Five minute NPR Mearsheimer & Walt interview
coaste...@yahoo.com
coaste...@yahoo.com
coaste...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
NPR on AIPAC spying operations in the U.S.:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4660751
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
>
"Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
coaste...@yahoo.com
Indeed but it is anti-Semitic to mention it out loud. That may be
breaking down a little:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4802479
High Miles
Bout damn time too.
If Jews here are so hot to support Israel - they'd better hurry on over.
They must be enormous contributors to be able to wag such a big dog.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> coaste...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Bill wrote:
> >> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
> >>>
> >> "Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
> >>
> >> Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
> >
> > Indeed but it is anti-Semitic to mention it out loud. That may be
> > breaking down a little:
> >
> > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4802479
> >
>
> Bout damn time too.
> If Jews here are so hot to support Israel - they'd better hurry on over.
America's Jewish community is not by any means united in this AIPAC
thing. The ardent expansionism displayed by successive Israeli
governments beginning with the Labor Government in 1967 which began the
West Bank settlement program isn't reflective of the views of even half
of American Jews. That certainly ought to add some justification for
reining AIPAC in.
> They must be enormous contributors to be able to wag such a big dog.
Raising large sums of money has not been a problem because a large
portion of it comes from a small minority of extremely wealthy American
Zionists. It's the ideology which induces them to part with it. And
it's that same expansionist ideology which fuels the Israeli policies
which are directely contrary to American interests.
The first step probably ought to be registration of AIPAC as an agent
of a foreign power. It would then have much more difficulty pressuring
Congress and defeating Congressmen who indulge incorrect speech or vote
the American interest as to the Middle East. I don't think foreign
powers are permitted to make campaign contributions. Contacts with the
bureaucracy would have to be reported. The prosecution of the two
senior AIPAC officials and a certain Mr. Franklin, a U.S. Government
employee, for espionage provides an example of the grounds for doing
it. It takes a certain hyper-chutzpah to bite the hand that feeds so
lavishly. If I recall correctly AIPAC has been active in an effort to
have Jonathan Pollard released from prison. Israel has promised him a
home. But the Franklin matter suggests that it has never stopped spying
on its "ally".
Perhaps I've never gotten over the USS Liberty attack. You might look
at the website run by the survivors.
I agree with Mearsheimer and Walt that we have an obligation to defend
Israel's "core interests," i.e., her sovereign independence inside her
1967 boundaries. That's it however and what she's done beyond that--and
our support for her regardless--has been largely responsible for
getting us into this stinking mess. We won't get out of it until we are
restored to the pursuit of our own interests.
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152221814.1...@s16g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> Raising large sums of money has not been a problem because a large
> portion of it comes from a small minority of extremely wealthy American
> Zionists. It's the ideology which induces them to part with it. And
> it's that same expansionist ideology which fuels the Israeli policies
> which are directely contrary to American interests.
>
"Deutschland".
High Miles
people with terrorist bombings ?
If they get shoved into the sea it might bring peace for a few minutes, but
the folks over there have been warring a lot longer than we have had
a nation here.
I still think we should butt out and let those few wealthy Zionists support
the hostile efforts with mercenaries.
Maybe Halloburton could help them out ?
High Miles
Bill
"High Miles" <2Blu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:w8SdnSMyH9EjETDZ...@comcast.com...
I don't think so. Blaming Germany's economic woes on the Jews was born more
out of Hitler's personal prejudices. I'm not saying anyone here has a
prejudice against Jews. In my opinion the Republicans and Democrats are
both trying to win the Jewish vote by spending our money like drunken
sailors.
Joel Olson
And here I was thinking we ignored ALL foreign governments.
--------------
The Hierarchy of Foreignness. Utlannings are strangers from our own world. Framlings
are strangers of our own species, but from another world. Ramen are strangers of
another species, capable of communication with us, capable of co-existence with
humanity. Last are the varelse. An alien life form that's capable of destroying all of
humanity, yet which we cannot possibly communicate with, an alien species that we
cannot live with. - Orson Scott Card
--------------
Joel Olson
In go, there is the concept of a "hanami ko". A "ko" is a back & forth, capture
and recapture situation, interspersed with threats elsewhere. The player with
the most and biggest threats is called "ko-master" and will eventually win when
his opponent runs out of threats that are as big as what is being contested in
the ko situation. In "hanami", of flower-viewing ko, one side is risking nothing,
and can continue the ko indefinitely. Everything to gain, nothing to lose.
iirc, Israel's neighbors all attacked her at once. She won the war and some
territory. Now that its over the attacking countries all want their territory
back. They want Israel to be a hanami-ko. A war of extinction with nothing to lose.
--------------
We have to go along a road covered with blood. We have no other alternative. For us it
is a matter of life or death, a matter of living or existing. We have to be ready to
face the challenges that await us. - G. Nasser
--------------
tim
"Joel Olson" <jeo...@webzone.net> wrote in message
news:FNprg.4306$PE1....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Bill wrote:
>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
>>>
>> "Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
>>
>> Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
>>
>
> And here I was thinking we ignored ALL foreign governments.
It's always the Jews' fault. WE blame Jews for OUR foreign policy?
I'm sick of this Jew-baiting. This is anti-semitism.
Bill
"Joel Olson" <jeo...@webzone.net> wrote in message
news:FNprg.4306$PE1....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
>>>
>> "Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
>>
>> Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
>>
>
> And here I was thinking we ignored ALL foreign governments.
>
Bill
"tim" <uchku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4vtrg.4963$cd3...@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Joel Olson" <jeo...@webzone.net> wrote in message
> news:FNprg.4306$PE1....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> Bill wrote:
>>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>>>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
>>>>
>>> "Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
>>>
>>> Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
>>>
>>
>> And here I was thinking we ignored ALL foreign governments.
>
> It's always the Jews' fault. WE blame Jews for OUR foreign policy?
>
> I'm sick of this Jew-baiting. This is anti-semitism.
>
as compared to what our politicians do to get their vote? Lets not forget
that every taxpayer was sent a check for $300 (of their own money) to vote
for Bush. Writing of that isn't taxpayer baiting and it isn't
anti-taxpayer.
coaste...@yahoo.com
You illustrate precisely the bind that the Lobby has consciously,
purposefully put Congress into. They are afraid to speak out for fear
of being called anti-Semitic, a political kiss of death, a stain that
once believed is almost ineradicable. One can't prove a negative.
The question of course is the truth of the matter. And the actual
American interest. And the price we are paying for deviating from it on
the altar of another country. The issue is making clear what it is we
owe Israel and what we don't. At the very core statesmanship is
political courage. The Lobby has had the effect of suppressing it in
our nation's capital.
See the quote from Juan Cole I just used to start another thread.
tim
"Bill" <bi...@home.now> wrote in message
news:-LidndC7YOnGGzPZ...@onvoy.com...
I know it when I see it. This discussion has all the tone of those you hear
from jerks who use the "n" word. It is too disingenuous for me.
The game of Blame the Jew is ancient. Don't play it. We can have the same
discussion without the Jew-baiting. It makes me uncomfortable, because I
know it is wrong.
And, please, in response to this, do NOT point to the Jews and say, "But,
but, but, the Jews..."
Enough.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Do you mean back in the 40s when Begin's Irgun terrorists were driving
the British out the UN Mandate in Palestine?
> If they get shoved into the sea it might bring peace for a few minutes, but
> the folks over there have been warring a lot longer than we have had
> a nation here.
Fine, but what's our policy to be? We need to disengage from this
"warring."
> I still think we should butt out and let those few wealthy Zionists support
> the hostile efforts with mercenaries.
The reason we don't take steps to disengage is primarily a matter of
domestic politics and at the very center of that are those shameful
political emotions, fear and self-interest.
> Maybe Halloburton could help them out ?
That might be a pretty good way to be rid of Halliburton and ITS
pernicious influence.
coaste...@yahoo.com
New York and Florida. Plenty to swing the outcome in a national
election. But the interesting thing is that most Jewish people vote
liberal and today support of Israeli beastliness is a "conservative"
issue. Our country is filled with Christian Zionists, fundamentalist
Protestants mostly, who far outnumber Jews and believe that the Bible
should drive American foreign policy.
My personal opinion is that America was and always should have been the
natural Zion for Europe's persecuted Jews. They came here in the late
19th and early 20th centuries, mostly from Eastern and Central Europe,
in their hundreds of thousands. They are now our most successful,
productive and creative national minority. If after WWII the European
survivors had all come here instead of being intruded into the Middle
East, we would be far better off today.
Bill
U.S. involvement in their problems and the price we are paying for that
involvement. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, Tim.
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152295164.3...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
group of people will be hated by some. It's like antiBillGatesism.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Yes, in 1967. That was a tat. The tit took place in 1948 when the
Israelis drove hundreds of thousand of simple Palestinian peasant
farmers from their ancestral villages and razed them to the ground. At
the center of the problem is this deaspora, made larger and more
miserable with each Israeli military "victory" and each punitive
incursion. All of the modern victories were made certain by unstinted,
unthinking American aid and diplomatic support driven by a liberal
assumed guilt for the Holocaust. We made sure that Israel became the
"ko-master." But unlike in go the game didn't end and the piper's pay
comes from you and me and the people working in twin towers and our
soldiers and Marines. And now it involves nuclear weapons. The Israelis
are able to beat up on the Palestinians without even having to tax
their people to pay for it. We need an independent Palestinian State
and the Israelis are using our money and support to manufacture a
failed state, a Somalia with which it would be fruitess negotiate.
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152296303....@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>We need an independent Palestinian State
> and the Israelis are using our money and support to manufacture a
> failed state, a Somalia with which it would be fruitess negotiate.
>
Shouldn't we bomb his home state into oblivion? No, because we realize
there will always be assholes like him and they have to come from somewhere.
"What the world needs now... (everybody join in)...."
coaste...@yahoo.com
tim wrote:
> "Joel Olson" <jeo...@webzone.net> wrote in message
> news:FNprg.4306$PE1....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Bill wrote:
> >> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1152200174.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5537557
> >>>
> >> "Researchers Say U.S. Policy Influenced by Israel"
> >>
> >> Incredible grasp of the obvious, huh?
> >>
> >
> > And here I was thinking we ignored ALL foreign governments.
>
> It's always the Jews' fault. WE blame Jews for OUR foreign policy?
>
> I'm sick of this Jew-baiting. This is anti-semitism.
I'm not quite sure who that was addressed to but, "You just can't say
these things! It will make us "sick!" sounds quite a bit like AIPAC's
thing. No one here shows any sign of anti-semitism.
The pathology has been obvious to those who watch the American
political scene and our Middle East policy closely. It didn't take
Mearsheimer and Walt to show that what we've been doing in the Middle
East for the last 40 years is not in our intererst as a nation. The
central point is that it only makes sense to place first priority on
our own national interests. This is the central tenet of the "realist"
school of foreign policy. I shouldn't have to apologise for being a
card carrying member. Putting the agenda of a second class regional
power ahead of our own interests in the Middle East makes no more sense
that did the white-washing of the Stalinist regime by left American
intellectuals in the 1930s. In both cases the facts were what mattered.
And in both cases the facts were ignored on the altar of some higher
sensitivity. In both cases that higher sensitivity was dead wrong.
High Miles
They don't need you to defend them.
They've got their own forces.
High Miles
I'm quite prepared to go to war against that lot. Rednecks or not.
>
> My personal opinion is that America was and always should have been the
> natural Zion for Europe's persecuted Jews. They came here in the late
> 19th and early 20th centuries, mostly from Eastern and Central Europe,
> in their hundreds of thousands. They are now our most successful,
> productive and creative national minority. If after WWII the European
> survivors had all come here instead of being intruded into the Middle
> East, we would be far better off today.
>
Jews don't bother me.
Fundis do.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Exactly. Nothing matters but the truth. The truth was not in Adolph
Hitler.
The baiting of people who violate political taboos (which are always
designed to inhibit reform) is the greatest hurdle we face if we hope
to extract ourselves from this world-wide struggle with the Muslim
world.
High Miles
And some still wonder why Arabs know we're their sworn enemies.
We made sure that Israel became the
> "ko-master." But unlike in go the game didn't end and the piper's pay
> comes from you and me and the people working in twin towers and our
> soldiers and Marines. And now it involves nuclear weapons. The Israelis
> are able to beat up on the Palestinians without even having to tax
> their people to pay for it. We need an independent Palestinian State
> and the Israelis are using our money and support to manufacture a
> failed state, a Somalia with which it would be fruitess negotiate.
Maybe we should spend the next forty years supporting Palestine.
High Miles
High Miles
working,
legal citizens of this country who would love to see the whole world
living in peace. And only two of them are Arab.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Truth is the key. It can never be libel or slander. But it is not
always safe to admit what it is in public. False political correctness
when it comes to Israel has disabled this pitiful, helpless American
giant.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Haha. Yes, and it's one without a rational solution.
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152299010....@s53g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
coaste...@yahoo.com
At least we've already got the money budgeted. All we have to do is
change the line item title.
High Miles
It's the people who want to keep the truth quiet that spin it into a slur.
High Miles
that.
High Miles
Where do we sign up to support that shift ?
tim
"Bill" <bi...@home.now> wrote in message
The defense against anti-semitism was issued before I mentioned
anti-semitism. Get it?
The debate is corrupted by anti-semitism whether you see it or not. Hence
the pre-emptive denial.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Yup; I'm now off to wash the breakfast dishes and the get the garbage
out.
Best,
Hunter
tim
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152299010....@s53g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
Get a grip.
High Miles
Joel Olson
So its in our interest to pull the plug on one of the most successful
new democracies? And that the middle east will then be hunky-dory?
Sounds like appeasement to me.
There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
Recall that the Saudis have been financing the development of this rabid
form of Islam for years. Originally, as opposition to communism, but now
its turned around toward us.
--------------
Beware if you try to stay neutral in a dispute when both sides need you as an ally -
for you can be sure that two nets have been cast out and two stake pits dug to ensure
your cooperation.--Emperor Ojaisun-the-Adroit, 3231-3245 GE - Donald Kingsbury
--------------
Bill
tim
"Bill" <bi...@home.now> wrote in message
This is what I hear. "I'm not an anti-semite. Let me tell why I hate
Jews."
High Miles
Bill
remind you of the beauty thing. Are you sure you are taking what you read
literally? Are you killing the messenger? Please, be more specific.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Who are you hearing it from? All I see here is the whimsical culture of
Zeitgeist which indulges the politically incorrect as a matter of
principle. Miles explained the doctrine succinctly just a few days ago.
What we've been speaking of has nothing whatever to do with Jews per
se. If the country were inhabited entirely by Zoroastrians the
principles involved would be exactly the same. It has to do with an
out-of-control American policy in the Middle East, one in which we gift
three thousand million dollars per year to one little country which in
turn uses our money and our equally lavish military and diplomatic
support to beat up on its neighbor with our own top drawer weapons such
as F-16s. If we're going to gift three thousand million dollars per
year to any tiny country for any reason we must in return have a say as
to what its core interests are and also be absolutely guaranteed that
nothing be done with the money and the weapons which is inimical to OUR
interests no matter how we define them, take it or leave it. You are
strident about "out now." The problem is that you seem not to have a
comprehensive handle on how we got in ab initio. Enhancing the security
interests of Israel was a big part of it. You haven't read M & W.
tim
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152313073....@s53g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
"I'm not an anti-semite. Let me tell you why I hate Jews."
"If the country were inhabited entirely by Zoroastrians the
> principles involved would be exactly the same.
But, it isn't. You have chosed Jews to blame.
> It has to do with an
> out-of-control American policy in the Middle East, one in which we gift
> three thousand million dollars per year to one little country which in
> turn uses our money and our equally lavish military and diplomatic
> support to beat up on its neighbor with our own top drawer weapons such
> as F-16s. If we're going to gift three thousand million dollars per
> year to any tiny country for any reason we must in return have a say as
> to what its core interests are and also be absolutely guaranteed that
> nothing be done with the money and the weapons which is inimical to OUR
> interests no matter how we define them, take it or leave it. You are
> strident about "out now."
It's your war. Not mine. Out now. Every second we stay is your fault.
> The problem is that you seem not to have a
> comprehensive handle on how we got in ab initio.
And, it's your job to make sure I have a comprenhensive handle. Fuck off.
> Enhancing the security
> interests of Israel was a big part of it. You haven't read M & W.
I posted the study before you even arrived on zeitgeist.
coaste...@yahoo.com
AIPAC has at least two jobs open. Perhaps you might apply.
> > It has to do with an
> > out-of-control American policy in the Middle East, one in which we gift
> > three thousand million dollars per year to one little country which in
> > turn uses our money and our equally lavish military and diplomatic
> > support to beat up on its neighbor with our own top drawer weapons such
> > as F-16s. If we're going to gift three thousand million dollars per
> > year to any tiny country for any reason we must in return have a say as
> > to what its core interests are and also be absolutely guaranteed that
> > nothing be done with the money and the weapons which is inimical to OUR
> > interests no matter how we define them, take it or leave it. You are
> > strident about "out now."
>
> It's your war. Not mine.
I opposed the idea from the first days after 9-11. I always opposed the
invasion of Iraq. I think you know that.
Out now. Every second we stay is your fault.
Steer sheise.
>
> > The problem is that you seem not to have a
> > comprehensive handle on how we got in ab initio.
>
> And, it's your job to make sure I have a comprenhensive handle. Fuck off.
Not at all. It's just that you don't.
> > Enhancing the security
> > interests of Israel was a big part of it. You haven't read M & W.
>
> I posted the study before you even arrived on zeitgeist.
Ah, well, when you've read it we can talk about it.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Who's saying pull the plug. Certainly not me; certainly not M & W. What
we're doning is confusing Israel's core interests with her expansionist
dreams and indirectly supporting the latter.
>
> There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
> Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
> embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
> We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
>
> Recall that the Saudis have been financing the development of this rabid
> form of Islam for years. Originally, as opposition to communism, but now
> its turned around toward us.
I think the doctrine you describe could have us at war with the Muslim
world virtually forever. American mistakes its legitimate destiny when
it is seen as a modern version of the Crusades.
coaste...@yahoo.com
July 7, 2006, 8:59PM
FBI Thwarts Terrorist Plot Against New York
By PAT MILTON Associated Press Writer
© 2006 The Associated Press
NEW YORK - A terrorist plot to flood lower Manhattan by attacking
train tunnels under the Hudson River used by tens of thousands of
commuters was thwarted before the conspirators could travel to the
United States, authorities said Friday.
Eight suspects _ including an al-Qaida loyalist arrested in Lebanon and
two others in custody elsewhere _ had hoped to pull off the attack in
October or November, federal officials said. But federal investigators
working with their counterparts in six other countries intervened. The
other five suspects remained at large.
"It was never a concern that this would actually be executed," Homeland
Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in Boston. "We were, as I say,
all over this."
Initial reports said that the terrorists wanted to attack the Holland
Tunnel, a major thoroughfare for cars entering the island of Manhattan.
But officials said the group had specifically mentioned only the train
tunnels under the Hudson River used by commuters on their way to New
York and New Jersey.
"This is a plot that involved martyrdom and explosives" and focused on
the "tubes that connect Jersey and lower Manhattan," said FBI Assistant
Director Mark J. Mershon.
The men believed that by bombing the train tunnels they could unleash
massive flooding in lower Manhattan, where Wall Street and the World
Trade Center site are located, New York Police Department Commissioner
Ray Kelly said.
A federal law enforcement official, who spoke on condition of anonymity
because the investigation is ongoing, said investigators believe that
an attack on a train tunnel, unlike the Holland Tunnel, could have
achieved that goal. The official said the suspects hoped to inflict
damage on the U.S. economy.
Investigators decided in recent weeks that the "plotting for this
attack had matured to a point where it appeared that the individuals
were about to move forward," Mershon said. "They were about to go to a
phase where they would attempt to surveil targets, establish a regimen
of attack and acquire the resources necessary to effectuate the
attacks."
Details of the plot _ first reported by the Daily News _ emerged on the
one-year anniversary of the attacks on the London transportation system
that killed 52 people. Officials said the timing of Friday's report in
relation to the anniversary was coincidental.
New York's transportation system has emerged as a potential terrorist
threat several times over the years. A June book by journalist Ron
Suskind highlighted a reported plot by al-Qaida terrorists to kill
thousands of New Yorkers by spreading cyanide gas in the subway. In
May, a man was convicted of plotting to blow up a bustling subway
station.
In 1993, the FBI rounded up more than a dozen men who allegedly
conspired to blow up five New York City landmarks including the Lincoln
and Holland tunnels. The prosecution resulted in more than a dozen
convictions.
In the latest case, a federal official said FBI agents monitoring
Internet chat rooms used by extremists learned of the plot in recent
months and determined that tunnels were possibly being targeted after
investigators pieced together code words from their conversations.
Another U.S. official, also speaking on condition of anonymity because
the investigation is ongoing, called the plot "largely aspirational"
and described the Internet conversations as mostly extremists
discussing and conceptualizing the plot. The official said no money had
been transferred, nor had other similar operational steps been taken.
Officials cited the arrest of the Lebanese suspect _ described as the
scheme's mastermind _ as a significant break in the investigation. A
Lebanese official said the Beirut man confessed to plotting to attack
New York City tunnels later this year, and that he was acting on Osama
bin Laden's orders.
Police arrested the man on April 27, acting on information from the
FBI. The 31-year-old suspect uses the alias Amir Andalousli, but his
real name is Assem Hammoud.
The suspect's family denied any al-Qaida links and his mother, Nabila
Qotob, said Hammoud taught economics at a local university. "His morale
is high because he is confident he is innocent," she said.
A U.S. law enforcement official said one of the others accused in the
plot is believed to be Canadian, but said there were no apparent links
to the 17 people arrested last month in a plot to bomb buildings around
Toronto.
Authorities close to the investigation told The Canadian Press that
police there questioned a man but released him because there was not
enough evidence to hold him.
Train riders took news of the plot in stride.
"It bothers us, it scares us, but you gotta keep living, you know?"
said Dudley Nosy, 21, a security guard from Brooklyn who regularly
takes the train to Jersey City to see his girlfriend. "You can't stay
in the house all day long."
___
Associated Press Writers Pat Milton in New York; Lara Jakes Jordan,
Katherine Shrader and Mark Sherman in Washington, D.C.; Sam F. Ghattas
in Beirut, Lebanon; and Glenn Johnson in Boston contributed to this
report.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Chanting "Not Another Nickel, Not Another Dime, No More Money for
Israel's Crime," over 100 people gathered across from the United
Nations in New York City to protest U.S. military aid to Israel, to
condemn Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip, and to call for an end to
the Israeli occupation of Palestine.
The demonstration had been called for 4:30 pm on Thursday, July 6, at
42nd Street but because of problems getting a permit for that site, the
organizers explained that the demonstration was moved to 46th Street.
Despite the last minute confusion, people found the new location.
One of the protesters explained why he had come:
"My heart hurts to see the collective punishment of the Israeli
military against the people living in Gaza. To me it is a war crime,
but what can I do about it? An answer came to my email box last night.
It was an 'urgent appeal to all anti-war activists and organizations to
join the July 6 protest against the Israeli assault on the Palestinian
People.' I decided to attend. On the way I asked myself why is it still
so hard for the world to stop such wanton mayhem and killing, as is now
happening in Gaza."
Among those who joined the demonstration were a group of Orthodox Jews
against Zionism who formed a solid line facing the U.N. with their
signs that read: "Torah forbids a Jewish State," "Judaism Rejects
Zionism," "All Palestine Under Palestinian Sovereignty." Some of the
members of the Orthodox Jews Against Zionism crossed the street with
their signs and stood mixed in with the three counter protesters
carrying Israeli, Palestinian and U.S. flags with slogans supporting
Israel .
Photo taken at July 6, 2006 demonstration across from U.N. protesting
Israel's actions in Gaza.
©2006 Ken Nakayama
One of the group of Orthodox Jews explained that, "according to the
Torah, all Palestine should be returned to the Palestinians and all
other occupied lands should be restored to their owners. According to
the Torah, he pointed out, "Jews are not allowed to shed blood, harm,
humiliate, or dominate another people." The group is American Neturei
Karta.
Among the groups involved in the demonstration were the International
Action Coalition, Truthout Coalition, Al-Awda (The Palestinian Right to
Return Coalition), the Green Party, United for Peace and Justice, and
Troops Out Now Coalition.
Other signs at the demonstration included, "Boycott Israel," "U.S. is
to Iraq as Israel is to Palestinians as Nazi Germany was to Jews," "End
the Occupation of Palestine and Iraq," "Israel Out of Gaza," "Israeli
State Terrorism, Air Raids, Sonic Booms, Home Destructions, Targeted
Assassinations, Humanitarian Disaster" and "U.S. Out of the Middle
East."
Speaking at the short rally held as part of the demonstration, Charles
Barron, a New York City Council member, compared the long struggle of
Afro-Americans for liberation with the current fight of the Palestinian
people. He said, "Tell Bush, you have blood on your hands." He said he
hoped Kofi Annan was hearing us today.
At one point in the demonstration, a number of the people lay down on
the sidewalk to honor those who had died in Palestine.
Three of those at the demonstration reported that they brought a letter
to the UN to Kofi Annan and gave it to his Special Advisor Vijay
Nambiar. The three who brought the letter, were Miriam Rimawi, Issa
Mikel and Lubna Hammad. They said that the letter addressed to
Secretary General Kofi Annan and the United Nations Security Council,
was signed by 100 organizations around the world. It protested the
"ethnic cleansing in Palestine" being carried out by Israel and asked
the U.N. to undertake actions to defend the Palestinian people. The
letter called for the U.N.:
1) to form an international force to send to protect the Palestinian
people,
2) to call for the immediate release of Palestinian prisoners held in
violation of international law, and
3) to hold Israel accountable for the war crimes being committed in
violation of international law.
Issa Mikel, speaking at the demonstration, explained that Nambiar met
with them and accepted the letter. Though they didn't expect that the
U.N. would meet the demands in the letter right away, this was a
beginning of people and organizations from around the world working
together.
One of the three who delivered the letter to the U.N. was Miriam
Rimawi, a Palestinian who is 10 years old. She said that Nambiar told
them that they would hear from him. She said she was happy and proud to
bring the letter to the U.N. She is hoping that maybe there is a chance
that Annan will protect the Palestinian people.
Using haza the Arabic word for "now," protesters chanted, "Haza, haza,
haza, Israel out of Gaza." The mood conveyed during the demonstration
was that despite the bloodshed, and the crimes against the Palestinian
people, Palestine would never die.
coaste...@yahoo.com
The Guardian, know for its anti-semitism:
Europe's response to the siege of Gaza is shameful
Jonathan Steele - Thursday, 06 July 2006, 13:27
The Palestinians have no partner for peace. They will only have one if
Israel agrees to recognise Palestine's right to function.
Thank goodness for the Swiss. Alone in Europe, their government has
dared to condemn what the Israelis are doing to Gaza. It is collective
punishment, they say. It violates the principle of proportionality.
Israel has not taken the precautions required by international law to
protect civilians.
Inevitably, the bloggers are pouring out the usual irrelevancies about
the role of Swiss banks during the Nazi period. But as the depository
of the Geneva conventions, one of the key legal advances to emerge from
the ravages of the 20th century, Switzerland has a duty to speak out.
Its statement stands in contrast to the European Union's shamefully
muted voice. The Palestinians kill two soldiers and take one prisoner
and, in response, power stations are blown up, sewage and water systems
grind to a halt, bridges are destroyed, sonic booms terrify children
day and night, and all this is inflicted on a hungry people who are
under siege in what is effectively a huge open prison. The EU's
response? Vague expressions of "concern" and calls for "restraint".
Is it World Cup madness? The rush for last-minute cheap summer holiday
deals? Couldn't European leaders show a tenth of the courage of
Israel's brilliant columnist, Gideon Levy? "It is not legitimate to cut
off 750,000 people from electricity. It is not legitimate to call on
20,000 people to run from their homes and turn their towns into ghost
towns. It is not legitimate to kidnap half a government and a quarter
of a parliament. A state that takes such steps is no longer
distinguishable from a terror organisation," he wrote this week in
Haaretz.
In a two hour appearance before MPs on Tuesday, all that Tony Blair
could produce was a classic fence-sitter: "I have learned enough about
this situation over the years to realise that going in and condemning
either side is not deeply helpful."
European impotence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is of course an
ancient problem. The disease's latest aggravation began in January
after Hamas's election victory. Here was an event which was bound to
have huge repercussions in Israel, on every state's relations with the
Palestinian authority, on the future of political Islam throughout the
Arab world, as well as on the west's image among Muslims. In short, it
was a moment where the time-honoured diplomatic technique - a pause for
reflection - was vital. The device is often used to cover unnecessary
delay. This time there was a genuine need to analyse and consult before
rushing to conclusions. There was no urgency since Israel was already
refusing to negotiate with President Mahmoud Abbas.
Yet the EU promptly lined up with the US and Israel in demanding Hamas
change its policies or be punished. The Quartet, a relatively recent
body set up to coordinate policies between the US, the EU, Russia and
the UN, became a trap, acting as an arm of the US state department for
keeping other states in line. The Quartet's demands on Hamas were
identical to Israel's.
Some European diplomats now regret their haste. The decision to cut aid
as well as contacts with the Palestinians is seen as a mistake. Last
month's French initiative to find a mechanism for resuming aid to Gaza
was the Quartet's first admission of error.
Refusing contact with Hamas was equally mistaken, especially as Hamas
had maintained a unilateral ceasefire for over a year (a point which
Israel tries to suppress). The fact that Hamas is defined as a
terrorist organisation need not have been a bar, since governments have
spoken to similar movements with nationalist agendas, be it the IRA,
the Tamil Tigers, or Eta. But again, thank goodness for the Swiss. As
non-EU members, they keep contact with Hamas and act as intermediaries
for other European governments which have trapped themselves into not
doing the same.
The outcome of the current crisis is unclear. However it ends, the
moment has surely come for Europe to break from its useless policy of
backing the US and Israel. The Olmert government is trying to destroy
not only Hamas but Mahmoud Abbas. Like Sharon's, it wants to undermine
every moderate Palestinian by showing them up as powerless. It seeks
only domination, not negotiation. Whether the ultimate agenda is to
starve all Palestinians into fleeing to Egypt, Jordan and even further
afield, or merely to keep Gaza as a prison of the unemployed and the
West Bank as a bunch of Bantustans, Israeli policy mocks every UN
resolution on the conflict.
The EU should admit that the Palestinians have no partner for peace.
They will only have one if Israel recognises Palestine's right to
function. Statements that Israel recognises a Palestinian state's right
to exist are empty as long as Olmert expands Jewish settlements and the
separation wall, and refuses to spell out how that state can operate as
a viable entity. Without the right to function, the right to exist is
hollow.
Olmert and his Labour party allies must also come clean on the last
serious Israeli peace formula, the Barak proposals which were put at
Taba five years ago. The Palestinians did not accept them, but
political circumstances were inauspicious - a fading Baruk government
and an ill Yasser Arafat. The same proposals might be acceptable now
and should be revived. If Kadima thinks of imposing or offering
anything less than Taba, then Israel cannot claim to want an end to the
conflict.
Finally, Israel must renounce violence, in particular the
assassinations of Palestinian leaders. The number of civilians killed
in these attacks this year alone far exceeds the number of Israeli
victims since Hamas declared its ceasefire last year. The facts do not
support the notion that Israel is "retaliating" to provocations. Last
week's Palestinian attack on a military outpost followed much greater
carnage by Israeli shells.
Some will argue that if the EU were to condemn Israeli actions, it
would lose influence with the Israeli government. But what has this
alleged influence managed to achieve since Sharon and Olmert have been
in power? The record is paltry.
Governments have greater effect by being morally clear and politically
firm. Condemnation and psychological isolation create "facts on the
ground" which can alert electorates, if not immediately their
governments. But the audience is not only in Israel. There is a global
audience which expects Europe to take the right stand. Whether Israel
chooses to listen should not be the decisive factor.
coaste...@yahoo.com
What you know is a conversation you want to stop in its tracks when you
hear it. There is no other purpose to your accusations of
anti-semitism.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> The game of Blame the Jew is ancient. Don't play it. We can have
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>> same discussion without the Jew-baiting. It makes me uncomfortable,
> >> >>>> because I know it is wrong.
You apparently can't abide the discussion in fact because there has
been no Jew-baiting. Israeli policy is the issue. What there has been
is politically incorrect speech, the sort of speech which our
Congressmen and Senators are terrified to use in public. With that
going on you're obviously "uncomfortable" about the wrong things. The
national security of the United States is at stake.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> And, please, in response to this, do NOT point to the Jews and say,
> >> >>>> "But, but, but, the Jews..."
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Enough.
> >> >>> I haven't read anything here about what the Jews do, but rather about
> >> >>> the U.S. involvement in their problems and the price we are paying
> >> >>> for
> >> >>> that involvement. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, Tim.
> >> >>
> >> >> The defense against anti-semitism was issued before I mentioned
> >> >> anti-semitism. Get it?
Your hurling of that deadly slur is an attempt to inhibit, to terminate
the conversation. That's exactly what has been going on in Washington
for years.
> >> >>
> >> >> The debate is corrupted by anti-semitism whether you see it or not.
> >> >> Hence the pre-emptive denial.
> >> > Honestly, Tim, I don't get it? Is it me or are you using ronspeak?
> >>
> >> This is what I hear. "I'm not an anti-semite. Let me tell why I hate
> >> Jews."
> >
> > Who are you hearing it from? All I see here is the whimsical culture of
> > Zeitgeist which indulges the politically incorrect as a matter of
> > principle. Miles explained the doctrine succinctly just a few days ago.
> >
> > What we've been speaking of has nothing whatever to do with Jews per
> > se.
>
> "I'm not an anti-semite. Let me tell you why I hate Jews."
The subject is Israeli policy.
>
> "If the country were inhabited entirely by Zoroastrians the
> > principles involved would be exactly the same.
>
> But, it isn't. You have chosed Jews to blame.
Beastly behavior by successive Israeli governments merits blame. Try
this:
Silent approval of Israeli terror
7/7/2006 7:00:00 PM GMT
(Reuters Photo) Israeli soldier points his gun at Palestinian stone
throwers
The military action by Israel in the Gaza Strip is designed to
terrorize the civilian population. This is openly acknowledged by
Israeli officials. It is being condemned by human rights groups in
Israel and around the world.
Rep. Cardin has been a staunch, consistent and unwavering supporter of
Israel. He has voted for the military equipment and financial aid that
provides Israel with the ability to terrorize Palestinian civilians.
It is now time for him, and others in the U.S. government, to speak out
against Israel's actions.
This is another email I (Kevin B. Zeese) sent to Rep. Ben Cardin. Mr.
Cardin is running for the U.S. Senate in Maryland as a Democrat. I am
also running for that U.S. Senate seat in a Unity Campaign where I have
been nominated by three parties -- Green, Libertarian, and Populist --
and have members of the Republican, Democratic Parties on my campaign
committee along with independents.
July 3, 2006
Rep. Ben Cardin
2207 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Via email
Dear Rep. Cardin:
On June 26 I wrote you to urge you to use your voice to protest the
mass violence about to occur in the Gaza Strip. At the time, the
Israeli military was lining up tanks, artillery, soldiers and other
military equipment on the Gaza border. Sadly, there has only been
silence, and neither your campaign nor congressional website mentions
the issue. (The most recent comment you've made on Israel was from
April 2006 urging Saudi Arabia to lift its boycott of Israel.)
The actions of Israel have worsened since my last letter to you. Sadly,
Israel's actions are complicating the release of the Israeli soldier
who was captured. Indeed, Israel's actions, military attack, group
punishment of civilians and refusal to negotiate, increase the
likelihood of his death more than his release. Israel is intentionally
terrorizing the civilian population to pressure the Palestinian
government. In doing so, Israel is creating a likely health
catastrophe that will result in the deaths of civilians. Sadly, this is
being done with weapons paid for by U.S. taxpayers - weapons and
funding for which you have consistently voted. Please use your voice to
speak out strongly against the Israeli terrorism.
Of particular concern are:
- An Israeli missile destroying a crucial power station in Rafah on
Tuesday- a power plant that provided for half of Gaza's daily energy
needs. Residents are now left without power for much of the day. This
also means residents are without water. Hospitals and clinics are now
without power, causing a health emergency. It will take up to six
months to repair the power station made more difficult by the bombing
of all four access roads to the plant.
- The destruction of bridges and roads preventing civilians from moving
to avoid the coming Israeli onslaught.
- The arrest of 64 elected members of the Palestinian government
including at least eight cabinet members (half the cabinet) among them
Nasser Shaer, the Palestinian deputy prime minister, Finance Minister
Omar Abdal Razeq, Social Affairs Minister Fakhri Torokma and Prisoners'
Affairs Minister Wasfi Kabha, some were led away blindfolded and in
handcuffs.
Also, the mayor of the West Bank town of Qalqiliya and his deputy were
detained.
- Aerial bombardment of the heavily populated Gaza Strip, with 30
aerial campaigns on Thursday. This has included targeting government
buildings including a school in Gaza City, the office of Palestinian
Prime Minister, the Interior Ministry, the office building of the
Auxiliary Force as well as the offices of government officials.
More actions are being planned as the Israeli military prepares for a
ground assault on parts of Gaza. Prime Minister Olmert has "ordered
the army and security forces to act with all their might. . ." The
trapped Palestinian population has been terrorized further by leaflets
drooped from the air warning them of further attacks. Remaining silent
as this horror unfolds is a silent approval of these terror tactics by
Israel.
Israel is being condemned by human rights organizations for violating
international law and the basic human rights of Palestinians. Human
rights groups are criticizing Israelis' actions:
- The Israeli human rights group, B'Tselem, sent an urgent request to
Israel's Defense Minister Amir Peretz to instruct Israeli forces to
refrain from bombing or deliberately damaging in any way facilities
that supply indispensable services to the civilian population in the
Gaza Strip. Further, they said Israel must refrain from using measures
which contravene International Humanitarian Law, which categorically
prohibits all sides to a conflict from attacking "objects
indispensable to the survival of the civilian population." B'Tselem
pointed out that "Israel's military operation in the Gaza Strip today
included Air Force bombing of Palestinian civilian infrastructure.
Among the facilities hit was the central electricity relay station
south of Gaza City, which caused a widespread blackout. Damage to
electricity facilities is liable to severely impair the provision of
indispensable services, such as water supply and health care." See:
http://www.btselem.org/english/Press_releases/20060628.asp
B'Tselem was also critical of the nightly sonic bombs over civilian
neighborhoods, saying:
"The sole purpose of these sorties is to prevent the residents from
sleeping and to create an ongoing sense of fear and anxiety. Regarding
the sonic booms, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that, 'thousands of
residents in southern Israel live in fear and discomfort, so I gave
instructions that nobody will sleep at night in the meantime in
Gaza.' The clear intention of the practice is to pressure the
Palestinian Authority and the armed Palestinian organizations by
harming the entire civilian population.
"Children, in particular, suffer from the sonic booms. In the past,
the Gaza Community Mental Health Center reported that the supersonic
sorties caused fear among many children, which led to a loss of
concentration, loss of appetite, bedwetting, and other disorders. The
Center also reported that sonic booms caused headaches, stomach aches,
shortness of breath, and other physical effects that appeared among
both children and adults. Sonic booms also cause property damage,
primarily shattered windows.
"The use of sonic booms flagrantly breaches a number of provisions of
international humanitarian law. The most significant provision is the
prohibition on collective punishment. Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, which is intended to protect civilians in time of war,
categorically states that 'Collective penalties and likewise all
measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.' The article
also states that, 'Reprisals against protected persons and their
property are prohibited.' Air force supersonic sorties also breach
the principle of distinction, a central pillar of humanitarian law,
which forbids the warring sides to direct their attacks against
civilians."
See:
http://www.btselem.org/english/Special/20060703_Supersonic_booms.asp.
- Amnesty International called on Israel to put an end to the wanton
destruction and collective punishment being carried out by Israeli
forces in the Gaza Strip. A press release issued by Amnesty
International (see:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150572006) said:
Amnesty International is also increasingly concerned by the excessive
use of force and wanton destruction of civilian property and
infrastructure by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip. Since 27 June, when
Israel began Operation Summer Rain, which it says is aimed at releasing
Gilad Shalit, the Israeli army has deployed large numbers of troops in
the South of the Gaza Strip and carried out large-scale wanton
destruction. This includes the bombardment and destruction of three
bridges and electricity networks across the Gaza Strip. These measures
have left half the population of Gaza without electricity and have
reportedly also adversely affected the supply of water.
In recent days the Israeli authorities have also closed the Rafah
crossing into Egypt, the only point of entry/exit for the 1.5 million
Palestinians who live in the Gaza Strip. Several hundred Palestinians
who were returning from abroad have been stranded on the Egyptian side
of the Rafah crossing for up to a week and are prevented from returning
to their homes. Those wishing to leave the Gaza Strip are likewise
prevented from leaving.
The wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure and property and the
disproportionate restrictions imposed on civilians by Israeli forces
amount to collective punishment on the entire population of the Gaza
Strip, a violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which
prohibits punishing protected persons for offences they have not
committed.
Amnesty International reiterates its call on the Israeli authorities
and army to put an end to the excessive and disproportionate use of
force against densely populated residential areas and infrastructure in
the Gaza Strip, including frequent artillery shelling and air strikes
which endanger the lives of Palestinian residents.
Since the beginning of this year Israeli forces have killed some 150
Palestinians, including some 25 children, and Palestinian armed groups
have killed close to 20 Israelis, including two children.
- Israel's destruction of Gaza's only electrical plant needlessly
punishes the civilian population and has created the potential for a
serious humanitarian crisis, according to Human Rights Watch. Sarah
Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division at
Human Rights Watch said:
"Israel must minimize the harm to Gaza's civilian population during
any military operation to rescue the corporal, and that includes not
destroying vital power plants."
Human Rights Watch also expressed concern about the intentional and
frequent use of sonic booms by Israeli military aircraft over Gaza,
which has caused great fear among the civilian population, particularly
among children. Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits
"measures of intimidation" against the civilian population. As
there appears to be no military justification for the use of the sonic
booms, other than the prohibited practice of intimidation, Human Rights
Watch urges Israel to immediately halt the practice. This practice has
been criticized in the past in November 2005, by Physicians for Human
Rights- Israel and the Gaza Community Mental Health Center.
- The civil rights group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR), said in a statement: "Mild rebukes for the deliberate
targeting of civilian infrastructure in Gaza will not stop Israeli
missiles. The Bush administration should condemn these war crimes and
demand that Israel stops using American taxpayer-funded weapons to
carry out attacks that will only serve to intensify the humanitarian
crisis in Gaza."
The complaints Israel makes of the Palestinians show the hypocrisy of
their policies as they are guilty of the same actions. Norman
Finkelstein, professor of Political science at DePaul University in
Chicago and author of "Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of
Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History," made this point recently in
a debate with a representative of AIPAC:
"I think it is useful to begin with what the human rights groups have
to say about this. Let's leave aside the background for a moment and
look narrowly at the incident that triggered the Israeli invasion.
Let's see what Hamas did not do, what the Palestinian 'militants' did
not do. Number one, they did not liquidate the corporal, which Israel
routinely does, namely its political assassinations. That's a war crime
under international law. Israel routinely does that. Hamas did not do
that to the corporal.
"Number two, they didn't kill the corporal while trying to arrest
him. Israel routinely does that. If you look at July 2005, B'Tselem,
the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied
Territories, they put out a very hefty report entitled "Take No
Prisoners." And the report shows Israel routinely, during so-called
arrest operations, kills Palestinians.
"It said . . . that they took him hostage, they kidnapped him. Okay.
Israel routinely takes Palestinians, Lebanese hostage. In fact, Israel
was the only country in the world, in 1997, which legalized
hostage-taking. The liberal head of the Israeli High Court, Aharon
Barak, he said it's legal, legitimate, under international law to take
what he called bargaining chips in order to get prisoners, Israeli
prisoners being held by the Lebanese. The decision was reversed in
2000, but Israel continued to hold Lebanese hostages until 2004. So, at
worst, Hamas is being accused of what Israel legalized and routinely
does.
"And finally, let's talk about those 9,000 Palestinians who are
effectively hostages being held by Israel. 1,000 of them are
administrative detainees. . . Administrative detainees who are being
held without any charges or trial. And the other 8,000 are being held
after military courts have convicted them, almost always on the basis
of confessions which were extracted by torture. So if we're going to
look simply at the numbers, we have one hostage on the Palestinian
side, and effectively we have about 9,000 on the Israeli side."
While Israel promises to hold elected officials in the Palestinian
Territory responsible for the actions of non-governmental organizations
- including openly threatening the assassination of elected officials
- should the Palestinian government hold Israel responsible for the
killing of civilians? For the bombing of civilian areas? For the
destruction of utilities, roads and bridges? For terrorizing
civilians? Should Prime Minister Olmert be held personally responsible
for these violations of international law, as he promises to do to
Palestinian officials?
More military action by Israel is promised in the Gaza Strip. Further,
Israel is threatening to widen the attack beyond the Gaza Strip into
Syria. Four Israeli military airplanes entered Syrian airspace and
flew low-altitude flights over the seaside home of Syrian President
Bashar Al-Assad near the Mediterranean port city of Latakia in
northwestern Syria. The Israeli military and Syria confirmed Israeli
warplanes entered its airspace.
As a long-term supporter of Israel, your voice can make a difference.
Please speak out against Israeli terrorism and violation of
international law.
Sincerely,
Kevin B. Zeese
>
> > It has to do with an
> > out-of-control American policy in the Middle East, one in which we gift
> > three thousand million dollars per year to one little country which in
> > turn uses our money and our equally lavish military and diplomatic
> > support to beat up on its neighbor with our own top drawer weapons such
> > as F-16s. If we're going to gift three thousand million dollars per
> > year to any tiny country for any reason we must in return have a say as
> > to what its core interests are and also be absolutely guaranteed that
> > nothing be done with the money and the weapons which is inimical to OUR
> > interests no matter how we define them, take it or leave it. You are
> > strident about "out now."
>
> It's your war. Not mine. Out now. Every second we stay is your fault.
The subject in the paragraph above is Palestine, not Iraq. "Out now,"
indeed.
Speaking of Iraq, you never did face the hypothetical. If I'm correct
abut it and there are1,000,000 additional dead Iraqis after a bug-out
rather than maybe 50,000 it will be your fault? Will you have 950.000
deaths on your conscience? By the perverse logic in the sentence above
of course it will.
>
> > The problem is that you seem not to have a
> > comprehensive handle on how we got in ab initio.
>
> And, it's your job to make sure I have a comprenhensive handle. Fuck off.
Read Mearsheimer & Walt.
> > Enhancing the security
> > interests of Israel was a big part of it. You haven't read M & W.
>
> I posted the study before you even arrived on zeitgeist.
You haven't read it. Obviously. Given your AIPAC attitude toward the
issues it raises it would have been ridiculous to post it. And nothing
any of us has said goes beyond the facts presented in that scholarly
paper. I think you should start looking at Al Jezeera. That's where the
Zeese article came from. It's very difficult to get that sort of thing
printed in the United States. The Atlantic didn't have the guts to
print M & W's paper. They had to take it to the London Review of Books.
You're a part of this problem. You should stop now. It's hurting the
United States.
High Miles
They definitely know how to piss away funds making themselves fancy nests
where ever they land.
Way too many chiefs and not enough braves..........typical federal
operation.
Joel Olson
It certainly sounds like it. Going so swiftly from a complaint about lobbying
to demanding they withdraw to their original borders, something that is not
about to happen, is quite a jump.
We definitely have problems in how influence is created and distributed,
but I don't see Israel as being any more to blame than a myriad of other
organizations.
>> There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
>> Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
>> embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
>> We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
>>
>> Recall that the Saudis have been financing the development of this rabid
>> form of Islam for years. Originally, as opposition to communism, but now
>> its turned around toward us.
>
> I think the doctrine you describe could have us at war with the Muslim
> world virtually forever. American mistakes its legitimate destiny when
> it is seen as a modern version of the Crusades.
>
You're misreading what I wrote. The religious aspect is (almost) all from
the Muslim world. The west just wants to do business, i.e. siphon off all
the oil. All we really need to do is sit back and let modern communications -
radio, tv, movies - do their work, eroding the religious strictures.
---------------
Preserving "ancient traditions" turns out to mean nothing of the sort. Romanians,
Navajos, and other peoples all over the world may talk about keeping ancient
traditions alive, but in fact, no group can really afford to reject modernism or
nationalism. Cultures cannot reject modern technology. They cannot banish popular
music. They cannot avoid becoming modern. And, for the most part, they do not even
want to; they simply want to be modern AS Basques or Cherokees or Latvians or Kurds.
- Lawrence M. Friedman
---------------
coaste...@yahoo.com
> > dreams and indirectly supporting the latter.
> >
>
> It certainly sounds like it. Going so swiftly from a complaint about lobbying
> to demanding they withdraw to their original borders, something that is not
> about to happen, is quite a jump.
This might be a little long. I won't be offended if you can't bring
yourself to read it all.
I acknowledge an American and Western debt to Israel. A deep and
abiding debt based on 2,000 years of beastly behavior by Christians
against Jews culminating in the Holocaust, a western phenomenon. But
who is to determine the nature of the debt and how it is to be
discharged? Certainly not Israel. In both cases we have to decide
ourselves and in doing so we have to pursue own interests first and
foremost.
The American interest is in an Israeli/Palestinian settlement so that
we can lower our profile in that part of the Middle East and begin
reducing unnecessary tensions with the Muslim world. We're paying much
too large a price for this embroilment. It's been going on for almost
40 years. There is certainly no light at the end of the tunnel. I
believe that the wall now under construction will not settle the
matter. I've looked carefully at the maps. Most of it is a
hyper-gerrymandered land grab described as a security necessity. So
long as we support that we won't be able achieve our primary interest,
a settlement. So what if the Israeli government wants to annex that
land? They shouldn't be able to do it and be supported by us at the
same time.
I would offer Israel a choice: 1967 borders with tiny changes;
recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state; both to be done
unilaterally within a year--and without destroying the infrastructure
and homes built with our money on the West Bank. If they agree we would
broker a defense alliance with US, Nato and European great powers
guaranteeing Isreal's sovereign independence. Along with that would go
certain aid packages for a term of years and for so long thereafter as
we deem necessary.
If it is rejected we would begin de-escalation of the relationship,
financially, militarily and diplomatically. Three years and "out" as
Tim might put it would be a pretty good time frame.
If the Israeli's choose to be hairy-chested about it, it's their
decision as a sovereign nation.
I'm convinced Hammas and Fatah will concede and deal. We and the
Europeans would make them offers they couldn't refuse.
If they did we would have done our best--and would still withdraw from
the area. You can take a horse to water. . . .
> We definitely have problems in how influence is created and distributed,
> but I don't see Israel as being any more to blame than a myriad of other
> organizations.
My concern right now is our national embroilment with the entire Muslim
world, not with the influence of Big Pharma and the Gun Lobby. We can
deal with them later. The Muslim thing has become hideously expensive
in just about every way. Contrary to popular belief we aren't fighting
a "war on terror" because they don't like the cut of our jib, or our
religion, or our secular culture. We're having these problems because
of what we have d o n e and continue to d o in the Middle East. I'm
convinced that the thesis put forth by "Anonymous," the high ranking
CIA analyst who wrote "Through Our Enemies' Eyes" is correct. We should
not have "boots on the ground" there. We should not be menacing their
coast lines. We should not support corrupt royalist governments as
against their own people, we should not have more than a cool, correct
diplomatic and business presence on the Arabian Peninsula and above all
we should change our relationship with Israel to that of protecting her
genuine core interests rather than of being her enabler in the
oppression of surrounding peoples. Nothing has damaged our reputation
among 1.3 billion Muslims more than that. A large part of the problem
is that we have actually lost touch with our own interests. We have put
those of a third class power with at best regional interests ahead of
our own. Our interests are global.
I truly believe that independence and 1967 borders with only tiny and
truly practical adjustments plus American and European aid will settle
it with the Palestinians. Even with Hammas. They are men and women just
like the rest of us. They want a settlement. But they have not been
able to generate any significant clout opposite the Israelis, and how
could they from their vantage point of life in refugee camps under
occupation for 40 years with us pouring billions and endless weapons
into Israel? Terrorism was the only hope they had of forcing the
Israelis to relent, to abandon the occupied territories. After all
that's how the Zionist Irgun drove the Brits out of the UN Mandate. I
see it as the only military response possible to them and think it is
self-defeating for us to moralize about it on behalf of our Israeli
clients. We should recognize Hammas as the legitimate, elected
government of the Palestinian people. We should invite their
ambassadors to Washington. This would send the right message at long
last to the entire Muslim world to say nothing of the israelis.
> >> There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
> >> Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
> >> embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
> >> We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
I couldn't agree more. But how and where "must" we support our values?
We as a nation haven't looked into that question carefully as it
relates to the Muslim world. Bush has got it dead wrong. One of my
desiderata is that we turn the tables enough so that it is they who
have to come to us, not vice versa. We can do that only by successfully
disengaging.
> >>
> >> Recall that the Saudis have been financing the development of this rabid
> >> form of Islam for years. Originally, as opposition to communism, but now
> >> its turned around toward us.
> >
> > I think the doctrine you describe could have us at war with the Muslim
> > world virtually forever. America mistakes its legitimate destiny when
> > it is seen as a modern version of the Crusades.
> >
>
> You're misreading what I wrote. The religious aspect is (almost) all from
> the Muslim world. The west just wants to do business, i.e. siphon off all
> the oil. All we really need to do is sit back and let modern communications -
> radio, tv, movies - do their work, eroding the religious strictures.
Yes, but we should not be seen as concerning ourselves with their
religious strictures. Let their modernist and medieval dragons devour
each other, Al Queda vs. King Abdullah--that's their business. We need
to keep a polite, correct distance. The US has now fought three
essentially anti-Muslim wars in the Middle east in the last fifteen
years. None of them was necessary. None of them has benefitted us.
Nation-building in Iraq much less Afghanistan has been ludicrous from
the beginning.
I'm resisting the impulse to ask where you get these always apposite
quotes.
Hunter
Joel Olson
I see no debt here, except possibly some apologies for the KKK and the
skinheads. Germany and Russia and Poland may be held liable, by modern
standards, as the worst offenders, but historians have not condemned
other exterminators, nor those who failed in the attempt.
It seems to me you see us owing more of a debt to Palestine.
> The American interest is in an Israeli/Palestinian settlement so that
> we can lower our profile in that part of the Middle East and begin
> reducing unnecessary tensions with the Muslim world. We're paying much
> too large a price for this embroilment. It's been going on for almost
> 40 years. There is certainly no light at the end of the tunnel. I
> believe that the wall now under construction will not settle the
> matter. I've looked carefully at the maps. Most of it is a
> hyper-gerrymandered land grab described as a security necessity. So
> long as we support that we won't be able achieve our primary interest,
> a settlement. So what if the Israeli government wants to annex that
> land? They shouldn't be able to do it and be supported by us at the
> same time.
>
So your basic position is that we should withdraw from the Middle East.
Recall that we forced the Japanese to enter WWII by cutting off their
supply of oil from the Middle East. It is certainly in our interest that
this NOT happen to us.
> I would offer Israel a choice: 1967 borders with tiny changes;
> recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state; both to be done
> unilaterally within a year--and without destroying the infrastructure
> and homes built with our money on the West Bank. If they agree we would
> broker a defense alliance with US, Nato and European great powers
> guaranteeing Isreal's sovereign independence. Along with that would go
> certain aid packages for a term of years and for so long thereafter as
> we deem necessary.
>
No carrot. They are to give up what self-sufficiency they have to lean
on a weak reed?
> If it is rejected we would begin de-escalation of the relationship,
> financially, militarily and diplomatically. Three years and "out" as
> Tim might put it would be a pretty good time frame.
>
> If the Israeli's choose to be hairy-chested about it, it's their
> decision as a sovereign nation.
>
A paper stick. The military-industrial complex won't allow it. Israel is
too good a customer.
> I'm convinced Hammas and Fatah will concede and deal. We and the
> Europeans would make them offers they couldn't refuse.
>
Such as?
They've already refused a number of reasonable offers and now that
Syrian-based Hamas is running Palestine ...
> If they did we would have done our best--and would still withdraw from
> the area. You can take a horse to water. . . .
>
So again, no teeth.
They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of the
people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
To believe they want to settle is wishful thinking.
>>>> There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
>>>> Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
>>>> embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
>>>> We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
>
> I couldn't agree more. But how and where "must" we support our values?
> We as a nation haven't looked into that question carefully as it
> relates to the Muslim world. Bush has got it dead wrong. One of my
> desiderata is that we turn the tables enough so that it is they who
> have to come to us, not vice versa. We can do that only by successfully
> disengaging.
>
True, we've not been consistent in supporting democracies over dictatorships.
We should be more so.
It would be nice if the Iraqis do manage to work out some democratic features,
despite the total screw-ups by the Bush administration. Civil liberties, for
instance.
The only reason Arabs would have to "come to us" is for arms. We have to go
to them for oil. Withdrawal and isolationism is not the way to go.
>>>> Recall that the Saudis have been financing the development of this rabid
>>>> form of Islam for years. Originally, as opposition to communism, but now
>>>> its turned around toward us.
>>>
>>> I think the doctrine you describe could have us at war with the Muslim
>>> world virtually forever. America mistakes its legitimate destiny when
>>> it is seen as a modern version of the Crusades.
>>>
>> You're misreading what I wrote. The religious aspect is (almost) all from
>> the Muslim world. The west just wants to do business, i.e. siphon off all
>> the oil. All we really need to do is sit back and let modern communications -
>> radio, tv, movies - do their work, eroding the religious strictures.
>
> Yes, but we should not be seen as concerning ourselves with their
> religious strictures. Let their modernist and medieval dragons devour
> each other, Al Queda vs. King Abdullah--that's their business. We need
> to keep a polite, correct distance. The US has now fought three
> essentially anti-Muslim wars in the Middle east in the last fifteen
> years. None of them was necessary. None of them has benefitted us.
> Nation-building in Iraq much less Afghanistan has been ludicrous from
> the beginning.
>
> I'm resisting the impulse to ask where you get these always apposite
> quotes.
>
> Hunter
>
While reading anything, I keep an eye out for well written line, the concise
statement of an idea, the novel insight. They then go into the quote file.
And I plagiarize like hell. And then quote them out of context.
(File available on request, 2.08M)
--------------
She had a pretty gift for quotation, which is a serviceable substitute for wit. - W.
Maugham
--------------
coaste...@yahoo.com
But earlier you suggested that I was ready to abandon Israel or some
such thing. I would give her options that were in no sense bluff. She
would have difficult choices to make.
Have you looked at The Black Book of Communism written by five European
historians? I think all the 20th Century exterminators have been
censured by the history profession, from the Turks to the Russians to
the Iraqis.
> It seems to me you see us owing more of a debt to Palestine.
The oppression of the Jews in Europe was primarily a Christian
endeavor, or at least it was justified by Christian doctrine. That goes
back to some of the early saints of the Church of Rome. We're a part of
that tradition. As far as the Palestinians are concerned, isn't it
clear that they have suffered far more than the Israelis since 1948 and
that it would have been far more difficult for the latter to accomplish
it without our lavish aid? Any humanist has to count the victims and
treat them with equal dignity.
>
>
>
>
> > The American interest is in an Israeli/Palestinian settlement so that
> > we can lower our profile in that part of the Middle East and begin
> > reducing unnecessary tensions with the Muslim world. We're paying much
> > too large a price for this embroilment. It's been going on for almost
> > 40 years. There is certainly no light at the end of the tunnel. I
> > believe that the wall now under construction will not settle the
> > matter. I've looked carefully at the maps. Most of it is a
> > hyper-gerrymandered land grab described as a security necessity. So
> > long as we support that we won't be able achieve our primary interest,
> > a settlement. So what if the Israeli government wants to annex that
> > land? They shouldn't be able to do it and be supported by us at the
> > same time.
> >
>
> So your basic position is that we should withdraw from the Middle East.
> Recall that we forced the Japanese to enter WWII by cutting off their
> supply of oil from the Middle East. It is certainly in our interest that
> this NOT happen to us.
Withdraw militarily, yes. Lower our profile, yes. But I'm not
extremist. We would have trade contacts, embassies, and friendly,
correct relations. If we quit intruding in their affairs and treating
them with disrespect they would have no reason to stop selling us oil.
It would be an irrational act. At present they have grievances.
> > I would offer Israel a choice: 1967 borders with tiny changes;
> > recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state; both to be done
> > unilaterally within a year--and without destroying the infrastructure
> > and homes built with our money on the West Bank. If they agree we would
> > broker a defense alliance with US, Nato and European great powers
> > guaranteeing Isreal's sovereign independence. Along with that would go
> > certain aid packages for a term of years and for so long thereafter as
> > we deem necessary.
> >
>
> No carrot. They are to give up what self-sufficiency they have to lean
> on a weak reed?
They've already eaten our entire carrot supply. They are given a choice
which is consistent with the American national interest. What's been
going on since 1967 is obviously inconsistent with it. Look what's
happened: a huge drain of treasure which is completely at odds with
common sense; three wars in 15 years, two of them ongoing and
stalemated; the trashing of our economy; the militarization of security
matters with the people having almost no idea what's going on behind
the scenes; the destruction of our reputation world-wide. One can go
on. They are leaning on us now, big time. It's time they stood up.
> > If it is rejected we would begin de-escalation of the relationship,
> > financially, militarily and diplomatically. Three years and "out" as
> > Tim might put it would be a pretty good time frame.
> >
> > If the Israeli's choose to be hairy-chested about it, it's their
> > decision as a sovereign nation.
> >
>
> A paper stick. The military-industrial complex won't allow it. Israel is
> too good a customer.
They use our money to buy that stuff. If the military-industrial
complex is that strong I vote for giving the three billion directly to
them. At least that won't piss off 1.3 billion Muslims.
> > I'm convinced Hammas and Fatah will concede and deal. We and the
> > Europeans would make them offers they couldn't refuse.
> Such as?
Such as a good part of the foreign aid that now goes to Israel.
> They've already refused a number of reasonable offers and now that
> Syrian-based Hamas is running Palestine ...
The offers haven't been reasonable. The key is the 1967 borders.
> > If they did we would have done our best--and would still withdraw from
> > the area. You can take a horse to water. . . .
> So again, no teeth.
The teeth is in our credible and determined refusal to play the game
any more. We would actually withdraw if they didn't strike the deal.
We're both speculating about the future, making semi-educated guesses
about cause and effect. I have a plan though. And the present situation
is obviously bankrupt. The plan holds out the hope of getting back onto
solid ground with the world's Muslims and at the same time protecting
Israel's core interests. I can't imagine continuing indefinitely down
the same path we're presently following. Iran is just one of the
symbolic problems we will have to face one after another.
> >>>> There is a lot of contradiction in values between Islam and the West.
> >>>> Rights vs. authoritarianism. We must support our values, and those who
> >>>> embody them. It looks like religious conflict, but its only one-sided.
> >>>> We're less "Christians" than "Moderns", i.e. liberals.
> >
> > I couldn't agree more. But how and where "must" we support our values?
> > We as a nation haven't looked into that question carefully as it
> > relates to the Muslim world. Bush has got it dead wrong. One of my
> > desiderata is that we turn the tables enough so that it is they who
> > have to come to us, not vice versa. We can do that only by successfully
> > disengaging.
> >
>
> True, we've not been consistent in supporting democracies over dictatorships.
> We should be more so.
>
> It would be nice if the Iraqis do manage to work out some democratic features,
> despite the total screw-ups by the Bush administration. Civil liberties, for
> instance.
I'd like to see the whole world benefit from them but America's Messiah
complex is self-defeating. For the most part these disparate peoples
are going to have to generate their own institutions. They have a long
history of getting real hostile when we attempt the export of our
political culture. The Brits should have learned that lesson in the 20s
and 30s in Misopotamia. We will wish them well but can't fight their
battles for them. The writ of Mr. Karzai doesn't reach beyond the
outskirts of Kabul. In the country side we rule the day and hole up at
night. We can conquer any given square mile of turf we choose. But they
don't stay conquered. Commiting to nation building in Afghanistan was
the most profoundly stupid move in the last century of American foreign
policy.
>
> The only reason Arabs would have to "come to us" is for arms. We have to go
> to them for oil. Withdrawal and isolationism is not the way to go.
Where has our intrusive policy gotten us?
Thanks, I'll collect them day by day. I certainly enjoy them. And I'm
amazed at how germane many of them are to the subjects at hand.
Lynne
finger and getting too intense.
Whatever happened to good ol' crotch humor -- in tents?
coaste...@yahoo.com
Exactly: something new. I'll be back off the grid for three months as
of Wednesday anyhow.
High Miles
Older people don't get into tents in the way that youngsters do.
And we haven't checked out Tim's brother's attitude toward smut yet .
At least he's not a vegetarian. He eats and enjoys proper foods.
High Miles
Sounds like that might be a relief for you.
Bill
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152409795.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
>> That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of the
>> people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
>>
reservations. That will only take another fifty or sixty years.
Bill
"Lynne" <LHRi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1152486583.5...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, all these discussions are causing too much wear on my scrolling
> finger and getting too intense.
>
>
> Whatever happened to good ol' crotch humor -- in tents?
>
Remember the good old days where we highlighted everything but what we were
reacting to, clicked the right hand mouse button and selected "cut" from the
drop-down menu?
Bill
"High Miles" <2Blu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5-WdnZrmv63ZOizZ...@comcast.com...
Since were back to food now, remember that raspberry patch I said would
produce a pint a day? I got two and half quarts yesterday and today. I can
only eat about a pint a day so I'm freezing the rest.
Joel Olson
In a way, I admire the Israeli's restraint. By historical standards, they'd
just wipe the losers out.
--------------
War never leaves a nation where it found it. - E. Burke
--------------
High Miles
> Bill wrote:
>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1152409795.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>>> They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
>>>> That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of the
>>>> people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
>>>>
>> Do you suppose they are following our lead? Kick their ass and put
>> them on reservations. That will only take another fifty or sixty years.
>>
>
> In a way, I admire the Israeli's restraint. By historical standards, they'd
> just wipe the losers out.
>
>
friends.
Bill
> Joel Olson wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1152409795.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
>>>>> That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of
>>>>> the
>>>>> people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
>>>>>
>>> Do you suppose they are following our lead? Kick their ass and put them
>>> on reservations. That will only take another fifty or sixty years.
>>>
>>
>> In a way, I admire the Israeli's restraint. By historical standards,
>> they'd
>> just wipe the losers out.
>>
>>
> Give 'em time................................and resources from their
> friends.
>>
working here.
tim
>> Bill wrote:
>>> <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1152409795.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
>>>>> That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of
>>>>> the
>>>>> people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
>>>>>
>>> Do you suppose they are following our lead? Kick their ass and put them
>>> on reservations. That will only take another fifty or sixty years.
>>>
>>
>> In a way, I admire the Israeli's restraint. By historical standards,
>> they'd
>> just wipe the losers out.
>>
>>
> Give 'em time................................and resources from their
> friends.
I keep worrying about the troubles we assume when we declare someone "under
our nuclear umbrella". We can't simultaneously argue for nuclear
non-proliferation while threatening other nations with nuclear anhiliation.
What a stupid idea. No one takes you seriously when you talk like that.
tim
"Bill" <bi...@home.now> wrote in message
Hamas, K Street's Largest and Most Successful Lobbying Firm. Just think of
the money that'll roll in.
coaste...@yahoo.com
It's always a relief to retreat from the gratuitous buzz of mankind.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Joel Olson wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1152409795.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> >>> They don't want to just return to the 1967 borders. They want it all.
> >>> That is their declared national purpose, supported by a majority of the
> >>> people in a recent election. They are an aggressor nation.
> >>>
> > Do you suppose they are following our lead? Kick their ass and put them on
> > reservations. That will only take another fifty or sixty years.
> >
>
> In a way, I admire the Israeli's restraint. By historical standards, they'd
> just wipe the losers out.
What's admirable about preferring three billion a year?
coaste...@yahoo.com
Maybe the analogy might be found in the Bantustans of southern Africa.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Exactly. One of the ways to quit worrying about "proliferation" would
be to gift nukes to every government, world wide. Then we'd come to an
understanding that any country which used them would have its entire
gene pool obliterated by everyone else. After all, once nuclear weapons
were spread beyond the US they were never used again.
>
> >> --------------
> >> War never leaves a nation where it found it. - E. Burke
> >> --------------
A very great man, Burke.
Joel Olson
A couple of our Congresspersons were saying we should give some to Japan.
--------------
Japanese organizations are actually very slow to respond in a crisis. Their
decision-making relies on precedents, and when a situation is unprecedented, people
are uncertain how to behave. - M. Crichton
--------------
coaste...@yahoo.com
Let's see now, the fact that I've not yet gotten over Pearl Harbor is
relevant. So is the fact that they've never gotten over Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. Upon reflection I've gotta vote no.
Adios, H.