Good point about seeing the whole picture, and possible things hspdeger (or what yourr name is).
But if you actually say ‘let’s start a genocidal program’ THEN you are a dangerous zealot who should be ignored/suppressed in the name of morality. Regardless.
And in this case, do you think that the threat of extinction/nukes/genocide would suppress the hatred/paranoia/violence of the muslim extremist terrorists? It is my contention that such a threat, especially if coupled with genocidal selection, would INTENSIFY the violence of these groups. They would try to attack all the things that such an agent loves, and also make big, passionate moves towards the destruction of such a force, don’t you think? Because, if you’re gonna be ripped apart by an n-bomb, what do you have to lose?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
…Peace in the Middle East depends on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict being resolved.
As long as the West Bank is occupied by Israel, terrorism will continue to be exported to other countries thanks to Al Jazeera and Co.
…
Untrue. Israel could disappear and Islamic terrorism would continue.
Are people being murdered in Baghdad to drive out Israel?
Would Al Qaeda stop trying to overthrow the Saudi monarchy if Israel was gone?
Would the Bombay bombings have occured if Israel never existed?
[/quote]
Do you know that for most Arabs the Israeli/Palestinian conflict takes precedence over their own national interests?
This means that this conflict can be used by Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and others to manipulate people and to recruit future terrorists.
If we wait long enough, you will be right and it will no longer matter if Israel exists or not.
But if Israel get out of the West Bank soon enough and makes sure that the Palestinian authority has a road map that will lead to economic developpment and an Independant Palestinian state, then I’m pretty confident that we will see the end of Islamist terrorism.
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
And in this case, do you think that the threat of extinction/nukes/genocide would suppress the hatred/paranoia/violence of the muslim extremist terrorists? It is my contention that such a threat, especially if coupled with genocidal selection, would INTENSIFY the violence of these groups. They would try to attack all the things that such an agent loves, and also make big, passionate moves towards the destruction of such a force, don’t you think? Because, if you’re gonna be ripped apart by an n-bomb, what do you have to lose?[/quote]
You continue to oversimplify the issue. Things are not black and white. You also seem to like to misconstrue my words – much as I did not propose we SHOULD start a genocide, I did not say we should bluff; I said we need to understand bluffing.
I made it very clear that I am not defending a particular strategy; I am not pretending to know the answer; I do not feel I have the experience, the training or the information to come up with an answer to this tremendous conundrum. I’m an Economist, not a Foreign Policy or Military Strategist.
I do believe that if we do bluff a genocide, we would obviously have to handle it intelligently – and that includes working on turning the non-fundamentalist Muslims against the fundamentalists as we do it. The fact that we didn’t take the chance to do that intelligently in Lebanon before this latest conflict started is quite possibly one of the most blatant acts of incompetence I’ve ever seen in the last couple of decades. Not that I am surprised, of course. I expected nothing more of Condi The Pitbull, Kofi The Passive, or the current diplomatically inept EU leadership.
[quote]hspder wrote:
You continue to oversimplify the issue. Things are not black and white. [/quote]
Hey man chill with defensiveness- I asked questions.
I said ‘if’, ‘THEN’ (conditional).
In an earlier post, i was trying to say how ‘murkily ambiguous’ the who situation is, but just met a wall of ‘Who are you?’ etc. So we’re on the same page.
We don’t have to join hands like we are in love, but let’s not take issues personally, if possible (i’ve been guilty of this in the past, i’ve learnt from it).
[quote]hspder wrote:
I made it very clear that I am not defending a particular strategy; I am not pretending to know the answer; I do not feel I have the experience, the training or the information to come up with an answer to this tremendous conundrum. I’m an Economist, not a Foreign Policy or Military Strategist. [/quote]
Cool man, that’s very noble, and humble of you (straight up). If anyone had the answer, the war would be no more. So let’s explore the issues (if we are interested) like intelligent people, and not waste so much time defending/attacking the characters of people who type profusely about this issue, with the best intentions.
[quote]
I do believe that if we do bluff a genocide, we would obviously have to handle it intelligently – and that includes working on turning the non-fundamentalist Muslims against the fundamentalists as we do it. [/quote]
I’ve seen evidence of this, in Britain. I grew up in Southall (strong Pakistani community) and lots of the community leaders are publicly distancing themselves from the fundamentalism/diviseness/terrorism, and are presumably teaching their ‘congreagation’ (or the correct word) similarly. I spoke to my sister today, a catholic who has read the qu’aran. She told me that Mohammad asked Muslims seeking to convert, who fail, to look at the subject (outsiders who don’t accept islam), and he said ‘If he is a good man, Allah will smile on him’. This is good in my opinion, not at all like Qutb.
I don’t know anything about Condi, but yeah, annan is strangely shy of rocking any boat, in any way. Perhaps we shouldn’t be looking to the leader of the UN to lead ideological conversions though. They are supposed to be entirely impartial (know it all, holy-than-thou), right? I’m sure in time, the moderate/non-radical arabs will continue to see just how ineffective terrorism is, and exhort their muslim brothers, with reference to Sacred passages, if that is more mellifluous to the young muslim’s ears.
If both sides in the conflict could be led towards a balanced, empathic sensibility, how much smoother things would be!
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
annan is strangely shy of rocking any boat, in any way. Perhaps we shouldn’t be looking to the leader of the UN to lead ideological conversions though. They are supposed to be entirely impartial (know it all, holy-than-thou), right?[/quote]
He can still play an active part in enforcing UN rules – which would have included helping Lebanon getting rid of Hezbollah – which is NOT a country that is part of the UN and hence NOT something he needs to be neutral about. In fact, it is an organization that is a big problem for a country that IS part of the UN (Lebanon) and IS now attacking another country that IS part of the UN (Israel).
Like people have commented before, including myself regarding res.242, the UN are quite good at making resolutions, or at least proposing them. What happens after is their failing! It’s all a big headache. I wish there was a little more ‘black and white’ about this situation, i’d feel a lot more tranquil. Especially when watching the news. What do you think EU/UN citizens like us can do toward a lasting peace, man?
What " firm, long-term, defined strategy" do you advocate? Hey man, i wrote email after email to Tony Blair when i was in college, suggesting that we not get into the iraq war as a) we have no laser missile defense system unlike some participants and i thought that we would bring the agression back on ourselves (sorry to sound cowardly, if that’s what picking your battles is, i’m a coward) and b) my brother-in-law, who i love, would get pulled into it. Anyway, there’s a point coming…
My mother’s been a labour party member since they were socialists, and wrote, to suggest an entirely different thing, about the economy. Etc etc. Noone even replies. we have no referendum= we have no choice, but to not join the military, and try to get rich, so one day we can whisper in the ear of eminent people.
[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
…Peace in the Middle East depends on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict being resolved.
As long as the West Bank is occupied by Israel, terrorism will continue to be exported to other countries thanks to Al Jazeera and Co.
…
Untrue. Israel could disappear and Islamic terrorism would continue.
Are people being murdered in Baghdad to drive out Israel?
Would Al Qaeda stop trying to overthrow the Saudi monarchy if Israel was gone?
Would the Bombay bombings have occured if Israel never existed?
Do you know that for most Arabs the Israeli/Palestinian conflict takes precedence over their own national interests?
This means that this conflict can be used by Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and others to manipulate people and to recruit future terrorists.
If we wait long enough, you will be right and it will no longer matter if Israel exists or not.
But if Israel get out of the West Bank soon enough and makes sure that the Palestinian authority has a road map that will lead to economic developpment and an Independant Palestinian state, then I’m pretty confident that we will see the end of Islamist terrorism.[/quote]
You must be joking.
You cannot possibly believe this is all due to the Israeli/Palestinian issue.
Israel could disappear and there would still be Islamic terrorism in Chechnya, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan etc…
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Yeh sounds good, but very vague. [/quote]
It is vague. On purpose.
I am an American citizen, and while I know relatively well how politics works in some European countries (The Netherlands and Portugal, in particular, since I lived in the former and have close family ties with the latter), I am completely ignorant with regards to UK politics. I don’t even really understand your parliamentary system.
Although I have heard that most British people don’t understand it either, they should; it is your civil duty to – and either way you’re intrinsically in a much better position to evaluate what would be the best strategy, not me.
I can tell you what I did in the Netherlands, though – I had a job as strategic economic consultant for the PvdA, one of the parties in power over there. My wife was also involved in the Dutch Government?s disaster planning, and she made some pretty substantial contributions.
Over here, in the US, I routinely bug my Senators and Congressmen – and yes, I have gotten many replies and I have had the pleasure of meeting both Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein in person. To all of them I express not only my support on some issues but also my complaints against their stances on others (immigration, supplements and controlled substances, mostly, since we basically agree on most everything else).
I have also had the pleasure of doing consulting work for the Federal Government more than once.
Yeh i’m not an expert, but i was interested at one point, and did some reading. Just a few books, but good ones. I’ll be fine. Just, it seems to be a fact of life that you look for the best candidate (since it’s a prop. rep. system) and then, you elect them, and they change. Cunts!
" I had a job as strategic economic consultant" Okay, that’s long-term, but respect for what YOU did man, really.
Still, how does this refer to trying to thaw the hatred and at the very least prejudice and destructive self-concern that is present in all political parties/nation states? I have some friends who do activism (not bombings, more ‘hippie protests’) and they are roundly ignored/ridiculed by conservatives, at every instance. For example on the iraq war, ecological issues, etce tc. they are just marginalised if their voice is not in accord with the minister/power, and what he/she believes is the demographic they represent. Do you think it’d be worthwhile to look at the statements of a shitload of MPs, and then we could discuss together, and he could maybe voice my concerns? Or would this be wasting time? (Hey, i’m supplicating before your greater experience, help me out)
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Still, how does this refer to trying to thaw the hatred and at the very least prejudice and destructive self-concern that is present in all political parties/nation states?[/quote]
With regards to my work as a consultant it doesn’t – as I said, that is not my area, so I can’t work on it professionally. I can only prod the people who do.
If you are in fact particularly interested in that specific area, you might want to study it, get an advanced degree in Middle Eastern studies and become a consultant on such matters. Takes a lot of work, but you clearly have the motivation.
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Do you think it’d be worthwhile to look at the statements of a shitload of MPs, and then we could discuss together, and he could maybe voice my concerns? Or would this be wasting time?[/quote]
That’s what we try to do here with Congressmen, and sometimes successfully (at least, with the good ones). Again, I have no experience with the UK political system, so I can’t tell you if it will be worthwhile or not.
Yes it is due to decades of propaganda but not just that which you see on t.v. Islam is an inherently violent religion. On nearly every single page of the Koran there is a reference to conflict with the “infidels” as well as a reference to violence. There are passages in the Koran that not only condone but require Muslims to take part in killing the “infidels” in order to go to heaven and have sex with 75 virgins.
As one of the most sexually opressed religions in the world this would be a very good incentive. I know this is extremely politically incorrect but it is true. The only difference between fundamentalist muslims and moderate muslims is the fundamentalist actually takes the koran literally. There would be no problem with taking the koran literally and being an Islamic fundamentalist if it weren’t for the fundamentals of Islam.
The religous moderate whether he be christian, jewish or Islam of today is nothing more than an enabler to Islamic Fundamentalists because he is not willing to criticize the concept of faith itself. There is nothing wrong with faith or religion until your faith/religion leads you to commit actions that affect the wellbeing of others. The religous moderate instead blames the problem on politics, economy etc. because he is empathetic of people of faith.
Granted there is alot more to the issue in the middle east than religion, but until we address that issue specifically the problem of terrorism will continue. However this is not a pardigm shift that can realisticly happen overnight. If that were to happen we would simply give the muslims who may not have been terrorists more reason to attack us.
However, I hope overtime we will realize the faults of faith based religion and all the pain agony and suffering it has caused us. I am not trying to imply that we should do away with religion, I am saying that we should not base actions that affect the rest of the world on a belief, an assumption, we should only base actions that affect others on reason, on empirical facts.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
…Peace in the Middle East depends on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict being resolved.
As long as the West Bank is occupied by Israel, terrorism will continue to be exported to other countries thanks to Al Jazeera and Co.
…
Untrue. Israel could disappear and Islamic terrorism would continue.
Are people being murdered in Baghdad to drive out Israel?
Would Al Qaeda stop trying to overthrow the Saudi monarchy if Israel was gone?
Would the Bombay bombings have occured if Israel never existed?
Do you know that for most Arabs the Israeli/Palestinian conflict takes precedence over their own national interests?
This means that this conflict can be used by Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and others to manipulate people and to recruit future terrorists.
If we wait long enough, you will be right and it will no longer matter if Israel exists or not.
But if Israel get out of the West Bank soon enough and makes sure that the Palestinian authority has a road map that will lead to economic developpment and an Independant Palestinian state, then I’m pretty confident that we will see the end of Islamist terrorism.
You must be joking.
You cannot possibly believe this is all due to the Israeli/Palestinian issue.
Israel could disappear and there would still be Islamic terrorism in Chechnya, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan etc…[/quote]
Each one of these places has the potentiel of generating new terrorist hot spots elsewhere just like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict did.
When that happens, terrorism will just keep on spreading.
Fortunately, for the moment the Israeli/palestinian conflict is the only one capable of rallying Islamists all over the world.
What must be done is what the US is trying to do in Irak.
1/ Empower a group of reasonable people so that they will be able to govern.
2/ Help them with developpment issues.
3/ Help them gain enough strength to deal with terrorism.
[quote]pitbull314 wrote:
Yes it is due to decades of propaganda but not just that which you see on t.v. Islam is an inherently violent religion. [/quote]
“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.”
(David Ben-Gurion - Israeli Prime Minister, 1949 - 1963)
“We must expel the Arabs and take their places.”
(David Ben-Gurion)
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
(David Ben-Gurion)
“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people… It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn’t exist.”
(Golda Meir - Israeli Prime Minister)
“The [Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs.”
(Menachem Begin - Israeli Prime Minister)
“(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers… heads smashed against the boulders and walls.”
(Yizhak Shamir - Isreali Prime Minister)
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.”
(Ariel Sharon - Israeli Prime Minister)
“Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial.”
(Ariel Sharon)
Israel/Occupied Territories: Deliberate attacks a war crime
30 June 2006
Deliberate attacks by Israeli forces against civilian property and infrastructure in the Gaza Strip violate international humanitarian law and constitute war crimes, Amnesty International said today.
The deliberate destruction of the Gaza Strip’s only electricity power station, water networks, bridges, roads and other infrastructure is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and has major and long-term humanitarian consequences for the 1.5 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip. http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150612006?open&of=ENG-ISR
Report: Israel responsible for PA collapse
Scathing report issued by Phycisians for Human Rights organization says Palestinian healthcare system collapsing because of aid cuts, Israel curfews; report warns Israel will be held responsible for collapse by international community.
Killing children is no longer a big deal
Haaretz
October 17, 2004
More than 30 Palestinian children were killed in the first two weeks of Operation Days of Penitence in the Gaza Strip. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/levy-children.html
No One Changed the Rules
Haaretz
December 12, 2004
For the past four years, the IDF has been engaged in liquidating Palestinians on a horrific scale, in killing children, in confirming killings and in inflicting abuse at checkpoints…
Palestinian doctors despair at rising toll of children shot dead by Israeli snipers
The Guardian
May 20, 2004
“Israel counted “81 days of quiet” without terrorist attacks. But there is no greater lie than this. The quiet was only here. During this “quiet,” dozens of Palestinians were killed, and almost no one bothered to report it. That is how it becomes possible to speak of quiet and then claim that the Palestinians disturbed it. The fact that the media does not speak of Palestinian deaths does not mean that they did not happen.”
(Gideon Levy, December 28, 2003)
“In fact, the U.S.-Israeli relationship has grown so very close over the years that it is almost impossible to distinguish whose policy, Israel’s or ours, is being pursued in the Middle East, and this is a reality that puts the United States in grave danger.”
(Bill Christison, 12 October 2004)
These quotes from the creators of Israeli social and foreign policy are all indicative of the things i tried to explain to people on here. They’ll likely all be discredited, ignored or marginalised as ‘not important’ (for some unspecified reason, which is blindness).
Everyone needs to realise that propaganda goes both ways, we are indoctrinated with hate just as the arabs are. The fact that no-one can accept that both sides have committed harm, as expressed when they make a statement, some platitude like ‘You’re justifying terrorism mmmmmmmmmmkay’ is just evidence of how pervasive propaganda is.
Bottom line, if you freely admit you are on any ‘side’, you are subject to propaganda. One set of propositions will be congenial to you, and will reinforce your schema, while a contrary opinion will be rejected without the rational deliberation it may require. This is just how it is.
This is not an accident. These are ‘silent weapons’. This is how we are mobilised for war in an innocuous way… through sports reportage, perfunctorily using war metaphors, and sensibility, and the ‘othering’ of certain groups that are not ‘us’,from our perceived self-group.
Read Billig, Van Dijk, and Townshend (Sociolinguistics). Watch news that you actually disagree with. When you watch the news you do agree with, see how they make the adjectives, verbs and nouns emotive, and you didn’t even notice! See all the connotations that would have been aroused in you, if you hadn’t been distant and objective. Now you are free to think for yourself and try to find the truth (usually it will be in the middle, of a greyish colour, though of course sometimes wrong is just WRONG).
Basically, This thread’s title illustrates just how powerful a tool this is. Please don’t take offence, just take advice.
I have read much of this thread and would like to make a few points:
There is no deliberate targeting of civilians taking place in Lebanon … there is a war between Iranian and Syrian backed proxies and Israel, and regrettably civilians have been killed on both sides.
The fact that there have been fewer Israeli civilian casualties is not because of any purity of intention from Hizballah’s side, but because Iran (or Syria) has not yet supplied Hizballah with more deadly weapons, or has not yet permitted Hizballah to use the most deadly weapons.
As it is, Hizballah has been packing its missiles with ball bearings - useless against military targets, but designed to maximise civilian casualties, in the same way that Palestininan suicide bombers regularly stuff their explosives with nuts and bolts to achieve the same effect.
Israeli casualties are also fewer because ever since the first Gulf War, when skuds were fired into Israel, Israeli buildings have to be built with bomb shelters. So far Hizballah has fired more than 2500 rockets into Israel, all of them aimed at civilian centres of population, and designed to intimidate and terrorise. Not one has been directed at a military target.
Sadly Israel is doomed to failure in this futile war. Hizballah’s strategy has been brilliant and Israel’s incredibly stupid, but that’s the subject of a different discussion. Hizballah hides amongst civilians … launches rockets from civilian neighbourhoods and relishes the consequences when civilians are killed - fuelling anti-Israeli propaganda.
Many Israeli Arabs and Druze have also been killed by these indiscriminate rockets.
Israel is not an apartheid or colonial state and the attempts to delegitmise Israel are part of a profoundly racist campaign to deny the Jewish people the same right to national self-determination that supposed friends of Palestinians wish the Palestinians to have. The struggle in Israel has nothing to do with race - its fault lines are demarcated by religious rather than racial divides, as well as left-right and secular religious. At least 50% of Israel’s Jewish population are Jewish refugees from Arab and North African lands, who arrive in Israel from 1950 onwards. A growing proportion of her population are Ethiopian Jews.
Hizballah, Hamas, and indeed mainstream media throughout the Islamic world frequently portray Jews and Israelis as dogs, pigs, blood hungry cannibals, or capitalist bloodsuckers. I suppose this ongoing dehumanisation is all part of “resistance?” To paraphrase Orwell “All racisms are unacceptable, but some are more acceptable than others…”
Saudia Arabia issued a strongly worded condemnation of Hizballah’s opportunistic adventurism, and many Sunni Arab countries are publicly condemning Israel and privately hoping Israel will help stem Iranian Shiite imperialism.
My suggestion to young dannyrat is that you read a wide variety of sources across the spectrum about the conflict, before you buy into antisemitic propaganda.
Oh … in conclusion, a personal observation. Dannyrat - you are an obnoxious arsehole. The arrogance and misplaced confidence with which you sprout your obviously undergraduate opinions is, quite frankly, embarrassing.
That’s fine exec, i’m glad you a) Don’y know me b) disagree with me only on matters which i know a lot about c) don’t listen to my comments for what they are. Did you even read the (accurate) quotes in the previous post? (justthefacts quoting Israeli prime ministers blatantly admitting that even they accepted the state of things as a neocolonial experiement?)
Sure there’s no deliberate targeting of civilians I AGREE. But with your perspective of exclusive fault at the doors of the people who look, and act the least like you, you wouldn’t likely see it.
True, IF terrorists got bigger guns, they’d fire them.
“Hizballah has been packing its missiles with ball bearings” Nothing can explain, justify, condone, or in any way support this. But don’t let it cloud your judgement.
“Sadly Israel is doomed to failure in this futile war. Hizballah’s strategy has been brilliant and Israel’s incredibly stupid, but that’s the subject of a different discussion.” I would disagree. the very fact that despite admissions from zionism’s pioneers, the (shit i explained earlier) has not been seen is evidence of Israel’s stealth, and also (equally) of the islamic terrorists complete lack of understanding in how to garner sympathy in the outside world… something Theodor Herzl was very skilled at.
“Israel is not an apartheid or colonial state and the attempts to delegitmise Israel are part of a profoundly racist campaign to deny the Jewish people the same right to national self-determination that supposed friends of Palestinians wish the Palestinians to have.” Nah man, it’s about reporting the facts, whatever they are…
“At least 50% of Israel’s Jewish population are Jewish refugees from Arab and North African lands, who arrive in Israel from 1950 onwards. A growing proportion of her population are Ethiopian Jews.” I wrote about this before. After the palestinians tried going on strike (a peaceful activism) from the jobs they help in menial roles in the Israeli economy (because Israel had, for all of the cumulative reasons in the conflict, strangled the Palestine economy) Israel got lots of people from the poorest places on earth, and brought them into illegally occupied lands, to remove the socialist struggle as a weapon in the Palestine arsenal (I don’t expect you to believe, listen or agree, i’ve already said this).
Orwell is a product of a very different system, and his dystopia was not religious.
Good on Saudi Arabia, but they are only arabs by race. They are detached, rich, and in bed with the West.
I’m not sure if i should take ‘obviously undergraduate as an insult’? It is obvious, as i’ve said that before, but the very fact that i told you i’ve studied this, and got very good marks for my essays, and have read widely, only seem to make you want to condescend to me because of my youth. Seriously, i think you should forget about me and just read the post. If you want momma jokes, so be it. Leave your frustration out of this.
ANTISEMITIC MENAS HATING ANYONE WHO SPEAKS A SEMITIC LANGUAGE (INCLUDING ARABIC) so don’t talk shit. That is about as intelligent as criticising me, then calling black ‘mahogany’.
Since you are patronising me, i would remind you that the conflict began when Israel took over arab land. (not racial)
In summary- Everyone’s shit stinks. Let’s not be unclear about this. If anyone wants to try to son me, do it in your head. Or speak to your own children that way. Or be quiet, and try to outmaneuver me in a discussion (not by claiming spurious opinions which sound very much like personal opinion, and constantly referring to my youth/perceived lack of competence).
Once more- A GUY WHO’D BEEN READING DIVERSE POV’S ON THIS FOR MOST OF HIS CAREER, THOUGHT MY OPINION WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE FACTS, AND GAVE ME A FIRST (like my good friend and housemate, who also agrees and is frustrated by the ignorance and self-bestowed authority with which people discuss this). Just leave insults out of this. It really shows me that you are trying to insult me until i’m quiet.
As i’m aware of the high level of understanding i have, and would like to share with you, I am led to believe this is because my opinion is different to yours, but more valid. Suppression is dirty my friend.
I’m so glad that i’m obviously a ‘sprouting’ student. That’s the style i used to write, quoting people’s statements, and authors and so on in defence of my point (not really my point, but the point of anyone who has seen death and injustice -shit- stinking from the side of both the Israelis and the Muslims).
I’ve no doubt that terrorism is evil (and also a useless tactic from a strategic point of view, once the world has been alerted to the conflict).
That people wish to believe that Islamic terrorism mysteriously, and inextricably, arose from the East at just the same time that the West began really seriously intefering with the region, is one of the central concerns i have about the limited representations i see espoused in the media… Economic subjugation and land theft (beyond what Israel was allotted, a quite fair 44% of a land they had no physical connection to so a great amount of time) is still tyranny.
If you’re of the opinion that ‘it doesn’t matter what happened before, terrorism is wrong’, cool, if you looked up the past a bit more, you’d be a real asset, and a wise guy. If you flatly refuse to believe that there was any injustice in the whole zionism/post 6 day war land theft/ continued barricade building/ sniper tower using/ suspicion of all people of one creed, i wish to diminish, or oppose any influence you have in this world, you’re dangerous. If you believe all rebels are simply bastards, open your eyes.
I read today that Israel are ‘like churchill’. This is in the most widely read newspaper in Britain (my friend works in a newsagent). This is very disturbing, as it is assimilated by people whose whole understanding of history/ world events comes from tabloids.
Some people believe that newspapers are objective. In reality they are more like a combination of rhetoric and adverts. I’ve worked at a newspaer before (sorry, not arrogant, just how it is), and also studied media for 2 years. Each newspaper has a ‘house style’ for its ideological position, just as much as it’s fonts and spellings must all be consistent. This is political. The editor (or owner) dictates what is portrayed about the world in the newspaper. If you don’t quote some stuff other than journalists i think you’re the victim of one of these indoctrinations.
This is not the only thing i was every trying to talk about in this or similar threads, but is the thing that people just can’t understand/believe, despite its veracity.
Oops didn’t mean to post. Enough has been said already. Check out the balck vixens thread we need more of these make love not war (or ignorant comments)
and i thought that we would bring the agression back on ourselves (sorry to sound cowardly, if that’s what picking your battles is, i’m a coward) and b) my brother-in-law, who i love, would get pulled into it. Anyway, there’s a point coming…