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

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Suicide bombers kill hope for peace

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Suicide bombers kill hope for peace
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 31 January 2004 10:38 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is a fine opinion peaced from a Canadian academic who is truly trying to understand.

academic Kitchener Waterloo Record

In case you are unable to access I have cut and pasted it below. I know this is not common practice but I do feel it is very much worth the read.

Suicide bombers kill hope for peace

BARRY KAY


(Jan 31, 2004)

In the recently produced documentary The Fog Of War, former U.S. defence secretary Robert McNamara reveals that the U.S. wrongly perceived the Vietnam War to be a fight against the spread of communism, whereas the Vietnamese understood it to be a civil war.

Similarly, the Islamic world and Palestinian Arabs in particular choose to interpret the struggle with Israel as a war against colonialism, without understanding that to Israelis it is an existential battle. Arabs want to imagine that the Israelis, like the British and French in the past, can be driven back to Europe or America or somewhere else, without appreciating that the Jews don't see themselves as having that option.

This incorrect perception, in addition to other cultural differences, xenophobia, an obsession with lost honour and a sense of "imshallah" that God will eventually correct past wrongs, lie at the core of their intransigence. It leaves this Third World society unwilling to compromise or recognize a first world nation that completely overwhelms it militarily and economically.

There is plenty of blame to be allocated to all and sundry for the futility of this situation, notably including the two adversaries themselves. Israeli expansion of settlements over much of the West Bank has clearly exacerbated the conflict, but it is myopic to think that without these incursions, peace would have been reached.

Arab political leadership was not ready to compromise with Israel in 2000 when a plausible two state agreement was on the table; nor before 1967 when the West Bank and Gaza had no Jewish presence whatsoever; nor in 1947 when the United Nations approved a partition plan; nor in 1937 when the British Peel Commission recommended two separate states; nor in the 1920s when the indigenous Jewish population in places like Hebron were subject to massacres in Arab riots and pogroms.

Recent concerns about the Israeli creation of a wall/fence partitioning the West Bank (less than five per cent of the pre-1967 area) would have been unnecessary if the Palestinian Authority had honoured their commitments in the Oslo process to actively resist terrorism in their community.

Likewise the Israeli practice of targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad operatives need never have occurred, had these groups not pursued the tactic of intimidating Israel with suicide bombers.

Little by little, the effectiveness of the suicide bombing campaign has been eroded by constructing the wall and other Israeli tactics that now pre-empt some 90 per cent of such attempts, but not all.

If the suicide bombers were actually increasing Palestinian leverage, their tactics could at least be understood, but they have led to internal economic chaos, the implosion of the Palestinian Authority, the shattering of Israel's political left, and the empowerment of the rightist Likud led by Ariel Sharon.

The Palestinians seem to be too intoxicated with their sense of victimization, to have any perspective on the self-destructive reality they have brought upon themselves. Not unlike an addicted gambler, the Palestinian leadership seeking to win everything (Israel's destruction), in the hope that one more battle would restore past losses, has consistently led itself to risk what it already possessed.

One would think that Palestinian sympathizers such as those on the left or in Europe would encourage them to follow a strategy that wasn't so counter-productive. They seem to be in denial that a politically weak society could share in the responsibility for its own condition against a more powerful adversary. The left would rather persist in romanticizing childhood fables of good versus evil, than to see a culmination of the struggle.

As a result, they prefer to have the Palestinians wallow in self-pity for another 55 years, rather than to make the compromises necessary for resolution.

Nations like France and Belgium, among others, after centuries of blood-soaked colonial exploitation and contemporary racist antipathy to their own unabsorbed immigrant population, are trying to sublimate their own shortcomings by self-righteously demonizing Israel.

Hardline Israeli policies have undoubtedly aggravated the problem, but they did not emerge out of a vacuum, and when a more moderate Labour government was in power, Yasser Arafat's regime was no more conciliatory.

Nothing so underscores the absurdity of Palestinian policy than the threat of abandoning the pretense of a two-state solution if the Israeli government follows through with its recent suggestion of making a partial withdrawal from the West Bank.

This trial balloon had been signalled by Likud cabinet minister Ehud Olmert, and less explicitly by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon himself. Such a unilateral retrenchment would be intended to preclude any possibility of an Arab demographic majority within Israeli jurisdiction. The area Israel abandons could be the base of a Palestinian state adjacent to Israel, if that was truly the Arab goal.

Unlike the lives lost to terrorism, walls could be removed if peace ever were to break out in the future.

However, so long as Israel feels that the ultimate Palestinian goal is a one-state solution with hundreds of thousands of Palestinians flooding into Israel, peace talks are not going anywhere. That is why the "right of return" stubbornly maintained by Palestinian officials has blocked past negotiations, as in Camp David and Taba in 2000 under former U.S. president Bill Clinton's auspices.

Barry Kay is a political science professor at Wilfrid Laurier University.

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 31 January 2004 10:50 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The problem isn't that it's "not common", the problem is that it's a violation of copyright, Mishei, as I'm sure you realize.

If you can access it by linking to it, then others can too. Could you please edit your post?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 31 January 2004 11:50 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Last week Wing also posted a full piece and no one seemed to care or notice.

The problem with the Record is that in order to access on-line items you have to be a subscriber to the hard copy.

So just let me know and I will be pleased to remove the article though it would make no sense then to leave the topic going.

Also in the future it would be wise to enforce the rules for everyone not just a select few.


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

posted 31 January 2004 12:58 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Did you post that whole article just so you could whine about some imaginary 'unfair treatment'? That's so sad.

BTW, whining is an action. You are whining. Therefore I conclude that you can _do_ things within the context of posting.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 31 January 2004 12:58 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Last week Wing also posted a full piece and no one seemed to care or notice.
The problem with the Record is that in order to access on-line items you have to be a subscriber to the hard copy.

So just let me know and I will be pleased to remove the article though it would make no sense then to leave the topic going.

Also in the future it would be wise to enforce the rules for everyone not just a select few.


Mishei, if it is this:

quote:
As the interview progresses, it emerges
with growing clarity that, while Morris the historian is a professional and cautious presenter of facts, Morris the intellectual
is a very sick person.

His sickness is of the mental-political kind. He lives in a world populated not by fellow human beings, but by racist abstractions and
stereotypes. There is an over-abundance of quasi-poetic images in the interview, as if the mind is haunted by the task of grasping what ails it: "The Palestinians citizens of Israel are a time bomb," not fellow citizens. Islam is "a world in which human lives don't have the same value as in the West." Arabs are "barbarians" at the gate of the Roman Empire. Palestinian society is "a serial killer" that ought to be executed, and "a wild animal" that must be caged.

Morris' disease was diagnosed over forty years ago, by Frantz Fanon. Based on his experience in subjugated Africa, Fanon observed that "the colonial world in a Manichean world. It is not enough for the settler to delimit physically, that is to say, with the help of
the army and the police, the place of the native. As if to show the totalitarian character of colonial exploitation, the settler paints
the native as a sort of quintessence of evil … The native is declared insensitive to ethics … the enemy of values. … He is a corrosive
element, destroying all that comes near it … the unconscious and irretrievable instrument of blind forces" (from "The Wretched of the Earth"). And further down, "the terms the settler uses when he
mentions the native are zoological terms" (let's not forget to place Morris' metaphors in the context of so many other Israeli appellations for Palestinians: Begin's "two-legged beasts",
Eitan's "drugged cockroaches" and Barak's ultra-delicate "salmon"). Morris is a case history in the psychopathology of colonialism.

Bad Genocide, Good Genocide

When the settler encounters natives who refuse to cast down their eyes, his disease advances to the next stage -- murderous sociopathy.


- article, that Wingnut posted, you are refering to, from:

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=31&t=000147

then it is originally from YellowTimes.org where they make clear that: YellowTimes.org encourages its material to be reproduced, reprinted, or broadcast provided that any such reproduction identifies the original source, http://www.YellowTimes.org. Internet web links to http://www.YellowTimes.org are appreciated.


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 31 January 2004 01:10 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As for the substance of the text, there have been many examples of a persecuted group being used as (often unwitting) agents of colonialism. Just think of the "Pilgrim Fathers" in the Great Republic to the south, or the many Huguenots who fled horrific religious persecution including outright pogroms, to South Africa.

There is also a confusion between the recent, searing memory of the Nazi genocide against Jews and the situation of the Israelis now. Sometimes the author says "Jews" when he means Israelis, not thinking of the millions of Jews in North and South America, Europe - including dastardly France and Belgium (where I know many Jewish people) etc.

There is no question but that Israelis have a mentality of being up against the wall due to the recent tragic history of the Jewish people - how could it be otherwise? But the Occupation really is a colonial act against a Third-World people.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 31 January 2004 01:11 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In the meantime, why doesn't someone address the perfectly valid points raised in the initial article.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 31 January 2004 02:01 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"...without understanding that to Israelis it is an existential battle."

LOL. Israeli tanks are exostential I suppose. Ridiculous. Reading Morris I guess.

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 31 January 2004 02:40 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The only point of substance in that article that hasn't been dealt with thoroughly in other babble threads is that the Palestinians (and the Arabs in general) don't appreciate what Israel means to those Jews who identify as Zionists. This is only partly correct. Some do, some don't. The real question is whether this knowledge would change their position. And for most Arabs, Muslims, etc., it doesn't change a thing. Whatever the excuse is, it's still an unnacceptable colonial violation. However its residents feel about it, it's still an outpost.
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 31 January 2004 03:09 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
fine opinion peaced from a Canadian academic who is truly trying to understand.
It is truly an opinion peace lacking any kind of balanced view. He's not trying to understand anything beyond his own preconceptions and biases.

quote:
it is myopic to think that without these incursions, peace would have been reached.
Definitely his speculative opinion. No facts to back up this assertion.

The Palestinians seem to be too intoxicated with their sense of victimization, to have any perspective on the self-destructive reality they have brought upon themselves.
Of course, it's ALL the fault of the Palestinians (as a whole no less). Very piercing analysis!

One would think that Palestinian sympathizers such as those on the left or in Europe would encourage them to follow a strategy that wasn't so counter-productive.... As a result, they prefer to have the Palestinians wallow in self-pity for another 55 years, rather than to make the compromises necessary for resolution.
So it's also the fault of European leftists as if a) they have the right to tell the Palestinians what to do and b) as if anyone would listen to them.

Hardline Israeli policies have undoubtedly aggravated the problem, but they did not emerge out of a vacuum..
But I guess hardline Palestinian policies did emerge from a vacuum?

Unlike the lives lost to terrorism, walls could be removed if peace ever were to break out in the future.
What about the 3,000 lives lost to the IDF? This guy's a professor?



From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 31 January 2004 03:47 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Non-partisan partisan:
[QB][/QB]It is truly an opinion peace lacking any kind of balanced view. He's not trying to understand anything beyond his own preconceptions and biases.
Ahhh but you are unbiased and you are right while Professor Kay is wrong. Ya that's it that's the ticket.


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

posted 31 January 2004 03:49 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sarcasmobri:
Did you post that whole article just so you could whine about some imaginary 'unfair treatment'? That's so sad.

BTW, whining is an action. You are whining. Therefore I conclude that you can _do_ things within the context of posting.


No what is sad is this stupid question.

Either rules are made for all and enforced equally or they are not. That is a statement. The fact that you can't tell the difference should be of great concern to you.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 31 January 2004 05:02 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The trouble here is that the author treats Palestinian/Arab perceptions as examples of misperception and misunderstanding while the Israeli/Jewish position is never similarly deconstructed. To him, the Arab perception of the conflict is a psychological construct that is not a clear representation of 'reality' (whatever that may be). However, he gives no similar treatment to what he sees as the crux of Israeli/Jewish perceptions - i.e. the notion that this is an existential crisis. By not exploring the 'truth' of the Israeli perception, a subtle move is made that gives credence to the Israeli view as being 'real' while the Arab perception is 'unreal'; ideological, irrational.

Both positions are features of individual and social psychology. Kay makes some nice attempts at using basic conflict theory models which see 'miscommunication' or failures in perception of, and empathy for another's view as the key to understanding any particular disputes. However, by falling into the trap of positing one side's position as more 'real' than the other's (however subtly) he fails to strigently apply the chief premise of the constructivist conflict theories that he is flirting with. The premise is simply that for the participants in a conflict all perceptions are 'real'. Perceptions ARE the reality of the conflict. The logic of the dispute depends on these perceptions, and so everyone must equally examine and deconstruct their own perceptions of the dispute in order to change the logic of the conflict. So in order to resolve the dispute, not only must an understanding/empathy arise between the parties, but a 'new' third perception (a new truth, if you will) must be produced jointly in order to leap past the current logic, which is of a piece with currently held 'truths'.

Kay simply fails to deconstruct the perceptions/communication methods of the Israelis as resolutely as that of the Palestinians. His knife only cuts one way. The Arab position is posited as a kind of ideological falsehood, while the grounding of the Israeli position is never questioned. Israeli tactics (the perception that drives these tactics is never examined except to posit it as wholly innocent and reactionary to the originary Arab misperception) at worst only "aggrevate" a situation created from Arab intransigence (that old racist canard of the stubborn, dim Arab...) and misunderstanding. The genesis and history of the Israeli psychology as he posits it are subtly positioned as solidly grounded and undeniable, and not requiring any wholesale change or reconfiguration in order to create a working peace. It as though the Arabs must unquestioningly bend to the Israeli perception. Sounds remarkably like Jabotinsky, in a way: "We are here, we will do what we want, get used to it. Our position is all that matters to us..." The Arabs, on the other hand, just seem to have gotten it all wrong. I guess it's because they just don't understand the "first world"; i.e. civilisation.


Sorry, Dr. Kay, but this sounds like just a watered down version of the nonsense that can be found on any mainstream and/or right-wing Zionist website, in the talking points of propandists for Israel, or in various Orientalist texts claiming to deconstruct the "Arab mind". The rehashing of all the old racist stereotypes of Arabs is the most disturbing thing. Furthermore, the old Occident/Orient divide is apparent here and, as usual, civilisation falls on the side of the Occident. Certainly peddling in such unsavoury supremacist stuff is not the way to bring reconciliation and cooperation to a conflict which is perceived (according to the author himself) by one side to be a fight against a supremacist colonialist logic. In other words, Kay's solution feeds right back into the logic of the conflict, simply reinforcing the view that he thinks Arabs should abandon in order to end the conflict.

Duh...

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 31 January 2004 05:06 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Ahhh but you are unbiased and you are right...
First, I didn't publish an opinion peace. Second, I never claimed to be an expert. Third, whether I'm right or wrong has no bearing on the accuracy of Kay's piece. Last, I AM biased - biased against Israel's expansionist, military policies which puts me in good standing with many Israeli citizens.

At least I'm willing to admit it and not make sweeping assertions backed up by nothing racist statements and your cheerleading talents.


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 31 January 2004 06:35 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Non-partisan partisan:
First, I didn't publish an opinion peace. Second, I never claimed to be an expert. Third, whether I'm right or wrong has no bearing on the accuracy of Kay's piece.

Kay has an opinion like you he does not claim to be an expert. In the end its his opinion vs yours. That's all.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 31 January 2004 06:48 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
Kay has an opinion like you he does not claim to be an expert.

Yes he does. He is publishing under his name and title as a professor of Political Science. That is an apparent position of 'expertise' and authority. Moreover, your own introduction makes this an issue by identifying him as an academic - meaning a professional expert....

quote:
In the end its his opinion vs yours. That's all.

Too bad he doesn't see the Israel/Palestine conflict that way. Too him, Palestinians have erroneous 'opinions' while Israel has 'truth' on their side. This move is subtle, but it's there.

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 31 January 2004 07:32 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
* plonk *

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 31 January 2004 07:56 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Too bad he doesn't see the Israel/Palestine conflict that way. Too him, Palestinians have erroneous 'opinions' while Israel has 'truth' on their side. This move is subtle, but it's there.


and it's perfectly obvious that to you Israelis have erroneous "opinions" while Palestinians have "truth" on their side.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 31 January 2004 08:14 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good grief. What Sarcasmobri said about the whining.

I'm not at home so I didn't notice WingNut's article. However, as flotsom has pointed out, it wasn't a violation of copyright. The fact that the online newspaper YOU cut and pasted from made you sign in before you read their articles, Mishei, makes it pretty clear that they do not have the same liberal copyright policies as the Yellow Times does.

In any case, the reason I didn't say anything to WingNut is because I didn't notice it. Believe it or not, I don't notice everything. And you're not the only person I've told this to, so enough with the persecution complex. I would have mentioned it to WingNut in any case, if only because a post that long interrupts the flow of the thread.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 31 January 2004 09:20 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
* plonk *

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 31 January 2004 11:38 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

and it's perfectly obvious that to you Israelis have erroneous "opinions" while Palestinians have "truth" on their side.


Can you read English?

I'll repeat myself and add in a little emphasis in case you are having a little trouble...

Both positions are features of individual and social psychology. Kay makes some nice attempts at using basic conflict theory models which see 'miscommunication' or failures in perception of, and empathy for another's view as the key to understanding any particular disputes. However, by falling into the trap of positing one side's position as more 'real' than the other's (however subtly) he fails to strigently apply the chief premise of the constructivist conflict theories that he is flirting with. The premise is simply that for the participants in a conflict all perceptions are 'real'. Perceptions ARE the reality of the conflict. The logic of the dispute depends on these perceptions, and so everyone must equally examine and deconstruct their own perceptions of the dispute in order to change the logic of the conflict. So in order to resolve the dispute, not only must an understanding/empathy arise between the parties, but a 'new' third perception (a new truth, if you will) must be produced jointly in order to leap past the current logic, which is of a piece with currently held 'truths'.

Kay simply fails to deconstruct the perceptions/communication methods of the Israelis as resolutely as that of the Palestinians. His knife only cuts one way. The Arab position is posited as a kind of ideological falsehood, while the grounding of the Israeli position is never questioned. Israeli tactics (the perception that drives these tactics is never examined except to posit it as wholly innocent and reactionary to the originary Arab misperception) at worst only "aggrevate" a situation created from Arab intransigence (that old racist canard of the stubborn, dim Arab...) and misunderstanding. The genesis and history of the Israeli psychology as he posits it are subtly positioned as solidly grounded and undeniable, and not requiring any wholesale change or reconfiguration in order to create a working peace. It as though the Arabs must unquestioningly bend to the Israeli perception. Sounds remarkably like Jabotinsky, in a way: "We are here, we will do what we want, get used to it. Our position is all that matters to us..." The Arabs, on the other hand, just seem to have gotten it all wrong. I guess it's because they just don't understand the "first world"; i.e. civilisation.

[ 31 January 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 February 2004 10:22 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Kay has an opinion like you he does not claim to be an expert. In the end its his opinion vs yours. That's all.

Opinions should be substantiated by facts. All we have here is a series of assertion, combined and then layered with an analysis.

I still can't get over the existential thing. I mean really that is pretty weird, frankly.

You can have an 'existential battle' in your closet. Goth kids with exsistential angst go to clubs. They dont need to go to Jerusalem to project angst on to Arab orange farmers.

It makes the whole Israeli position trite. I wouldn't go spreading that around to convince people of anything.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 01 February 2004 12:35 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:


I still can't get over the existential thing. I mean really that is pretty weird, frankly...

It makes the whole Israeli position trite. I wouldn't go spreading that around to convince people of anything.



Yes like homicide bombings are trite. It is hard to convince the average Israeli (of course this would include Jews, Muslims , Christinas ...all are "Isreali) that homicide bombs are not meant to murder Israelis. I know, since you live here in your warm and comfortable Canadian home you could never put yourself in the shoes of an Israeli who wonders if her turn will be next just because she takes a bus with her two children to church on Sunday. Yes I understand how you would have trouble understanding how this is existential for them.

G-D help us.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 01 February 2004 01:14 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I know, since you live here in your warm and comfortable Canadian home you could never put yourself in the shoes of an Israeli who wonders if her turn will be next just because she takes a bus with her two children to church on Sunday

I love quoting shrill and overwrought commentary sans context.

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 01 February 2004 01:40 PM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yes I understand how you would have trouble understanding how this is existential for them.

What the fuck does Jean-Paul Sartre have to do with any of this? Is this whole conflict just a thought-game in a college Philosophy 101 class? Sheesh.

IF we're gonna go that route, though, how much more "existential" is the Palestinians' situation? Rootless, adrift, stateless for over 50 years, literally oppressed under brutal military dictatorship for over 30, lands stolen, houses detroyed, humanity denied, criminalized from birth, basic living rendered impossible by arbitrary restrictions on movement, constantly facing the possibility of life being snuffed out at any given moment by a missile fired from an Israeli helicopter.

I see your "existentialism" and raise it, Mishei.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 01 February 2004 02:23 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by beluga2:

What the fuck does Jean-Paul Sartre have to do with any of this? Is this whole conflict just a thought-game in a college Philosophy 101 class? Sheesh.

IF we're gonna go that route, though, how much more "existential" is the Palestinians' situation? Rootless, adrift, stateless for over 50 years, literally oppressed under brutal military dictatorship for over 30, lands stolen, houses detroyed, humanity denied, criminalized from birth, basic living rendered impossible by arbitrary restrictions on movement, constantly facing the possibility of life being snuffed out at any given moment by a missile fired from an Israeli helicopter.

I see your "existentialism" and raise it, Mishei.



No speak to Arafat and his corrupt leadership who have kept the Palestinian people from reaching their goal of Statehood.

As a tinpot dictator not responsible to anyone but his other cronies a state is not in Arafat's best interests. Not one bit


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

posted 01 February 2004 02:49 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
No speak to Arafat and his corrupt leadership who have kept the Palestinian people from reaching their goal of Statehood.

As a tinpot dictator not responsible to anyone but his other cronies a state is not in Arafat's best interests. Not one bit


Tinpot dictator? Sure looks to me like he actually got elected.

You know, right-wingers often shoot their mouths off spewing the same kind of crap about Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela. Even though he got elected in 1998 and again in 2000 in honest (well, by South American standards, anyway - although the recent US election is definitely in doubt) elections, the rightoids haul out the same crap as you do, and trash Chavez with it.

You call yourself a liberal, so why are you pulling the same idiotic crap suited only for a troglodyte of a right-winger who knows bupkiss about world affairs?

[ 01 February 2004: 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 01 February 2004 03:01 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:

Tinpot dictator? Sure looks to me like he actually got elected.

You know, right-wingers often shoot their mouths off spewing the same kind of crap about Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela. Even though he got elected in 1998 and again in 2000 in honest (well, by South American standards, anyway - although the recent US election is definitely in doubt) elections, the rightoids haul out the same crap as you do, and trash Chavez with it.

You call yourself a liberal, so why are you pulling the same idiotic crap suited only for a troglodyte of a right-winger who knows bupkiss about world affairs?

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]



Because democratic leaders dont steal their peoples money and hide it away in secret bank accounts. And then encourage their young people to don dynamie belts , cross into other countries and murder their citizens.

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 01 February 2004 03:20 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Unfortunately, Mishei, a lot of democratically elected politicians DO steal their population's money and hide it away in secret bank accounts! Guess I've just studied Italian history too much but there has been a lot of misuse of public funds even in the supposedly upright world of Northern European heritage.

You are aware that Sharon faces similar allegations. I wouldn't be surprised that there is substance to both. Power often corrupts.

The problem is that negotiations of any sort have to be carried out with the adversary or enemy. I don't much care for Arafat, and far less for Sharon - who doesn't exactly have the most spotless hands either, after his involvement in Sabra and Chatila - but negotiaitons will have to take place between whomever the Israelis and Palestinians have chosen as leaders, unsavoury as they may be.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 01 February 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by lagatta:
Unfortunately, Mishei, a lot of democratically elected politicians DO steal their population's money and hide it away in secret bank accounts! Guess I've just studied Italian history too much but there has been a lot of misuse of public funds even in the supposedly upright world of Northern European heritage.

You are aware that Sharon faces similar allegations. I wouldn't be surprised that there is substance to both. Power often corrupts.

The problem is that negotiations of any sort have to be carried out with the adversary or enemy. I don't much care for Arafat, and far less for Sharon - who doesn't exactly have the most spotless hands either, after his involvement in Sabra and Chatila - but negotiaitons will have to take place between whomever the Israelis and Palestinians have chosen as leaders, unsavoury as they may be.



Yes lagatta, I agree...despite Sharon's less than stellar record let us remember ...Arafat has the murder of thousands on his hands...that is deliberate cold and calculated murder by terrorism.

Of couse now all the anti-Israel afficianados here will trot out Sharon's record, yes we know..but in comparision to Arafat there is no match..Arafat wins hands down as therroist bully and thug.

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 01 February 2004 03:28 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Could someone making the corruption charge against Arafat please publish some significant evidence that Arafat has indeed stolen money from the PA and hidden it in secret bank accounts?

Thank you.


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 01 February 2004 03:30 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yes lagatta, I agree...despite Sharon's less than stellar record let us remember ...Arafat has the murder of thousands on his hands...that is deliberate cold and calculated murder by terrorism.

Could you please show evidence DIRECTLY linking Arafat to the "murder of thousands"? You know, the same kind of evidence that would be required to make a charge of "cold calculated murder" [sic].

Thank you.

quote:
Of couse now all the anti-Israel afficianados here will trot out Sharon's record, yes we know..but in comparision to Arafat there is no match..Arafat wins hands down as therroist bully and thug.

Personally, I couldn't care about the comparison. It's really unimportant. But, since you made the comparison first, you probably have lots and lots of evidence on which to base your judgement, as well as a solid model for comparison.

You do have that, right?

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 01 February 2004 03:36 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
that is deliberate cold and calculated murder by terrorism.

As opposed to the warm, fuzzy, snuggly murder by Apache attack helicopter or assassination squads.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 February 2004 04:28 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yes like homicide bombings are trite. It is hard to convince the average Israeli (of course this would include Jews, Muslims , Christinas ...all are "Isreali) that homicide bombs are not meant to murder Israelis.

More or less my point. Except I would have avoided all the needlessly colourful language, and spin. Yes. You really want to reduce all that the an existential battle? As in "...without understanding that to Israelis it is an existential battle."

I can assure you sucide bombing is definitely not existential. Nor was the holocaust, etc. etc. etc.

Its silly and trite.

As I said, the converted will approve of this article because it is on side, but dont expect it to win any converts.

quote:
Could someone making the corruption charge against Arafat please publish some significant evidence that Arafat has indeed stolen money from the PA and hidden it in secret bank accounts?

Yes, why is that crazy old bastard hanging out wid da bros in da hood after pickin all that low flying fruit? His squat is a mess, since the Israelis blew it up. I'd be in Cancun, safer for one thing, and Sharon would pay the fare no doubt.

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 02 February 2004 12:09 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Courage:

Personally, I couldn't care about the comparison. It's really unimportant. But, since you made the comparison first, you probably have lots and lots of evidence on which to base your judgement, as well as a solid model for comparison.

You do have that, right?

[ 01 February 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


This is a good start....ahhh but Courage your friend and terrorist Yasser Arafat is untouchable in your eyes...I understand given your adoration how you will negate anything that shows Yasser in a bad light.

quote:
On Tuesday, November 27, at 11:00am, at the Palaise de Justice, Place Poelaert 1000, Brussels, Belgium, the Terror Victims Association and a group of terror victims from Israel filed a claim charging Yasser Arafat with murder, genocide, and crimes against humanity. Thirty Israelis have signed on the petition, and their lawyers assert that dozens more will follow. Lawyers for the plaintiffs are Jerusalem-based Yaacov Rubin, former head of the Israeli Bar Association; William Goldnadel of Paris, president of "Lawyers Without Borders;" and Yehudit Shachor of Israel, whose son was murdered by Palestinian terrorists.



Arafat's connection to murder

[ 02 February 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 02 February 2004 12:33 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Uhh, these are untried allegations. You might try finding direct evidence, through testimonies etc. to back up your claim. The suggestion is that Arafat controls an organization that murders people. How is this established?

quote:
Arafat allowed terrorists to train in Palestinian Authority territory, and to plan and carry out terrorist actions against Israeli citizens.

Is the state where Timothy McVey trained in a militia responsible for the acts committed by McVey. Only if it is proved that the State wilfully ignored its activities.

quote:
He further freed terrorists from prison and granted refuge to terrorists who killed and maimed Israelis.

Are parole boards responsible if they let people out of prison who later go on to commit crimes. Only if it is proved that knowingly freed them toward the end of having them commit future crimes..

This is very tenuous stuff.

The IDF raided Arafat's Ramallah compound and you dont have anything stronger than this?

My impression is that Arafat is no virgin in these matters, but you have to have something.

[ 02 February 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 02 February 2004 12:42 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Arafat was charged with murders which he ordered and which were carried out by members of organizations which Arafat controls: the P.L.O., the Palestinian Authority Police, Fatah, Tanzine, and Force 17.

The site's precise allegations are here.

Notice that Hamas is conspicuously absent.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 02 February 2004 12:48 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, sorry I revised my post. There is none of the evidence supporting this allegation.

I seriously would like to see something stronger. As far as I know Arafat is Nobel Peace Prize winner. That is what I know.

Again, Arafat is only repsonsible for the acts of people in his organization if he colludes in the acts or wilfully ignores their activities. It may be impossible for him to control all of his organization, especially in the present circumstances.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 02 February 2004 12:51 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Isn't it generally considered a truism, though, that the people at the top are ultimately responsible for the actions of their underlings? If it can be shown that Arafat was made aware of certain actions taking place and did not take all reasonable steps to stop them, I'd say that makes him responsible.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 02 February 2004 12:53 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The PA is like the New York Rangers.

Good on paper, expensive, and nonexistent where it matters.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 02 February 2004 05:27 AM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:


Arafat's connection to murder

[ 02 February 2004: Message edited by: Mishei ]


I will be awaiting the presentation of evidence and outcome of the trial.

Curious though, since you think that an indictment is proof that someone is guilty, do you then agree that Sharon is a war criminal? Not only has his own state found him responsible for massacres carried out in his chain-of-command, but there are indictments against him in Belgium as well.

Me, I'll be waiting to see some actual evidence, you go ahead and draw all the conclusions you want....


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 February 2004 08:07 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
ahhh but Courage your friend and terrorist Yasser Arafat

What the...? You wanna watch that, please?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 02 February 2004 08:24 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

What the...? You wanna watch that, please?



Michelle, ...now just so I understand, what exactly is the problem (I do not want to repeat the error).

Courage is of the opinion that Arafat is not a terrorist and has defended him on this thread.

The use of the term "your friend" is at best sarcastic at worst (if you believe her is a terrorist) not nice. But there has been much worse here with no admonitions.

So (at the risk of again being called a whiner by those who think they are in a school yard) please outline the problem.

Thanks.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 February 2004 08:44 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think a detailed explanation is necessary, Mishei, but if you insist. You're implying in your post that Courage would be friends with terrorists. It's inflammatory and unnecessary.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 02 February 2004 09:09 AM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I will be awaiting the presentation of evidence and outcome of the trial.

Me too

But Courage you haven't proved a thing. Sharon has been convicted and has paid so far accordingly for the crimes he's been convicted of. He maybe convicted of more true but until then let us stick to what know. The reason Sharon can be brought justice is because he is a part of a democracy. At least a country which is more democratic then many others. There are intuitions in place which can hold him accountable he is not a despot. There was even an inquiry brought forth on Facility 1391 and an investigation is under way.

Arafat it is much more difficult to prove whether he is guilty of any crime. He essentially lives in the Wild West where there are no institutions or laws. That, that he hasn't had a proper court hearing doesn't mean he is innocent. Or maybe he is because where comes from laws apply differently.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 02 February 2004 10:40 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
I don't think a detailed explanation is necessary, Mishei, but if you insist. You're implying in your post that Courage would be friends with terrorists. It's inflammatory and unnecessary.

Well I was more inferring that Arafat is a terrorist. That Courage wishes to defend him is clear. I retract any inference that Arafat and Courage may be friends.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 02 February 2004 11:28 AM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I once bought a pair of silver earrings from a (failed) terrorist. What was his name, was it Ahmed Rhassam ? In any case, the guy living in Montréal who was accused of trying to smuggle a shitload of fertiliser across the US border to blow up a target down there had a tiny shop where he sold silver jewellery and little tchotches from North Africa and the Middle East - right next to the famously cheap grocery store Segals, known to us as the "United Nations of Rudeness". I'm sure a lot of other Montrealers who frequent boulevard Saint-Laurent did too.

Needless to say, no inkling of his sympathies.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 02 February 2004 04:04 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post
from Al-Qa-bong
quote:
OPP? Watch this move Sarcasmo:
Professor Shemp Libovitz. If you really are a professor from Israel, then you're an indictment of the Israeli education system.

Brenda. Just a racist.

**Double Plonk**


Hey Michelle, is calling Brenda a racist not inflammatory or unnecessary. (how about distasteful?)
What gives?


From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 02 February 2004 05:57 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
*Triple plonk*
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 02 February 2004 06:00 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not many babblers can land a triple like that.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 February 2004 06:01 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Depends. Show me the context in which it was said.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 03 February 2004 12:59 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post
from features, similar theme
Topic: Criminal at birth: refugees in Lebanon

quote:

Brenda
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4684
posted 27 January 2004 12:07 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know, the whole story seems like Isreali bashing to me. The jews felt the same way some 60 years ago as in that quote. I also don't understand how Palestinians being treated like dogs in Lebanon has anything to do with Isreal. It's like saying that England is to blame for how our Canadian gov. treated the Japanese Canadians in WWII. Also, if you are struggaling to survive, with no basic human rights, why would you bring a child into that world? Or is that just my hated, Western way of life thinking, getting the better of me?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: West | Registered: Nov 2003 | IP: Logged

Professor Shem Libovitz
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4911
posted 27 January 2004 01:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This post smells of Anti Semitism
Palestinians abandoned their homes in Israel. The Jews turned Israel into a garden. The Palestinians are basically Nomads that wandered all over the Mideast and they have no real home.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Israel | Registered: Jan 2004 | IP: Logged

DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490
posted 27 January 2004 01:46 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see you are recycling the "we made the land bloom" myth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: In the beta continuum | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Michelle
assistant babbler
Babbler # 560
posted 27 January 2004 03:05 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Professor, I know you're new and everything, but around babble, if you're going to accuse other posters of anti-Semitism, you'd better be able to back it up. Otherwise you're not abiding by the policy you agreed to when you signed up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: the centre of the universe | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged



cont'd

quote:

Brenda
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4684
posted 29 January 2004 10:34 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The new archival material, Morris reveals, records routine execution
of civilians, twenty-four massacres, including one in Jaffa, and at
least twelve cases of rape by military units, which Morris
acknowledges are probably "the tip of the iceberg." Morris also says
he found documents confirming the broader conclusions favored by his
critics: the expulsion was pre-meditated; concrete expulsion orders
were given in writing, some traceable directly to Ben Gurion."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back and forth, back and forth. What led to these excecutions and rapes? Mabey a palestinian suicide bomber that killed 10 civilians and wounded 50, just like the one that did that today? It's ironic too, because as soon as there are peace talks and negotiations, extremists from both sides try and kill their own leaders. There will never ne peace in the middle east. That hatred will always be there.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: West | Registered: Nov 2003 | IP: Logged

Sarcasmobri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885
posted 29 January 2004 10:55 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They just can't help themselves, eh Brenda? It must be in their blood, right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: In the path of destruction | Registered: Nov 2001 | IP: Logged

al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807
posted 29 January 2004 11:15 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPP? Watch this move Sarcasmo:
Professor Shemp Libovitz. If you really are a professor from Israel, then you're an indictment of the Israeli education system.

Brenda. Just a racist.

**Double Plonk**


I don't know about you, but i find it pretty rotten that someone who makes a arguement that a certain post has the odour of anti-semitism and you tell him to watch his step and Al-Qa'bong comes right out and accuses someone of being a racist and not a peep.

Plonking? Seems it means 'self satisfaction at not being able to form a coherent arguement'.


From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 03 February 2004 01:09 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The professor didn't say what it is about the post that is anti-semitic - he just came to this message board as a new poster and smeared someone with absolutely no justification.

Whereas al-Qa'bong was expanding on Sarcasmobri's analysis of what he was talking about with Brenda - namely that she seemed to be saying that there will be no peace in the Middle East because these people just can't help hating and killing each other.

Truthfully, I don't necessarily think that Brenda was outright racist with what she said. She basically said that she doesn't think the back and forth of violence in the region is going to end because of the extremists on both sides. I've often thought the same thing despairingly. So yeah, al-Qa'bong should back it up if he calls someone racist.

The other thing, caoimhin, is that I don't always see everything. And I'm sure WingNut, al-Qa'bong, Courage, and the other regular participants with Palestinian sympathies will tell you that there have been lots of times when I've asked them to cool it as well when arguments get out of hand. I don't just lean on the pro-Israelis.

I don't catch everything, however, because a) this is volunteer work, and b) people on babble know the procedure if someone says something that offends them - private message me with the quote and the thread, and I'll look into it.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 03 February 2004 02:21 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post
Thank you,
From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 03 February 2004 02:33 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Plonking? Seems it means 'self satisfaction at not being able to form a coherent arguement'.

Well that isn't what it means.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 03 February 2004 02:45 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think what it really means is "I'm not content to just not talk to you anymore; I have to make one last, visible show of letting you know I won't be talking to you anymore."

It's like breaking up with someone — it's very, very politically important to be the one doing the dumping, not the one to get dumped. That way everyone knows that it's the other person that's the "unreasonable" one. Same with a plonk.

The tour de force of plonking is, of course, the flounce, which for all intents and purposes is a plonk on every babbler. The closest real-world analogy to a flounce that I can think of would be to commit suicide... or at least pretend to in order to gauge sympathy. Flouncing reminds me of the common childhood fantasy of being able to die, but come back to your own funeral to see how regretful and sorry everyone (hopefully!) is. Here you flounce, let everyone know that it's their fault you're leaving, then come back the next day to see what they say about you.

Me, personally, I figure that if I can't communicate with you then I really don't need to try and communicate with you to tell you so, but if you do a babble search for "plonk" then you'll find that plenty of babblers disagree.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 03 February 2004 02:49 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You've obviously put a lot of thought into the matter, Mr.M.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 03 February 2004 03:08 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I miss the days of the killfile.

You could really *plonk* someone back then, and it really meant something. Simply hit ^K, and copy the offender's address into your list. Never again could David Frum's admirers come into your discussion and call you a bunch of terr'ist-loving commies. Neo-nazis could speak once and once only. Ah, the bliss.

These days, a *plonk* is merely a symbolic gesture; a harkening back to a simpler time when technology was managable; a gleeful, perhaps a little childish, way of focussing your frustration with a repetitive poster. A shame that the new technology which makes boards like this possible don't keep some of the better features from the past.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 03 February 2004 03:09 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ya, watching some of the plonk-fests here at babble you pick up a few things. It's always changing too. For example, the "plonk" is seeing new competition from what I will call the "silent" plonk. It's more of a group activity, and nobody actually comes out and says the word "plonk", but everybody cuts and pastes some long-winded technical explanation of something, or a description of a species of bird, or some other non-sequitur. Sometimes contributors will also talk at length about wines they like, and everyone is encouraged to jump in. Like the plonk, this is in lieu of simply not communicating with someone, and I suspect serves as some kind of reassurance to the group that "we all agree, and he/she is the wrong one". It also seems to serve some kind of shaming, or belittling role as well, with the object of this "silent plonk" left to realize of his or her own accord that if only they hadn't held the opinions they held, then everyone else wouldn't be forced to talk around them like they weren't there. Fascinating to watch.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 03 February 2004 03:27 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually, the phenomenom described above is (I believe) called doe snot. I've picked up many a good recipe from doe snot sessions.

[ 03 February 2004: Message edited by: Sarcasmobri ]


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 03 February 2004 03:33 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why isn't stuff like this in the FAQ?
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 03 February 2004 03:39 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
diomedea exulans
From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 03 February 2004 05:17 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My Komodo Dragon could eat your albatross for breakfast.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 03 February 2004 05:28 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
My Komodo Dragon could eat your albatross for breakfast.

There'd be a bit of tax on that. Wandering Albatrosses are huge.

And I see by your unhealthy fixation with Komodos that you've been completely swept up in this decade old dinosaur marketing craze.

If you ever get to Toronto again be sure and go to the Royal Ontario Museum's natural history wing, where you will see an extinct bird there that is albatross-like but has an enormous wing-span and a head the size of a rugby ball.


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 03 February 2004 05:45 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I've seen of Toronto you could fit into Pearson Airport.

Varanus komodoensis

Eight feet long, 200 pounds and it has poison saliva.

I still maintain my lizard could lick yer bird.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 03 February 2004 05:54 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ha.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

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

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca