babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Dershowitz on the Middle East

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Dershowitz on the Middle East
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 May 2003 10:42 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Alan Dershowitz's view on present day tensions in the Middle East.

Dershowitz


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 22 May 2003 10:50 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I see Dershowitz has moved from advocating torture to advocating assasination. Good for him; shows personal growth.

But remember, "what's good for the goose, is good for the gander." If this is a war, and there are no rules, then Palestinians are also justified in engaging in assasinations.

[ 22 May 2003: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 22 May 2003 11:12 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A catalogue of logical fallacies in one speech!

quote:
Dershowitz, who spoke to an overflow crowd of 1,500 at Shaare Zion Congregation, said the United States has no business criticizing Israel’s pre-emptive killings of terrorists because in the Gulf and Iraq wars, it twice set out to assassinate a head of state.

In fact, he said, Israel’s method of eliminating terrorist leaders is generally on a higher moral plane than the American way. Israel usually targets the individual without hurting anyone else, while the U.S. use of bombing kills innocent civilians, Dershowitz said.


These paragraphs effectively say "the US was wrong for killing civilians in an attempt to kill Hussein, but Israel is less wrong, 'cause they kill fewer innocent civilians."

Furthermore, he makes it sound like the targetted assassinations are carried out by precision weapons, instead of artillery shells and Apache-mounted rockets. He ignores the callous disregard for civilians inherent in launching such a weapon into a crowd, or an apartment complex.

quote:
“In every single respect, Israel has shown a greater compliance to human rights. If Israel gets a B, the U.S. gets a B-minus. Egypt, Jordan and France would get far lower grades.”

Based on what? Lumping France in with a despotic government like Jordan belies the author's own prejudices.

quote:
“Many of the French intellectuals hoped that there had been a massacre at Jenin, because then they could have said Israel is just as bad as we are. It’s a way of expiating European guilt over the Holocaust.”

Or maybe these nameless "French intellectuals" thought any hint of a refugee massacre should be thouroughly investigated, 'cause, ya know, massacres are a bad thing.

quote:
Because of its relatively swift victory, Dershowitz thinks the United States has shown it is “the only game in town when comes to influencing world action,” including a Palestinian-Israeli peace settlement.

Might makes right. Lovely.

quote:
“I’m told by my friends in the State Department – who are few – that it was put on the table to be taken off, but that is bad psychology. No Palestinian leader will be able to take it off… If the road map fails, it will be for that reason.”


I agree with this. The cynical side of me believes that the right of return was included in the Road Map as a throw-away item after "conceding" other rights to the Palestinians. Any good (and dishonest) negotiator will include points they don't mind conceding so that other points they desire will be agreed to. Unfortunately (from the Bushites and Sharon's POV), the Palestinians aren't as anxious to trade away the right of return as Bush might think. Sharon likely realizes this, which is why he's willing to scuttle the agreement on what seems like a canard clause to BushCo.

quote:
“We have to distinguish between true anti-Semitism and criticism of Israel,” he said.

Calling someone anti-Semitic is “the nuclear weapon” to be used only when warranted, he said. “We should not throw around the phrase, which is very lethal, unless we are sure the motivation is anti-Semitism.”


Even a broken watch is right twice a day.

quote:
To “single out Israel all the time” for human rights violations, without putting its record in context with what other countries do, is anti-Semitic “in effect, if not intent.”

Why, for example, aren’t those who criticize Israel not concerned with China’s brutal 50-year occupation of Tibet, he asked.


Why, pray tell, can we not be concerned with both issues?

quote:
Critics of Israel usually overlook the record of its Supreme Court, which has repeatedly made rulings that “control the excesses of the Israeli army,” he said, adding he can’t think of any other country whose highest court has so firmly placed civilian human rights above military expediency.


As I've noted on another thread, IDF soldiers rarely get punished for these excesses. Arrests are rarely made, and the IDF PR department usually releases uncorraborated versions of the incidents soon after they are independantly reported. In most investigations, key witnesses are not even interviewed by investigators.

In conclusion, most of Dershowitz' arguments are based on crap. He is right on one count...tirelessly flinging the anti-semite epithat at people legitimately concerned about Israeli policies is a very damaging tactic. He may be right about the right of return being included on the Road Map as a cynical throw-away clause, as well.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 22 May 2003 11:12 AM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Josh did you read the title or the whole article???

Anyways It's not a new notion but strongly believe it that even if human rights records are debatable that part of the reason that Israel is so focused on is so that Europeans can say "hey we weren't so bad they're just as bad as we are if not worse"

It's part of a guilt complex so they feel less guilty about what had been done.

Look at the French record in Africa and see who is worse. Yes it's always nice to get out of the spot light and avoid bad publicity human nature.

[ 22 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 22 May 2003 11:24 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dershowitz is often interesting, and sometimes provocative. While he is right to say that criticism of Israel, and no one else, is anti-semitism in effect, I disagree with this:


quote:
The exact opposite of terrorism is targeted assassination,” he said.

His argument is that terrorists attack the public at large, including the innocent, whereas "targetted assassination" attacks enemy combattants.

When one is using attacks upon the public at large as the point of comparison, most state practices will appear to be justified. Probably even Saddam Hussein did not attack Iraqis in general, but that would not be a compelling justification for his regime.


It is the experience of the 20th century that it is unwise to allow the state to assassinate those individuals it deems enemies, or even "enemy combattants." For one thing, secret processes to identify "enemies of the people" are often unjust and flawed. They quickly become a way of controlling political opponents, and have a tendency to spin out of control.

It might be recalled in this context that the "Gulag Archipelago", Stalin's system of concentration camps, had its origins in the Civil War period, when "enemy combattants" did exist, and when the threat to the Soviet state was real.

Anyone advocating "targetted assassination" of anyone should explain why civil liberties, the right to a lawyer and the right to state a defence, etc. are important generally, but not important when the state sets up a procedure to identify "enemy combattants" for the purpose of killing them.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 22 May 2003 12:43 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If there were any possible way to capture them I'm sure they would as many combatants have been captured. You have to do what's good for the Majority.

Proof of this is that Israel does not have capital punishment. It does not execute prisoners. You might say that targeted assassination is a form of a capital punishment I say it's strictly self defense and there is all the difference.

Furthermore as far as the argument on torture go. Every country use torture occasionally probably even Canada in some police interrogation. The laws emplaced by Israel on torture are not there to justify it but to protect the captives to regulate. There are strict rules on what's allowed to be done and what isn't allowed to be done to a captive such as not killing him in the process or causing any irreversible physical damage.

Certain things are better off regulated then to have them outlawed completely and cause really serious damages sort of like drinking alcohol.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 22 May 2003 01:38 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

Every country uses torture? I sure as hell hope not. Maybe you can substantiate that assertion.

Israel does have capital punishment. However, it has only been utilized one time, in the case of Adolph Eichman.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 May 2003 01:54 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Israel does not have Capital Punishment. The law was ammended in the case against Eichmann for him and him alone.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 22 May 2003 01:55 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There's no business like show business, eh?

Is this thread in the right forum? I'd put it under Pop Culture.

Look! at those mindless overgeneralizations. I won't repeat Sarcasmo's careful list of the illogicalities, but it is hard to believe this guy was ever a lawyer.

But hey! Who needs the law when you can find a good agent?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 22 May 2003 02:00 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Every country uses torture? I sure as hell hope not. Maybe you can substantiate that assertion.

It's sad but true as I showed already what do you call police interrogation? Do they not use force on their suspects sometimes? Even if it's illegal you know it's occasionally practiced and not always are the persons committing the practice of torture punished nor always should they be.

Under certain circumstances it is clearly justified. If it is really in order to protect the greater part of society it is justified. Truth serums aren't that effective yet. If some one had information that would save peoples life and didn't want to give it up what would you do? If someone was going to hurt a group people and you had reasonable proof of his/her intention and there was no way to capture them what would you do?

quote:
Israel does have capital punishment. However, it has only been utilized one time, in the case of Adolph Eichman.

That was quite a while ago and under a very, very special circumstance it wouldn't happen today.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 22 May 2003 02:12 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, now they wouldn't even bother with the trial.

To equate police interrogation with torture is quite a stretch, to the say the least. A totally unconvincing argument.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 22 May 2003 02:14 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You might say that targeted assassination is a form of a capital punishment I say it's strictly self defense and there is all the difference.

Capital punishment is often justified as self-defence of society against killers. To me, the claim to have abolished capital punishment rings hollow when followed by the comment: "We do, of course, allow extrajudicial executions."

Dershowitz says that targets who are asleep in bed may be assassinated as enemy combattants. That doesn't sound like self-defence to me.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 22 May 2003 02:34 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Josh Isn't it true that in some interrogations police use physical force???

For the rest I must say yes sometimes excessive force is used yup we have one case of a one tone bomb dropped from an F-16 on building complex?

However in the vast majority of cases Israel gives prior warning before blowing up weapons cashes or manufacturing facilities. The IDF gives prior warning and then before they are about to blow up the facility they give a couple warning shots outside to make sure no one is in it. What other country takes these precaution. Who here can vouch for the accuracy of a missile shot from an apache it's probably more accurate then a patriot or a Palestinian made mortar. Is there any other country you know of that is fighting a battle like this that takes these precautions.

If anyone wants to talk about France I suggest you try and calculate how many innocent civilians were killed by there excessive force in West Africa. Your right you can't lump France with Jordan. So France gets a C- and Jordan a D both lower then Israel trying doing the math and you'll see.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 22 May 2003 08:55 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Justice:
The IDF gives prior warning and then before they are about to blow up the facility they give a couple warning shots outside to make sure no one is in it.

Right, that's really just superfantastic.

I can just see it now: two IDF soldiers stand near said installation, and fire two "warning shots". Then, just two seconds later, a plane roars overhead, blasting the whole damn building to smithereens.

Now I don't know about you, but I would call that a pretty lame attempt at creating a credible "we fire warning shots" excuse, and any person with a working brain would instantly see that the IDF's spokesbeings were, in the vernacular, full of it.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 May 2003 02:03 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
To “single out Israel all the time” for human rights violations, without putting its record in context with what other countries do, is anti-Semitic “in effect, if not intent.”
Why, for example, aren’t those who criticize Israel not concerned with China’s brutal 50-year occupation of Tibet, he asked.

They aren't?

As is usual in these discussions, Dershowitz completely fails to take into account Israel's relationship with the West, and particularly the United States, which basically pays for the occupation of the West Bank. When the US starts sending blank cheques to China, then you can complain about the disproportionate emphasis on Israel.

I agree that those who make exaggerated claims about the occupation - that it is on par with or worse than the Holocaust, that it is actually worse than all the other injustices of its nature going on in the world - may be thought of as anti-Semitic. But it is ridiculous to hurl or insinuate accusations at people simply for discussing the issue "too much."

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 02:10 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I agree that those who make exaggerated claims about the occupation - that it is on par with or worse than the Holocaust, that it is actually worse than all the other injustices of its nature going on in the world - may be thought of as anti-Semitic. But it is ridiculous to hurl or insinuate accusations at people simply for discussing the issue "too much."


Well, finally something we agree on!!

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 May 2003 02:53 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Reread the last sentence of the paragraph you quoted.

Agreeing with that would call into question your entire reason for being here. You might have to go leaflet another board.

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 04:24 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh poor poor Smith. How long has it been now?...You looking and trying to do what you can to find picky issues about anything I post? Poor Smith, ...please don't let me stop your fun.

But please let us do it through Private messaging. We need not assault babblers with this childish nonsence...OK?

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Newpress
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4104

posted 23 May 2003 04:39 PM      Profile for Newpress   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Any country but Israel, constantly under attack, would long since have used conventional warfare and used all the weapons at its disposal.

They have not targeted civilian leaders but rather those who planned or carried brutal murders of innocent civilians.


From: Netanya, Israel | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 04:42 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dear Friend,

Attached is an article written by Shlomo Avineri published in the weekend insert , May 16, 2003, of Yediot Ahronot .
I thought you would find it of interest. Avineri is a professor of Political Science at Hebrew University in Israel.


Every year, Palestinians - including those who are Israeli citizens

- mark May 15 as a day of national mourning, in remembrance of the

disaster, which befell the Palestinian Arabs in the 1948 war. As

human beings and as Jews, we must be attentive to their pain and

suffering: Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children were

uprooted from their homes - some fled, some were expelled.

This is a human tragedy beyond its national dimensions. Whoever

hopes for peace and reconciliation between us and the Palestinians

cannot be indifferent to their sorrow. However, whoever wishes to

be attentive to the Palestinians' pain must see things in their

proper political and moral contexts.

It is no coincidence that the Palestinians chose the phrase naqba,

meaning "disaster". This is a neutral term, as if one were

discussing a natural disaster. But what happened to the

Palestinians in 1948 was the result of a political decision on their

part, and political decisions have consequences.

We should say it openly and forthrightly: The Palestinians who mourn

on May 15 do not believe that the decision to prevent the carrying

out of the partition of the Palestine was either incorrect or

immoral. What they regret is that they lost that war, not that they

began it.

It is possible to understand the heart of the Palestinians in

particular and that of the Arabs in general: from their

point-of-view, the whole Zionist endeavor was an act of colonialism

that came to rip away a section of the Arab homeland. Arab

consciousness finds it hard to accept this fact and therefore, the

Arab response to the Zionist attempt to gain a foothold in the land

was, from the outset, a total war - in which the murder of civilians

is considered a legitimate tool.

It was not following the occupation of 1967 that the Palestinians

turned to terror, in the simplest sense of the word - intentionally

attacking civilians. This was the Palestinians' modus operandi in

1920, in 1929, and in 1936-9. When the Arabs of the Land of Israel

- supported by the Arab countries - decided to prevent the

establishment of a Jewish in 1948, they came out against not only

the Zionist movement and the Jewish community in Palestine, but

against international legitimacy as well.

It was the UN - the sole body that expressed, however imperfectly,

international legitimacy - which determined that the Jews merited a

state in part of their homeland. It was the UN that accepted the

Zionist claim that this was a conflict between two national

movements, and which therefore saw compromise, i.e. partition, as

the only fair way out. The Zionist movement - not without some

reservations - accepted the principle of partition. The Arabs of

the Land of Israel and the Arab countries rejected it.

When four Arab states, who are members of the UN - Egypt, Syria,

Lebanon and Iraq - were recruited to support the Israeli Arab armed

struggle against the establishment of the Jewish state, they went to

war not only against the Jewish community in the Palestine, but also

against the UN decision. It is irrelevant that Israel has not always

done what the UN expected of it; what is important is that on the

central issue - the right of the Jewish people to have its own state

in its own land - the UN accepted the Jewish claim and rejected the

Arab claim. From the point of international legitimacy, the Arab

war against Israel was born in sin.

The fact is that even today Palestinians refuse to accept that we

are talking about rights against rights; from their point of view,

in 1948, as today, we are talking about rights against injustice.

This is the basis of the insistence on the right of return. The

tragedy is that this viewpoint fundamentally prevents compromise.

The Palestinian attempt to compare the naqba to the Holocaust is

bound in deep moral obtuseness: European Jews who were murdered by

Nazis did not go to war against Germany. The Arabs of the Land of

Israel went to war - and lost. That is the only difference.

However, there is an aspect of comparison with Germany that is

politically and morally relevant: When Germany was defeated, in

1945, over 10 million Germans were deported - all of whom were

civilians, woman and children, not only members of the Nazi party -

from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Yugoslavia. That is the

terrible price that millions of innocent Germans paid for Nazi

crimes. Nobody - not even Germany -petitions today for the right of

return for these millions and their children, to the countries they

were expelled from and where they and their ancestors had lived for

hundreds of years.

A German government, that raises the issue of the right of return

for these millions as a condition for peace with eastern European

countries, will be perceived - justifiably - as neo-Nazi, and as

trying to change the outcome of the Second World War. This is cruel

and harsh - but the whole world, including the entire German

political sphere, except for negligible margins, recognizes this.

Therefore, we listen attentively and with empathy to the sufferings

of the Palestinians - as every person, including Jews, cannot be

impervious to the sufferings of millions of Germans who were

expelled from Eastern Europe. Gunter Grass's last book, "Crabwalk",

is a noble expression of this pain, and is expressed specifically by

someone to the left of the political spectrum.

However, with all the understanding for the suffering of fellow men,

the truth must be told to our Palestinian neighbors: Just like

Germany in 1939 went to war - and lost; just as in the German case,

the fall was bound with much suffering; but just as Germany

internalized the messages of the World War, in the same way - with

all the pain and understanding - if the Palestinians want peace,

they must take moral responsibility for the decisive outcome in

1948, to go to war, not just against Israel, but also against

international legitimacy, which accepted the Jews' right to

sovereignty.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 23 May 2003 04:46 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Newpress, it might have escaped your attention, but many countries are not under constant attack. Sometimes, there's a reason.

I realize as I write that that there are many other countries that are under regular attack, mainly in Africa and South-East Asia. It is a curiosity deserving of political analysis that we do not spend more of our time worrying over them on this board.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 04:51 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It is a curiosity deserving of political
Skdadl I have opined this often. Each time I am told that Babblers have posted many threads on these countries. Only I have not been able to find many.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 23 May 2003 04:52 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, for God's sake, Mishei: I got half way through that and I just cannot go further without throwing up.

Of all the racist crap! And using the misery of other peoples -- deported Germans, eg -- to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestine!!!

I can't finish it. I can't do a detailed analysis. You shock me, Mishei. I didn't think you could any more, but you just have.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 05:08 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Oh, for God's sake, Mishei: I got half way through that and I just cannot go further without throwing up.

Of all the racist crap! And using the misery of other peoples -- deported Germans, eg -- to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestine!!!

I can't finish it. I can't do a detailed analysis. You shock me, Mishei. I didn't think you could any more, but you just have.



St. Skdadl, give me a break. Avineri is considered one of the world's most astute political researchers. He has taught at Universities and lectured all over the world:

quote:
Shlomo Avineri is a Professor of Political Science at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He has also served as Director of Eshkol Research Institute (1971-74); Dean of Faculty of Social Sciences (1974-76); Director-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1976-77); and Director of the Institute for European Studies (1997 to present). Dr. Avineri has had numerous visiting appointments including Yale University; Wesleyan University; Australian National University; Cornell University; University of California; Queen's College; and Oxford. He has been a visiting scholar at the Wilson Center and Brookings Institute in Washington, DC and at the Institute of World Economics and International Relations in Moscow. Dr. Avineri served as Director-General of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 1975-77. He also headed the Israeli delegation to the UNESCO General Assembly and in 1979 he was a member of the joint Egyptian-Israeli commission that drafted the Cultural and Scientific Agreement between the two countries. Dr. Avineri is the recipient of many honors and awards including a British Council Scholarship (1961); Rubin Prize in the Social Sciences (1968); Naphtali Prize for the study of Hegel (1977); Present Tense Award for the Study of Zionism (1982); and Israel Prize (1996). His publications include The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx; Karl Marx on Colonialism and Modernization; Israel and the Palestinians; Marx' Socialism; Hegel's Theory of the Modern State; Varieties of Marxism; The Making of Modern Zionism; Moses Hess: Prophet of Communism and Zionism; Arlosoroff: A Political Biography; Communism and Individualism (co-author); and an historical introduction to the Hebrew edition of Theodore Herzl's Diaries.


You should be more careful as to who you choose to heap your venom on.

As for what you think of me, I never really cared. But if you really had something to say to me it would have been better said in a PM. At least that way your personal attacks could be kept personal. Then again that probably would not serve your purpose.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 23 May 2003 05:26 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You should be more careful as to who you choose to heap your venom on.

Oh, I see. Credentials matter more than what people actually say or do. Is that it, Mishei?

Ye gods, Mishei, this gets worse and worse. Avineri may be the queen of England, for all I care: if he is going to publish syrupy, condescending, racist garbage, he needs to be criticized, and if he is influential, all the more reason to criticize him strongly.

Credentials impress you a lot, don't they, Mishei?

Public profile impresses you a lot, doesn't it, Mishei?

Gee, but that makes you easy to scare.

Such a shame you so seldom know to whom you are talking on babble. I don't have that problem, Mishei. I speak from and to the evidence, Mishei. I don't turn my mind off in the presence of the rich, famous, titled, or multi-degreed, Mishei.

God, but you must live in terror, Mishei, always trying to figure out where either power or fashion has moved to today.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 23 May 2003 05:37 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, Mishei, if you stand in their shoes, you'll see that view it as having their country divided without their say. A not too commonplace event. And their country was divided in response to an event that took place far from their soil. Meanwhile, the perpetuator of the Holocaust, Germany, though divided based on the cold war, remained "Germany."

Again I ask the question I've asked many times: If the purpose of the UN action was to atone for the Holocaust of European Jewry, why was Palestine, and not Germany, required to forefit land?

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 23 May 2003 05:44 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Palestinians in Israel are comparable to Germans in Poland? Sad POS.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
cadre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3780

posted 23 May 2003 06:06 PM      Profile for cadre        Edit/Delete Post
Prof. Avineri should note that with EU enlargement in 2004 deported ethnic Germans and their descendants, like all citizens of EU members, will have a right to live and work in the new member states, including Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovenia.

The UN approval of the partion of Palestine was approved in 1947 by a vote of 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions. Most of today's members had no vote.


From: Stalingrad in mourning | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 23 May 2003 06:14 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Nobody - not even Germany -petitions today for the right of return for these millions and their children, to the countries they were expelled from and where they and their ancestors had lived for
hundreds of years.

I suppose Avneri has never heard of the Sudeten Germans.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 23 May 2003 06:16 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I can just see it now: two IDF soldiers stand near said installation, and fire two "warning shots". Then, just two seconds later, a plane roars overhead, blasting the whole damn building to smithereens.

If you never saw how could you say its worng?


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 23 May 2003 06:25 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
However in the vast majority of cases Israel gives prior warning before blowing up weapons cashes or manufacturing facilities. The IDF gives prior warning and then before they are about to blow up the facility they give a couple warning shots outside to make sure no one is in it. What other country takes these precaution. Who here can vouch for the accuracy of a missile shot from an apache it's probably more accurate then a patriot or a Palestinian made mortar. Is there any other country you know of that is fighting a battle like this that takes these precautions.

What a load of garbage.

Extra-judicial killings.

quote:
Extrajudicial executions, as carried out by Israel against Palestinians suspected of violent hostile actions against Israeli soldiers or civilians, are a fundamental violation of international human rights and humanitarian law. Furthermore, extrajudicial executions constitute wilful killings and are as such a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention, subject to universal jurisdiction.

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel as the Occupying Power has the right to arrest and bring to trial those suspected of violent hostile activities. However, the Fourth Geneva Convention does not allow for wilful killing under specific or exceptional circumstances, as this would contradict one of the main principles embedded in the Convention: The right of protected persons to be treated humanely - under all circumstances and at all times.

The duty to respect the lives of protected persons and the inviolability of their fundamental rights, are spelt out in Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Although it states at the end that "the parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of war", it specifies that "protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons" and that "they shall be at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof."

The principles proclaimed in Article 27 are "the basis on which the Convention rests, the central point in relation to which all other provisions must be considered." It emphasizes the obligation to give humane treatment as part of the right of protected persons to respect for their lives. The ICRC Commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention clearly establishes that the reservation made in article 27 concerning security issues does not involve fundamental rights of the individual. Whatever security measures are taken, "they should not affect the fundamental rights of the persons concerned. As has been seen, those rights must be respected even when measures of constraint are justified."

In Article 32, the requirement of humane treatment is enforced by the prohibition of certain acts considered to be absolutely incompatible with the notion of humane treatment. Among the acts explicitly prohibited by Article 32 are murder and any measures of brutality that may cause physical suffering:

The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from taking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person, but also to any other measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents.

With regard to protected persons suspected of hostile activities, article 5 of the Fourth Geneva Convention establishes that where

an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such state.

Although article 5 establishes that a protected person engaged in hostile activities loses some of the rights afforded by the Convention, it does certainly not include a license to kill, as it clearly states that "in each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity". Furthermore, the rights derogable under Article 5 mainly refer to communication rights and do certainly not include the right to be protected from wilful killing. The ICRC commentary on Article 5 of the Fourth Geneva Convention reads as follows:

The rights referred to are not very extensive in the case of protected persons under detention; they consist essentially of the right to correspond, the right to receive individual or collective relief, the right to spiritual assistance from minister of their faith and the right to receive visits from representatives of the Protecting Power and the ICRC.

The security of the State could not conceivably be put forward as a reason for depriving such persons of the benefit of other provisions - for example, the provision of Article 37 that they are to be humanely treated when they are confined pending proceedings or subject to a sentence involving loss of liberty. Torture and recourse to reprisals are of course prohibited.

In consequence, article 5 of the Fourth Geneva Convention cannot be invoked in order to justify wilful killings in situations where the state security is deemed to be threatened.

Furthermore, concerning the status of civilians who engage in hostilities, article 51/3 of Additional Protocol I provides:

"Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take direct part in the hostilities."

Article 51/3 states that civilians who engage in hostilities lose their protected status but places an important restriction - only "for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities". In the case of the extrajudicial executions carried out by Israel, the victims were however not taking part in hostilities at the time they were killed. For this reason, even if the allegations brought forward by Israel against those assassinated were true, Israel could not rely on article 51/3 of Additional Protocol I in order to represent its "liquidation policy" as compatible with international humanitarian law.



From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 23 May 2003 09:44 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Justice:
If you never saw how could you say its worng?

You do realize I was speaking metaphorically when I said "I can just see it now", yes?

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 23 May 2003 11:35 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:

Oh, I see. Credentials matter more than what people actually say or do. Is that it, Mishei?

Ye gods, Mishei, this gets worse and worse. Avineri may be the queen of England, for all I care: if he is going to publish syrupy, condescending, racist garbage, he needs to be criticized, and if he is influential, all the more reason to criticize him strongly.

Credentials impress you a lot, don't they, Mishei?

Public profile impresses you a lot, doesn't it, Mishei?

Gee, but that makes you easy to scare.

Such a shame you so seldom know to whom you are talking on babble. I don't have that problem, Mishei. I speak from and to the evidence, Mishei. I don't turn my mind off in the presence of the rich, famous, titled, or multi-degreed, Mishei.

God, but you must live in terror, Mishei, always trying to figure out where either power or fashion has moved to today.


It is said that those who continually repeat a person's name are very condescending. Now I understand what this means.

[ 23 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 24 May 2003 12:02 AM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It is said that those who continually repeat a person's name are very condescending.

By whom?

I sort of read it as an expression of genuine frustration with you. In fact I'd have to say that was pretty clear. Golly Mishei, I hope you're not in a profession where you have to communicate on a very sophisticated level. Your attentiveness to the messages that others are trying to give you seems weak.


From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 24 May 2003 12:21 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It is said that those who continually repeat a person's name are very condescending.

I agree, especially the way Mish opens some posts with a repetition of someone's name, as in, "Smith, Smith, Smith..." (or "Jones, Jones, Jones" for that matter).


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 11:15 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:

I agree, especially the way Mish opens some posts with a repetition of someone's name, as in, "Smith, Smith, Smith..." (or "Jones, Jones, Jones" for that matter).


Al, are you agreeing with the repition factor because that was all I was referring to.

To open a post with a person's name is to only acknowledge who you are directing the post towards.

Old Goat, frustration you say, well there are ways to express frustration without stooping to condascension. Skdadl disagreed with Avineri. Many probably agree with him. For her to blow the gasket she did simply because I wanted to illustrate who he was...well it was a bit over the top.

BTW, Avineri has been assailed by the Israeli right as a peacenik. You see he was a one time leader of Israel's peace movement who to this day remains in constant dialogue with Palestinians. He is respected for his leftist views on social democracy in Israel and around the world.

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 May 2003 01:19 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
BTW, Avineri has been assailed by the Israeli right as a peacenik.

I think that says more about the Israeli right than it does about Avineri.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 01:35 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Smith:

I think that says more about the Israeli right than it does about Avineri.


Clearly you and others here have no idea who Avineri is..but then again why should you if you did you would find it far more difficult to make absurd judgements. Why, cuz they do not fit in to your pre-conceived notions.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 May 2003 01:54 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You're one to talk about pre-conceived notions; you appear to think anything written by a person with "credentials" must be right. I shall quote skdadl:

quote:
Avineri may be the queen of England, for all I care: if he is going to publish syrupy, condescending, racist garbage, he needs to be criticized, and if he is influential, all the more reason to criticize him strongly.

Racist garbage is racist garbage. I have no doubt that Avineri is who you say he is; however, it does say something about him that he would write a piece like that one. Large portions of the Israeli right have come out strongly in favour of "transfer," and some public figures have suggested murdering 100 Arabs for every Israeli who dies in a suicide bombing. To such people, almost anyone is going to look like a left-wing peacenik.

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 02:01 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Curious if you would point out exactly what you consider to be racist in Avineri's article. Thanks.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 24 May 2003 03:26 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You do realize I was speaking metaphorically when I said "I can just see it now", yes?

Yes I do but are you saying then you've been there or are you just saying you simple don't believe it's true?

If your talking about the reports that come out yeah sure one says this one says the other how do you know which is true? Seeing believing I've seen quite a bit with my own eyes. I know sometimes there are cases when it's pure murder but not as often as people would like to believe or make out.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 24 May 2003 04:12 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Aside to Mishei:

I dunno if you're a bit confused, but the Avineri you quoted is not the Uri Avineri of Gush Shalom.

"Shlomo Avineri" is a different Avineri.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 May 2003 04:45 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Condescension seems to me the wrong word for my tone above. Shock and scorn combined would, I think, be more precise.

Normally, Mishei, I would say that you are one of the champion patronizers and head-patters on babble, and you're doing a certain amount of it here, but first prize for condescension on this thread undoubtedly has to go to Shlomo Avineri.

From the last sentence of his first paragraph, Avineri signals the lofty, distanced, indulgent-uncle attitude he will take throughout to profound human misery -- that of others, of course. Well: two groups of the Other, Germans (all Germans, as far as we can tell) and Palestinians (all Palestinians, as far as we can tell).

Of course he feels the pain of the Palestinians -- but we must put their pain in the proper context ... Must we indeed? And guess who is about to tell us what is "proper"?

And then he shakes his finger at the victims, instructing them that these things have "consequences," you know. He does that, of course, maintaining his more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger superiority throughout, shaking his head at the poor childish wretches, so sad they can't see his generous attitude towards them, and be grateful.

Why, he even believes that "It is possible to understand the heart of the Palestinians in particular and that of the Arabs in general." No shit, eh? Big of him. Imagine. He must feel he is talking to a lot of people who regard that as a major feat.

I won't go on with the analysis of the rhetoric, which to me drips condescension throughout. I am simply allergic to people who talk and write like this, who think they are doing me or anyone else such a favour by feeling sorry for us -- we all know the type. They are obviously drunk on their own public image as magnanimous wise-men. Pompous windbags, more like.

I will return, though, to the summary analysis of his political manoeuvres that I and others have already sketched above, ignored though it may have been.

This man is capable of saying

quote:
That is the terrible price that millions of innocent Germans paid for Nazi crimes

-- and then sitting back and contemplating that thought serenely, as though there were some justice to it. Ye gods. It is one thing to recognize and accept historical fact, tragedies that we now must swallow because time has left us with other facts on the ground -- it is QUITE another to rationalize them, to pretend there is any justice in the horror of any kind of ethnic cleansing at all.

So first, he rationalizes the ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe. Then he segues to the always disgusting argument that might makes right (you fight a war; you lose; any and all further suffering then imposed on an entire people is suddenly recast as the "moral consequences" rather than what it really is: victor's justice).
And then: he draws that smarmy parallel between the Palestinians and the displaced Germans. Who can read this sentence and not gag:

quote:
Therefore, we listen attentively and with empathy to the sufferings of the Palestinians - as every person, including Jews, cannot be impervious to the sufferings of millions of Germans who were expelled from Eastern Europe.

Oh, big of you, Shlomo. But news flash, Shlomo: the Palestinians are not the Germans.

On babble, anyway, when people draw sloppy analogies between Israel and Nazi Germany, they quite rightly get their paws slapped. This is equally appalling -- although the fact that some people don't get it has given me sudden insight into the problem. God. I'm not sure I wanted it.

If that's the truth, how very very sad for Avineri, and all who share his views.

One peculiarity about the guy's rhetoric: "born in sin"; "the fall" -- he sounds as though he's channelling John Milton. (And there was a windy patriarchal figure if ever there was one.) Why the Christological imagery?

Anyway, anyone can run on and on lecturing entire peoples about how they have caused their own miseries, tut tut, such a shame, and isn't it amazing how ungrateful the natives remain after you've given them so much of your time and advanced wisdom?


And as a last footnote: Mishei, if you can't see why you get reactions every time you post some version of this:

quote:
Clearly you and others here have no idea who Avineri is

then, I dunno -- you probably belong in a Gogol short story, or something.

I would remind everyone reading: Mishei began his first reply to me with a warning. A warning!!!

quote:
You should be more careful as to who you choose to heap your venom on.

The bloody cheek. Why should I "be more careful," Mishei? What is the implied "or else"? What kind of civil response do you expect to that kind of bullying?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 May 2003 04:56 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei believes he is superior to us, is all.

quote:
Therefore, we listen attentively and with empathy to the sufferings of the Palestinians - as every person, including Jews, cannot be impervious to the sufferings of millions of Germans who were expelled from Eastern Europe.

Apparently, while it is completely unacceptable to compare Israeli forces to the Nazis in any way whatsoever, it's hunky-dory to compare Arab forces to the Nazis, and to do so explicitly.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 05:03 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Skdadl you are an amazing piece of work. While I disagree with your over-the-top analysis of Avineri Im sitting here giggling at your incredible reaction to my asking you to be "careful" as to who you malign. Wow for you to give me such power is mind-boggling. I don't understand you at all.

I am a poster here. You don't like what I post. I can live with that. But you can be sure that i am putting no hexes on you nor do I have the power to threaten you with anything. Such ideas of "threat" are totally foreign to me. I don't believe in such tactics and for you to leave the impression that I would threaten anyone here is, well, just silly.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 05:06 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Smith:
Mishei believes he is superior to us, is all.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, we listen attentively and with empathy to the sufferings of the Palestinians - as every person, including Jews, cannot be impervious to the sufferings of millions of Germans who were expelled from Eastern Europe.
-------------------------------------------------

Apparently, while it is completely unacceptable to compare Israeli forces to the Nazis in any way whatsoever, it's hunky-dory to compare Arab forces to the Nazis, and to do so explicitly.



Um I do not see anything in what you quoted where any such thing is suggested. Perhaps you can clarify exactly which quote proves your point. Thanks Smith.

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 May 2003 05:11 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So what did you mean?

Seriously. I'm curious. Why would you tell me to be careful? Why?

Do you just toss words out without meaning them? I honestly don't understand how you can write something, and then pretend you either didn't say that or you can't even remember what you meant.

I meant, by the way, to explain my use of the word "scorn" at the top of the last post. If there's anything I truly do hate, it is cheap snobbery, and condescension of the Avineri sort seems to me a sub-category of cheap snobbery. I do my damnedest never to condescend to anyone -- until I run into someone who is trying it on others ... And then I fight, with all means at my command. I try never to start the sniffing wars; but if someone else does, I fully intend to finish them. (See Gary Cooper, High Noon.)


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 May 2003 05:16 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Smith was observing, as did I, that Avineri is drawing a tactical, political, and of course obscenely dishonest parallel between Palestinians and Germans (he doesn't distinguish -- note that, Smith: he regrets that this happened to a lot of Germans who weren't Nazis -- and yet, he only regrets that ... so much).

But then: all Germans are, after all, Germans, aren't they?

Awfully generous of him at least to use the word Palestinian. I thought the overgeneralization there was just Arab.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 24 May 2003 05:23 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The difference between most of you and Meshi is that you can't accept that the Palestinians have any responsibility. Or should compromise or try to negotiate at all?

We can be self critical anything one of the most important things about being human is not just showing compassion and sympathy which it doesn't seem as if you have any for the Israelis that’s not surprising because there are a lot that don't and yet the Israelis do and people like me and Meshi do show understanding empathy and compassion towards the Palestinians yet still most people on this chat believe Israel doesn't have any right. One of the most important things understanding were not perfect.

quote:
Oh, I see. Credentials matter more than what people actually say or do. Is that it, Mishei?

No yet It's still arrogant to criticize some one just because a person disagrees they should analyze ant try and understand not just hear what they want.


Analysis isn't so difficult here is a good sample.

All you have to do is think about Motive opportunity and intent.

On the question who wants to wipe who out?

IDF

Motive yes

Opportunity (do the have the means to do so yes) Yes

Intent hmmm? I say hard to prove(they have the means but don't really use their full capability)

Religious radicals

Motive yes

Opportunity No

Intent: Their actions clearly indicate yes, because they don't really have the means yet they are clearly motivated to do so why? Well that’s another story we can argue.

Another good question is Israel actions impearl?

If it returned the Sinai and removed settlements how can people continue to accuse it of impearlisim???


Finally why don't you stop fighting and return to the issues if you can't maybe it proves there are no more intelligent comments left to be made and we're all to stupid to compromise?

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 May 2003 05:30 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Justice, you just are not reading what other people write.

Many many people here have talked calmly about the two-state solution. No one has said that the Palestinians have "no" responsibility.

But we were commenting on an article claiming that they should take ALL the responsibility, and not only for working things through now but historically! Which is absurd.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 24 May 2003 05:39 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't like historical arguments either. History is important because it a part of what makes a persons identity people need that. We can also learn from the mistakes of our past.

But we need modern solutions for modern problems. If we wanted to debate this argument and historical grounds there would be no end.

I don't accept anyone who says only we deserve because we were here first. They deserve something maybe possibly even probably but not absolutely nothing is absolute that's why we need compromise, compromise, compromise.

It doesn't really matter what was written before at this point but I will go back read. What maters is that people stop taking things personally and relax if they have to curse at someone it just shows they have no case to prove their point and they aren't smart off to reply with an intelligent answer.

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 May 2003 06:19 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I don't accept anyone who says only we deserve because we were here first.

Then I take it you would not accept Israeli arguments about "continuous presence" in Palestine.

Please point out to me where anyone has said that the Palestinians bear no responsibility. I don't see that. I do, however, reject the claim that stopping the violence is exclusively the Palestinians' responsibility; I also refuse to respect the arguments of people who insist that all Israeli violence in the area is simply "protection." A dead civilian is a dead civilian.

[ 24 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 24 May 2003 07:24 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
violence is exclusively the Palestinians' responsibility; I also refuse to respect the arguments of people who insist that all Israeli violence in the area is simply "protection." A dead civilian is a dead civilian.

Never said that however I do believe Israel has gotten a very disproportionate amount of bad rap. I'm not accusing you but there has been quite a few postings lately comparing Israel presence in the west bank and Gaza similar to the Nazis in ghettos and concentration camp. There is denying the Palestinians are suffering however Israel treatment of them as much more humanitarian then people make it to be. I feel that people have greatly demonized the IDF . The IDF may not be angles but they are far from demonized I can bring examples of may armies that are much worse including those of westernized countries. If the IDF is as bad as people make it to be I don't what this worlds coming to. I can't stand that because I've been and I've seen.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 24 May 2003 08:10 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It is possible to understand the heart of the Palestinians in particular and that of the Arabs in general: from their point-of-view, the whole Zionist endeavor was an act of colonialism
that came to rip away a section of the Arab homeland. Arab consciousness finds it hard to accept this fact and therefore, blah blah blah...

This is as far as I got. I don't listen to racist pigs. I am shocked that you would post this, Mishei, after your denunciation of the skinheads who harrassed the Gypsies. After your careful policing for antisemitism on this board. Posting an article with such a racist slant towards Arab people is beneath contempt.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 24 May 2003 09:52 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mish:
quote:
Al, are you agreeing with the repition factor because that was all I was referring to.

No, I meant that I find you condescending...and annoying, dense, smug, obtuse and prickly, and a poor speller.

skdadl, regarding Mish's "or else" comment, I've noticed how often Mish pretends to be oblivious to the meaning of what he writes.

This is particularly amazing coming from someone who claims to have voodoo antennae with which he is able to discern antisemitism in the writings of so many others on babble, even if the babblers in question had no idea they were antisemites.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 10:05 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
and a poor speller.

There is sort of an unwritten rule on Babble not to make fun of how people spell. It is possible that some here are dyslexice or have some other disability. Please refrain from doing this again or am I exempt from what others are not?

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 10:06 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I don't listen to racist pigs. I am shocked that you would post this, Mishei, after your denunciation of the skinheads who harrassed the Gypsies.
The term "Gypsy" s a racist slander against the Roma people. You sure are one to talk.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 May 2003 10:34 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
The term "Gypsy" s a racist slander against the Roma people. You sure are one to talk.

Please explain to me, Mishei, how the folk term Gypsy is a racist slander?

I recognize that many of the folk-tales that other folk have conjured up about "Gypsies" are paranoid and neurotic, but I am not confident of your etymology. Perhaps I shall go check that.

And spreading paranoia and neurosis about another people is, of course, always heinous. I cannot see that Sarcasmo was doing that.

What I can see is that you are feeling cornered.

And I agree: spelling flames are lame. (Although, it's true: some people post in ways that are so odd that it is hard not to notice ...)


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 24 May 2003 10:43 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The spelling bit was supposed to be a joke. Polish your antennae Mish.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 24 May 2003 11:22 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:

Please explain to me, Mishei, how the folk term Gypsy is a racist slander?

I recognize that many of the folk-tales that other folk have conjured up about "Gypsies" are paranoid and neurotic, but I am not confident of your etymology. Perhaps I shall go check that.

And spreading paranoia and neurosis about another people is, of course, always heinous. I cannot see that Sarcasmo was doing that.

What I can see is that you are feeling cornered.

And I agree: spelling flames are lame. (Although, it's true: some people post in ways that are so odd that it is hard not to notice ...)


OK let's start with this from the recent decision of the Onatrio Court of Appeal:

quote:
It was suggested in argument before us that the reason that the Crown specified Roma rather than gypsies as the identifiable group in the information was in order to be sensitive to the Roma people. The term gypsy in its broadest sense is often used to refer to people who lead a nomadic life, and for many Roma, the term gypsy conjures up unflattering or stereotypical images.

Then this story from the BBC over an apology for using the gypsy slur:

BBC

And then there is this story from the World Jewish News:

quote:
A right-wing extremist must pay a fine of nearly $3,000 for calling German Jewish leader Michel Friedman a "Gypsy-Jew." Hermann Reichertz, a former member of Germany's far-right Republican Party, used the term in a pamphlet distributed in November. In its ruling this week, Bavaria's Supreme Court overturned a previous ruling that "Gypsy" and "Jew" are neutral terms and that no slur was involved. That ruling prompted a wave of protests, which in turn prompted the government of the state of Bavaria to order a new trial.

And finally this from Toronto's Roma advocacy Centre:

Call us Roma not Gypsies

Need any more to convince you?


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 24 May 2003 11:41 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I hardly think Sarcasmobri had racist motives when he used the term Gypsy. But of course, you need to jump on this like a ton of bricks and thus argue on your turf, because you referenced an article that is clearly patronizing towards the Palestinian-Arabs, and you're getting thumped for it.

As a master veteran of these kinds of debating tactics, Mishei, I have to say that you can't fool an old dog like me.

Leaping on someone else's mistake in order to hammer at that weak point to cover up your own is an old, but effective, trick.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 12:55 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Doc I hardly "leaped" at it. I pointed out that the term gypsy was a slur. You are the one jumping down my throat. I expect it now from some of you here given that you are so blinded by your mistrust of anyone who is in the least bit a Zionist that you look for anything to devalue their argument.

It's OK Doc I understand why you and the others do this. Wilful blindness can be a real stigma.

BTW, I was really trying to give Skdadl information. But Im sure you will find a way to turn that around as well.

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 01:10 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Doc I hardly "leaped" at it. I pointed out that the term gypsy was a slur.

And then you said "You're one to talk," implying that a person who used the word "gypsy" - once - is somehow not worth your consideration; and indeed, you did not respond to any more of that poster's argument.

quote:

I expect it now from some of you here given that you are so blinded by your mistrust of anyone who is in the least bit a Zionist that you look for anything to devalue their argument.

Yes, which is so unlike picking one word in a competitor's argument and using it to devalue the whole argument.

You're not the only Zionist on this board. You have attempted to co-opt the term to refer only to your particular brand of Zionism, which I find hateful and self-serving. But you do not represent the entire movement. We don't dislike you because you're a Zionist. We dislike you because, as was so brilliantly stated earlier in this thread, you're "condescending...and annoying, dense, smug, obtuse and prickly."

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 09:55 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And then you said "You're one to talk," implying that a person who used the word "gypsy" - once - is somehow not worth your consideration; and indeed, you did not respond to any more of that poster's argument.


Wow I said ALL THAT. Please indicate exactly where. Smith, it amazes me that you accuse me of so much and here you actually LIE about what I said. Disgraceful. TPTALLY DISGRACEFUL!!!!

quote:
We dislike you because, as was so brilliantly stated earlier in this thread, you're "condescending...and annoying, dense, smug, obtuse and prickly."

No, you dislike me because you are an immature debator who prefers to accept and repeat calumnys and slanders against fellow Babblers.


Smith, a wise person once "if you don't have something nice to say about somebody, don't say anything at all". You should listen to those with wisdom and maturity.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 10:07 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Wow I said ALL THAT. Please indicate exactly where. Smith, it amazes me that you accuse me of so much and here you actually LIE about what I said.

Where did I lie about what you said? I said you said "you're one to talk," which you did; I said you didn't respond to any more of the post, and you didn't. Seems pretty honest to me.

quote:
Smith, a wise person once "if you don't have something nice to say about somebody, don't say anything at all".

Remind me, was that Thumper or Flower?

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 25 May 2003 10:20 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It was Thumper quoting his dad.

The skunk said, of Bambi's error, "He can call me Flower if he wants to."

I just plain disagree with Mishei's categorical condemnation of the word gypsy. It can be used as a slur, and such use must of course be condemned. But it can be used innocently in other contexts.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 25 May 2003 11:36 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Seriously. I'm curious. Why would you tell me to be careful? Why?



Well, I am certasin he didn't mean to chill your speech, That only happens when someone says something, to him, as evil and silencing as "grow up."

I am surprised you all insist on continuing to take mishei seriously.

I can hardly wait for his hysterical reaction to this where he will call me names for allegedly calling him names (hysterical).

Has no one else noticed how he will toss about antisemitic like confetti at a wedding but then moan to the moderator if anyone dare reacts in kind? Or even look how he tells skdadl "to be careful" after accusing smith, and myself, of trying to "chill" his speech.

How does anyone take him seriously?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 11:48 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Does anyone take him seriously?
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 03:14 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
OOOOOO no one here takes me seriously...oooo bad bad .....Im sooooo sad.

Of course you take NO ONE seriously who just happens to support Israel (and BTW a two-state solution). That's the problem with some of you.

Frankly as you know I have lost no sleep over the fact that Wing or Smith or others do not take me "seriously". It only reinforces my conclusion about how one-sided you can be.

quote:
I just plain disagree with Mishei's categorical condemnation of the word gypsy. It can be used as a slur, and such use must of course be condemned. But it can be used innocently in other contexts.


But Skadal that is just the point, I took the time to indicate numerous sources (including the Roma community itself) who believe that "gypsy" is a slur.

So if you wish to totally ignore the position of the Roma Advocacy centre continue to believe that its OK to use the word "innocently".
Some words that harm people should just be dumped.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 25 May 2003 03:36 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's an interesting issue, actually.

First, of course, I would make sure myself to follow the reading and recommended practice of the Roma community. Fair enough.

But why would I not be automatically on alert to find the word used by someone else in a quite different context?

Some words get so internalized as slurs that people who have been brought up to discriminate against a group, who have then become enlightened and horrified at their training, go on to treat even straightforward descriptions of that group as tainted terms. I'm remembering, eg, the reaction of an English friend when I once asked someone else if he was Irish. She took me aside and hissed at me: "Never do that! Never ask people if they are Irish!"

You see the problem? In some circles in England, "Irish" really is a dirty word; and ironically, it is those most concerned not to seem bigoted who treat it the way you and I would treat racist slurs against blacks.


Now, of course, the Irish have not asked the rest of us to stop calling them Irish. The Roma have asked us to stop calling them gypsies, and the Roma rule on that turf.

But if I open up my tummy and look at my own guts honestly, I find that I have no more automatic feelings about the word gypsy than I do about the word Irish. I've just never known prejudice against either, so the words don't do much to me. I suspect that is true of most Canadians -- although obviously not the little turds who picketed the Roma in Toronto.

There are words I can't say. But clearly, I can't say them because at some point in my past, I was taught to look at the people to whom they were applied as somehow other. Takes a long time to get over that. We all know what a quandary NA whities are in over the N-word, and how much fun many blacks have with our discomfort. It's an interesting situation. We no doubt deserve it.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 03:43 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Skdadl, thank you for a thoughtful reply. You have given me much to ponder.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 04:07 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

Frankly as you know I have lost no sleep over the fact that Wing or Smith or others do not take me "seriously". It only reinforces my conclusion about how one-sided you can be.

Oh, my. When you look at the Internet, are you looking through a window or into a mirror?

quote:
Of course you take NO ONE seriously who just happens to support Israel (and BTW a two-state solution). That's the problem with some of you.

And your evidence for this is...what?

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 05:49 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And your evidence for this is...what?


You

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 06:24 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow, I had no idea I was that important. I must be getting to Mishei. How flattering!

And here I was picturing myself something of an Israeli sympathizer, compared with some others on this board at least. Goodness, how wrong I was.

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 25 May 2003 07:21 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Of course you take NO ONE seriously who just happens to support Israel (and BTW a two-state solution). That's the problem with some of you.


See, now how does anyone take that childish statement seriously? On this board, for example, I think Justice is thoughtful and considerate and is yet to call anyone an antisemite for having a different viewpoint and is yet to meow to the moderator over anything. Yet is as much pro-Israel, and perhaps more so, as anyone else here.

Grow up, mishei. Oh, gosh, sorry didn't mean to chill your speech.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 07:58 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
See, now how does anyone take that childish statement seriously? On this board, for example, I think Justice is thoughtful and considerate and is yet to call anyone an antisemite for having a different viewpoint and is yet to meow to the moderator over anything. Yet is as much pro-Israel, and perhaps more so, as anyone else here.

Grow up, mishei. Oh, gosh, sorry didn't mean to chill your speech.


MMM nice tactic Wing playing one off agaist the other. Still, I have challenged you and others here to show where I have unjustifiably called anyone an antisemite...and surprise surprise NO ONE can take up the challenge. Hypocrates!

BTW, where is your admonishment to Smith who was very quick to label me a racist. Oh of course she plays in your park so its OK

[ 25 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 25 May 2003 08:04 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
and is yet to meow to the moderator over anything.
And do you the same whenever Skdadl threatens to "meow" to the moderator as she has here often with many more than have I?

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 25 May 2003 09:51 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
BTW, where is your admonishment to Smith who was very quick to label me a racist.

Possibly because I produced evidence for what I said; possibly because you have been pretty darn quick to accuse multiple people on this board of "crossing the line"; possibly because I attacked one poster and not an entire board. Take your pick.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 12:05 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Smith:

Possibly because I produced evidence for what I said; possibly because you have been pretty darn quick to accuse multiple people on this board of "crossing the line"; possibly because I attacked one poster and not an entire board. Take your pick.


Or possibly because it is easier for the mmany to gang up on the few.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 26 May 2003 12:22 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You prove to me where your charges, direct or implied, have ever been justified. The burden of proof is upon the accuser. In fact, you have implied everyone on thsi board but those who accept Israeli policy blindly are antisemetic.

And who am I dividing? The reasoned from the unreasoned? Yes, I guess I am.

And no, skdadl has not yet run off to the moderator as often as you have. I would think you hold the record. But that is a guess.

And thank you, for proving my point. You called me a name. Tsk, tsk. Couldn't hold it back, could you?

And later, probably in thsi same thread, you will be c=whinging that someone called you a name. Ah, so predictable.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 12:36 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Still, I have challenged you and others here to show where I have unjustifiably called anyone an antisemite...and surprise surprise NO ONE can take up the challenge. Hypocratese!

Well, Mish, you called me an antisemite (among other things) on one of the al-Jazeera threads.
I suppose, though, that you thought you were justified.

Damn, those antennae of yours trump any argument!


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 08:41 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In fact, you have implied everyone on thsi board but those who accept Israeli policy blindly are antisemetic.
This is another lie. Please show where I have " implied everyone on this board but those who accept Israeli policy blindly are antisemetic".

In fact I have said on numerous occassions that questioning Israeli policy DOES NOT make one antisemitic.

And Al given what you were saying at the time, my concerns were valid IMHO.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 26 May 2003 09:38 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The term "Gypsy" s a racist slander against the Roma people. You sure are one to talk.

I used the term "Gypsy" because it is what the skinheads painted on their signs. Unlike the Crown, I was trying to avoid confusion. You, Mishei, still should be ashamed for posting the rantings of an anti-Arab racist pig. Your little sidestep does not deflect this shame.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 11:07 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Scars, Avineri is far from an "antiArab racist pig". He was one of the key leaders in the Barak Labor governemnet advocating peace with the Palestinians.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 26 May 2003 11:35 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, he sure does a good job writing like a racist pig. I've documented how far I got in his article before I had to stop because of physical revulsion.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 11:43 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Scars you and Skdadl should have that looked into.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 26 May 2003 11:49 AM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It hardly matters what he did during [sarcasm]The Great Noble Peacenik[/sarcasm] Barak's time, if this is the sort of tripe that he rights. Not that I care much for Barak either. The difference is a matter of presentation, not substance.
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 26 May 2003 12:06 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, I'd be more worried if I hadn't reacted negatively to that crap.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 12:56 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mandos:
It hardly matters what he did during [sarcasm]The Great Noble Peacenik[/sarcasm] Barak's time, if this is the sort of tripe that he rights. Not that I care much for Barak either. The difference is a matter of presentation, not substance.
You know if you can't see that Barak held out an olive branch and was ready to lead Israel to peace then sad to say that peace is a long long way off.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 26 May 2003 01:08 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
On Barak:

Interesting.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 01:13 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Scars, Avineri is far from an "antiArab racist pig". He was one of the key leaders in the Barak Labor governemnet advocating peace with the Palestinians.

No he wasn't!

Shlomo, the guy whose stuff I had to read in my Modern Political Theory class

Uri Avnery, the Gush Shalom guy.

What Avnery says about Clinton and Barak:

quote:
Clinton threw the whole weight of the US presidency into the scale, in order to enter the pages of history, or at least the list of Nobel Peace Price laureates. He decided to achieve peace in Camp David at any cost. He believed that Ehud Barak would really put on the table an incredibly generous offer. While being himself an accomplished liar [see: Monika], he believed that Barak was telling the truth. He could not imagine that Barak was a liar of genius, in another league altogether. "At the end of the day", Clinton was booed off the stage, miserably humiliated.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: al-Qa'bong ]


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 26 May 2003 01:58 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My position on Barak and the entire Oslo-derived enterprise has been plainly stated on babble many, many times. It was a fraud. Barak, in particular, was a fraud. The formula from Oslo to Barak was "security for a (shadow of a) state". Not "rights and reparations." There can be no solution until it is seen in the correct moral context.
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 02:06 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And Al given what you were saying at the time, my concerns were valid IMHO.

So you're admitting you were wrong? I suppose I can expect an apology?

From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 02:38 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:

So you're admitting you were wrong? I suppose I can expect an apology?

Where in heavens name would you get the idea that I admitted I was wrong? Read my post.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 26 May 2003 02:44 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And do you the same whenever Skdadl threatens to "meow" to the moderator as she has here often with many more than have I?

I almost never complain to the moderators, actually, even though I've been asked to do that more often.

Someone would have to do something egregious for me to complain. Oddly enough, yesterday, on a different thread, somebody (no one here -- an obvious troll) posted something so dehumanizing that I felt I had to alert audra. But I haven't done that for a long time.

Sometimes I write to defend a poster, though. There have been a few times when I thought that particular people were being targeted for removal and I've been worried about them, so I've written pre-emptive defences.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 03:11 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Where in heavens name would you get the idea that I admitted I was wrong? Read my post.

Fair enough Mish. You must therefore maintain that I am an antisemite.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 03:17 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:

Fair enough Mish. You must therefore maintain that I am an antisemite.


Al one can write posts that fall into the antisemitic category. It doen't necessarily mean the person is antisemitic especially if they can see the issue raised.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 03:44 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
[QB]

I almost never complain to the moderators, actually, even though I've been asked to do that more often.

Someone would have to do something egregious for me to complain.
--------------------------------------------------
Really?

OK, how about this or was it in jest?

[QUOTE] Is that a reaction to my "Och, aye"?

Because, if so, I am going to complain to audra about anti-Celticism on babble.


Or how about this one Skdadl which Smith clarified and you decided not to go to Audra after all

quote:
I honestly can't follow the logic leading to Mishei's charge above that Smith is racist and a liar, so I will be in touch with audra.

Or was that also a joke and both those examples are in only 2 days of posts

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 26 May 2003 03:52 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
1. Mishei -- is it really possible that you have NO SENSE OF HUMOUR???? My remark about anti-Celticism is OBVIOUSLY A JOKE. (If anyone else thought I was seriously worried about prejudice against Celts, please speak up.)

2. About the charges against Smith, I wrote exactly as I said above. I wrote to tell her that I do not believe Smith was either lying or being racist, and I hoped that, if audra received complaints about Smith, she would read through Smith's posts carefully rather than react to a single exchange. I say above that I have done this before -- pre-emptive defences I think are principled, so sometimes I do them.

I didn't write to complain about you Mishei. I can't imagine there would be any point in doing that.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 04:02 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Really?

OK, how about this or was it in jest?

[QUOTE] Is that a reaction to my "Och, aye"?

Because, if so, I am going to complain to audra about anti-Celticism on babble.


Good grief, I know I said "obtuse," but gimme a break!

quote:
Al one can write posts that fall into the antisemitic category. It doen't necessarily mean the person is antisemitic especially if they can see the issue raised.

Mish, do you honestly believe that this sort of prevarication and dissembling somehow enhances your credibility around here?

I seldom give advice, but I think you ought to devote some time, however many months it may take, and seriously reflect on why so many babblers find you so very repulsive.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: al-Qa'bong ]


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 07:26 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
1. Mishei -- is it really possible that you have NO SENSE OF HUMOUR???? My remark about anti-Celticism is OBVIOUSLY A JOKE. (If anyone else thought I was seriously worried about prejudice against Celts, please speak up.)

2. About the charges against Smith, I wrote exactly as I said above. I wrote to tell her that I do not believe Smith was either lying or being racist, and I hoped that, if audra received complaints about Smith, she would read through Smith's posts carefully rather than react to a single exchange. I say above that I have done this before -- pre-emptive defences I think are principled, so sometimes I do them.

I didn't write to complain about you Mishei. I can't imagine there would be any point in doing that.



I knew it was a joke hence I said so in the post. Its hard to have a sense of humour here when you are being constanttly attacked and verbally assaulted.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 07:32 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Mish, do you honestly believe that this sort of prevarication and dissembling somehow enhances your credibility around here?

I seldom give advice, but I think you ought to devote some time, however many months it may take, and seriously reflect on why so many babblers find you so very repulsive.


Number one, couldn't care less what you or anyone else here thinks about me.

Number two, Im sure that "so many" Babblers find me offensive because I defend the State of Israel with passion and reason. I know for many that is hard to take here. So be it. I can live with Babblers who can be totally judgemental of someone based souly on posts to this Board. Frankly people who make those judgenments so easily are far more in need of "many months" of "serious" reflection than am I.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 09:15 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Number one, couldn't care less what you or anyone else here thinks about me.

So you are aware of the root causes of your popularity, even if you refuse to recognise them.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 09:17 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Al dont you get it..Just because posters here dont like what i have to say therefore dislike me...who gives a shit..OK get it!! Now move on
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 09:57 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Its hard to have a sense of humour here when you are being constanttly attacked and verbally assaulted.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 26 May 2003 10:12 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Im sure that "so many" Babblers find me offensive because I defend the State of Israel with passion and reason.

Passion, yes.

quote:
Its hard to have a sense of humour here when you are being constanttly attacked and verbally assaulted.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 26 May 2003 10:23 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey Smith, my telescope must be working, I saw the world's smallest violin as clear as day on my monitor there.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 26 May 2003 11:04 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey guys this is feeling more and more like a scool yard filled with bullies. It is almost a living example for children on how they shouldn't behave. Perhaps I can send it to school boards initiating their anti-bully campaigns as examples they can use of bullying.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 26 May 2003 11:06 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lose the crown of thorns, Mish, it's cutting off circulation to your brain.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 26 May 2003 11:16 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, you know, William Jennings Bryan may have been a fervent creationist but that doesn't take away from his wonderful line about the crown of thorns.

"You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold!"


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca