NYT Tom Friedman: Their Anti-Israel Et Cetera Narrative Is Maladaptive
Robert Cohen
for my slant
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
Bret Cahill
> for my slant
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
The English subway bombers were born and raised in the UK.
The French have a lot of first and second generation Muslims as well
as immigrants. They have some issues but no bombings or spree
killings which may or may not be remarkable considering the large
population.
Speculating wildly it may be that the nth generations smooth the way
for the immigrants and first generation Muslims.
It's 100% certain the French have looked at it in great detail, books,
studies, movies, stats, etc. and may know the solution.
Bret Cahill
Robert Cohen
I'm in the Use Net alt.france n.g.too
If I agreed with your assessment, i'd
say so
Go to the NY Review of Books, and
read the."..Big..." article of
Nov presently
Is the author reluctantly
acknowledging that the 1960s Tory turned very
controversial super-nationalist-nativist Brit
Enoch Powell being pretty much affirmed?
I don't feel good linking it
Robert Cohen
reality is not hitting the Mega $50 million lottery, it's more like:
Sean
"Robert Cohen" <robt...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6978989d-ecca-454b...@x16g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, it's actually an insightful, brilliant essay, which I paraphrased
> for my slant
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
>
RE:
Propagated by jihadist Web sites, mosque preachers, Arab intellectuals,
satellite news stations and books - and tacitly endorsed by some Arab
regimes - this narrative posits that America has declared war on Islam, as
part of a grand "American-Crusader-Zionist conspiracy" to keep Muslims down.
Sean: This is a narative that actually comes OUT OF America on a consistent
daily basis by taling heads, extremjists, and even posters to a.r.e.
IT is merely shared amongst people in the Arab world and taken as it is
given. Yes they do not get a balanced view, as bad news travels faster no
matter what culture one lives in.
RE:
The dominant narrative there is that 9/11 was a kind of fraud:
Sean: This narative also was BORN in the USA - this IS an American whacko
kooks conspiracy theroey of huindreds about the *illuminati* or whatever
label one wishes to place upon these *mystery powers* trying to take over
the world and eliminate 3 billion people ..... blah blah ********** blah
goes the EXtremist Nut-Cases resident ala America and spewing forth their
version of Insantity on what others label their *RIGHT* to Free Speech ...
meaning any LUNATIC can say what they want -- any New Media group can pick
that up and label it *important news* and thus pour it non-stop into the
bedrooms of ARabs and Muslims all over the world.
And you wonder WHY they might believe that *that America has declared war
on Islam* ?????????????????
Robert, with respect, there is definitely some truth to the telling friedman
gives. He doesn't lie, that's good, for america has indeed done these good
things with good intentions overall .. this is true.
But what about the ELEPHANT IN THE CHINA SHOP ????
What is the point of addressing what he addressed and totally ignoring and
dismissing the long held and dep concerns all Arabs and most Muslims have
about the actions of Israel and America regarding the Land of Palestine and
ALL the people there?
At the last UN assembly where every nation got up to speak for a few minutes
.. every single predominantly Muslim nation and especially every single Arab
Nation representative got up and unilaterally condemned Israel and the
ongoing suport of Amercia that enables Israel to do what it does with
impunity.
Whilst the elephant in the china shop is being ignored, when the USA speaks
out of BOTH sides of it's mouth on issues of freedom, liberty, and for
people to govern themselves out from under the yoke of TYRANNY then and only
then ois there any chance that the *narrative will change an ounce* .
Everytime a wedding party is bomed by a remote controled drone also doesn't
help, and Friedman toitally ingored this and the DIRECT increase in
recruitment of men in Pakistan to the Taliban cause and the jihadist
*narrative* which says *Look!! Amerika comes and bombs our people silently
in the night -- for this is also 100% true because IT DOES ..
All the newspaper articles in the world prointed in safe and sound USA will
NEVER be more powerful than seing you family blown to pieces by a missile
form a drone.
That the average American , but especially every single gung ho militarised
gun-totin' right-tarded whack-a-doodle nut job figures that blowing up
towell-heads is great sport, a great Computer Game where one doesn't even
get to smell the cordite!!
Friedman needs to tell the WHOLE Truth Robert, and include exactly what it
is like to walk in an Arabs shoes, in a Palestinians shoes ... before
claiming they are the ones that *have it all wrong about America*
They do NOT have it ALL wrong .... and Friedman does NOT have it ALL Correct
either ...... see what I mean ???
Bret Cahill
Western Civilization will be more influenced by China than Islam.
Bret Cahill
"Jahan, bring us the wisdom of the East."
-- smart ass engineering prof to Muslim student
Sean
No way did Suddam or Iraq support Bin Laden's Wahabbi Terrorist goals --
don't get all maladaptive about the historical record.
"Robert Cohen" <robt...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6978989d-ecca-454b...@x16g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, it's actually an insightful, brilliant essay, which I paraphrased
> for my slant
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
>
RE
Yes, after two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely
dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny - in
Bosnia, Darfur, Kuwait, Somalia, Lebanon, Kurdistan, post-earthquake
Pakistan, post-tsunami Indonesia, Iraq and Afghanistan - a narrative that
says America is dedicated to keeping Muslims down is thriving.
Although most of the Muslims being killed today are being killed by jihadist
suicide bombers in Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Indonesia, you'd never
know it from listening to their world. The dominant narrative there is that
9/11 was a kind of fraud: America's unprovoked onslaught on Islam is the
real story, and the Muslims are the real victims - of U.S. perfidy.
Have no doubt: we punched a fist into the Arab/Muslim world after 9/11,
partly to send a message of deterrence, but primarily to destroy two
tyrannical regimes - the Taliban and the Baathists - and to work with
Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics. "" end quote from
link
====
SEAN:
I think that people would be much wiser if they considered the fullness of
the situation inn the eyes of the Arabs, and thier direct knowledge about to
what degre the British and other world Powers have manipulated the Middle
Eastern people since long before WW1 and WW2 and the "issueing of \"
National Independecne Licences with the OK of the G5 world powers at the
time.
It is now 2009 and it;s about time that the people of the world and
especially the wisest one's with a bent for Philosophy got to realize the
reality that nations like Iraq have had to deal with in their living memory
.. SOME exmaples of how they see it follows ::::
====
The classification markings are original to the Iraqi documents and do not
reflect current US classification.
Englis Title: Correspondence, dated 24 Sep 2002, within the General Military
Intelligence
Directorate (GMID), regarding a research study titled, "The Emergence of
AI-Wahhabiyyah
Movement and its Historical Roots"
Narne: AL- 'AMIRI, SA'IO MAHMUO NAJM
Other Attribute: MILITARY RANK: Colonel
Other Attribute: ORGANIZATION: General Military Intelligence Directorate
IRAQ
Photograph Available
Sex: Male
These 53 pages contain correspondence, dated 24 Sep 2002, within the General
Mi1itary Intelligence Directorate (GMID), regarding a research study titled,
"The Emergence of
AI-Wahhabiyyah Movement and its Historical Roots". The file details are as
follows: -Pages 23:
53: Contain correspondence, dated 24 Sep 2002, within the General Military
Intelligence
Directorate (GMID), regarding a research study titled, "The Emergence of
AI-Wahhabiyyah
Movement and its Historical Roots", and submitted by the intelligence
Colonel Sa"id Mahmud
Najm AI- "Amiri. The study aims at uncovering the links of this movement
with the British
Government and promoting Muhammad Bin 'Abd-al-Wahab (the founder) and his
meetings
with the ruleers of AI-Sa'ud to pass on their plans to target Islam and
causing division among
Muslims.
Capture Information Capturing Unit. Date/Time of Capture:OlXXXXMAY03 Country
of........
In the name of God the most compassionate the most merciful
Top Secret
Republic of Iraq
Presidency Headquarters
General Military Intelligence Directorate
Air Defense Security System
Number/ Sect. 2/ Dept. 4/
Date: 9/24/2002
Keep your enemy in front ofyour eyes
Never let him behind your back
Saddam Hussein (God save & protect him)
To/ General Military Intelligence Directorate/8th Deputy Dir./ Sect.43
Subject/ Forwarding of a Study
Attached to our letter; please find the study prepared by the security
officer ofthe 7th airborne aircraft
brigade; the study is titled: (The Essence ofAI-Wahabi Movement).
Please review.
With all appreciation.
The Birth of AI-Wahabi Movement
And it's Historic Roots
Prepared by
Intelligence Colonel
Sa'id Mahrnud Najrn AI-'Arniri
The Birth of AI-Wahabi Movement and it's Historic Roots
Preface
1. The purpose ofthis study is to learn about the history of AI-Wahabi
Movement and the harmful
elements it contains.
AI-Wahabi movement claims that; it strives to recant all kinds of
polytheism, but such allegations at
the time ofpractice have transformed into the killing of Muslims,
destructing, demolishing, and
promoting the turmoil. So we can say that such behavior with its pure
superficial and discriminating
teachings is nothing but a deadly weapon in the hand of the occupation and
the enemies of Islam who
use AI-Wahabi Movement in the political arena to prevent the unity
ofMuslims.
We have to frankly say that; AI-Wahabi's superficial and false teachings,
and grasping on to the shell
is the main obstacle standing in the way ofMuslims' goal to unit, and the
biggest cause of the killing,
dispersing, and breaking up ofMuslims.
This kind of hostility towards Muslims, antagonizing them, considering them
disbelievers, hitting
them, insulting them, and hurting them reveals an ugly and dangerous face of
AI-Wahabi features
which depicts it as a destructive and chaotic group raising the slogan
ofdestruction, savageness and
harshness.
AI-Wahabi today is subconsciously working in all its power on promoting
occupation in all its
power in order to achieve its despicable desires. The Wahabis have worn the
Muslim robe
inside out therefore; they couldn't apprehend any of the Muslim goals,
because how is it
possible for someone who seeks the help of infidels to speak ofunity? They
sign treaties of
peace and friendship with the criminals, surrender and bow in front ofthe
masters of rotten
politics.
3. Therefore; I wanted in my study to focus on the history ofthis movement
from the stand point
ofits relation with the British government and how Britain had employed all
its spies in
Muslim countries in order to establish and spread this movement to destroy
Muslim religion
and create heterodoxies in Islam.
I also wanted to touch on the creator ofthis movement; Muhammad Bin
'Abd-al-Wahab, his
meetings with Muhammad Bin Su'ud and their agreement to support each other,
and in
conclusion show opinions ofhistorians and writers who discussed this
movement, and the
history ofthe Su'ud Family which many have agreed that it is on of the
destructive religious
movements that is conceived, extreme and aiming to destroy Islam through
Jews and British.
The Purpose:
4. To find the connection between this movement and the British government
and how they found
the so called; Muhammad Bin 'Abd-al-Wahab, and his meetings with the leaders
ofSa'ud
Family to facilitate their suspicious plans which aim at striking at Islam
and create division
among Muslims
First Topic:
Britain and its animosity towards Islam
.:. Britain and fabrication ofbeliefs to serve dispersion
.:. Britain's goals to weaken the Muslim religion
.:. The British plans to dominate the Muslim countries
.:. How Britain deployed its spies and created differences among Muslims.
Britain and making up of beliefs to serve dispersion
5. Colonialism continues to look for ways to force its power, and still uses
its old slogan
(divide and rule), and one ofthe most important methods of achieve that is
to create a
decadent environment of disbelieving and immoral society therefore;
colonialism tops
the list of important and major factors which create the environment of
disbelieve and
immorality in a Muslim society, and in creating a sense ofdistrust among
Muslim
groups and false accusations. We will not be exaggerating ifwe say that the
most
successful methods used by colonialism to weaken the strength of Muslims and
demolish Islam; are the methods ofdividing, discriminating and fabricating
believes
and creating profits.
In order to reveal the reasons which made the colonialism go this rout and
the goals
desired from it, and the methods used to achieve such goals; we have to
mention few
things before we go into our main topic.
Britain's objectives from the weakening ofthe Muslim religion:
6. Colonialism countries face so many obstacles among each other when
attempting to
dominate powerless countries, for the purpose ofplundering the material and
immaterial
wealth of these countries. It was never as simple as to occupy a country and
have its
people welcome them with open arms. At minimum, at the very beginning they
are
faced with many problems and obstacles. There were so many factors that made
people
oppose the colonialism such as; nationalism, language, culture, and
religion. Some of
these factors had temporary effects on the fight against colonialism, and
lost their
effectiveness gradually until they lost their impact eventually. The only
factor remained
as a well fortified barrier against the goals of colonialism is; the
influence ofreligion on
people, with Islam in the forefront. Since the day when the representative
of colonialism
90f56
171
stood in the British House ofCommons holding the Koran in his hand saying:
( Europe
has to know that; as long as this book is the guide to all Muslims, we will
not be able to
establish the foundations for our colonialism policy in these countries) and
up to this
day, Islam is considered the largest barrier facing colonialism, and the
biggest threat to
its interests because; Islam has distinguished characteristics each alone
stands as a
mountain in the way of achieving the goals colonialism the thing that all
other religions
lack.
The teachings of colonialism [I think that this is a misprint and the
correct sentence
should be the teachings of Islam] and its political worship rituals, have
always been a
danger to colonialism and its objectives because; Islam refuses all forms of
colonialism
and exploitation in any shape or form
4
, condemn, motivate Muslims to fight injustice and tyrants, calls for
struggle to bring
social fairness in all areas on the face of earth, and to free the weak from
slavery and
occupation. And it goes without saying that this struggle is not only to
free Muslims
alone, but it is for saving all weak nations in the world and free them.
7. Therefore; Islam finds itself obligated to extend a helping hand to all
liberation
movements as much as possible "0 ye who believe! Take not my enemies and
yours as
friends (or protectors) - offering them your love"l, "These are the ones who
wait and
watch about you" 2, "Let not the Believers take for protectors Unbelievers,
rather than
Believers"3 then it puts forth the motto of adhering to God for he is the
ultimate master
"And hold fast all together, by the Rope which Allah stretched out for you,
and be not
divided among yourselves"4 "A Believer is a brother of another Believer,
they are like
one body if one part is in pain the rest of the body parts suffer the same
way".
"Muhammad is the messenger ofAllah; and those who are with him are strong
against
unbelievers, but compassionate amongst each other." 5. Muslims are
responsible one to
another and get angry at infidels and don't get into compromises with them,
"Truly
Allah loves those who fight in his cause in battle array, as ifthey were a
solid cemented
structure"6. This meaning has always been the source of inspiration and
strength for all
Muslims in their struggle against tyrants and arrogant throughout history.
Such content
of Islam has created in the heart of Islam, all this movement, enthusiasm,
creativity,
change, and steadiness in fighting injustice. Ifwe were to study all
uprisings which took
place in the recent century; we would have more dearly found the role of
Islamic
teaching in stirring those people against injustice, arrogance and
oppression. Friend and
enemy admit, for example, admit to the dynamics prompted by Islam in the
liberation
revolution ofthe Algerian people which threw the French occupation outside
the
10 of 56
172
The classification markings are original to the Iraqi documents and do not
reflect current US classification.
-11-
country. About this wrote two well known writers; (Collette) and (Francis
Johnson)7
(No doubt that Islam had a great influence on the Algerians, demand for
freedom, and
the Algerians have become aware since day one ofthe French occupation's
objective to
destroy Islam, and based on this they come to realize that Islam is their
way to
liberation, and they all have to
Foot Notes:
1 Al-Mumtahinah: 1 [CL: verse 1 from the Koran Chapter Al-Mumtahinah]
2 Al-Nisa': 141 [CL: verse 141 from the Koran Chapter Al-Nisa']
3 Al 'Urnran: 28 [CL: verse 28 from Koran Chapter Al-'Urnran]
4 Al 'Urnran: 103 [CL: verse 103 from Koran Chapter Al-'Urnran]
5 AI-Fath: 29 [CL: verse 29 from Koran Chapter Al-Fath]
6 Al-Saff: 4 [CL: verse 4 from Koran Chapter Al-Saff]
7 "2 schools" cited from Propagation and Colonialism in Arabic Countries by
Dr. Mustafa Khalid;
page 64.
And when colonialism found it hard to penetrate Islam, it started to look
for a successful
way to fight it and started to use all its power and capabilities to remove
this obstacle,
and tried all kinds ofmethods to achieve its objective. Such methods are the
following:
A. Direct confrontation
First, by direct military confrontation such as the Crusaders war, and
military
occupation of Islamic countries as in the case ofLibya, Iraq, Afghanistan,
Algeria and others.
Second, by attacking Islamic teachings by means of; twisting and reversing
their principles, accusing Islam, and slandering its sanctuaries.
B. Indirect confrontation
First, promote immoralities and corruption among Muslims to weaken their
adherence to religion.
Second, promote feelings of nationalist and patriotism to divide individuals
as
well as groups into different parties in Islamic countries.
Third, create division and dissimilarities by spreading accusations,
mistrust, and
suspension among Muslims.
The British Plans to Dominate Islamic Countries
In 1973, the autobiography ofthe British spy Humfer in regards to his work
in Iraq and
Istanbul was translated, and it included the British plans to dominate the
Muslim
countries. Great Britain has been, since long time ago, thinking about
keeping its
influence on its many colonies in India, China, the Middle East and others.
It is true that
it wasn't actually controlling big parts of these countries because; it was
in the hands of
its own people, but its policy was a successful and effective policy, and it
used to think
twice.1
a. Once to continue controlling what has been practically controlled.
b. And once to add to its properties what hasn't been practically
controlled.
And based on this, the British government had allocated special committees
in every
part of these countries particularly to study the task:
India
Through the "Eastern Company of India", whose apparent role was strictly
commercial,
yet deep inside was to strengthen the means to control India and the roads
leading to
these huge lands extending to the end of the continent.
The British government was so sure of India where the nationalities are
different;
religions are scattered, dissimilar languages, and conflicting interests.
And this way the government was sure of China where; the Buddhism and the
Confucianism, which is the most prominent in that country, both were not a
threat for
they are dead religions focusing on the spiritual side and have no
connection with the
living side therefore; it was far fetched to see a feeling ofpatriotism
among people of
these two areas. And that is why the British government had no concern when
it came
to these two countries, and it worked out long term plans to create
division, ignorance,
poverty, and sometimes keep these countries in sickness. They were applying
an old
Buddhist proverb (Let the patient crave his medicine even if it tastes
severely bitter).
Second: The Muslim Caliphs State:
What concerned the British government was the Muslim countries and they used
to call
them; the Sick Man. Many treaties were signed and all were for the advantage
of the
British government, and the outlook ofthe British Colonies' Ministry is that
the Man
will breathe his last in less than a century.
12 of 56
174
Third: The Governments in the Persian States
The British government had secretly signed many treaties with the Persian
government
and they set out spies and agents in it and resulted in bribery and
corrupted
administration and the engagement of its kings in corruption and clotted the
body of this
country
===== and on and on it goes ....
Robert Cohen
Please correct my facts
Up to the end of WW I, Turkey also reigned in the M.E. including
Palestine
The British are responsible for constructing the Suez Canal in 19th
century
The British Empire including parts of the Americas, India, Africa,
and important parts of the Orient (Hong Kong)
was of course ultimately economically self-interested: including
"issues" for gold, god, and geography
While colonialism is debasing, cruel, racist, and exploitative, I'll
uphold the pragmatic "civilizing" benefits as more than
chopped liver
.
So, by the re-publishing of a sample of manipulative administration,
Sean makes the case of the former
Moslems, Arabs, Pakis etal are apparently "self-conditioned" (self-
perpetuating) to RESENT rather than to adapt well, and that's their
and
our mutually dynamic fearing and loathing plight
Sean
> re: Colonialism as enlightenment & degradation
>
> Please correct my facts
>
> Up to the end of WW I, Turkey also reigned in the M.E. including
> Palestine
>
"barely controlled" would be a better term .... broadly empoverished
obviously so.
the Ottoman Empire was, in many respects, an Islamic successor to the
Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. ending in 1923 just after being Germany's
allie in the loss of WW1.
This empire was far from strong thruought the 19th century and was NOT
considered a National Power by any means and had been under constant
military attack for decades.
The rise of nationalism swept through many countries during the 19th
century, and the Ottoman Empire was not immune. A burgeoning national
consciousness, together with a growing sense of ethnic nationalism, made
nationalistic thought one of the most significant Western ideas imported to
the Ottoman empire, as it was forced to deal with nationalism both within
and beyond its borders. There was a significant increase in the number of
revolutionary political parties. Uprisings in Ottoman territory had many
far-reaching consequences during the 19th century and determined much of
Ottoman policy during the early 20th century.
the Young Turk Revolution(July 3, 1908) with the sultan's announcement of
the restoration of the 1876 constitution and the reconvening of the Ottoman
Parliament. It marks the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire#Decline_and_modernization_.281828.E2.80.931908.29
Being a herditary Monarchy the entire time, the emergence of the new Turkey
was a completely different kettle of fish, one based on Republican secular
and democractic principles eventually.
Before the end of WW1 Turkey had lost nominal government of Egypt, the
Levant, Arabia and Palestinian territories, which then were split between
the French and British.
Western Colonialism of the region was cemented at this time by 1918.
> The British are responsible for constructing the Suez Canal in 19th
> century
>
Mmmmmmmm, :::
The British government had opposed the project of the canal from the outset
to its completion.
Construction by Suez Canal Company
In 1854 and 1856 Ferdinand de Lesseps obtained a concession from Sa'id
Pasha, the viceroy of Egypt, to create a company to construct a canal open
to ships of all nations, according to plans created by Linant de Bellefonds,
a French engineer and high level official of the Egyptian administration of
canals, bridges and roads, and by Italian engineer Alois Negrelli. The
company was to operate the canal for 99 years from its opening. De Lesseps
had used his friendly relationship with Sa'id, which he had developed while
he was a French diplomat during the 1830s. The Suez Canal Company (Compagnie
Universelle du Canal Maritime de Suez) came into being on 15 December, 1858
and work started on the shore of the future Port Said on 25 April 1859.
The excavation took some 10 years using forced labour (Corv�e) of Egyptian
workers during a certain period. Some sources estimate that over 30,000
people were working on the canal at any given period, that altogether more
than 1.5 million people from various countries were employed and that
thousands of laborers died on the project.[38][39]
next?
> The British Empire including parts of the Americas, India, Africa,
> and important parts of the Orient (Hong Kong)
> was of course ultimately economically self-interested: including
> "issues" for gold, god, and geography
>
Yes, of course. At it's hieght in the 19th Century the British Empire was
the greatest empire ever existence on earth, and it was the only Super
Power. It therefore acted like one.
> While colonialism is debasing, cruel, racist, and exploitative, I'll
> uphold the pragmatic "civilizing" benefits as more than
> chopped liver
> .
That depends on whether it was your liver being chopped. :)
Look Robert I think you are mnisunderstanding here ... the british don't
need apologists, it;s no big deal, it happened the same as all Empires had a
degree of exploitation and civilising benefits.There is no "attack or blame"
by me about an Empire being an Empire be it the Ottomans of 700 years, the
romans or britains progressive owlrd domination over 200 years from the
1700's. It happens. It was a long time ago.
But I simply saying that the IRAQIs and the Arabs have fresh memories from
the 20th century when they were tied over a barrel cheated and robbed by the
British. When they left, the Americans and the collective western influences
of the UN moved in.
If you really want to understand the problem then one must discover what is
the REAL nararrative of those people. IN 2002 from this one example can be
seen how DEEP this belief in being screwed over by the British really is
.... it;s a kind of built in paranoia of having been cheated before.
I am saying this is what I think .. I am showing you that this is HOW and
WHY the Iraqis and other Arabs and the Iranians see things like they do ...
not much different than the Africans such as Mugabe now, and the ANC in
1970's south africa when the British and the americans BOTH supported that
undemocratic, corrupt, racists regime of terror .
Such hisotrical events may not mean much to the average American, or be seen
as that important but they are engranined into the 3rd world psyche. Ignore
these things, with spiffy throw away Op=Eds in big Amercian newspapers all
you want and it means ZIP to Muslims in Pakistan, or Sudan, or Egypt, or
Syria, or Morroco or Yemen. Nothing.
Most of the way the West dealt with the Arab States in the formative years
after WW1 and again after WW2 has been, to say the least, underhanded.
Since the partitioning of
Palestine by the UN some 62 years ago, the history and practice of the West
towards the Muslim States has been anything other than fairness and
consideration.
However, it is and has always been WELL KNOWN and documented
Saddam Hussein thought about terrorists
in general and Osama Bin Ladin in particular.
He didn't like them, and he
didn't want them in his country. What's more, he was particularly effective
in controllong terrorists.
Further, when George Bush Snr was asked why he didn't go in and finish the
job in the first Iraq War (War? lol) he responded "I don't need a civil war
on my hands".
So WHY did the US invade? Neo-Con publications prior to the election of Bush
Jnr advertised clearly what they wanted to do, which was to invade Iraq.
I do the math, and the notion of the invasion of Iraq having anything overly
much to do with terrorists seems less likely than the usual motivation of
control of oil and the broader *strategic interests* which includes
hightened support for israel as spelled out by the neocons of the day .. who
overtly said that for a decade plus!
The fact that Saddam was doing a deal to get sanctions
lifted through the Russians and French in return for trading his oil desk in
Euro rather than US currency "may" have been a factor as well.
The reality is
that the Western powers have methodically and regularly trounched on the
natural rights of states and individuals. The resentment and anger from the
Muslim States towards the West has it's foundation in this.
The Iranians have GOOD VALID REASONS to not trust the British, the french,
the russians, the americans and the germans ... that no one knows this or
mentions this in todays context is why Amercians are ignorant and why what
happens in the middle east never makes any sense to them ... they are NOT
privy to the whole story, therefore Governments are able to SPIN anything
I won't go on beause it gets boring, but even the establishment of the World
Bank was at the cost of the Emirates being screwed over by the West, and
totally limitiing the Arab states ability to venture into the world
financial and banking markets to invest the huge windfalls they were making
from Oil.
> So, by the re-publishing of a sample of manipulative administration,
> Sean makes the case of the former
>
No not at all .. they have good reason to resent ongoing interference no
matter how wel intentioned people safe at home on the other side of the
world believe what their great leaders tell them to think.
> Moslems, Arabs, Pakis etal are apparently "self-conditioned" (self-
> perpetuating) to RESENT rather than to adapt well, and that's their
> and
> our mutually dynamic fearing and loathing plight
>
>
I guess it is similar to the Americans getting over their resentment for the
entire Arab and Muslim world for what happned on 9/11 .. and finally working
out that 1,300 million are totally innocent, there was only 19 hijackers
and probably another equal number who had anything to do with it, and that
every Islamic and Arab NATION IN THE WORLD CONDEMNED THOSE ATTACKS ...
[becasue what some flacky crazed Iman said somewhere in some mosque, or what
osama bin laden said is not that impoprtant when one looks and listens to
the overall majority.]
what more do you want, before you think the avergae joe can get over it and
gain a mature and nuanced perspective of the rest of the World? :)
cheers sean
Robert Cohen
> "Robert Cohen" <robtco...@msn.com> wrote in message
>
> news:eefcc22a-522f-4df8...@g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>
> > re: Colonialism as enlightenment & degradation
>
> > Please correct my facts
>
> > Up to the end of WW I, Turkey also reigned in the M.E. including
> > Palestine
>
> "barely controlled" would be a better term .... broadly empoverished
> obviously so.
>
> the Ottoman Empire was, in many respects, an Islamic successor to the
> Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. ending in 1923 just after being Germany's
> allie in the loss of WW1.
> This empire was far from strong thruought the 19th century and was NOT
> considered a National Power by any means and had been under constant
> military attack for decades.
>
> The rise of nationalism swept through many countries during the 19th
> century, and the Ottoman Empire was not immune. A burgeoning national
> consciousness, together with a growing sense of ethnic nationalism, made
> nationalistic thought one of the most significant Western ideas imported to
> the Ottoman empire, as it was forced to deal with nationalism both within
> and beyond its borders. There was a significant increase in the number of
> revolutionary political parties. Uprisings in Ottoman territory had many
> far-reaching consequences during the 19th century and determined much of
> Ottoman policy during the early 20th century.
>
> the Young Turk Revolution(July 3, 1908) with the sultan's announcement of
> the restoration of the 1876 constitution and the reconvening of the Ottoman
>
> Being a herditary Monarchy the entire time, the emergence of the new Turkey
> was a completely different kettle of fish, one based on Republican secular
> and democractic principles eventually.
>
> Before the end of WW1 Turkey had lost nominal government of Egypt, the
> Levant, Arabia and Palestinian territories, which then were split between
> the French and British.
> Western Colonialism of the region was cemented at this time by 1918.
>
> > The British are responsible for constructing the Suez Canal in 19th
> > century
>
> Mmmmmmmm, :::
> The British government had opposed the project of the canal from the outset
> to its completion.
>
> Construction by Suez Canal Company
> In 1854 and 1856 Ferdinand de Lesseps obtained a concession from Sa'id
> Pasha, the viceroy of Egypt, to create a company to construct a canal open
> to ships of all nations, according to plans created by Linant de Bellefonds,
> a French engineer and high level official of the Egyptian administration of
> canals, bridges and roads, and by Italian engineer Alois Negrelli. The
> company was to operate the canal for 99 years from its opening. De Lesseps
> had used his friendly relationship with Sa'id, which he had developed while
> he was a French diplomat during the 1830s. The Suez Canal Company (Compagnie
> Universelle du Canal Maritime de Suez) came into being on 15 December, 1858
> and work started on the shore of the future Port Said on 25 April 1859.
>
Why are you sloughing over the bin Ladens are receiving funds
and moral support from many sympathizers?
If they aren't so accepted, they'd be gone yesterday
You are taking p.c. to quite an absurd extreme by ignoring ...
yourself
I'm stressing your implication their apparently normative resentment
is imperfectly justified
Bret Cahill
without any western intervention.
Of course you could say the same thing about western Europe.
I'm primarily against the quagmires because they don't do the U. S.
any good.
Bret Cahill
ZerkonXXXX
This is actually a bigoted, biased piece of typical clap trap racist NYT
propaganda to help ramp up and justify the new war expenditure.
"Yes, after two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely
dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny.."
Can only be believe by the morally vacant and coping with drugs and those
terminally attached to “The War Narrative” the WMD NYT is so famous for.
FOX NEWS for the East 80's and for those who feel so saddened they are so
imperially burdened with the task of bombing countries.
"Although most of the Muslims being killed today.."
As opposed to all those killed yesterday who did not really matter? As
reported by the embedded media sucking up military press releases?
Robert Cohen
I'd prefer that more Moslems not emigrate to US & Europe, and remain
to push reform within Moslem
dominated lands
Israel has always had an approx twenty percent Moslem population
within that pre-1967 border, while there is no
or very minimal Jewish presence today in all of Araby where Jews lived
for awhile (two millenia--four millenia) usually
as "non-equals," but apparently often better/safer than in Europe &
Russia
In the late 1940s & early 1950s approx 700,000+ Arabian land native-
born Jews voluntarily or by force
came to Israel
It is my humble perception that most/many Arabs are oblivious of this,
perhaps they have
deliberately ignored this because it doesn't gel with their own
narrative
Morality and adaptation are necessarily (except for ye idealists-
Quakers) "two way streets," which means to me that pluralism can not
work well enough when the diverse people cannot be adequately mutually
tolerant
Sean
============================
No that's not right at all Robert. Too many asumtions based on beliefs not
facts, imho.
I am not speaking for Bin Laden or those who finance him -- at elast not how
you imagine I am --- , in fact I never mentioned him or al queda, except to
point out that they are responsible for 9/11 and NOT the other 1.3 billion
muslims even if they hate your guts and distrust Britian totally, and still
feel resentment for being ripped off and lied to.
This is a good look at the history, written by a New Yorker chap ..... 93
pages well written, better than a WST article written by an amateur on the
subject.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/10547094/The-Caliphate-the-Hejaz-and-the-Saudiwahhabi-Nationstateotherwise a long answer could be ............What I am saying is that there is very justified resentment by Arabs and*some* mulsims directly affected by the actions of the British, america, thewest in general over the last 150 years in particular the period 1900 thruto 1970 when they turned the Oil taps off. :)I am saying that they as a people, as separate nation states are in factbehaving as Rational Actors and this includes Iran.If I was the President of Iran I might have told the world I was going tobuild 100 new enrichment plants and really stir the emotional pot ofunjustified irrational fear in America. Why? Because it is so easy to pushyour collective buttons. :)You may like to have a look at this .. written by an American Muslim in NYCabout teh collapse of the Ottomans and the creation of the Wahabi-SaudiCaliphate by the British.What people need to realize [ eventually ] is that Osama bin laden is aperfect product of the radical extremist Wahabi sect and the philosophicalmainstay of the Saudi monarchy.The Taliban sect is the very same thing but by another name in anotherlanguage not Arabic. A tradional tribal sect these people lived in theremote areas of Aghanistan and NWF of Pakistan and in other pockets in theregion.The Taliban took advantage of the power vacume that existed upon the exit ofRussia and washing of American hands in Afghanistan immediately afterwards.Nothing can alter the fact that after Clinton had attacked Bin laden withcrusie missiles inside Afghanistan that before 9/11 President GW Bush, onbehalf of the American people, was giving to these Wahabi ideologues, theextremist radicalized brutal regime of the Taliban then protecting Osama BinLaden from extradition for the African bombs and the USS Cole gifts ofFinancial aid to the tune of $250 million barely 6 weeks before 9/11 inSeptember 2001.AND mulitple US Corporations with the assistance of the US State DEpartmentwere in Kabul drawing up Commercial Contracts with this very same INSANE andUNCIVILIZED Regime.Nothing changes these truths -- especially not 9/11 for they are in factDIRECTLY RELATED.What you need to realise is that the Shi'a of Iraq, Iran, Pakistan andIndia, and elsewhere are the mortal enemies of the Wahabi and are seen asinfidels far worse than any Christian or Jew.What you folks need to realise is that the by far majority 90% plus ofMuslims are NOT extremist Wahabi-Taliban type people at all :: in Lebanon,Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Palestine, Egypt, North Africa, India, Iran,Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indonesia totally reject the Wahabiinterpretations of the Quran and other matters social and political andlegal and religious matters of faith.In some places Wahabi-Taliban like ideologues are as rare as Communistsinside the United States!!!! Like as rare as hens teeth!!!That includes the 99% majority of Muslims in the West like Europe Canada,USA and Australia are all quite normal human beings who are probably livingi the West to GET AWAY FROM THE CRAZY EXTREMISTS who currently govern somenations, not to mention the endless WARS ............After 9/11 Amercia went and attacked the most ANTI-Wahabi-Taliban, mostANTI-Osama Bin Laden Nation on this earth Earth bar Iran, that being Iraq!!!!And yet the most Pro-Wahabi Ideologue, the nation of Saudi Arabia, and homeof birth to the 9/11 terrorists has open doors into the White House powerbase, and America sells/gives it the latest in weapons. This is trullyamazing -- and yet you accuse me of being pro-al queda? Put the koolaidedown :)
Sean
"Bret Cahill" <BretC...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:8d5a12fd-02f7-4f0a...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Hey I agree .... and they don't do anyone any good, not just the US.
Do you think the USA will ever apologise to the rest of the world for
leading it into war with Iraq in 2003, and being so TOTALLY wrong about the
DECEPTIVE justifications given for the invasion .... and for the
unnecessary deaths, destruction, injuries, lives destroyed, harm done, civil
dysfunction caused, the ongoing Refugees flows and costs, and every single
last one of the unnecessary downstream outcomes of this invasion and the
incompetent way that Iraq and Afghanistan have been "managed and governed"
since both plummetted into Civil War from then to today?
Or does anyone really believe that the iraq and the rest of the world should
say "Golly gosh thank you so much America!"
Untill the people be they left or right, democrat or republican, social
minded or an extremist money grubbing capitalist GET THIS STRAIGHT .. then
everything else is simply going to be more the elephant in the China shop
and crap continually coming back in your face from the region in various
forms ... the royal finger of building another 50 enrichment plants is just
one of the ways this crap flies. <smile>
Sean
On Dec 1, 11:20 am, ZerkonXXXX <Z...@erkonx.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:27:47 -0800, Robert Cohen wrote:
> > Hey, it's actually an insightful, brilliant essay, which I paraphrased
> > for my slant
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
>
> This is actually a bigoted, biased piece of typical clap trap racist NYT
> propaganda to help ramp up and justify the new war expenditure.
>
See Robert, I was being kind and subtle in my reply ... <smile>
>
> As opposed to all those killed yesterday who did not really matter? As
> reported by the embedded media sucking up military press releases?
I'd prefer that more Moslems not emigrate to US & Europe, and remain
to push reform within Moslem
dominated lands
=============================
Then first STOP bombing the crap out of Muslim lands and they will stop
becoming refugees from HELL.
===============
Israel has always had an approx twenty percent Moslem population
within that pre-1967 border, while there is no
or very minimal Jewish presence today in all of Araby where Jews lived
for awhile (two millenia--four millenia) usually
as "non-equals," but apparently often better/safer than in Europe &
Russia
===================
Who gives a **** if jews live or don't live in the middle of Muslim Arabia
.. I don't care in the least --- if they don't like living in the middle of
muslim world pack their bags and go soemwhere else, just like everyone else
on the planet has to do when surrounded by a people with different values
than your own ....
Many english came here to australia after the war .. our values are similar
and yet over 30% didn;t like being here, so they went home to englnad ..
they didn't tell the rest of Australia IT needed to change to suit them ....
and the Jews have no bigger or better right than anyone else ... the very
same way that the swiss can say no Minarets, and any other nation or local
council can say NO WAY .. you are not building a 5 story high Buddha statue
on top of that Hill you own.
iow, get over your jewishness, and get over this incessant DEMAND that just
because your a jew that means the REST OF SOCIETY MUST ACCOMODATE your
jewish preferecnes of how life should or shouldn;t be .... IOW get over your
jewishness becasue I for one am sick of hearing about it. It is Irrelevant -
it ain't nothing special to have a religion or philosophy about Life, and
also have dna related ancestors with a history, everyone is exactly the same
in this regard.
=====================
In the late 1940s & early 1950s approx 700,000+ Arabian land native-
born Jews voluntarily or by force
came to Israel
====================
YES it is called MASSIVE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION after a period of War and
upheaval in peoples lives.
The INFLUX of JEWS into Palestine makes the so-called flood of Muslims into
Europe look like a dripping tap with a bad washer.
The equivalent today of the NON-STOP FLOOD of non-indigenous Jewish people
into Plaestine post WW2, post 1948, and post-1967, would be like 250 million
Arab Muslims already being inside Europe right now !!!!
Think about that ... and then ask yourself how come it is ok to bitch about
Muslim immigration that is no higher than 3% of the total population of
Europe or America or Canada now, vs the massive ILLEGAL, repeat the ILLEGAL
immigration, that occurred in palestine under the Zionists organisations
from 1945 to today that has totally changed that region to one that is
equivalent to having 250 million muslim arabs in Europe right now .... ???
Can you imagine living in New York City where the population included OVER 8
MILLION MUSLIM ARABS - and they were fully registered as Citizens ... and
when they arrived in the country .. they were given a voucher to build a
settler shack in the farmlands of Virginia but not to worry about the people
there who foolishly *believed* they still owned the farms, the land and the
homes there. ?
Would you complain if YOU were there first, even IF you emigrated legally as
a child before or soon after WW2 to NYC USA ?????
Who decides it's OK for the same level of ASSAULT is OK in Palestine, but
hell anything one hundred times less of an impact is a crime to be stoped in
Europe or America?
I'd really like to know how on earth anyone can justify such an invasion of
aliens into the PRE-EXISTING SOCIAL ORDER, and no expect a VIOLENT BACKLASH
after they have their lands and homes and buisnesses stolen as well.
===========================
It is my humble perception that most/many Arabs are oblivious of this,
perhaps they have deliberately ignored this because it doesn't gel with
their own
narrative
Morality and adaptation are necessarily (except for ye idealists-
Quakers) "two way streets," which means to me that pluralism can not
work well enough when the diverse people cannot be adequately mutually
tolerant
==========================
I think that all sounds fine in THEORY ... and so it;s true in theory. :)
Bret Cahill
> .. I don't care in the least --- if they don't like living in the middle of
> muslim world pack their bags and go soemwhere else, just like everyone else
> on the planet has to do when surrounded by a people with different values
> than your own ....
>
> Many english came here to australia after the war .. our values are similar
> and yet over 30% didn;t like being here, so they went home to englnad ..
> they didn't tell the rest of Australia IT needed to change to suit them ....
> and the Jews have no bigger or better right than anyone else ...
The U. S. could acquire all 8 million and no one would even notice.
Anti-semitism in the U. S. is a mile wide and an inch deep except
where it's a mile deep and an inch wide.
This makes it possible on a good day to believe any combination from
inch wide / inch deep to mile wide / mile deep.
> the very
> same way that the swiss can say no Minarets,
Two wrongs don't make a right. That was a right wing reaction, a
violation of mosque and state.
> and any other nation or local
> council can say NO WAY ..
Peak oil and AGW are bigger issues to most people than Israeli-
Palestinian politics.
Bret Cahill
Sean
>> Who gives a **** if jews live or don't live in the middle of Muslim
>> Arabia
>> .. I don't care in the least --- if they don't like living in the middle
>> of
>> muslim world pack their bags and go soemwhere else, just like everyone
>> else
>> on the planet has to do when surrounded by a people with different values
>> than your own ....
>>
>> Many english came here to australia after the war .. our values are
>> similar
>> and yet over 30% didn;t like being here, so they went home to englnad ..
>> they didn't tell the rest of Australia IT needed to change to suit them
>> ....
>> and the Jews have no bigger or better right than anyone else ...
>
> The U. S. could acquire all 8 million and no one would even notice.
>
The Palestinians sure would :)
So why don't you do that ....... go take other peoples farm land in the USA
give it the Israelis for free ...as see what your fellow 10th generation
citizens feel about that??
<vbg>
Robert Cohen
> "Bret Cahill" <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
This is undeniably harsh, and thus deserving of skimming, not that
it's pertinent to ideas
expressed in a candid-bash-trash-thread of the alt.unsanitary-land-
fill-n.g.
http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/derisionist-history
Bret Cahill
> >> Arabia
> >> .. I don't care in the least --- if they don't like living in the middle
> >> of
> >> muslim world pack their bags and go soemwhere else, just like everyone
> >> else
> >> on the planet has to do when surrounded by a people with different values
> >> than your own ....
>
> >> Many english came here to australia after the war .. our values are
> >> similar
> >> and yet over 30% didn;t like being here, so they went home to englnad ..
> >> they didn't tell the rest of Australia IT needed to change to suit them
> >> ....
> >> and the Jews have no bigger or better right than anyone else ...
>
> > The U. S. could acquire all 8 million and no one would even notice.
>
> The Palestinians sure would :)
The Palestinians only reason for existence would be gone. The region
would feel a great loss and they would start killing each other.
> So why don't you do that ....... go take other peoples farm land in the USA
That's already been done many times.
That's why I'm a Georgist. No one can really legitimately "own" land,
not the Palestinians, not the Israelis, not George III, not the native
Americans not any landlords not anyone.
Land should be taxed at its full rental value which turns control over
to the most productive.
> give it the Israelis for free ...as see what your fellow 10th generation
> citizens feel about that??
Fred claims that land theft is OK if you wait a few generations.
Bret Cahill
Shrikeback
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:27:47 -0800, Robert Cohen wrote:
> > Hey, it's actually an insightful, brilliant essay, which I paraphrased
> > for my slant
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html?em
>
> This is actually a bigoted, biased piece of typical clap trap racist NYT
> propaganda to help ramp up and justify the new war expenditure.
>
> "Yes, after two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely
> dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny.."
Kosovo?
> Can only be believe by the morally vacant and coping with drugs and those
> terminally attached to “The War Narrative” the WMD NYT is so famous for.
> FOX NEWS for the East 80's and for those who feel so saddened they are so
> imperially burdened with the task of bombing countries.
>
> "Although most of the Muslims being killed today.."
> As opposed to all those killed yesterday who did not really matter? As
> reported by the embedded media sucking up military press releases?
Saddam Hussein's regime was responsible for the deaths
of more than a million Muslims, what with continual war
from 1979 to Kuwait. I'm not sure how that compares to
Putin's bloody suppression of Chechnya.
Sean
http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/derisionist-history
===========
Nothing really new there for me. My understanding for a liong has been that
the Palestinians were historically looked upon by the rest of the Ummar, the
Arabs, as being 3rd class uncivilised peasants.
not much different than the serfs in dark ages britain, the aboriginals and
native americans in the new worlds, the armenians to the turks, the kurds to
the arabs, the tibetans to the chinese, the indians to the thais, and the
japanese to the koreans.
To this day, the palestinians as a group are not highly regarded by the
lebanaese, the syrians, the saudis, the egyptians, the jordainians, the
iraqis, or anyone else. They have a problem for all of them.
This does not change what the british did, nor america, nor the east, nor
the UN that was prepared to give 55% of the land to 40% of the poeple, most
of whom had only very recently immigrated, and mostly as illegal aliens no
different than mexicans crossing the US border today ......
The day that an equivalent number of illegals could enter America, which
would be about 250 million over barely 10 years, and that those living
there beforehand the 305 million would FREELY agree to have 55% of the land
mass of the United States given over to these recent illegal immigrants to
create a new nation of their own on Amercian soil, then maybe calling what
happened in palestine as "just and proper" might become barely believeable.
But there is a good reason why it is not just and not proper, and that to
this day justice [ of a standard enshrined in the US Constituion and in the
UN Constituion ] has not been done in Palestine.
40-45% of the population of the historical mandate of palestine now etch out
an existing on barely 12% of the land.
RELIGION, and radical islamic terrorism, has stuff all to do with honestly
seeing and accepting as real the injustices here.
When faced with nothing left to lose, all the rules go out the window.
Israel may well have a military advantage and be the 4th most powerful
military on earth and have the US Intelligence backups.
But it isn't 1948, nor 1967 anymore, for it is 2009. And in 2009 the
combined forces of Turkey, Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,
Jordan, and Egypt are quite forminable, and physically controls an enormous
amount of the surrounding territory and air-space and sea ways.
I seriously doubt that Greece, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Kazakstan,
Ajerbeijan etc, any of the north african states, none of the gulf states,
italy, spain, france, russia, poland, chech republic, hungary, denmark,
germany, the nordic nations, netherlands, china, indonesia, south africa,
the sudan, japan, thailand, india, bangladesh, malaysia, phillipines,
taiwan, iceland, belgium, or anyone else nearby would immeditately spring to
Israel's defense.
Which leaves ............... who to do the dirty work yet again???
Surely repatriating oneself back inside the 1967 Borders which is already
far beyond the 1948 UN Parition plan and actually facilitating the creation
of a self-supporting independent Palestinian nation state [ ala a East Timor
model ] is a much more rational, more just, more thoughtful, and more
respectful and sustainably peaceful option than taking 100% of the UN
partition plan plus 100% of Jerusalem as well?
Just seems so much more sensible that's all. I have little respect left for
the religious sensitivities, for the historical framing of perspectives, for
the cultural nuances, for the hurt emotions of, for the hyperbole of
blogging fools online, OR for the entrenched fears of the Israelis, the
Arabs, or the Americans.
Everyone is culpable here, everyone.
It will not be resolved untill everyone acts with integrity ..... the exact
opposite of which is clearly shown by the behaviour of the British in the
region from the 1900's on, as it is by the leadership of all parties still
today.
anyway just a few idle thoughts of mine, for a bit of perspective of life
outside the American Mind Box
Sean
Well then I am a Georgist too!
As well as an Australian Aboriginal :))
turtoni
returning to their ancient homeland after undergoing near
extermination by the Nazi's?
Sean
"turtoni" <tur...@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:6f18dd02-51e6-439b...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> Who would have just left the Jews to be slaughtered by the Arabs for
> returning to their ancient homeland after undergoing near
> extermination by the Nazi's?
Absolutely not ... and I would have defended them as well in the 1948 war,
and the 1967 war too.
I would NOT have done what the British did - IT WAS INEXCUSABLE -- to BOTH
the israelis and the local Palestinians who were in the mandate including
all the recent Jewish refugees just before during and after WW2 ....
I also did personally agree with israel being defended during the first Gulf
War too, even tough i didn't support the Gulf War itself ... defending
israel from the scud missiles was still correct [ how odd you think ? ]
See? I can agree that israel should exist, that the jewsih refugees should
have been allowed to pour in during WW2 and after, AND I can still say that
the palestinians have been ROYALLY SCREWED IN THE PROCESS and deserve
Justice and LONGTERM International Support via the UN just like East Timor,
and every other traumatised people gets assistance.
Do you see some conflict in this thinking, because it ALL sits well with me.
<smile>
Sean
explaining and providing links and information about the point of view and
historical influences on a particular nation or people, how and why it is
like that, and giving examples -- and mistaking that for an agreement to
that point of view, as a defense of , or a justification for anything that
"group" might have done as a group or as individuals now or in the past.
Not leaping to assumptions and recognising the differences is highly
recommended.
It is very important to not ever believe you know exactly why someone is
doing something, or what they are thinking, or why they think that -- but
sometimes wise to ask.
It's even more important to realise that 99% of the people 99% of the time
are acting rationally given their point of view of the situation they
believe exists before them. You, me, the palestinians, and yes, even the mad
man [sic] Suddam Hussein.
cheers