OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE POPULATION OF AFRICA IS ABOUT *780* MILLION PEOPLE !!
ISRAEL GETS MORE U.S. *TOTAL* FOREIGN AID THAT *ALL* OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CONTINENT OF AFRICA !!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINCE 1949, U.S. TOTAL FOREIGN AID TO ISRAEL HAS BEEN ABOUT ***$100 BILLION*** !!!
THIS TOTAL AID HAS COST THE THE U.S. TAXPAYERS ABOUT ***150 BILLION** !!!
(2003 approx. estimated order of magnitude)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
( This doesn't include other much higher, and perhaps more SUBJECTIVE COSTS related to Israel like
- the 1973 OPEC Arab Oil Embargo against the U.S.;
- other U.S. military expenses to defend/support Israel's wars in Lebanon (like shelling Lebanon from a U.S. battle fleet or stationing marines there), Egypt, Syria, etc.;
- maintaining extra U.S. naval fleets presences;
- 9-11, where U.S. foreign policy, imperialism, "meddling", treatment and double standards in Middle Eastern countries related to Israel was one of bin Laden's primary grievances;
- and even the cost of the two U.S.-Iraq Wars, arguably fought for Israel as certainly one of the primary considerations (besides control of oil).
THESE COSTS INCLUDED 100's OF BILLIONS MORE! A CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR REPORT PUTS THE *GRAND* TOTAL ESTIMATE AT OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS !!!)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WE CAN BE SURE THAT IT HAS BEEN NO WHERE NEAR THAT FOR EGYPT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources:
The Christian Science Monitor, December 09, 2002
"Economist tallies swelling cost of Israel to US"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.htm
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
"A Conservative Total for U.S. Aid to Israel: $91 Billion—and Counting"
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/010201/0101015.html
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
"U.S Financial Aid To Israel: Figures, Facts, and Impact"
http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
Memri - yes I am aware of who they are Im surprised he isnt aware of who they are. They are not really "shadowy" I believe i saw an interview with the guys once. and yes it is all about arab into english not hebrew into english.
- As to their "impartiality, they are at least as independant than the "independant sources" that calculate how many people died in iraq.
Clearly the guardian is fighting to see a conspiricy where there is none
The point however is
"Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations"
And if they were wrong they WOULD be disputed therefore it is a valid reference point
"These incidents involving Saudi Arabia should not be viewed in isolation. They are part of building a case against the kingdom and persuading the United States to treat it as an enemy, rather than an ally."
The person complains about bias in memri and then jump to a mega conspiricy theory. As far as i understand memri, it is just a natural outshoot of translating arab sources to be seeming to build a case against certain countries which would like to hide the fact that their media is pretty anti israel.
How widely spread is the translations of the hamas charter? and yet surely it is a vital part of the middle east situation. I would say there is STILL not enough translation.
"It's a campaign that the Israeli government and American neo-conservatives have been pushing since early this year - one aspect of which was the bizarre anti-Saudi briefing at the Pentagon, hosted last month by Richard Perle."
We are NOT going to attack saudi arabia, if richard perl wants that then he is pissing in the wind and it is only going to blow back onto his face.. that would be insane on SO many levels just like attacking china (even if saudi arabia does produce terrorists or china does sell WMD).. Everyone with half a brain knows that.
"Unfortunately, it is on the basis of such sweeping generalisations that much of American foreign policy is built these days."
Have you looked around this board lately? If it is true here on a Sanfransisco board it is most certainly going to be true in saudi arabia etc where opinion of US is lower. surely they are not saying the "sweeping generalization" is incorrect? We all know what world opinion of the hegemon is like particularly arab world opinion (if I have to Ill break out the surveys again)
You have taken a attack on the site (which really only said the isnt enough hebrew being translated into english which as far as i can tell is rubbish) and interpreted it as discreditoing the site despite the fact that the pro palistinian guardian actually accepted their translations as correct.
"Stop these zionists from censoring the truth ..."
You said the arabs shouldnt provide their side? you just want to censor the jews? er...
Angie
"Where was his accusations of terrorism? Of murder? "
- I am sure there are enough people in the world calling it murder.
"I mentioned the above to show that anyone who believes Sharon is going to in any way allow a REAL Palestinian state is living in a fool's paradise."
You have stated the opinion of someone who doesnt like sharon. (and incidentally seems to think bush is a good guy who has just been mislead) That proves nothing.
"In other words, similar to a serfdom, still under the oppression and control of Israel."
Lucky you arent doing translations.
- As to their "impartiality, they are at least as independant than the "independant sources" that calculate how many people died in iraq.
Clearly the guardian is fighting to see a conspiricy where there is none
The point however is
"Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations"
And if they were wrong they WOULD be disputed therefore it is a valid reference point
"These incidents involving Saudi Arabia should not be viewed in isolation. They are part of building a case against the kingdom and persuading the United States to treat it as an enemy, rather than an ally."
The person complains about bias in memri and then jump to a mega conspiricy theory. As far as i understand memri, it is just a natural outshoot of translating arab sources to be seeming to build a case against certain countries which would like to hide the fact that their media is pretty anti israel.
How widely spread is the translations of the hamas charter? and yet surely it is a vital part of the middle east situation. I would say there is STILL not enough translation.
"It's a campaign that the Israeli government and American neo-conservatives have been pushing since early this year - one aspect of which was the bizarre anti-Saudi briefing at the Pentagon, hosted last month by Richard Perle."
We are NOT going to attack saudi arabia, if richard perl wants that then he is pissing in the wind and it is only going to blow back onto his face.. that would be insane on SO many levels just like attacking china (even if saudi arabia does produce terrorists or china does sell WMD).. Everyone with half a brain knows that.
"Unfortunately, it is on the basis of such sweeping generalisations that much of American foreign policy is built these days."
Have you looked around this board lately? If it is true here on a Sanfransisco board it is most certainly going to be true in saudi arabia etc where opinion of US is lower. surely they are not saying the "sweeping generalization" is incorrect? We all know what world opinion of the hegemon is like particularly arab world opinion (if I have to Ill break out the surveys again)
You have taken a attack on the site (which really only said the isnt enough hebrew being translated into english which as far as i can tell is rubbish) and interpreted it as discreditoing the site despite the fact that the pro palistinian guardian actually accepted their translations as correct.
"Stop these zionists from censoring the truth ..."
You said the arabs shouldnt provide their side? you just want to censor the jews? er...
Angie
"Where was his accusations of terrorism? Of murder? "
- I am sure there are enough people in the world calling it murder.
"I mentioned the above to show that anyone who believes Sharon is going to in any way allow a REAL Palestinian state is living in a fool's paradise."
You have stated the opinion of someone who doesnt like sharon. (and incidentally seems to think bush is a good guy who has just been mislead) That proves nothing.
"In other words, similar to a serfdom, still under the oppression and control of Israel."
Lucky you arent doing translations.
I don't know what you would call it, Scottie, but where I live when someone assassinates another human being it's murder. To pretend it is anything else is but to bury one's head in the sand.
I don't know of anyone who likes Sharon. Most people do not like war criminals.
And with respect to your comments re "translation", once again I can only assume you know what you're talking about. If you do, it is safe to say you're the only one.
I don't know of anyone who likes Sharon. Most people do not like war criminals.
And with respect to your comments re "translation", once again I can only assume you know what you're talking about. If you do, it is safe to say you're the only one.
Talk about a hack job, look at what Whitaker actually says and doesn't say:
> Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations
So what's the problem?
Ironically, whereas Whitaker makes false complaints about Memri's disclosures, he neglects to mention his own agenda and conflict of interest. It just happens that Whitaker runs several anti-Israel web-sites. Makes you wonder about his paper's objectivity, no?
> MEMRI replied to the article, but the bullshit they spouted does not answer the accusations. <
Let's take a look and let the readers here reach their own conclusions:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Whitaker's Selective Memri is an example of selective journalism.
Disregarding the Guardian's own code - "A newspaper's primary office is the gathering of news" - Whitaker has simply recycled inaccurate and previously published material.
Two days before his piece appeared on the web, he called our Washington office to ask for the Arabic original of an article translated by Memri from the London daily Al-Hayat. He could have used this opportunity to check his facts. He chose not to do so.
To start with, Memri is not a "mysterious organisation". Our telephone number, fax and email appear on every dispatch. True, the office address is no longer posted on our website. Whitaker may scoff, but we have received threats from rightwing radicals in America.
Had he asked, we would have provided him with our addresses in Washington, London, Berlin, Moscow and Jerusalem (as well as informing him that I retired from government office almost a decade ago).
We could also have told Whitaker that we have over 30 employees of different nationalities, rather than six. But then, facts might have got in the way of a "good story".
Memri is involved in a variety of projects, apart from translating material into most European languages and Turkish: an economic project, headed by a former World Bank expert, an Arab anti-semitism documentation project, studies of school books from Arab educational systems, monitoring Friday sermons in the Arab world.
Most important and innovative is our reform project, which highlights liberal voices, not only from western capitals, but also from within the Arab and Muslim world, courageously calling for political, religious, social and economic reform, and taking all the risks involved.
Is this "Selective Memri"? No, it's Selective Whitaker. He cites the Memri-translated "Blood Libel" - an article that resurrected an ancient myth that accuses Jews of using the blood of (non-Jewish) children to make a special pastry for the Purim religious festival - published by the Saudi al-Riyadh daily.
This is a paper which, contrary to Whitaker's statement, is identified as government-controlled by the Saudi government's website, by the BBC and by news agencies such as Associated Press.
It is true that the editor later apologised and the columnist was sacked. Memri reported all this, giving the paper credit even though these events came in the wake of severe US criticism.
Whitaker implies that this was a marginal case - another article deliberately "selected" by Memri that merely reflects the "ignorance of many Arabs - even those [as] highly educated" as the author of the piece - a university teacher.
Does Brian Whitaker still think it mere ignorance when the major Egyptian government daily Al-Ahram follows a similar line? The government-appointed editor-in-chief is currently facing prosecution in France (and possible prosecution in the UK) for incitement to anti-semitism and racial violence.
The editor is prepared to do battle over his right to spread this poison and he is supported by most of Egypt's literary elite, parliamentarians, trades unions and various organisations throughout the Arab world.
Surely the Guardian's editorial board would agree that this goes far beyond ignorance. It is the deliberate dissemination of a Blood Libel.
Another supposedly marginal issue "selected" by Memri is the Ode to Terrorism by the Saudi Ambassador to the UK, Ghazi Al-Qusaybi. Were Whitaker a regular reader of the Arab papers published in London, he would know that it is not a matter of poetry.
Al-Qusaybi has authored several articles expressing the same political position (Memri Dispatches 251, 256, 389 at http://www.memri.org). Indeed, does Whitaker read the Arab press at all? Or does he rely on Arab Media Watch?
If this is the case, we could provide him with some documentation on their bias. In any event, I wouldn't blame him for seeking assistance. Monitoring the Arab media is far too much for one person to handle. We have a team of 20 translators doing it, and we can't possibly cover it all.
Whitaker's view of Memri's work is not shared by others. In fact most of the well-known media in the US respect and frequently quote Memri, for example the New York Times, Washington Post, New Republic, The New Yorker, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe and Miami Herald.
The Guardian itself published Thomas Friedman's column (October 16 2001) commending Memri translations. The Qatari Al-Jazeera television channel also trusts Memri and frequently asks me to appear on their programmes.
Even the Palestinian National Authority website has posted our material - with attribution. On the other hand, it is interesting to see whom Whitaker did choose to quote to back up his allegations against Memri. Ibrahim Hooper is the spokesman of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, which supports Hamas.
> Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations
So what's the problem?
Ironically, whereas Whitaker makes false complaints about Memri's disclosures, he neglects to mention his own agenda and conflict of interest. It just happens that Whitaker runs several anti-Israel web-sites. Makes you wonder about his paper's objectivity, no?
> MEMRI replied to the article, but the bullshit they spouted does not answer the accusations. <
Let's take a look and let the readers here reach their own conclusions:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Whitaker's Selective Memri is an example of selective journalism.
Disregarding the Guardian's own code - "A newspaper's primary office is the gathering of news" - Whitaker has simply recycled inaccurate and previously published material.
Two days before his piece appeared on the web, he called our Washington office to ask for the Arabic original of an article translated by Memri from the London daily Al-Hayat. He could have used this opportunity to check his facts. He chose not to do so.
To start with, Memri is not a "mysterious organisation". Our telephone number, fax and email appear on every dispatch. True, the office address is no longer posted on our website. Whitaker may scoff, but we have received threats from rightwing radicals in America.
Had he asked, we would have provided him with our addresses in Washington, London, Berlin, Moscow and Jerusalem (as well as informing him that I retired from government office almost a decade ago).
We could also have told Whitaker that we have over 30 employees of different nationalities, rather than six. But then, facts might have got in the way of a "good story".
Memri is involved in a variety of projects, apart from translating material into most European languages and Turkish: an economic project, headed by a former World Bank expert, an Arab anti-semitism documentation project, studies of school books from Arab educational systems, monitoring Friday sermons in the Arab world.
Most important and innovative is our reform project, which highlights liberal voices, not only from western capitals, but also from within the Arab and Muslim world, courageously calling for political, religious, social and economic reform, and taking all the risks involved.
Is this "Selective Memri"? No, it's Selective Whitaker. He cites the Memri-translated "Blood Libel" - an article that resurrected an ancient myth that accuses Jews of using the blood of (non-Jewish) children to make a special pastry for the Purim religious festival - published by the Saudi al-Riyadh daily.
This is a paper which, contrary to Whitaker's statement, is identified as government-controlled by the Saudi government's website, by the BBC and by news agencies such as Associated Press.
It is true that the editor later apologised and the columnist was sacked. Memri reported all this, giving the paper credit even though these events came in the wake of severe US criticism.
Whitaker implies that this was a marginal case - another article deliberately "selected" by Memri that merely reflects the "ignorance of many Arabs - even those [as] highly educated" as the author of the piece - a university teacher.
Does Brian Whitaker still think it mere ignorance when the major Egyptian government daily Al-Ahram follows a similar line? The government-appointed editor-in-chief is currently facing prosecution in France (and possible prosecution in the UK) for incitement to anti-semitism and racial violence.
The editor is prepared to do battle over his right to spread this poison and he is supported by most of Egypt's literary elite, parliamentarians, trades unions and various organisations throughout the Arab world.
Surely the Guardian's editorial board would agree that this goes far beyond ignorance. It is the deliberate dissemination of a Blood Libel.
Another supposedly marginal issue "selected" by Memri is the Ode to Terrorism by the Saudi Ambassador to the UK, Ghazi Al-Qusaybi. Were Whitaker a regular reader of the Arab papers published in London, he would know that it is not a matter of poetry.
Al-Qusaybi has authored several articles expressing the same political position (Memri Dispatches 251, 256, 389 at http://www.memri.org). Indeed, does Whitaker read the Arab press at all? Or does he rely on Arab Media Watch?
If this is the case, we could provide him with some documentation on their bias. In any event, I wouldn't blame him for seeking assistance. Monitoring the Arab media is far too much for one person to handle. We have a team of 20 translators doing it, and we can't possibly cover it all.
Whitaker's view of Memri's work is not shared by others. In fact most of the well-known media in the US respect and frequently quote Memri, for example the New York Times, Washington Post, New Republic, The New Yorker, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe and Miami Herald.
The Guardian itself published Thomas Friedman's column (October 16 2001) commending Memri translations. The Qatari Al-Jazeera television channel also trusts Memri and frequently asks me to appear on their programmes.
Even the Palestinian National Authority website has posted our material - with attribution. On the other hand, it is interesting to see whom Whitaker did choose to quote to back up his allegations against Memri. Ibrahim Hooper is the spokesman of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, which supports Hamas.
As to how the US favours Israel over egypt etc. In terms of shared values how often does israel vote with the US in the UN and how often does egypt vote with the US in the UN?
Have a look at how money is donated by every country in the world NOBODY does it by land area and population.
Besides who knows when one of them will become an iraq if the US gave them too much money you would be on their back for "arming their dictators" or some similar complaint like you were with iraq even though the events you were complaining about were decades old (and vastly more weapons were supplied by the russians and french according to statistics i have seen)..
Still if its too high for you go loby your local politicians.
Have a look at how money is donated by every country in the world NOBODY does it by land area and population.
Besides who knows when one of them will become an iraq if the US gave them too much money you would be on their back for "arming their dictators" or some similar complaint like you were with iraq even though the events you were complaining about were decades old (and vastly more weapons were supplied by the russians and french according to statistics i have seen)..
Still if its too high for you go loby your local politicians.
Scottie: "Have a look at how money is donated by every country in the world NOBODY does it by land area and population."
JA: This is really too *STOOPID* to respond to, but since I can make it brief:
So, if there were two different countries with starving people, but one country had 3 million starving people and another coutry had 6 million starving people, it would make 'sense'(?) for the U.S.--or the UN, or whatever--to give the one with *6* million starving people the same lower amount (total or per capita) that would do the job alleviating starvation for the country with 3 million starving people?
DU-UHHH...!
I'm not even going to debate the rest of Scottie's political garbage here. I got better things to do.
JA: This is really too *STOOPID* to respond to, but since I can make it brief:
So, if there were two different countries with starving people, but one country had 3 million starving people and another coutry had 6 million starving people, it would make 'sense'(?) for the U.S.--or the UN, or whatever--to give the one with *6* million starving people the same lower amount (total or per capita) that would do the job alleviating starvation for the country with 3 million starving people?
DU-UHHH...!
I'm not even going to debate the rest of Scottie's political garbage here. I got better things to do.
"So, if there were two different countries with starving people, but one country had 3 million starving people and another coutry had 6 million starving people, it would make 'sense'(?) for the U.S.-to give the one with *6* million starving people the same lower amount (total or per capita) that would do the job alleviating starvation for the country with 3 million starving people?"
YOU ARE MAKING HTE RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THAT IS THE ONLY CRITERIA.
anyway where does the money go that the US donates to egypt for example? I thought you were the one who did not like proping up evil reigemes?
DU-UHHH...!
YOU ARE MAKING HTE RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THAT IS THE ONLY CRITERIA.
anyway where does the money go that the US donates to egypt for example? I thought you were the one who did not like proping up evil reigemes?
DU-UHHH...!
Scottie: "YOU ARE MAKING HTE RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THAT [population and size of country] IS THE ONLY CRITERIA [for U.S. foreign aid]."
You're *RIGHT*, Scottie! If the other country is *ISRAEL* in the middle of the Arab world and WHITE NEOCON JEWISH ZIONISTS in the White House run U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East for the WHITE APARTHEID Jewish government (and its outright *crooked* regimes, like Sharon's) in ISRAEL (a country of *20%* non-Jews, or is it almost *50%*, when you take "Greater Israel" into account) , then you get almost $100 BILLION DOLLARS MORE!!!
You're *RIGHT*, Scottie! If the other country is *ISRAEL* in the middle of the Arab world and WHITE NEOCON JEWISH ZIONISTS in the White House run U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East for the WHITE APARTHEID Jewish government (and its outright *crooked* regimes, like Sharon's) in ISRAEL (a country of *20%* non-Jews, or is it almost *50%*, when you take "Greater Israel" into account) , then you get almost $100 BILLION DOLLARS MORE!!!
hmm thought you were going to make a point however in your twisted israel hating little way you just admitted to being wrong hmm...
why does Palestine MURDER women and children in schools, shopping centers and churches. THEN HIDE LIKE COWARDS
http://www.msnbc.com/news/927968.asp
Aryan Nations plots a comeback at Idaho campout
But critics say civil suit made racist group irrelevant
By Kari Huus
MSNBC
FARRAGUT STATE PARK, Idaho, June 22 — Amid a stand of pines in the Idaho panhandle, Richard Butler sits slightly hunched in a camp chair, a large swastika affixed to the wall of the campground bathrooms behind him. He is surrounded by a loyal coterie of men, some in full Nazi uniform, others in skinhead garb. At 85, the founder of the Idaho-based Aryan Nations is frail, but still influential in racist circles, and extremely tenacious. “What you’re seeing today is the prelude to the awakening of the white race,” he says. But others say it’s more like the death rattle for the umbrella organization of white-supremacy groups.
BUTLER AND HIS followers admit this is not the heyday of his annual Aryan Nations World Congress, which was long held in the organization’s own compound near here and drew hundreds of white supremacists from around the country.
On this day, there are perhaps 75 people gathered, including children, women flipping hamburgers on a grill and half-seen security guards in the trees at the perimeter of a campground in Farragut State Park. Others have come and gone before the program got under way because of an icy rain in the morning.
“Help us fund our war,” urges one speaker, calling on the participants to buy Confederate flag T-shirts and Nazi pins. On one unmanned table there is an Adolf Hitler doll in a box on a table, apparently a raffle prize.
“It’s kind of like the flat-Earth society, a dying group,” says Dick Cottam, media relations officer for the Spokane Police Department, where the authorities were planning their surveillance of the annual event, as were the local police and the FBI. “They’ll be out there with the animals and bugs,” says Cottam.
The comment reflects views of many people in the area who saw civil rights activists and lawyers deal what seemed to be the final blow to the Aryan Nations here. In 2000, a jury voted 12-0 that the Aryan Nations were responsible for the assault of Victoria Keenan and her son by guards at the organization’s compound. In the civil suit pressed by local activists and lawyers — and bolstered by the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center’s civil rights attorney Morris Dees — the organization was hit with a $6.3 million penalty, which bankrupted the organization and took away its compound.
Bradley Jenkins, the Imperial Wizard of the Aryan Nations Knights of the Ku Klux Klan out of Alabama, speaks to a gathering at Farragut State Park on Saturday.
The key message, according to civil rights activists, was that the community did not welcome the racist groups, and did not want to be seen as a haven for white supremacists. “It was a unanimous guilty verdict of Butler’s peers, regular people of the community,” says Norman Gissel, a local attorney who worked to prosecute the case. “That’s as close to a political statement as you can make. That judgment is a far more important cultural document than judicial document because of what it says about our community.”
But it was also risky, says Gissel, because a loss would have sent a message to racists that Idaho was a state where they could beat the top guns in civil rights law.
It was a breakthrough for local activists who had been trying to fight the Aryan Nations’ influence and presence in the area for decades, with limited success. Though they firmly believed that Butler’s preaching against non-whites, Jews and the U.S. government had inspired many crimes, including murders, the forums were protected by the First Amendment. The Keenan case, says prominent civil rights activist Tony Stewart, was the “smoking gun.”
DOWN BUT NOT OUT
Aryan Nations founder Richard Butler, right, and his successor Ray Redfeairn salute after Redfeairn is formally named the next leader of the racist organization on Saturday.
And yet, the fight is not over for Idaho.
“After the lawsuit, the Aryan Nations took a hit — a big one,” says Ray Redfeairn, whom Butler formally designated as his successor on Saturday. “Even in the movement, a lot of our comrades thought we were down and out, we were gone. But we weren’t. We knew we weren’t going anywhere. ... This may come as a shock to Morris Dees,” he adds.
Indeed, this year’s congress, which pulled together a full menu of racist leaders from around the country, suggests the Aryan Nations has crept back from the brink. In the lineup:
Redfeairn, the newly anointed successor to lead Butler’s Aryan Nations. In taking over the white supremacist organization, his greatest enemies are Jews, and he proclaims that the Bible demands their genocide. Group members also preach hatred of all non-whites and see the federal government as a betrayer of the “white race,” which in their view is endangered with extinction as a consequence.
Bradley Jenkins, the Imperial Wizard of the Aryan Nations Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, an Alabama-based group focusing most of its wrath against blacks and all non-Western European immigrants. His presence was the result of an alliance spearheaded by Redfeairn early this year, drawing together one of the more powerful of the dozens of Southern KKK clans with the Aryan Nations. Jenkins said the deal had breathed new life into his group.
Billy Roper, leader of a new group called White Revolution, which he started after losing a power struggle for the leadership of the neo-Nazi National Alliance last year. Roper’s group, which mixes a rare brand of genetics with a white supremacist interpretation of Christianity, is attempting to be an umbrella group for the white movement. Roper is in his 30s, a former high school teacher with a history background. Watchdog groups say he doesn’t have the stature yet of some of the other leaders, but his style may appeal to more mainstream young people.
Hal Turner: A surprise guest from New Jersey, Turner is a talk show host who does a daily broadcast of fiercely anti-immigrant, anti-Jewish and anti-federal rhetoric via shortwave radio and the Internet. Turner has the cachet of show business and draws easily on the politics of the day to support his case.
Jeff Schoep and Tim Bishop: Leaders of the Minneapolis-based National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi organization that appeals to young skinhead-variety racists. Watchdog groups say he is gaining influence, in part benefiting from factionalism in other groups.
Notably absent from the gathering, say watchdog groups, was Tom Metzger, the current leader of the White Aryan Resistance and a guru for the skinhead movement. Metzger was listed as a “special guest” speaker but was not present.
MOVEMENT IN DISARRAY
The Aryan Nations is emblematic of the disarray seen throughout the white supremacist movement, civil rights watchdogs say. They note that within Aryan Nations, factionalism has been rife, and Redfeairn himself has been named successor before, and then split with Butler before having a prodigal son-type reunion. A splinter group started in Pennsylvania under a former member, and competes for prominence.
Ray Redfeairn, the next leader of the Aryan Nations.
The death of neo-Nazi William Pierce last July took a toll on the movement, they say, as did the arrest of Mathew Hale, the self-proclaimed “Pontifex Maximus” of the racist and anti-Semitic World Church of the Creator. Hale was arrested in January and charged with soliciting the murder of a federal judge and obstruction of justice.
More broadly, in the post-Sept. 11 security environment, both the white supremacists and their detractors say they have been tracked more closely by federal agents who are better funded and more vigilant about potential domestic terrorists.
“The white supremacist world is in flux,” says Marilyn Mayo of the Anti-Defamation League, which monitors the movements of anti-Semitic groups. “It’s very hard to say who will emerge.”
But she warns: “What happens in situations like this is that you get people leaving these groups and maybe starting more radical groups or going underground.”
Meanwhile, Redfeairn disputes the notion that local activists have ended the reign of the Aryan Nations in Idaho. He says the state will remain the headquarters even after Butler dies, and that he will eventually move to the area from his current home in Ohio. He says the group hopes to have the funds to buy new property in the area by next year’s congress.
The Aryan Nations will continue to recruit through the Internet and increasingly through increasing cable access; Redfeairn envisions one day setting up a white power show along the lines of televangelist programs. The group will also continue its prison outreach, which has brought many convicts into its fold.
Redfeairn, who served 12 years for shooting a police officer portrays the prison ministry as a way to get convicts to clean up their act: “We give them direction. A lot of people don’t like the direction we give them, but we’d rather have them working for the race … doing something positive.”
IDAHO’S HEARTS AND MINDS
The Aryans are counting on tacit sympathy or at least apathy from the area’s nearly all-white population. They appeal to the working poor in the area and argue that even many new arrivals in the area have moved to Idaho to flee mixed-race cities on the coasts. As they see themselves, they are the warriors willing to fight off the incursion of racial minorities and Jews. Meanwhile, they have succeeded to the extent that they have helped create the reputation of the state as a bastion of white racism, deserved or not.
There is clearly a contingent of people in northern Idaho fighting the image and the influence. In the wake of the lawsuit against the Aryan Nations, the former compound was razed and made into a Peace Park, while in the capital of Boise, funds poured in for an Anne Frank center to teach human rights. A gaggle of human rights groups are active in the state, and the university branches have special courses on hate groups.
Stewart, a professor at North Idaho College in Coeur d’Alene, also lectures around the country about Idaho’s success in beating back the Aryan Nations. He counsels other communities to “never, never ignore the movement of a group like this into the community, and never remain silent.”
Apart from law enforcers and activists, few local residents were aware or seemingly concerned about the congress of white supremacists.
Business people here are quick to declare the group dead. Gatherings of radicals, especially ex-convict radicals, are not good for the tourism business, which is key to the local economy.
And attitudes among the general public are mixed:
“I despise them,” said a barista at an espresso stand when he learned that the congress was under way a few miles down the road.
“To each his own,” shrugged an older man waiting for his take-away order at Silly Chile’s, a Tex-Mex stand down the road. “Whatever trips their trigger, I guess,” he said of the event, which turned out to be within earshot of his house.
“My impression is that people of Coeur d’Alene don’t like Aryan Nations because it is a fringe group and because it was bad for business,” said one Idaho lawyer who asked not to be named. “It bothered me that they didn’t seem as disgusted by what (the racist groups) were saying.”
A call to City Hall in Coeur d’Alene produced no comment from the mayor, but a spokeswoman pointed out that the Aryan congress could not get a parade permit this year. “They are outside city limits,” she said, bringing the conversation to an end.
Aryan Nations plots a comeback at Idaho campout
But critics say civil suit made racist group irrelevant
By Kari Huus
MSNBC
FARRAGUT STATE PARK, Idaho, June 22 — Amid a stand of pines in the Idaho panhandle, Richard Butler sits slightly hunched in a camp chair, a large swastika affixed to the wall of the campground bathrooms behind him. He is surrounded by a loyal coterie of men, some in full Nazi uniform, others in skinhead garb. At 85, the founder of the Idaho-based Aryan Nations is frail, but still influential in racist circles, and extremely tenacious. “What you’re seeing today is the prelude to the awakening of the white race,” he says. But others say it’s more like the death rattle for the umbrella organization of white-supremacy groups.
BUTLER AND HIS followers admit this is not the heyday of his annual Aryan Nations World Congress, which was long held in the organization’s own compound near here and drew hundreds of white supremacists from around the country.
On this day, there are perhaps 75 people gathered, including children, women flipping hamburgers on a grill and half-seen security guards in the trees at the perimeter of a campground in Farragut State Park. Others have come and gone before the program got under way because of an icy rain in the morning.
“Help us fund our war,” urges one speaker, calling on the participants to buy Confederate flag T-shirts and Nazi pins. On one unmanned table there is an Adolf Hitler doll in a box on a table, apparently a raffle prize.
“It’s kind of like the flat-Earth society, a dying group,” says Dick Cottam, media relations officer for the Spokane Police Department, where the authorities were planning their surveillance of the annual event, as were the local police and the FBI. “They’ll be out there with the animals and bugs,” says Cottam.
The comment reflects views of many people in the area who saw civil rights activists and lawyers deal what seemed to be the final blow to the Aryan Nations here. In 2000, a jury voted 12-0 that the Aryan Nations were responsible for the assault of Victoria Keenan and her son by guards at the organization’s compound. In the civil suit pressed by local activists and lawyers — and bolstered by the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center’s civil rights attorney Morris Dees — the organization was hit with a $6.3 million penalty, which bankrupted the organization and took away its compound.
Bradley Jenkins, the Imperial Wizard of the Aryan Nations Knights of the Ku Klux Klan out of Alabama, speaks to a gathering at Farragut State Park on Saturday.
The key message, according to civil rights activists, was that the community did not welcome the racist groups, and did not want to be seen as a haven for white supremacists. “It was a unanimous guilty verdict of Butler’s peers, regular people of the community,” says Norman Gissel, a local attorney who worked to prosecute the case. “That’s as close to a political statement as you can make. That judgment is a far more important cultural document than judicial document because of what it says about our community.”
But it was also risky, says Gissel, because a loss would have sent a message to racists that Idaho was a state where they could beat the top guns in civil rights law.
It was a breakthrough for local activists who had been trying to fight the Aryan Nations’ influence and presence in the area for decades, with limited success. Though they firmly believed that Butler’s preaching against non-whites, Jews and the U.S. government had inspired many crimes, including murders, the forums were protected by the First Amendment. The Keenan case, says prominent civil rights activist Tony Stewart, was the “smoking gun.”
DOWN BUT NOT OUT
Aryan Nations founder Richard Butler, right, and his successor Ray Redfeairn salute after Redfeairn is formally named the next leader of the racist organization on Saturday.
And yet, the fight is not over for Idaho.
“After the lawsuit, the Aryan Nations took a hit — a big one,” says Ray Redfeairn, whom Butler formally designated as his successor on Saturday. “Even in the movement, a lot of our comrades thought we were down and out, we were gone. But we weren’t. We knew we weren’t going anywhere. ... This may come as a shock to Morris Dees,” he adds.
Indeed, this year’s congress, which pulled together a full menu of racist leaders from around the country, suggests the Aryan Nations has crept back from the brink. In the lineup:
Redfeairn, the newly anointed successor to lead Butler’s Aryan Nations. In taking over the white supremacist organization, his greatest enemies are Jews, and he proclaims that the Bible demands their genocide. Group members also preach hatred of all non-whites and see the federal government as a betrayer of the “white race,” which in their view is endangered with extinction as a consequence.
Bradley Jenkins, the Imperial Wizard of the Aryan Nations Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, an Alabama-based group focusing most of its wrath against blacks and all non-Western European immigrants. His presence was the result of an alliance spearheaded by Redfeairn early this year, drawing together one of the more powerful of the dozens of Southern KKK clans with the Aryan Nations. Jenkins said the deal had breathed new life into his group.
Billy Roper, leader of a new group called White Revolution, which he started after losing a power struggle for the leadership of the neo-Nazi National Alliance last year. Roper’s group, which mixes a rare brand of genetics with a white supremacist interpretation of Christianity, is attempting to be an umbrella group for the white movement. Roper is in his 30s, a former high school teacher with a history background. Watchdog groups say he doesn’t have the stature yet of some of the other leaders, but his style may appeal to more mainstream young people.
Hal Turner: A surprise guest from New Jersey, Turner is a talk show host who does a daily broadcast of fiercely anti-immigrant, anti-Jewish and anti-federal rhetoric via shortwave radio and the Internet. Turner has the cachet of show business and draws easily on the politics of the day to support his case.
Jeff Schoep and Tim Bishop: Leaders of the Minneapolis-based National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi organization that appeals to young skinhead-variety racists. Watchdog groups say he is gaining influence, in part benefiting from factionalism in other groups.
Notably absent from the gathering, say watchdog groups, was Tom Metzger, the current leader of the White Aryan Resistance and a guru for the skinhead movement. Metzger was listed as a “special guest” speaker but was not present.
MOVEMENT IN DISARRAY
The Aryan Nations is emblematic of the disarray seen throughout the white supremacist movement, civil rights watchdogs say. They note that within Aryan Nations, factionalism has been rife, and Redfeairn himself has been named successor before, and then split with Butler before having a prodigal son-type reunion. A splinter group started in Pennsylvania under a former member, and competes for prominence.
Ray Redfeairn, the next leader of the Aryan Nations.
The death of neo-Nazi William Pierce last July took a toll on the movement, they say, as did the arrest of Mathew Hale, the self-proclaimed “Pontifex Maximus” of the racist and anti-Semitic World Church of the Creator. Hale was arrested in January and charged with soliciting the murder of a federal judge and obstruction of justice.
More broadly, in the post-Sept. 11 security environment, both the white supremacists and their detractors say they have been tracked more closely by federal agents who are better funded and more vigilant about potential domestic terrorists.
“The white supremacist world is in flux,” says Marilyn Mayo of the Anti-Defamation League, which monitors the movements of anti-Semitic groups. “It’s very hard to say who will emerge.”
But she warns: “What happens in situations like this is that you get people leaving these groups and maybe starting more radical groups or going underground.”
Meanwhile, Redfeairn disputes the notion that local activists have ended the reign of the Aryan Nations in Idaho. He says the state will remain the headquarters even after Butler dies, and that he will eventually move to the area from his current home in Ohio. He says the group hopes to have the funds to buy new property in the area by next year’s congress.
The Aryan Nations will continue to recruit through the Internet and increasingly through increasing cable access; Redfeairn envisions one day setting up a white power show along the lines of televangelist programs. The group will also continue its prison outreach, which has brought many convicts into its fold.
Redfeairn, who served 12 years for shooting a police officer portrays the prison ministry as a way to get convicts to clean up their act: “We give them direction. A lot of people don’t like the direction we give them, but we’d rather have them working for the race … doing something positive.”
IDAHO’S HEARTS AND MINDS
The Aryans are counting on tacit sympathy or at least apathy from the area’s nearly all-white population. They appeal to the working poor in the area and argue that even many new arrivals in the area have moved to Idaho to flee mixed-race cities on the coasts. As they see themselves, they are the warriors willing to fight off the incursion of racial minorities and Jews. Meanwhile, they have succeeded to the extent that they have helped create the reputation of the state as a bastion of white racism, deserved or not.
There is clearly a contingent of people in northern Idaho fighting the image and the influence. In the wake of the lawsuit against the Aryan Nations, the former compound was razed and made into a Peace Park, while in the capital of Boise, funds poured in for an Anne Frank center to teach human rights. A gaggle of human rights groups are active in the state, and the university branches have special courses on hate groups.
Stewart, a professor at North Idaho College in Coeur d’Alene, also lectures around the country about Idaho’s success in beating back the Aryan Nations. He counsels other communities to “never, never ignore the movement of a group like this into the community, and never remain silent.”
Apart from law enforcers and activists, few local residents were aware or seemingly concerned about the congress of white supremacists.
Business people here are quick to declare the group dead. Gatherings of radicals, especially ex-convict radicals, are not good for the tourism business, which is key to the local economy.
And attitudes among the general public are mixed:
“I despise them,” said a barista at an espresso stand when he learned that the congress was under way a few miles down the road.
“To each his own,” shrugged an older man waiting for his take-away order at Silly Chile’s, a Tex-Mex stand down the road. “Whatever trips their trigger, I guess,” he said of the event, which turned out to be within earshot of his house.
“My impression is that people of Coeur d’Alene don’t like Aryan Nations because it is a fringe group and because it was bad for business,” said one Idaho lawyer who asked not to be named. “It bothered me that they didn’t seem as disgusted by what (the racist groups) were saying.”
A call to City Hall in Coeur d’Alene produced no comment from the mayor, but a spokeswoman pointed out that the Aryan congress could not get a parade permit this year. “They are outside city limits,” she said, bringing the conversation to an end.
>Aryan Nations
The only difference between Zionist and Nazis is that Zionists are Jews.
The only difference between Zionist and Nazis is that Zionists are Jews.
Irrelevant comparison.
at least provide some irrelevant evidence like everyone else when you make your irrelevant comparisons
at least provide some irrelevant evidence like everyone else when you make your irrelevant comparisons
The only difference between the Zionists and the Nazis is that the Zionists aren't Nazis.
@%<
@%<
No, just Zionist AshkeNAZIs!
With all the comments pouring forth on to the board here, I'm surprised we haven't heard from "Concerned Zionist" from the Rachel Corrie video thread.
Hmm. Wonder where he is!
Hmm. Wonder where he is!
Who knows
maybe he figures the "Im a nazi" line wont fly.
maybe he figures the "Im a nazi" line wont fly.
Concerned Zionist will be entertaining (to me) no matter which thread he's on. In any event, if we don't hear from him again, I've got all his comments copied.
"I don't know what you would call it, Scottie, but where I live when someone assassinates another human being it's murder. To pretend it is anything else is but to bury one's head in the sand."
As I said you have that angle covered. If the administration says it is unproductive and you and your media sources say its murder the case that is really missing is the "it was productive" argument.
Anyway more importantly Israel and the PLO are the two parties involved you can demonize third parties like hamas if you want but it is unproductive to demonize those two (as organiztions) unless you really do want to give up on peace.
Personally I think small operations to assasinate particular hamas leaders is really not very helpful. You either do it right or not at all.
"I don't know of anyone who likes Sharon. Most people do not like war criminals."
- Not that Sharon is my buddy or anything but the two sentances are unrelated since you havent proven sharon is a war criminal.
By the way do you hate arafat for being a "war criminal"?
re "translation",
" I still remember his speech to the Government back on Christmas Day of 2002 wherein he stated that he favoured " a totally unarmed Palestinian state with reduced borders", etc.
In other words, similar to a serfdom, still under the oppression and control of Israel. "
- He did not say similar to serfdom, that does not follow from your quote AT ALL you are arguing with JA's invisible zionist.
What he means (surely you can put yourself in his shoes for just a second) is that an unarmed state could not attack his state (he isnt sure if a plaistinian state woul be peaceful if itwas well armed) and here are a few bits of land with settlers on them that he would like to keep. This is what he prefers for trational reasons however he also knows not all of that is possible.
As I said you have that angle covered. If the administration says it is unproductive and you and your media sources say its murder the case that is really missing is the "it was productive" argument.
Anyway more importantly Israel and the PLO are the two parties involved you can demonize third parties like hamas if you want but it is unproductive to demonize those two (as organiztions) unless you really do want to give up on peace.
Personally I think small operations to assasinate particular hamas leaders is really not very helpful. You either do it right or not at all.
"I don't know of anyone who likes Sharon. Most people do not like war criminals."
- Not that Sharon is my buddy or anything but the two sentances are unrelated since you havent proven sharon is a war criminal.
By the way do you hate arafat for being a "war criminal"?
re "translation",
" I still remember his speech to the Government back on Christmas Day of 2002 wherein he stated that he favoured " a totally unarmed Palestinian state with reduced borders", etc.
In other words, similar to a serfdom, still under the oppression and control of Israel. "
- He did not say similar to serfdom, that does not follow from your quote AT ALL you are arguing with JA's invisible zionist.
What he means (surely you can put yourself in his shoes for just a second) is that an unarmed state could not attack his state (he isnt sure if a plaistinian state woul be peaceful if itwas well armed) and here are a few bits of land with settlers on them that he would like to keep. This is what he prefers for trational reasons however he also knows not all of that is possible.
Some of us define war criminals for what they are and don't try to make excuses for them. Apparently you don't.
What would you call "a totally unarmed Palestinian state with reduced borders"? What does he have in mind? A vegetable garden? Doesn't the "totally unarmed" bit bother you in the least?
Apparently not.
What would you call "a totally unarmed Palestinian state with reduced borders"? What does he have in mind? A vegetable garden? Doesn't the "totally unarmed" bit bother you in the least?
Apparently not.
The idea of a totally disarmed Germany and Japan didn't bother anyone in 1945. Even today, Japan doesn't have a viable defensive force of its own. Does a disarmed Lebanon bother anyone? Certainly not Syria. Why should a disarmed Palestine bother anyone? Unless they have reason to believe they will be fighting someone in the near future.
If they are afraid of what would become of them without their guns, I'm sure USA could be convinced to provide all the security they need, giving them complete protection from Israel. However, USA cannot do that unless all the Palestinian groups are disarmed. If they can be assured Israeli incursions will stop, who do they fear will attack them?
The other choice, of course, is to let Hamas provide the Palestinians with security. Or Fatah. Or Islamic Jihad, or all of the above plus the freelancers, which is the situation they have now.
I suspect (as many do), that they oppose disarmament, but their reasons have nothing to do with self-defense.
If they are afraid of what would become of them without their guns, I'm sure USA could be convinced to provide all the security they need, giving them complete protection from Israel. However, USA cannot do that unless all the Palestinian groups are disarmed. If they can be assured Israeli incursions will stop, who do they fear will attack them?
The other choice, of course, is to let Hamas provide the Palestinians with security. Or Fatah. Or Islamic Jihad, or all of the above plus the freelancers, which is the situation they have now.
I suspect (as many do), that they oppose disarmament, but their reasons have nothing to do with self-defense.
Some of us define war criminals for what they are and don't try to make excuses for them. Apparently you don't.
- We already addressed this issue earlier why do you talk as if we havent? a militia got out of control it wasn't even sharons militia! seems to have paralells with arafat and his responsibility for hamas bombings. At any rate you should admit that there is a plausible defense for sharon OR your definition of war criminal is a broard one. Sharon did NOT do a "milosovich".
LAD covered the other part of your comment pretty much as I would have.
Riobard might have somthing to say regarding the disarming if the IRA and the prodestant armies in nthern Ireland.
- We already addressed this issue earlier why do you talk as if we havent? a militia got out of control it wasn't even sharons militia! seems to have paralells with arafat and his responsibility for hamas bombings. At any rate you should admit that there is a plausible defense for sharon OR your definition of war criminal is a broard one. Sharon did NOT do a "milosovich".
LAD covered the other part of your comment pretty much as I would have.
Riobard might have somthing to say regarding the disarming if the IRA and the prodestant armies in nthern Ireland.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network