They've lost me this time

[Tannin]

On the radio just now, in the shower, I heard something that made my blood chill, and then boil.

There was a peace rally somewhere in the occupied territories. Children, not adults, and perfectly peaceful. An ABC reporter was there, and I heard the whole thing. I'm not talking homicidal teenagers here, I'm talking primary school children, children of 5 and 8 years, boys and girls.

I listened to them singing peace songs, beautiful singing, piping little voices all in harmony. And then two armour-plated Israeli Army jeeps drove straight into the crowd, gassing them and letting off stun grenades. Now they were screaming.

That's it.

I've had a gutful.

I've always been sympathetic to Israel in the past, gradually come to feel that they were being unreasonable and gradually become more of a fence sitter.

As of right now, if I was the Prime Minister, I'd be on the phone to the Israeli Ambassador telling him to haul his arse over to my office this very minute, cause by this time tommorow he'll be on a 747 going home.

I'd kick the bastards out. No aid, no trade, no nothing.

When your army starts making war on primary school children, that's the end.

You are no longer part of the human race.

 

[Mercutio]

I came to a similar decision some time ago. Basically, I see a combination of factors playing into each other, including the currently ascendant right-wing government, general religious loonieness on the part of orthodox jews (the kind with the most rights in Israel), general loonieness on the part of the US government and evangelical xtian fairs, and now the carte blanch given by the "war on terror". Add to that the fact that the palestinians are ineffectual, driven apart by desire for a secular government and the fact that most of those ready to die for the cause are already religious fanatics who'd like nothing more than another middle eastern state formed under the tenents of sha'ria, and the naked hatred each side has from years of low-level conflict in which Israel has all the good cards, and I just *don't* see a way out.

Tea, changing Israel's government will do no good. As long as a palestinian stands on land that an Israeli wants, there will be conflict. As long as there is a nation of the Jews called Israel, there will be conflict.

It is sad, but it is also true.

 

[mubs]

What both of you said echoes my own sentiments.

You might know that an American college girl who had gone there to see things for herself was mowed down and killed by an Israeli tank. Right in front of other people. This was not an accident; she was protesting and stood her ground when the tank approached. Even in China, of all places, in Tianamen sqaure, the bloody tank stood still when a single unarmed man defied it. The L.A. Times published an email the girl wrote her parents just a couple of hours before she was killed. It detailed the unfairness, the crazy logic, the "other dimension" aspects of life there.

I didn't read/hear of any American protest against Israel. If Israel can get away with killing a defenceless American citizen in broad daylight, plain view and in cold blood, I shudder to think what they must be doing to the Arabs.

More and more parts of the world are going back to the barbaric might-is-right mentality and behaviour.

Sad indeed.

 

[jtr1962]

Tannin, you probably would have come to that realization by the time you were about six if you lived in New York. For many reasons, the Jews have been a thorn in my side ever since I could remember, and current events have only increased my feelings in this matter. Yes, Israel is unreasonable and hypocritical, and unfortunately this a trait it's people share with many Jews the world over.

It's well past time that world leaders saw that putting Israel where it is was a huge mistake made in 1947. Honestly, the best place for it would have been some of the mostly uninhabited desert areas of the United States. There would have been no hostile countries surrounding it, and as a bonus cities like New York would have hopefully been able to encourage most of their Jews to relocate there. There would have been a safe Jewish homeland protected by the borders of the US(hence no need for billions in aid annually). As a bonus, if we had been successful in getting most of the Jews in the US to live in the US-based Israel, the damage they did to the US as legislators and lawyers starting from the 1960s onwards never would have occurred. I'm referring here to the ill-conceived welfare and medicaid programs, frivolous lawsuits, ubiquitous sex and violence, and some parts of the civil rights movement like affirmative action. Besides that, for whatever reason, they just tend not to be very well liked by most other groups, so giving them a safe, secure homeland in the US would have benefitted both the Jews(by protecting them from persecution), and those who dislike them(and simply want them gone by whatever means).

I hope this post doesn't come off as sounding too anti-Jewish. I more angry at what prominent Jews have done in both Israel and New York rather than prejudiced against all Jews. That tank incident mubs refers to was particularly disgusting.

 

[Mercutio]

jtr, you're right that your comments sound extremely anti-semitic.

 

[e_dawg]

I knew it was all downhill from there as soon as Ariel Sharon was elected into office...

 

[e_dawg]

And i agree with Mercutio. That's scary stuff you wrote, jtr...

 

[jtr1962]

If you think what I wrote is scary then it's a good thing one of my cousins doesn't post on this board. This is a person who considers Hitler one of his personal heroes, and he's far from the only one. A person my brother works with has feelings to the same effect. The point here is that if you start getting posts like I wrote(very measured, BTW, considering my true feelings), and even Tannin's initial post(which could be construed as veiled anti-Semitism) on a board like this, you can only imagine what the average person is saying at their dinner table. I think it's better to get things out in the open rather than hide behind a veil of courtesy.

Remember the historical context for the existence of Israel-namely the Holocaust. The placement of Israel in it's current location was a knee-jerk reaction to an awful event. Not much thought was given to the fact that an Israel in it's original biblical location would create more problems than it would solve. It seems to me that world leaders of the time were so determined that a Holocaust should never occur again that the idea of Israel was rammed down the throats of everyone, and sympathy because of the Holocaust was high enough to prevent a rational discussion of the subject. Inadvertently, the seeds for the next Holocaust were already sown once the state of Israel was established in 1947. Anti-Semitism in Europe is at levels not seen since Nazi Germany, and it is the fastest growing form of hatred in places like the US as well. Sadly, I see no solution to the current dilemma other than the relocation of Israel. Each new atrocity committed by Israel will only fan the flames of anti-Semitism the world over, which means there is only one other possible ending to this-the second Holocaust long predicted by the scriptures. Once Israel loses US support, which it will as the public grows more disgusted with the constant cycle of violence there, there will really be no stopping it.

A very interesting thought occurred to me recently. The US just set a very dangerous precedent recently by invading Iraq without world support. This invasion can be used as justification to invade Israel by those countries who see Israel's current regime as being just as evil as that of Iraq. One can imagine the countries of the EU undertaking exactly such an invasion, no doubt with the blessings of most of the Arab world. The end results of such an action are not pretty by any stretch of the imagination. Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel will use them once it feels it's very existence is threatened.

 

[Mercutio]

I'm pretty sure the the now two-year-old+ palestinian uprising started basically the same day Sharon paid a visit to the Temple Mount. IIRC Netanyahu <sp?> was still in office then.
Of course, putting hardliners in office after Shamir and Rabin was more or less the regional equivalent of spitting on the Oslo accords to begin with.

The fact that I know more about Israeli politics than those of my own state government frightens me.

 

[mubs]

At the time Israel was created, weren't the Palestinians promised their own country? IIRC, Britain was the main negotiator / arbitrator during those events. Everybody has conveniently forgotten about those poor people who had lived in that area for so many hundreds of years.

As jtr1962 pointed out, the Middle-East is clenching its teeth and putting up with this only because the U.S. backs Israel. Once the U.S. disengages itself (if that will ever happen), the gloves are sure to come off. Isn't that the main reason for building the Islamic bomb?

It's very difficult to be optimistic that that region will ever see peace resulting from an equitable settlement of grievances.

 

[its.fubar]

why is it there are so many films being made on the Jewish problem which must run in to the many hundred in one form or another, but next to nothing showing the Palestine problem,it is also a proven fact the propaganda value of a good movie is beyond calculations,is it possible the Palestinian people are incapable of producing a decent film or is it as I suspect they do not have the political influence in the USA where the majority of the English speaking films are made.

 

[e_dawg]

I just don't understand this intolerance all the way over in N.America (and I'm not just talking about anti-semitism here)... I am thankful I live in Canada. We settle our differences in the hockey rink

 

[Handruin]

Speaking of Hockey and indifferences, I was chatting with friends and family tonight and they were discussing how a perticular Canadian hockey team was booing while the US national anthem is being played. This even occurred at a hockey game for young kids...

 

[e_dawg]

Yes, the American anthem was booed once by the fans in a Canadian city (Montreal) since the war started. In retaliation, the fans in Atlanta booed the Canadian anthem. Both cities' fans were wrong, but Atlanta was booing simply out of retaliation, which is stupid. The Montreal fans were booing as a form of protest against the war, which is at least for a purpose, however misguided.

<soapbox> Playing national anthems before sports games is totally unnecessary, though, because nobody is playing for their country. Professional sports leagues have nothing to do with nationalism, unlike the Olympics or World athletic competitions. Get rid of the pre-game anthems already... </soapbox>

 

[Tea]

In Canada we settle our differences in the hockey rink

If it's all the zame to you, E_Dawg, I've seen Canadians play hockey and I'll stick to the old-fashioned method of settling differences: guns, knives, atom bombs, and sticks with nailz in. Much zafer.

 

[its.fubar]

How embarrassing for the countries involved would you think, after their national anthem has been played, these so called sportsman have a punch up to settle their differences these countries with their flag sitting high on top of the mast are condoning and excepting this behavior. what message are they giving to the rest of the world.


It's not surprising we have Wars when we cannot have a sports game without fighting.

 

[e_dawg]

Yeah, but the difference is that we have a code: you leave it on the ice. Tempers flare during the game because it's extremely intense... but you never take your differences off the ice. That's the way it is. Just like martial arts. You never use your black belt skills to beat someone up outside the dojo.

 

[honold]

the girl that got rolled by an israeli tank did fall by accident (according to her friends), and she was there burning american flags and aiding palestenians, not 'checking things out'.

just reporting what i read, not picking sides.

 

[honold]

i would be willing to wager that most people who are against the war have at least 50% of their 'anti-war' sentiment stemming from a hatred of america in general. (this does not discredit their interest in peace, whatever part that may be)

 

[honold]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/16/rafah.death/ claims both sides of the story. i suppose the only people that will really know were there.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030317/168/3j5nj.html has the pic of her burning a mock flag w/palestenians

 

[its.fubar]

Yeah, but the difference is that we have a code: you leave it on the ice. Tempers flare during the game because it's extremely intense... but you never take your differences off the ice. That's the way it is. Just like martial arts. You never use your black belt skills to beat someone up outside the dojo.

So what you are saying it is all right for the players to fight because it is extremely intense "using your words "but then it must be just as intense for the spectators, with your reasoning it must be OK for them to have a fight as long as they do not take it out of the ice hall.

 

[CougTek]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030317/168/3j5nj.html has the pic of her burning a mock flag w/palestenians

Burning a flag is no reason for being rolled over by a thank. Whatever she was doing, thanks had nothing to do anywhere close where the protestors were. Israeli way to handle civil crowd is barbaric and unforgivable. They aren't the only ones to use shameful methods against protestors though and the others who use similar tactics are equally lame. This doesn't excuse their means.

i would be willing to wager that most people who are against the war have at least 50% of their 'anti-war' sentiment stemming from a hatred of america in general.

Just like I would be willing to wager that most people who are for the war (and for boycotting France/Germany) have at least 50% of their "pro-war" sentiment stemming from a hatred of the rest of the world outside United States in general (or at least outside the "British-breed" nations).

In case anyone's worried, I'm not a U.S. hater. However, I would say that I am a proud U.S. Rednecks hater. Unfortunately, that's what you currently have at the head of the White House. I don't plan to start a boycot of your country just because I don't agree with some of you. I wonder if those who want to boycot some EU countries would be just as enthousiastic if all the countries who disagree with U.S. would start to boycot american products. Boycot isn't so moral afterall then, huh?


Sorry for being off-topic in this thread. It had to go and I've been too lazy to post some parts in the appropriated SR thread. Just nevermind.

 

[CNN Sport]

"Thanks for staying with us, you're on CNN Sport."

"Dave, last time we looked at the big game in the Geopolitical Arena, the station was going to run a major opinion poll. Do we have the results yet?"

"Well, that's a good question, Ed. We actually did plan to have the survey done by now, with answers from every country in the world, but they have run into technical difficulties."

"What, they can't find enough Tasmanian Aboriginies?"

"Not exactly, Ed. It seems that no-one could answer the question."

"Whatda mean, Dave? How hard can it be? It was just about world hunger, right?"

"Right, Ed. But no-one understood it."

"So what was the question?"

"Well, they asked people this: In your humble, honest opinion, what is to be done about the food shortage in the rest of the world?"

"Sounds simple enough. What's the problem?"

"Well, in China they didn't understand 'opinion'."

"Hmm..."

"And in France, they didn't know what 'humble' meant."

"Go on, Dave."

"In Europe, they didn't understand 'shortage'."

"And, let me guess, in Russia they didn't understand 'honest'?"

"That's right, Ed. And in Africa they didn't understand 'food', while in the USA they didn't understand 'rest of the world'."

"Hmm.... Guess we better take a station break."

"Guess you're right, Ed. I'm Dave Spadruck and thanks for watching CNN Sport. We'll be right back."

 

[e_dawg]

So what you are saying it is all right for the players to fight because it is extremely intense "using your words "but then it must be just as intense for the spectators, with your reasoning it must be OK for them to have a fight as long as they do not take it out of the ice hall.

Not a chance. I said the players settle their differences on the ice if they have to, and they leave it on the ice. I said nothing about the audience, and anything off the ice, even if it is within the arena (ice hall, as you put it) is not tolerated. How do you make the leap that watching the game presents the audience with the same feelings and emotion as the players feel on the ice? If you're sitting in the stands, do you ever get blindsided by a 230 pound defenseman going at 30 km/h? ... Oh well, I don't expect you to understand the culture of hockey or Canada in the course of a discussion on SF...

 

[mubs]

honold wrote:

the girl that got rolled by an israeli tank did fall by accident (according to her friends)

The way you handle a civil protest is to disperse the crowd first. Do your dirty work (bull-dozing) when you're sure no civilian is around. Whether the girl fell or not, whether it's her fault for being there or not, is immaterial. The bulldozer driver should have stopped, turned the damn thing off and called for help to disperse the crown. You just don't mow people down like that.

About 15 years ago, in Northern California, a bunch of agricultural laborers were on strike, and were laying across a railway line in protest. This was a line meant for goods trains, and the doofus who was shunting wagons with his locomotive saw the crowd but still went right through it. Most people jumped out of the way at the last second, but one (IIRC the leader) lost both legs when he was run over. Don't give me BS that he deserved it. Civil protest is exactly that - civil. Running over and maiming/killing them is a completely different animal (pun intended).

 

[Tea]

<soapbox> Playing national anthems before sports games is totally unnecessary ... Get rid of the pre-game anthems already... </soapbox>

Or just get rid on national anthemz completely. Useless damn things. Looked at as patriotic symbols, they are pointless. jingoistic, and divisive. Looked at as music, most of them are inferior to the average intimate hygene advert.

 

[P5-133XL]

On the radio just now, in the shower, I heard something that made my blood chill, and then boil.

There was a peace rally somewhere in the occupied territories. Children, not adults, and perfectly peaceful. An ABC reporter was there, and I heard the whole thing. I'm not talking homicidal teenagers here, I'm talking primary school children, children of 5 and 8 years, boys and girls.

I've been watching the news and have heard nothing relating to this incident. I would think that even with the war, that something like this would be making a very big stink world wide. The incident is so outregous that I rather need independant verification: Otherwise, I have a basic problem with belief.

 

[honold]

Burning a flag is no reason for being rolled over by a thank. Whatever she was doing, thanks had nothing to do anywhere close where the protestors were. Israeli way to handle civil crowd is barbaric and unforgivable. They aren't the only ones to use shameful methods against protestors though and the others who use similar tactics are equally lame. This doesn't excuse their means.

i don't see where you're inferring that i think it's excusable behavior if it was infact intentional. i was only pointing it out to counter the 'she was there checking things out' bit.

Just like I would be willing to wager that most people who are for the war (and for boycotting France/Germany) have at least 50% of their "pro-war" sentiment stemming from a hatred of the rest of the world outside United States in general (or at least outside the "British-breed" nations).

i feel i can speak pretty confidently as i am an observant american. racism against blacks is not against africans - it's against black americans. racism against asians is not against asians - it's against asian americans. etc. the only place the us has the 'who cares? just nuke them off the face of the earth' sentiment about is the middle east.

before this situation i'm more than certain that french people hated americans more than we hated them - hate against them never really existed here, just the 'oh they're snobby' and 'oh they're wimps' thing. you'd only get that if you actually ASKED though. if something about france was on the news, people wouldn't start egging the television and yelling about snobby wimps. french people hated americans, where americans felt a negative kind of indifference.

now people are sick of france, but they still don't hate them. they now consider them useless. french people hate us more than ever.

i think a lot of pro-war sentiment does stem from the 'who cares? just kill them' sentiment with regards to the middle east. more extreme 'patriots' want to boycott french goods, and i don't sense any kind of anti-german vibe in the general public.

 

[honold]

The way you handle a civil protest is to disperse the crowd first. Do your dirty work (bull-dozing) when you're sure no civilian is around. Whether the girl fell or not, whether it's her fault for being there or not, is immaterial. The bulldozer driver should have stopped, turned the damn thing off and called for help to disperse the crown. You just don't mow people down like that.

since i now need disclaimers, here's one

do not misinterpret this as justification. i completely agree that the killing of innocents is wrong

okay, now. israel is literally connected to the palestenian region, and neither of them are that large. lots of palestenians live in israel itself. so now, this is a guess, but i would guess that if israel waited for protestors to be removed from any given area before conducting their 'business' they would never get anything done.

Don't give me BS that he deserved it. Civil protest is exactly that - civil. Running over and maiming/killing them is a completely different animal (pun intended).

if the 'don't give me bs that he deserved it' line is directed to me, i think you're being absolutely ridiculous[/b]

 

[honold]

I've been watching the news and have heard nothing relating to this incident. I would think that even with the war, that something like this would be making a very big stink world wide. The incident is so outregous that I rather need independant verification: Otherwise, I have a basic problem with belief.

same here. i'm sure it COULD happen, but i'm not sure it did.

 

[mubs]

honold said

if israel waited for protestors to be removed from any given area before conducting their 'business' they would never get anything done.

Really? Even with the absolute, total and complete supriority Israel has WRT to weapons, the power they wield in the region and the ultra-liberal/casual use of force?? How long do you think it'd take them if they wanted to break up a crowd of unarmed Palestinians???

You must be living in another dimension than I am.

 

[honold]

your level of aggression is quite unwarranted, mubs. i'm done talking.

 

[CougTek]

i don't see where you're inferring that i think it's excusable behavior if it was infact intentional. i was only pointing it out to counter the 'she was there checking things out' bit.

Ok.

]before this situation i'm more than certain that french people hated americans more than we hated them - hate against them never really existed here, just the 'oh they're snobby' and 'oh they're wimps' thing.

?

Europeans are generally more expressive people than you are, so maybe that's why you perceived their disagreement with your politics was in fact hate. I don't think it's the case. All French people I heard (not on the Net, but in real life) didn't hate you. They were often disgusted by the way you use your superior military and commercial power though, but that wasn't hate.

 

[honold]

Europeans are generally more expressive people than you are, so maybe that's why you perceived their disagreement with your politics was in fact hate. I don't think it's the case. All French people I heard (not on the Net, but in real life) didn't hate you. They were often disgusted by the way you use your superior military and commercial power though, but that wasn't hate.

try vacationing in paris as an american (that speaks french). it is hate

 

[its.fubar]

So what you are saying it is all right for the players to fight because it is extremely intense "using your words "but then it must be just as intense for the spectators, with your reasoning it must be OK for them to have a fight as long as they do not take it out of the ice hall.

Not a chance. I said the players settle their differences on the ice if they have to, and they leave it on the ice. I said nothing about the audience, and anything off the ice, even if it is within the arena (ice hall, as you put it) is not tolerated. How do you make the leap that watching the game presents the audience with the same feelings and emotion as the players feel on the ice? If you're sitting in the stands, do you ever get blindsided by a 230 pound defenseman going at 30 km/h? ... Oh well, I don't expect you to understand the culture of hockey or Canada in the course of a discussion on SF...

Actually my friends I do understand a little bit about ice hockey because most of your superstars come from the country I am living in,"do you know what country I'm talking about" unfortunately they didn't learn these dirty tricks until they started playing in Canada and the USA,I suppose you have never been to a game where there hasn't broken out fighting in the public, it sounds like you Canadians are so domesticated and so very French.

 

[Tannin]

P5-133XL and Honold, when I said "ABC" I didn't mean American ABC, I mean the real thing.

You can trust it.

 

[its.fubar]

Burning a flag is no reason for being rolled over by a thank. Whatever she was doing, thanks had nothing to do anywhere close where the protestors were. Israeli way to handle civil crowd is barbaric and unforgivable. They aren't the only ones to use shameful methods against protestors though and the others who use similar tactics are equally lame. This doesn't excuse their means.

i don't see where you're inferring that i think it's excusable behavior if it was infact intentional. i was only pointing it out to counter the 'she was there checking things out' bit.

Just like I would be willing to wager that most people who are for the war (and for boycotting France/Germany) have at least 50% of their "pro-war" sentiment stemming from a hatred of the rest of the world outside United States in general (or at least outside the "British-breed" nations).

i feel i can speak pretty confidently as i am an observant american. racism against blacks is not against africans - it's against black americans. racism against asians is not against asians - it's against asian americans. etc. the only place the us has the 'who cares? just nuke them off the face of the earth' sentiment about is the middle east.

before this situation i'm more than certain that french people hated americans more than we hated them - hate against them never really existed here, just the 'oh they're snobby' and 'oh they're wimps' thing. you'd only get that if you actually ASKED though. if something about france was on the news, people wouldn't start egging the television and yelling about snobby wimps. french people hated americans, where americans felt a negative kind of indifference.

now people are sick of france, but they still don't hate them. they now consider them useless. french people hate us more than ever.

i think a lot of pro-war sentiment does stem from the 'who cares? just kill them' sentiment with regards to the middle east. more extreme 'patriots' want to boycott french goods, and i don't sense any kind of anti-german vibe in the general public.

Unfortunately there is obviously a small percentage of Europeans that hate the Americans and that's blown up in the mass media out of all proportion for sensationalism, but they are very few in number, the real problem is the arrogance of your government is what they hate "not the people" do you understand the difference.

 

[P5-133XL]

Tannin,

Sorry but I did a quick and dirty web search and disn't find legitimate references to your incident: I didn't try to be particularly complete, so I could easily misses something. I've seen nothing about it on the news. Without independant verification I'm stuck a dis-believer. I just don't see how something like this could be "covered-up". Especially if there was a reporter (any news organization) on site recounting the live events.

I do note that I saw a single reference (on the web) to a similar incident that supposedly occured years ago. Unfortunately, that reference was from a anti-semetic that was promulgating all sorts of junk that I also will choose to disbelieve. I really must consider the source and his biases.

If you wish me to believe that what you said is correct, give me independant verification

 

[Tannin]

Mark, I'm talking the ABC, quite possibly the most respected news organisation on the planet. (Though fans of the BBC World Service would argue, no doubt.)

It was a broadcast by a regular ABC reporter - I think It was John Hyfield (sp?) though I didn't pay too much attention to his name, a familiar voice at any rate - on AM, which is their premier news and current affairs program, and indeed the premier news and current affairs program in the country.

He described the demonstration, dispassionately described the disgusting actions of the armoured jeeps, and played back the recording - you could hear it for yourself, tiny voices singing together and then suddenly screaming, screaming, and the sound of the stun grenades exploding over the screams.

The ABC is an independant source, and they don't carry propaganda crap, especially not on their flagship news program.

I should imagine that it wouldn't make the TV news because there were no pictures (or that's my guess) - I shouldn't think that even the Israelis would be so stupid as to do that with a TV camera there. But a radio reporter, being inconspicuous, can go places that a TV crew can't. They probably didn't even know he was there. Besides, no-one was killed; they were only hospitalised.

 

[Tannin]

Correction, John Highfield is the presenter, the voice in the studio, and he does The World Today, the lunchtime 1 hour current affairs program, not AM. (There are three: AM at 8:30, The World Today at lunchtime, and PM at 6:00.)

But keep your eye on http://www.abc.net.au/am/default.htm - they put transcripts and tapes up there, only the transcripts don't get posted till a day or two later. They don't transcribe every story, but you'll quite likely be able to read & listen to it for yourself in a day or two. Meanwhile, cruise around the site and see how it compares to CNN or CBS.