Europe slipping back into Anti-Jew Fascism
RWB
The United States has said Europe must do more to tackle
a resurgence of anti-Semitism around the world. /snip/
In a message read, [ by former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani ]
to the conference urged countries to "ensure that anti-Semitism is
excluded from school text books, official statements,
official television programming and official publications".
Last month, the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre
said attacks on Jews had reached the highest level since
World War II.
As well as physical attacks on Jews, many countries have
reported vandalism of synagogues and Jewish cemeteries.
from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3004408.stm
====================
Europe, the birthplace of Nazis and Fascism. No wonder
Europe backs Saddam and bin Laden.
Winston Smith, American Patriot
> Europe warned on anti-Semitism
>
> The United States has said Europe must do more to tackle
> a resurgence of anti-Semitism around the world. /snip/
>
> In a message read, [ by former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani ]
> to the conference urged countries to "ensure that anti-Semitism is
> excluded from school text books, official statements,
> official television programming and official publications".
>
> Last month, the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre
> said attacks on Jews had reached the highest level since
> World War II.
>
> As well as physical attacks on Jews, many countries have
> reported vandalism of synagogues and Jewish cemeteries.
>
> from:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3004408.stm
NOTE FOR THE EDIFICATION OF THE READER:
Examples of anti-Semitism include but are not limited to the following:
(1) any criticism of any policy of the state of Israel
(a) includes criticism of the policy of Israel to murder
Palestinian Arabs in the Occupied Territories. That means
ALL ARABS: mothers and their infants, the elderly, small children
(b) includes criticism of the policy tearing down Palestinian homes for
the confiscate the land for building of settlements
(c) includes criticism of the policy of settlement building and its
justification ("to claim the deed given by God")
(2) any criticism of people involved in making policy of the state of
Israel, or referring to them by terms you may think to be truthfully
descriptive (such as "anti-Arab/anti-Muslim bigot")
(a) ESPECIALLY includes criticism of the
statements/remarks/comments/musings of Ariel Sharon, or references to him
or depictions of him as a "war criminal" or sadist
(b) includes criticism of the advisers, associates and assistants of
Sharon
(3) any criticism of Jewish-American groups or their philosophies or
policies, including criticism of the advocacy of the genocide, cultural
or otherwise, of Arab and Muslim peoples
(4) the listing of examples of what anti-Semitism includes but is not
limited to
Nicolas Benicoeur
> to the conference urged countries to "ensure that anti-Semitism is
> excluded from school text books, official statements,
> official television programming and official publications".
The rise in anti-Semitism is a direct result of Israeli apartheid and ethnic
cleansing in the occupied territories. Its pretty hard to speak passionately
about concentration camps, ghettoes and the destruction of houses and
property when the ZioNazi Army are doing it 'live' on satellite TV.
Sam Fisher
100percent of middle eastern arabs are semitic, so what the fuck are these
people talking about
--
Music for the free:
http://www.lajkofelix.hu/press/english.php
"RWB" <r...@redwhiteblue.org> wrote in message
news:iuouy8i8i8G...@redwhiteblue.org...
Russell Ranshaw
>The United States has said Europe must do more to tackle
a resurgence of anti-Semitism around the world. /snip/>
Antisemitism is the fault of the USA. Let the US fix the problem.
--
------------------------------------
So many idiots, so few comets.
neptune3
wrote:
> Europe warned on anti-Semitism
>
>The United States has said Europe must do more to tackle
>a resurgence of anti-Semitism around the world. /snip/
>
The Jews say it is fine to consider a country an enemy. People can
think
Iraq is their enemy and no one says that is outrageous. They may argue
whether Iraq is really an enemy or not, but they don't just dismiss
the idea of enemies out of hand.
Then the Jews say that it is not OK to be against a group that is
not
a country, such as the Jews. Jews say only countries can be enemies
and we
should never fight our real enemies, who are the Jews themselves.
A Jew said the French were "cheese eating surrender monkeys". Why
can't the
French howl "anti-French" like the Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because
the French don't
control the media, Jews do.
"[Non-Jews] have to realize that the Jews in the U.S. control the
entire information and propaganda machine, the large newspapers, the
motion pictures, radio and television, and the big companies. And
there is a force that we have to take into consideration."
--U.S. President Richard Nixon, as noted in the book Anti-Semitism in
America by Leonard Dinnerstein, pp. 232-233
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
Spooky Cheese
<sam0f...@yahhhooo.com> wrote:
>90 percent of jews are ashkenazi ie non-semitic people, like myself.
>100percent of middle eastern arabs are semitic, so what the fuck are these
>people talking about?
Exactl;y that, anti-semitism, such as Arab racial profiling by police
forces, institutionalised anti-semitism by rounding up Arabs and
holding them in custody without any rights, or knowing why they are
held, and preventing them from seeing either their family or even a
lawyer.
Unfortunately, the United States in this regard is one of the most
anti-semitic nation on Earth.
The Prisoner
\
Fine. Redefine words any way you like. You after all are the boss.
But as to your comments. We in the US take notes.
Arabs and Islams blow shit up hijack aircraft and dream of bridge
collapses and train derailments.
Jews here don't seem to be engaged in that activity.
The Islam activity though is showing itself to be an organized
worldwide activity. These detainees are potential espionage agents and
saboreurs. Fuck em.
6
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
>
>
>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:43:42 GMT, "Sam Fisher"
>> <sam0f...@yahhhooo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>90 percent of jews are ashkenazi ie non-semitic people, like myself.
>>>100percent of middle eastern arabs are semitic, so what the fuck are these
>>>people talking about?
>>
>>
>> Exactl;y that, anti-semitism, such as Arab racial profiling by police
>> forces, institutionalised anti-semitism by rounding up Arabs and
>> holding them in custody without any rights, or knowing why they are
>> held, and preventing them from seeing either their family or even a
>> lawyer.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the United States in this regard is one of the most
>> anti-semitic nation on Earth.
>
>\
>Fine. Redefine words any way you like. You after all are the boss.
> But as to your comments. We in the US take notes.
>Arabs and Islams blow shit up hijack aircraft and dream of bridge
>collapses and train derailments.
"Arabs and Muslims" ?
You should be careful with that vocabulary. A third of Arabs in the
United States are Christians, mostly Orthodox, and many Catholics, of
which I myself am one. Most Muslims in the world are not even Arabs.
>Jews here don't seem to be engaged in that activity.
Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
conflict.
> The Islam activity though is showing itself to be an organized
>worldwide activity. These detainees are potential espionage agents and
>saboreurs. Fuck em.
You cannot paint the entire world's Islamic population, or even the
Islamic population in the United States, with as wide a brush. It
would be like our tourists and residents in foreign countries being
arrested for membership of the Ku Klux Klan (which has more adherents
in the United States than Islamic terrorists worldwide, BTW, with the
Klan having nearly 5 million members). We are talking about a VERY
small proportion of foreign nationals in our country that are involved
in these activities, less than a hundredth of one percent of them.
Last I checked there were 10 million Muslims in our country.
The Prisoner
Spooky Cheese wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:06:52 GMT, The Prisoner <#6...@TehVillage.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:43:42 GMT, "Sam Fisher"
>>><sam0f...@yahhhooo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>90 percent of jews are ashkenazi ie non-semitic people, like myself.
>>>>100percent of middle eastern arabs are semitic, so what the fuck are these
>>>>people talking about?
>>>
>>>
>>>Exactl;y that, anti-semitism, such as Arab racial profiling by police
>>>forces, institutionalised anti-semitism by rounding up Arabs and
>>>holding them in custody without any rights, or knowing why they are
>>>held, and preventing them from seeing either their family or even a
>>>lawyer.
>>>
>>>Unfortunately, the United States in this regard is one of the most
>>>anti-semitic nation on Earth.
>>
>>\
>>Fine. Redefine words any way you like. You after all are the boss.
>> But as to your comments. We in the US take notes.
>>Arabs and Islams blow shit up hijack aircraft and dream of bridge
>>collapses and train derailments.
>
>
> "Arabs and Muslims" ?
Well yes . They are not always one and the same.I admit it's tricky.
>
> You should be careful with that vocabulary. A third of Arabs in the
> United States are Christians, mostly Orthodox, and many Catholics, of
> which I myself am one. Most Muslims in the world are not even Arabs.
A fact of which we have become aware. Obviously of the 1.2 billion
muslims on earth they are not all arabs nor are all arabs muslims and
not all of them are terrorists or share this new world view.. OK.
But Arabs and muslims of varied ethnicity account for , shall we say, an
inordinate amount of what we would consider terorist avtivitir=es around
the world. And this around the world part is pretty important to an
understanding of the situation.
>
>
>>Jews here don't seem to be engaged in that activity.
>
>
> Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
> attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
> conflict.
That sounds good but it is not true.
Many Arab nations have handsomely profited from the Anerican use of oil,
ther only serious export.
And who rushed to the aid of Kuwait and Saudi whenn they were threatened?
We give aid to Egypt and Jordan as you know, and finance Mrs. arafat's
Parisian excursions.
Except for their crazy TV Qatar seems friendly enough?
And if they think we are going to just dump Israel to make them happy
they are deluded.
>
>
>> The Islam activity though is showing itself to be an organized
>>worldwide activity. These detainees are potential espionage agents and
>>saboreurs. Fuck em.
>
>
> You cannot paint the entire world's Islamic population, or even the
> Islamic population in the United States, with as wide a brush.
I am not. I am painting those who rise into the radar of the authorities
as terrorists, helpers or sympathizers. And those skulking below the
radar as well.
It is you who must distinguish between the radical world domination
inspired muslims such as the members and admirers of Al Qaeda and the
normal folks like yourself. We are coming to terms with that despite our
legitimate fear. I live in NJ. There has been very very little violent
backlash here. It is not the American way. Nobody is going to do
anything to you if you are an honest person who can account for yourself
just like the rest of us have to.
It
> would be like our tourists and residents in foreign countries being
> arrested for membership of the Ku Klux Klan (which has more adherents
> in the United States than Islamic terrorists worldwide, BTW, with the
> Klan having nearly 5 million members).
If the Klan were declaring war on them and blowing shit up in their
countries
and hijacking ttheir aircraft, then arrest the fucks!
We are talking about a VERY
> small proportion of foreign nationals in our country that are involved
> in these activities, less than a hundredth of one percent of them.
> Last I checked there were 10 million Muslims in our country.
I dispute your estimates of the sympathizers.
But by your numbers that is 10,000 terrorists running around the USA.
Buddy! That's a problem.
That is a law enforcement crisis. at least!
What do you think? all those trains derailed themselves last summer?
6
neptune3
<donteve...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>conflict.
>
Jews are not allies but our tyrannical rulers.
Liberating America From Israel
by Paul Findley
Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused
to
help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express
this
conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the
catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during the
past
35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until
Israel
withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any
determined
president-even President Bush this very day-could prevail and win
overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by laying these
facts
before the American people:
Israel's present government, like its predecessors, is determined to
annex
the West Bank-biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become
Greater
Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli
politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater
Israel is a
reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed,
aggressive, and
influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined
to
prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West
Bank.
In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel uses the pretext of
eradicating terrorism, but its forces are actually engaged advancing
the
territorial expansion just cited. Under the guise of anti-terrorism,
Israeli
forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle. With due process nowhere
to be
found, hundreds are detained for long periods and most are tortured.
Some
are assassinated. Homes, orchards, and business places are destroyed.
Entire
cities are kept under intermittent curfew, some confinements lasting
for
weeks. Injured or ill Palestinians needing emergency medical care are
routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many children are
undernourished. The West Bank and Gaza have become giant concentration
camps. None of this could have occurred without U.S. support. Perhaps
Israeli officials believe life will become so unbearable that most
Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral homes.
Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
most
countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
violations of
the United Nations Charter, international law, and the precepts of all
major
religious faiths.
How did the American people get into this fix?
Nine-eleven had its principal origin 35 years ago when Israel's U.S.
lobby
began its unbroken success in stifling debate about the proper U.S.
role in
the Arab-Israeli conflict and effectively concealed from public
awareness
the fact that the U.S. government gives massive uncritical support to
Israel.
Thanks to the suffocating influence of Israel's U.S. lobby, open
discussion
of the Arab-Israeli conflict has been non-existent in our government
all
these years. I have firsthand knowledge, because I was a member of the
House
of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee in June 1967 when Israeli
military forces took control of the Golan Heights, a part of Syria, as
well
as the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza. I continued as a member for 16
years
and to this day maintain a close watch on Congress.
For 35 years, not a word has been expressed in that committee or in
either
chamber of Congress that deserves to be called debate on Middle East
policy.
No restrictive or limiting amendments on aid to Israel have been
offered for
20 years, and none of the few offered in previous years received more
than a
handful of votes. On Capitol Hill, criticism of Israel, even in
private
conversation, is all but forbidden, treated as downright unpatriotic,
if not
anti-Semitic. The continued absence of free speech was assured when
those
few who spoke out-Senators Adlai Stevenson and Charles Percy, and
Reps. Paul
"Pete" McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard, and myself-were
defeated
at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel forces.
As a result, legislation dealing with the Middle East has been heavily
biased in favor of Israel and against Palestinians and other Arabs
year
after year. Home constituencies, misled by news coverage equally
lop-sided
in Israel's favor, remain largely unaware that Congress behaves as if
it
were a subcommittee of the Israeli parliament.
However, the bias is widely noted beyond America, where most news
media
candidly cover Israel's conquest and generally excoriate America's
complicity and complacency. When President Bush welcomed Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon, sometimes called the Butcher of Beirut, as "my
dear
friend" and "a man of peace" after Israeli forces, using U.S.-donated
arms,
completed their devastation of the West Bank last spring, worldwide
anger
against American policy reached the boiling point.
The fury should surprise no one who reads foreign newspapers or
listens to
BBC. In several televised statements long before 9/11, Osama bin
Laden,
believed by U.S. authorities to have masterminded 9/11, cited U.S.
complicity in Israel's destruction of Palestinian society as a
principal
complaint. Prominent foreigners, in and out of government, express
their
opposition to U.S. policies with unprecedented frequency and severity,
especially since Bush announced his determination to make war against
Iraq.
The lobby's intimidation remains pervasive. It seems to reach every
government center and even houses of worship and revered institutions
of
higher learning. It is highly effective in silencing the many U.S.
Jews who
object to the lobby's tactics and Israel's brutality...
Today, a year after 9/11, President Bush has made no attempt to
redress
grievances, or even to identify them. In fact, he has made the scene
far
worse by supporting Israel's religious war against Palestinians, an
alliance
that has intensified anti-American anger. He seems oblivious to the
fact
that nearly two billion people worldwide regard the plight of
Palestinians
as today's most important foreign-policy challenge. No one in
authority will
admit a calamitous reality that is skillfully shielded from the
American
people but clearly recognized by most of the world: America suffered
9/11
and its aftermath and may soon be at war with Iraq, mainly because
U.S.
policy in the Middle East is made in Israel, not in Washington.
Israel is a scofflaw nation and should be treated as such. Instead of
helping Sharon intensify Palestinian misery, our president should
suspend
all aid until Israel ends its occupation of Arab land Israel seized in
1967.
The suspension would force Sharon's compliance or lead to his removal
from
office, as the Israeli electorate will not tolerate a prime minister
who is
at odds with the White House.
If Bush needs an additional reason for doing the right thing, he can
justify
the suspension as a matter of military necessity, an essential step in
winning international support for his war on terrorism. He can cite a
worthy
precedent. When President Abraham Lincoln issued the proclamation that
freed
only the slaves in states that were then in rebellion, he make the
restriction because of "military necessity."
If Bush suspends U.S. aid, he will liberate all Americans from long
years of
bondage to Israel's misdeeds.
Mr. Paul Findley, who served as a Republican congressman from Illinois
for
22 years, is the author of 'They Dare to Speak Out' and a member of
the
American Educational Trust's Foreign Relations Committee.
Also See: http://www.stop-us-military-aid-to-israel.net/
Citizens for Fair Legislation ALERT: NO NEW AID TO ISRAEL
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/01/1556560.php
Congressman Paul Findley: Liberating America From Israel
http://www.mediamonitors.net/findley2.html
Pat Buchanan: Why Politicians Prefer Israel over American
Interest?
http://amconmag.com/01_13_03/buchanan7.html
Israeli Minister - 'We've Become Barbarians'
http://rense.com/general33/become.htm
Wales Politician Compares Apartheid Israel to Nazi Germany
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/page.cfm?objectid=12498073
&method=full&siteid=50082
Israel's image of liberal democracy takes a battering
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/04/wisr04.xml&s
Sheet=/news/2003/01/04/ixworld.html
Israel Bans Christian Politician and Party from Election
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1845530.stm
Israel to Expel Christian Politician and non-Jewish Parties from
Knesset
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,866348,00.html
Row over Arabs' election ban
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/01/wisr01.
xml&sSheet=/news/2003/01/01/ixnewstop.html
How Americas Zionist controlled media spin the facts.
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/98414_comment.php
American Media Controlled by Israeli Supporters
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Eric+Alterman+MSNBC+Israel&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT
F-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3caaa1d0_1%40news.tm.net.my&rnum=1
The Myth of Barak's Generous Offer
http://fair.org/extra/0207/generous.html
Direct Financial Cost of Israel to US: $1.6 trillion and
growing
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html
MAKING MERCHANDISE OUT OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD: SELLING THE UPCOMING
WAR IN
IRAQ http://www.endtimesnetwork.com/m2_s1.html
Zionism Unbound - Vidal Gored 16 Years Ago
http://www.rense.com/general32/unbound.htm
'It's Time To Get Tough With Israel' - Patriotic US Army Brig
General
http://www.rense.com/general33/tough.htm
Israel's Policy Of 'Covert Aggression'
http://www.rense.com/general31/ze.htm
ISRAEL'S SACRED TERRORISM
http://abbc.com/historia/zionism/rokach.html
The Men From JINSA and CSP
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&c=1&s=vest
JINSA Behind Drive To Cover-Up Israeli Spy Scandal
http://rense.com/general18/JINSA.HTM
Christian Coalition Abandonment of Palestinian Christians is
Hypocritical http://www.mediamonitors.net/sherri64.html
Where does world-famous televangelist's money go?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/845747.asp#BODY
Christian Patriarch of Holy Land calls for end of Oppressive
Israeli
occupation http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2604761.stm
Zionism versus the Bible - Peace and Jutice on Earth or the
Extremism of
the 'Christian' Right? http://www.mediamonitors.net/williamson4.html
THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE - Christianity & The NWO
http://www.rense.com/general20/unholy.htm
No Joy in Bethlehem
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,865083,00.html
'Saddest Christmas Ever' in Bethlehem
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=021225&cat=news&st=newsmideas
tdc
For Unbiased News, visit:
http://www.commondreams.org
http://www.rense.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
http://www.independent.co.uk/
http://www.thenation.com/
http://www.mediamonitors.net/
http://www.antiwar.com/
http://www.fair.org/
http://www.counterpunch.com/
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.progressive.org/
http://www.yellowtimes.org/
http://www.latimes.com/
For Good Analysis and Commentary, visit:
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/
http://www.robert-fisk.com/
http://www.iacenter.org/
http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm
http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h-col.html
http://www.nader.org/public_interest.html
http://reese.king-online.com/
http://fair.org/media-beat/
http://avnery-news.co.il/english/
Please distribute....
The Prisoner
neptune3 wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:35:04 -0400, Spooky Cheese
> <donteve...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>>conflict.
>>
>
> Jews are not allies but our tyrannical rulers.
So Spooky? here's the short hurdle.(Not trying to interrogate you or
anything)
How do you feel about all that sniPped stuff?
6
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:35:04 -0400, Spooky Cheese
><donteve...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>>conflict.
>>
> Jews are not allies but our tyrannical rulers.
>
>Liberating America From Israel
>
>by Paul Findley
I'd like to note, though, that while the argumentation is sound, I'd
like to see some corroboration of the allegations of Washington
corruption regarding foreign policy towards Israel. While It's no
secret that "We the People" don't run the nation as much as special
interests lobbies do, thus threatening the very concept of democracy
-- as opposed to oligarchy -- I'd like to see members of both the
Republican and Democratic parties speak out. This is too important an
issue to be relegated to a pathetic "liberals say this - conservatives
say that" debate.
A few quotes from this interesting article.
""Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the
precepts of all major religious faiths."
"However, the bias is widely noted beyond America, where most news
media candidly cover Israel's conquest and generally excoriate
America's complicity and complacency. When President Bush welcomed
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, sometimes called the Butcher of
Beirut, as "my dear friend" and "a man of peace" after Israeli forces,
using U.S.-donated arms, completed their devastation of the West Bank
last spring, worldwide anger against American policy reached the
boiling point."
"Today, a year after 9/11, President Bush has made no attempt to
redress grievances, or even to identify them. In fact, he has made the
scene far worse by supporting Israel's religious war against
Palestinians, an alliance that has intensified anti-American anger. He
seems oblivious to the fact that nearly two billion people worldwide
regard the plight of Palestinians as today's most important
foreign-policy challenge. No one in authority will admit a calamitous
reality that is skillfully shielded from the American people but
clearly recognized by most of the world: America suffered 9/11 and its
aftermath and may soon be at war with Iraq, mainly because U.S. policy
in the Middle East is made in Israel, not in Washington."
This just about sums up the most important aspects that the author
brings up. Very interesting article, thanks for posting. I think it is
extremely important that the author states explicitely that this is
the single most important issue in foreign policy around the world,
and most particularly for people living in Arab States.
If we want to make any headway into curbing Islamic terorism, we may
want to put our guns down, and open our ears to what they are telling
us, and have been telling us for decades: that this is not right.
Religion is merely a pretext for the violence exhibited on September
11th; the real cause is widespread anger. Arabs don't necessarily
agree with the horrific action taken, but they *understand* why it was
done by violent components seen in any society.
People understand this in the streets, in cafés, in teahouses, in
homes, everywhere. And our violent actions since have given the rather
accurate impression that we Americans didn't get it, "the people there
aren't mad, they're just terrorists and they hate us for our
freedoms". By describing the terrorists as irrational, we are making a
great disservice to us; it means we don't have to care why they did
this.
While Timothy MacVeigh was a radical wingnut, Al Qaeda is backed by
massive widespread anger against *us*, and us specifically. They don't
hate our freedoms, they hate for the freedoms we take in their
homeland.
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
>
>
You'll find my response next to the post.
Essentially, I find it interesting, but I'd like some multi-party
corroboration of Washington corruption in favour of Israel. I'd hate
to see this become another tiresome "Dems-against-Repubs" debate. It's
too important an issue, and it's not even being talked about in US
media. It's talked about pretty much anywhere else in the world, and
is the focal point of "anti-Americanism" (Gawd I hate that term
though).
The Prisoner
It was a short hurdle.
You didn't pass it. Sorry. You seem to think we have done
something to these people or that the "palestinian issue' excuses anything.
Wrong on both points. I tell you again that even Arafat has said that
bin laden uses the palestinian casue as a false pretense,
Never nind the blatant anti-semitism.
BZZZZZT!
6
The Prisoner
Spooky Cheese wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:25:10 -0500, neptune3 <np...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:35:04 -0400, Spooky Cheese
>><donteve...@nomail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>>>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>>>conflict.
>>>
>>
>> Jews are not allies but our tyrannical rulers.
>>
>>Liberating America From Israel
>>
>>by Paul Findley
>
> I'd like to note, though, that while the argumentation is sound, I'd
> like to see some corroboration of the allegations of Washington
> corruption regarding foreign policy towards Israel.
Why don't you just give up any pretense of rationality.
Join the Nazi party. Join CI. Join Islamixc jihad.
stop all your pussyfooting about coroboration when you already are hip
deep in believing the lies half truths and distortions of the enemies of
freedom.
6
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
>
>
>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:06:52 GMT, The Prisoner <#6...@TehVillage.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:43:42 GMT, "Sam Fisher"
>>>><sam0f...@yahhhooo.com> wrote:
>> You should be careful with that vocabulary. A third of Arabs in the
>> United States are Christians, mostly Orthodox, and many Catholics, of
>> which I myself am one. Most Muslims in the world are not even Arabs.
>
>A fact of which we have become aware. Obviously of the 1.2 billion
>muslims on earth they are not all arabs nor are all arabs muslims and
>not all of them are terrorists or share this new world view.. OK.
>But Arabs and muslims of varied ethnicity account for , shall we say, an
>inordinate amount of what we would consider terorist avtivitir=es around
>the world. And this around the world part is pretty important to an
>understanding of the situation.
Okay. But we are only concentrating our scope to the current
definition, with current events only. Terrorism has been practised
over and over again throughout history. Wall Street was even bombed
once. The distinction is that terrorism is usually domestic.
Perhaps we should define what terrorism is: a violent act committed
against random innocent civilians/bystanders for the purpose of
achieving a political goal/cause, by terrorising the public at large
into compliance.
As such, by this definition, Israeli soldiers' indiscriminate killings
of civilians hurling rocks is terrorism, while attacking settlers is
not. 9/11 was terrorism; bombing embassies is an iffy, since the
attack was directed against State officials.
Terorism has historically been practised to achieve independance:
Algeria, Israel, and now Palestinians. It has also failed in many
instances, such as in Quebec, Spain, Sri Lanka, Chechnya, I really
can't remember all of them, there are lots of them.
What I want to get to is that there's a huge difference between
domestic terrorism, and Al Qaeda. Domestic terrorism for independance
is, although bloody, a legitimate way for a repressed minority (or in
the case of Palestinians, a majority) to free themselves from their
oppressors / conquerors / colonizers. If it happens now that there are
more Muslims behind these acts, I don't have a problem with that. The
People that founded out country were also willing to die for it. In
the case of the countries I listed, the army they are pitted against
is many times more powerful, so they must rely on "other" tactics. Who
in their right minds would go after the Russian, French, British,
Israelo-American armies with sticks and stones?
There are other domestic terrorism cases where the cause is not
independance, but a radical group. It happened in Japan, Oklahoma
City. It happened when Wall Street was bombed. The Unabomber. Some
suggest the sniper case in the Washington area. Some early on in the
rise of the automobiles would also attack them for fear of technology.
Here again, there's a lot more than that, but I can't seem to remember
now. You cannot reason with them. They are so entangled into their
twisted cause that you have no chance to reach them. Al Qaeda is an
international version of this.
The particularity with Al Qaeda is that their core belief is that they
view themselves as under siege. While their methods are obscene, their
ideology crazed, the basis for its formation lie in events that
surrounds them. You think there's too many Muslim terrorists? They
think too many Muslim countries are subjected to unfair treatment,
from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Sudan, Palestine, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt,
Algeria, Lybia. I suggest this link for a basic chronology::
http://www.zmag.org/shalomhate.htm
So while we have no chance to "strike a deal" with Al Qaeda; the more
we attack, the more will come; the meaner we are, the meaner they will
be; we can however do something about the envoronment which bred it in
the first place. We can show the generous side that all (most)
Americans have. We can institute policies that are fair, not that
reflect our interests or those that lobby our government (i.e. Israel
policy and the AIPAC). Our People, along with other nations like us,
are capable of generosity and good will, as exemplified with the Peace
Corps, Doctors Without Borders, Engineers Without Borders, UNICEF. But
they don't see it. They see Uncle Sam through the barrel of our tanks.
This puts our country at grave risk.
>>>Jews here don't seem to be engaged in that activity.
>>
>>
>> Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>> attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>> conflict.
>
>That sounds good but it is not true.
>Many Arab nations have handsomely profited from the Anerican use of oil,
>ther only serious export.
Nations, not people. We have put in place, or helped put in place,
ruthless dictators that guarantee the flow of oil. The average Saudi
doesn't see a dime from oil exports.
That's the problem: we see their government, not their people. They
see our government, not our people.
>And who rushed to the aid of Kuwait and Saudi whenn they were threatened?
>We give aid to Egypt and Jordan as you know, and finance Mrs. arafat's
>Parisian excursions.
We give nearly as much aid to Israel as we do to Egypt. But Egypt is
12 times more populous. And that doesn't count the technology
transfer, the intelligence, the expertise, that Israel is the sole
benefitor. That money doesn't go to weapons in Egypt. It goes to
economic reform.
>Except for their crazy TV Qatar seems friendly enough?
>
>And if they think we are going to just dump Israel to make them happy
>they are deluded.
It's not about dumping one side or another. It's about being fair. We
back Israel whatever happens..But invading Iraq for WMD and UN
resolution violations, while Israel is still standing, is unfair.
>>> The Islam activity though is showing itself to be an organized
>>>worldwide activity. These detainees are potential espionage agents and
>>>saboreurs. Fuck em.
>>
>>
>> You cannot paint the entire world's Islamic population, or even the
>> Islamic population in the United States, with as wide a brush.
>
>I am not. I am painting those who rise into the radar of the authorities
>as terrorists, helpers or sympathizers. And those skulking below the
>radar as well.
>It is you who must distinguish between the radical world domination
>inspired muslims such as the members and admirers of Al Qaeda and the
>normal folks like yourself. We are coming to terms with that despite our
>legitimate fear. I live in NJ. There has been very very little violent
>backlash here. It is not the American way. Nobody is going to do
>anything to you if you are an honest person who can account for yourself
>just like the rest of us have to.
Very few (VERY VERY few) people endorse Al Qaeda. Very few
fundamentalists endorse Al Qaeda. However, many people understand why
they did that, and I include myself in that long list of people. In
fact, most Arabs I know understand too. We knew something like this
would end up happening. I know, hindsight is 20/20, but it's true.
It's interesting that just a week before September 11th there was a
conference on racism in Durban, South Africa. Third World countries
voted on a declaration that would describe Israel as an apartheid
State. So we decided to boycott the event.
> We are talking about a VERY
>> small proportion of foreign nationals in our country that are involved
>> in these activities, less than a hundredth of one percent of them.
>> Last I checked there were 10 million Muslims in our country.
>
>I dispute your estimates of the sympathizers.
> But by your numbers that is 10,000 terrorists running around the USA.
> Buddy! That's a problem.
>That is a law enforcement crisis. at least!
> What do you think? all those trains derailed themselves last summer?
Not al of them are involved in actions. You need a big organisation to
pull off 9/11. Fund raising, real estate, document forgery, illegal
money transfers, training, endoctrination, recruitment, etc. And
there's various levels of sympathy, and action.
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
>
>
Why don't you consider a former senator a valid source? What
distortions has the author committed? What's so irrational about it?
This is not the first time something like this has been said,
including former Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali on a recent
interview I saw on TV. I just want corroboration of the claims he
makes of what goes on in Washington... what's wrong with that?
The Prisoner
Spooky Cheese wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:07:02 GMT, The Prisoner <#6...@TehVillage.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:06:52 GMT, The Prisoner <#6...@TehVillage.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:43:42 GMT, "Sam Fisher"
>>>>><sam0f...@yahhhooo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>
>>>You should be careful with that vocabulary. A third of Arabs in the
>>>United States are Christians, mostly Orthodox, and many Catholics, of
>>>which I myself am one. Most Muslims in the world are not even Arabs.
>>
>>A fact of which we have become aware. Obviously of the 1.2 billion
>>muslims on earth they are not all arabs nor are all arabs muslims and
>>not all of them are terrorists or share this new world view.. OK.
>>But Arabs and muslims of varied ethnicity account for , shall we say, an
>>inordinate amount of what we would consider terorist avtivitir=es around
>>the world. And this around the world part is pretty important to an
>>understanding of the situation.
>
>
> Okay. But we are only concentrating our scope to the current
> definition, with current events only. Terrorism has been practised
> over and over again throughout history. Wall Street was even bombed
> once. The distinction is that terrorism is usually domestic.
Well that has changed. And when it is local it would seem to be linked
to the international organizations of terror and world domination.
>
> Perhaps we should define what terrorism is: a violent act committed
> against random innocent civilians/bystanders for the purpose of
> achieving a political goal/cause, by terrorising the public at large
> into compliance.
No not through public compliance but outcry against gettting killed all
the time.
>
> As such, by this definition, Israeli soldiers' indiscriminate killings
> of civilians hurling rocks is terrorism, while attacking settlers is
> not. 9/11 was terrorism; bombing embassies is an iffy, since the
> attack was directed against State officials.
Military action is not terrorism. Might be mean but it's not terrorism.
Bombing embassies is exactly terrorism.
>
> Terorism has historically been practised to achieve independance:
> Algeria, Israel, and now Palestinians. It has also failed in many
> instances, such as in Quebec, Spain, Sri Lanka, Chechnya, I really
> can't remember all of them, there are lots of them.
And theyy used to chop heads off too. But it's here now. 2003.
Not going back to Saladin's empire.
Want to talk industrial terror. Look to the Islamic past. Makes the IDF
look like boy scouts.
So let us not argue historical comparisons. It is here and now.
>
> What I want to get to is that there's a huge difference between
> domestic terrorism, and Al Qaeda.
No. One might say that for instance the Balii bombing was domestic in
the casue of an slamic state in Maylasia, but it is alsao Al qaeda
related. Chechnya too. Alll the same thing world over.
Domestic terrorism for independance
> is, although bloody, a legitimate way for a repressed minority (or in
> the case of Palestinians, a majority) to free themselves from their
> oppressors / conquerors / colonizers. If it happens now that there are
> more Muslims behind these acts, I don't have a problem with that. The
> People that founded out country were also willing to die for it. In
> the case of the countries I listed, the army they are pitted against
> is many times more powerful, so they must rely on "other" tactics. Who
> in their right minds would go after the Russian, French, British,
> Israelo-American armies with sticks and stones?
For the leaders of an organization to brainwash a highschool kid from
down the block to kill himself to kill other innocents is depraved.
They don't even do it themselves. They are depraved cowards.
At the funerals and paraades you can see that they have plenty of
machine guns.
I have more respect for snipers.
other tactics myy ass. It is terrorism designed to provokke publiic outcry.
>
> There are other domestic terrorism cases where the cause is not
> independance, but a radical group. It happened in Japan, Oklahoma
> City. It happened when Wall Street was bombed. The Unabomber. Some
> suggest the sniper case in the Washington area. Some early on in the
> rise of the automobiles would also attack them for fear of technology.
> Here again, there's a lot more than that, but I can't seem to remember
> now. You cannot reason with them. They are so entangled into their
> twisted cause that you have no chance to reach them. Al Qaeda is an
> international version of this.
You can't equate lone nuts with a large organization that has many
sympathizers and an idea that apparently sells.
>
> The particularity with Al Qaeda is that their core belief is that they
> view themselves as under siege. While their methods are obscene, their
> ideology crazed, the basis for its formation lie in events that
> surrounds them. You think there's too many Muslim terrorists? They
> think too many Muslim countries are subjected to unfair treatment,
> from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Sudan, Palestine, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt,
> Algeria, Lybia. I suggest this link for a basic chronology::
All the time the excuse is "American foriegn policy" Which poliicy I
ask. Israel only answer.
The day we stop fixing their industrial innfrastructure and buying their
oil, that's the day they will be in true trouble.
>
> http://www.zmag.org/shalomhate.htm
>
> So while we have no chance to "strike a deal" with Al Qaeda; the more
> we attack, the more will come;
So be it.
the meaner we are, the meaner they will
> be;
They started out mean and twisted.
we can however do something about the envoronment which bred it in
> the first place. We can show the generous side that all (most)
> Americans have. We can institute policies that are fair, not that
> reflect our interests or those that lobby our government (i.e. Israel
> policy and the AIPAC).
See that's it the only thing you can think of that will makke tthese
nuts happy is to asstop our support of Israel..
Our People, along with other nations like us,
> are capable of generosity and good will, as exemplified with the Peace
> Corps, Doctors Without Borders, Engineers Without Borders, UNICEF. But
> they don't see it. They see Uncle Sam through the barrel of our tanks.
> This puts our country at grave risk.
Itt's too bad their vision is so bbadd.
>
>
>>>>Jews here don't seem to be engaged in that activity.
>>>
>>>
>>>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>>>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>>>conflict.
>>
>>That sounds good but it is not true.
>>Many Arab nations have handsomely profited from the Anerican use of oil,
>>ther only serious export.
>
>
> Nations, not people. We have put in place, or helped put in place,
> ruthless dictators that guarantee the flow of oil. The average Saudi
> doesn't see a dime from oil exports.
>
> That's the problem: we see their government, not their people. They
> see our government, not our people.
>
>
>>And who rushed to the aid of Kuwait and Saudi whenn they were threatened?
>>We give aid to Egypt and Jordan as you know, and finance Mrs. arafat's
>>Parisian excursions.
>
>
> We give nearly as much aid to Israel as we do to Egypt. But Egypt is
> 12 times more populous. And that doesn't count the technology
> transfer, the intelligence, the expertise, that Israel is the sole
> benefitor. That money doesn't go to weapons in Egypt. It goes to
> economic reform.
Right and it's still a shithole with no economy. Not our fault. Not
Israel's fault.
>
>
>>Except for their crazy TV Qatar seems friendly enough?
>>
>>And if they think we are going to just dump Israel to make them happy
>>they are deluded.
>
>
> It's not about dumping one side or another. It's about being fair. We
> back Israel whatever happens..But invading Iraq for WMD and UN
> resolution violations, while Israel is still standing, is unfair.
Nations w/ WD are judged by their percieved responsibbillity as nnations.
China can have WMD's w/ no prob.
India has em but we made Pakistan take theirs apart because theyy are
unstable and irresponsible.
Russia's got em no problem. France no problem. North Korea, falls unnder
the line of responsibility and stability that are required.
Israel above. Iraq below. It's a standard of sorts.
Iran very tricky could go either way.
nd if 10,000 are innvolved on all those levels , arrest deport, kill
them now.
6
The Prisoner
Spooky Cheese wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 03:48:51 GMT, The Prisoner <#6...@TehVillage.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Spooky Cheese wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:25:10 -0500, neptune3 <np...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:35:04 -0400, Spooky Cheese
>>>><donteve...@nomail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Of course not, we are Israel's sole ally. We don't have the same
>>>>>attitide towards Arab nations. That's sort of the point in this
>>>>>conflict.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Jews are not allies but our tyrannical rulers.
>>>>
>>>>Liberating America From Israel
>>>>
>>>>by Paul Findley
>>>
>>> I'd like to note, though, that while the argumentation is sound, I'd
>>>like to see some corroboration of the allegations of Washington
>>>corruption regarding foreign policy towards Israel.
>>
>>
>>Why don't you just give up any pretense of rationality.
>>Join the Nazi party. Join CI. Join Islamixc jihad.
>> stop all your pussyfooting about coroboration when you already are hip
>>deep in believing the lies half truths and distortions of the enemies of
>>freedom.
>
>
> Why don't you consider a former senator a valid source?
Well for one thing He was not a senator. He was a congressman. Big
difference.
What
> distortions has the author committed?
To analyze the distortions published by our less tha eloquent, by
himself, Neptune3 is far too lengthy a process for me to undertake at
this time. Click his links.. The Nazis like al qaeda.
You want to be like one of those people? You want to believe that Jews
are the problem in the whole world even in places where there are no
jews to speak of and jews could care less, fine , have your deliusion if
it assuages you.
What's so irrational about it?
The idea of punishing your allies in order to APPEASE your enemies
is irrational. The idea that destroting Israel would make "World Islam"
a less attractive idea, is absurd, but it sells beacuse people don't
like jews and are afraid that 13 million bookworms will overrun their
precious national identities.
And it's ok to say anything you want about jews. Say they frim=nk babies
blood and steal palestuinains livers. Nobody says boo.
I say we gotta look at the moslem immigrants closely beacause even YOU
admit there is a 10,000 strong fifthh column alt=ready here and possibly
100,000,000 Jihadies worldwide but that's no problem they will just
melt away when we let the ARabs kill all the jews.
What a sick dreamworld you try to live in.
There's a reason why this Findley is no longer a Rep. or Cynthia
Mckinney too. They are nutso.
> This is not the first time something like this has been said,
> including former Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali on a recent
> interview I saw on TV.
Welll he is ann authority after all. Ineffective figure head just like
his replacement.
I just want corroboration of the claims he
> makes of what goes on in Washington... what's wrong with that?
Lot's of people have lobbies.
Lot's of countries industries special interest groups of all kinds.
If one is effective why is that a problem? Got you airbags.
6
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
Aside from differences between their legislative responsibilities, how
does that make the congressman less credible?
> What
>> distortions has the author committed?
>
>To analyze the distortions published by our less tha eloquent, by
>himself, Neptune3 is far too lengthy a process for me to undertake at
>this time. Click his links.. The Nazis like al qaeda.
I haven't read the links. There are too many. I limit myself to the
article.
>You want to be like one of those people? You want to believe that Jews
>are the problem in the whole world even in places where there are no
>jews to speak of and jews could care less, fine , have your deliusion if
>it assuages you.
I have no problems with Jews. I have a problem with _radical_ jews,
just like I have a problem with _radical_ Muslims (eg fundamentalists)
because they have disciminated against us back in Egypt, just like I
have a problem with radical _Christians_, (eg Southern Baptists),
because they back Israel because they believe it will bring about
Judgement Day. I used to live in a mostly Jewish neighborhood in
Alexandria, and thought nothing of it. I think most Israeli Jews want
peace, just like most Palestinians want it, but they are being
manipulated by a terrorist war criminal who has no intention of
backing down (Sharon, and Netanyahu)
>> What's so irrational about it?
>
>The idea of punishing your allies in order to APPEASE your enemies
>is irrational. The idea that destroting Israel would make "World Islam"
>a less attractive idea, is absurd, but it sells beacuse people don't
>like jews and are afraid that 13 million bookworms will overrun their
>precious national identities.
The article never advocated destroying Israel. It advocated ceasing to
unconditionally back Israel... that's the difference.
"Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the
precepts of all major religious faiths."
Somehow I think we didn't read the same article.
>And it's ok to say anything you want about jews. Say they frim=nk babies
>blood and steal palestuinains livers. Nobody says boo.
Livers? I never said anything about that. Please don't imply things
that I never got close to saying. Just because I don't think *Israel*
is all it's cracked up to be doesn't mean I think *Jews* aren't. In
fact, a great majority of them are reasonable people. But some, much
like my American countrymen, and my former Muslim countrymen, have
bought into a propaganda machine of hate. And this hate will continue
growing until each of us begins to look at ourselves. I submit that
September 11th is the wake-up call that we needed.
> I say we gotta look at the moslem immigrants closely beacause even YOU
>admit there is a 10,000 strong fifthh column alt=ready here and possibly
>100,000,000 Jihadies worldwide but that's no problem they will just
>melt away when we let the ARabs kill all the jews.
> What a sick dreamworld you try to live in.
I never advocated killing Jews. Most Arabs do not want to kill all
Jews. Most Muslims do not want to kill all Jews. A great majority just
want peace and fairness, and they're not getting it. The US position
is not "black and white", there are grays in between. I, and many more
Arabs, want an end to the American unconditional support of Israel.
The fact that the US has a veto in the Security Council is the only
thing stopping the UN from actually treating the parties fairly.
Instead of inferring things I never said, and drawing conclusions from
those imagined declarations, please respond to my articles, and only
my articles.
>There's a reason why this Findley is no longer a Rep. or Cynthia
>Mckinney too. They are nutso.
I never heard of them until today.
The Prisoner
Well aside from the fact that it takes radically less peo0ple to elect a
congreesman than a senator I will give you that. There are plenty of
discredutable ones. Hey Strom Thurmond just dropped dead. Have yuou
heard of him?
Jesse Helms.
Robert Byrd was like a grand Kleagle or something.
Joe McCarthy.
Gopher from the Love Boat is a congressman for god's sake!
It is his views that make him less credible.
>
>> What
>>
>>>distortions has the author committed?
>>
>>To analyze the distortions published by our less tha eloquent, by
>>himself, Neptune3 is far too lengthy a process for me to undertake at
>>this time. Click his links.. The Nazis like al qaeda.
>
>
> I haven't read the links. There are too many. I limit myself to the
> article.
If you looked at his links you (being apparently a nice guy) would not
want to associate yourself with almost any remark that this individual
might endorse.
>
>
>>You want to be like one of those people? You want to believe that Jews
>>are the problem in the whole world even in places where there are no
>>jews to speak of and jews could care less, fine , have your deliusion if
>>it assuages you.
>
>
> I have no problems with Jews. I have a problem with _radical_ jews,
> just like I have a problem with _radical_ Muslims (eg fundamentalists)
> because they have disciminated against us back in Egypt, just like I
> have a problem with radical _Christians_, (eg Southern Baptists),
> because they back Israel because they believe it will bring about
> Judgement Day. I used to live in a mostly Jewish neighborhood in
> Alexandria, and thought nothing of it. I think most Israeli Jews want
> peace, just like most Palestinians want it, but they are being
> manipulated by a terrorist war criminal who has no intention of
> backing down (Sharon, and Netanyahu)
Even though I don't believe those men to n=be war criminals , are
arafat, Rantisi Shiek Yassin and Abu Abbas any less war criminals and
what about the ones whose names I don't happen to know, becasue the
hhierarchy of radical muslim terrorists is not high on my list of things
I must know.?
>
>
>>> What's so irrational about it?
>>
>>The idea of punishing your allies in order to APPEASE your enemies
>>is irrational. The idea that destroting Israel would make "World Islam"
>>a less attractive idea, is absurd, but it sells beacuse people don't
>>like jews and are afraid that 13 million bookworms will overrun their
>>precious national identities.
>
>
> The article never advocated destroying Israel. It advocated ceasing to
> unconditionally back Israel... that's the difference.
You back your allies. They have a good case.. If it's war as has been
stated so many times then the Palestinians have lost several times and
should take the terms offerd by Israel. The fact thhat the terms are
being drawn up in Washington is pretty far already.
>
> "Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
> most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
> violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the
> precepts of all major religious faiths."
>
> Somehow I think we didn't read the same article.
I am sorry but the UN has been an Anti-Jew organization for at least 40
years.
Israel is the only country voted down to have a rotating security
council chair.
Syria sits.
Egypt sits.
Caneroon sits.
Guinea sits.
Colombia sits.
Only the Jews can't sit in.
>
>
>>And it's ok to say anything you want about jews. Say they frim=nk babies
>>blood and steal palestuinains livers. Nobody says boo.
>
>
> Livers? I never said anything about that. Please don't imply things
> that I never got close to saying. Just because I don't think *Israel*
> is all it's cracked up to be doesn't mean I think *Jews* aren't. In
> fact, a great majority of them are reasonable people. But some, much
> like my American countrymen, and my former Muslim countrymen, have
> bought into a propaganda machine of hate. And this hate will continue
> growing until each of us begins to look at ourselves. I submit that
> September 11th is the wake-up call that we needed.
You told me to be careful with my language and watch what I say about
some people. I will not.
I'll Say what I think.
>
>
>> I say we gotta look at the moslem immigrants closely beacause even YOU
>>admit there is a 10,000 strong fifthh column alt=ready here and possibly
>>100,000,000 Jihadies worldwide but that's no problem they will just
>>melt away when we let the ARabs kill all the jews.
>> What a sick dreamworld you try to live in.
>
>
> I never advocated killing Jews. Most Arabs do not want to kill all
> Jews. Most Muslims do not want to kill all Jews. A great majority just
> want peace and fairness, and they're not getting it. The US position
> is not "black and white", there are grays in between. I, and many more
> Arabs, want an end to the American unconditional support of Israel.
But what des that mean when so many of these countries do not recognize
Israle's right to exist in any form or size and refusse to go against
organizatioons whose charter specifies the killing of jews and taking
back of the land?
> The fact that the US has a veto in the Security Council is the only
> thing stopping the UN from actually treating the parties fairly.
The only thing that keeps the UN from doing what?
Do you want them to stand in the middle or something?
send blue tannks to fight the IDF.? What?
>
> Instead of inferring things I never said, and drawing conclusions from
> those imagined declarations, please respond to my articles, and only
> my articles.
>
>
>>There's a reason why this Findley is no longer a Rep. or Cynthia
>>Mckinney too. They are nutso.
>
>
> I never heard of them until today.
Perhaps I am more familiar with the persons of the legislature than you.
Spooky Cheese
wrote:
McCarthy? Alright, I'll concede you have a point on this one. But
then, should we disregard all congressmen's opinions? What would make
*this* congressman's opinion less valid? I did some searching, and
found that the contents of his letter to be echoed in respectable
articles.
National Capital Insiders Vote AIPAC, Israel's American Lobby, Second
Most Powerful Interest Group in Washington
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0198/9801065.htm
Sharon is the worst of them all, mostly for his activities prior to
going into politics (as a former IDF general). Abu-Abbas bears no
relation, as far as I know, to any Palestinian military organisation.
As to the rest, on either the Palestinian or Israeli side, yes, they
are equatable, yes their actions are despicable. We are, however,
backing one despicable side in a very dirty dispute. We could argue
"who started it" but it has been 50+ years now. It's time to discuss
solutions instead of continuing this. However, I don't see us taking
any progressive action on Israel. We turn a blind eye as it violates
another set of human rights, but we brand as "terrorists" when
Palestinians do same.
I agree with you, both sides have been at this so long that they haev
corupted themselves in the process. Palestinians can excuse blowing up
a bus full of people, many of whom might agree with them. Israeli
soldiers looting, killing indiscriminately, confiscating,
assassinating, all acts that encourage a cycle of violence that
doesn't stop. And when one side discusses a cease-fire, the other side
takes advantage of that and do more killing, all the while requiring
that to end this killing that a cease-fire is not sufficient (!).
I see no end in sight.
>>>> What's so irrational about it?
>>>
>>>The idea of punishing your allies in order to APPEASE your enemies
>>>is irrational. The idea that destroting Israel would make "World Islam"
>>>a less attractive idea, is absurd, but it sells beacuse people don't
>>>like jews and are afraid that 13 million bookworms will overrun their
>>>precious national identities.
>>
>>
>> The article never advocated destroying Israel. It advocated ceasing to
>> unconditionally back Israel... that's the difference.
>
>You back your allies. They have a good case.. If it's war as has been
>stated so many times then the Palestinians have lost several times and
>should take the terms offerd by Israel. The fact thhat the terms are
>being drawn up in Washington is pretty far already.
We have other allies in the region too, namely Egypt and Jordan. Well,
those regimes are in trouble, and have been in trouble for some time
now, until this conflict is resolved. The problem is not that Israel
is our ally, not that we back them either, but that we
*unconditionally* back them. That is, whatever Israel does, we follow.
For Christ sake, we even proliferated weapons of mass destruction with
them by giving them nukes.
Every country has a preference in a bilateral dispute between two
countries. But we have scorned our allies in the past and present for
their actions (Iraq!!!), but not in the case of Israel. We never told
them, "You're going to make peace and that's the end of it. Otherwise,
you don't get any funding." They tell us what to do. They tell us to
invade Iraq, threaten Syria and Iran.
The fact is that the Arab League has recently offered a recognition of
Israel in exchange for peace along a 2-State solution. Egypt and
jordan have already recognised Israel for some time now. Syria wasn't
far from that a few years back. We can blame them for not recognising
Israel 50 years ago, but that would be too easy; they felt cheated by
the British. They are now on-board for the solution proposed in the UN
Resolution that *created* Israel, solution which has been reiterated
many times afterwards. If Israel doesn't agree with that Resolution,
then perhaps we should scrap it altogether and repeal the very
existence of Israel...
>> "Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
>> most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
>> violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the
>> precepts of all major religious faiths."
>>
>> Somehow I think we didn't read the same article.
>
>I am sorry but the UN has been an Anti-Jew organization for at least 40
>years.
> Israel is the only country voted down to have a rotating security
>council chair.
> Syria sits.
>Egypt sits.
>Caneroon sits.
>Guinea sits.
>Colombia sits.
> Only the Jews can't sit in.
The UN is not biased against any nation, or group of nations, by its
very design. Countries decide not to have Israel sit, not the United
Nations. The UN holds a vote on this. And it could be stated that the
UN is anti-Palestinian, too, as no Palestinian has had a seat on the
Council either. As long as the conflict endures, other countries will
continue to vote it down. There are more resolutions on the
Palestinian-Israeli issue than any other nation or conflict. That's
not anti-Jew, that's just good sense.
>>>And it's ok to say anything you want about jews. Say they frim=nk babies
>>>blood and steal palestuinains livers. Nobody says boo.
>>
>>
>> Livers? I never said anything about that. Please don't imply things
>> that I never got close to saying. Just because I don't think *Israel*
>> is all it's cracked up to be doesn't mean I think *Jews* aren't. In
>> fact, a great majority of them are reasonable people. But some, much
>> like my American countrymen, and my former Muslim countrymen, have
>> bought into a propaganda machine of hate. And this hate will continue
>> growing until each of us begins to look at ourselves. I submit that
>> September 11th is the wake-up call that we needed.
>
>You told me to be careful with my language and watch what I say about
>some people. I will not.
>I'll Say what I think.
You can say what you think. But you can't say what *I* think, or would
think. You can state whatever opinion you want, it is a free country,
but when your comments are directed towards a person, it may be
libellous. So yes you have to watch what you say about people if you
want to keep this civil.
>>> I say we gotta look at the moslem immigrants closely beacause even YOU
>>>admit there is a 10,000 strong fifthh column alt=ready here and possibly
>>>100,000,000 Jihadies worldwide but that's no problem they will just
>>>melt away when we let the ARabs kill all the jews.
>>> What a sick dreamworld you try to live in.
>>
>>
>> I never advocated killing Jews. Most Arabs do not want to kill all
>> Jews. Most Muslims do not want to kill all Jews. A great majority just
>> want peace and fairness, and they're not getting it. The US position
>> is not "black and white", there are grays in between. I, and many more
>> Arabs, want an end to the American unconditional support of Israel.
>
>But what des that mean when so many of these countries do not recognize
>Israle's right to exist in any form or size and refusse to go against
>organizatioons whose charter specifies the killing of jews and taking
>back of the land?
These countries refuse to recognise Israel as long as the conflict
endures. It's a bargaining chip. Some of them have already recognised
Israel. And, as stated previously, the Arab League has proposed to
normalise relations with Israel in exchange for peace.
Oh, and all terrorist groups are radicals. Read the charter of any
group, be it the IRA, Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang (Zionist
terrorist groups), Hamas, or any other group, you'll find some kooky
stuff there. They have to be radical, otherwise they wouldn't be
prepared to commit the actions they have undertaken. There is no
difference between these groups, and many others.
>> The fact that the US has a veto in the Security Council is the only
>> thing stopping the UN from actually treating the parties fairly.
>
>
>The only thing that keeps the UN from doing what?
>Do you want them to stand in the middle or something?
> send blue tannks to fight the IDF.? What?
All Council Resolutions regarding Israel have been worded such that
the US doesn't veto them. This allows for a resolution against Israel
to pass, but one that is not binding, thus allowing Israel to ignore
the UN. Peacekeepers are already involved in strained areas, even in
the extrremely tense Cyprus. The island is divided. I want White Tanks
in the West Bank and Gaza, and at the borders, and forbid the IDF from
entering it. I don't want the trigger-happy IDF anywhere near
Palestinians. Peacekeepers do the job... the IDF clearly doesn't,
especially as their increasingly brutal actions have actually
_increased_ the death rate on both sides. You can blame whomever you
want for this, but the tanks were sent in for security, and there is
none.
>> Instead of inferring things I never said, and drawing conclusions from
>> those imagined declarations, please respond to my articles, and only
>> my articles.
>>
>>
>>>There's a reason why this Findley is no longer a Rep. or Cynthia
>>>Mckinney too. They are nutso.
>>
>>
>> I never heard of them until today.
>
>
>Perhaps I am more familiar with the persons of the legislature than you.
It seems so.
The Prisoner
Yes they have a good lobby organization. I paraphrase REp. Barney Frank,
" part of the art of this job is taking people's money listening to
their gripes and then doing what You think is right".
A cease fire (of some kind)and some pull back by the Israelis, freedom
of travel for the Palestinians and a ratcheting down of the rhetoric is
a good start.
>
>>>>>What's so irrational about it?
>>>>
>>>>The idea of punishing your allies in order to APPEASE your enemies
>>>>is irrational. The idea that destroting Israel would make "World Islam"
>>>>a less attractive idea, is absurd, but it sells beacuse people don't
>>>>like jews and are afraid that 13 million bookworms will overrun their
>>>>precious national identities.
>>>
>>>
>>>The article never advocated destroying Israel. It advocated ceasing to
>>>unconditionally back Israel... that's the difference.
And I didn't say destroy I said Punish. Certainly looking the other way
while there is open hostility and a culture of lies would be punishment.
>>
>>You back your allies. They have a good case.. If it's war as has been
>>stated so many times then the Palestinians have lost several times and
>>should take the terms offerd by Israel. The fact thhat the terms are
>>being drawn up in Washington is pretty far already.
>
>
> We have other allies in the region too, namely Egypt and Jordan. Well,
> those regimes are in trouble, and have been in trouble for some time
> now, until this conflict is resolved. The problem is not that Israel
> is our ally, not that we back them either, but that we
> *unconditionally* back them. That is, whatever Israel does, we follow.
> For Christ sake, we even proliferated weapons of mass destruction with
> them by giving them nukes.
>
> Every country has a preference in a bilateral dispute between two
> countries. But we have scorned our allies in the past and present for
> their actions (Iraq!!!), but not in the case of Israel. We never told
> them, "You're going to make peace and that's the end of it. Otherwise,
> you don't get any funding." They tell us what to do. They tell us to
> invade Iraq, threaten Syria and Iran.
You don't know who tells who what. The prime minister of Israel does not
give instructions to the president of the US. I would submit that when
the door is closed the reverse is true.
I think the peace process is enhanced when prvocateur nations who
reward terroorism openly and support the groups we want to stop
are disuuaded or as Iraq dismanntled. ( and Iraq was singular in this
region due to it's unique recent history of aggression against it's
neighbors and it's incredible tyrant worshipping cruel political system)
Let''s skip ahead a bit. What about Kashmir doesn't the UN care about
that? There has nearly been NUCLEAR war twice over this disputed region.
Where is the outcry? But again I am skipping ahead a bit.
Where is their supposed good sense on this issue?
>
>>>>And it's ok to say anything you want about jews. Say they frim=nk babies
>>>>blood and steal palestuinains livers. Nobody says boo.
>>>
>>>
>>>Livers? I never said anything about that. Please don't imply things
>>>that I never got close to saying. Just because I don't think *Israel*
>>>is all it's cracked up to be doesn't mean I think *Jews* aren't. In
>>>fact, a great majority of them are reasonable people. But some, much
>>>like my American countrymen, and my former Muslim countrymen, have
>>>bought into a propaganda machine of hate. And this hate will continue
>>>growing until each of us begins to look at ourselves. I submit that
>>>September 11th is the wake-up call that we needed.
>>
>>You told me to be careful with my language and watch what I say about
>>some people. I will not.
>>I'll Say what I think.
>
>
> You can say what you think. But you can't say what *I* think, or would
> think. You can state whatever opinion you want, it is a free country,
> but when your comments are directed towards a person, it may be
> libellous. So yes you have to watch what you say about people if you
> want to keep this civil.
>
I'm sorry if I overstated your opinions. All apologies.
It would not be possible to libel Neptune3 though.
>
>>>>I say we gotta look at the moslem immigrants closely beacause even YOU
>>>>admit there is a 10,000 strong fifthh column alt=ready here and possibly
>>>>100,000,000 Jihadies worldwide but that's no problem they will just
>>>>melt away when we let the ARabs kill all the jews.
>>>>What a sick dreamworld you try to live in.
>>>
>>>
>>>I never advocated killing Jews. Most Arabs do not want to kill all
>>>Jews. Most Muslims do not want to kill all Jews. A great majority just
>>>want peace and fairness, and they're not getting it. The US position
>>>is not "black and white", there are grays in between. I, and many more
>>>Arabs, want an end to the American unconditional support of Israel.
>>
>>But what des that mean when so many of these countries do not recognize
>>Israle's right to exist in any form or size and refusse to go against
>>organizatioons whose charter specifies the killing of jews and taking
>>back of the land?
>
>
> These countries refuse to recognise Israel as long as the conflict
> endures. It's a bargaining chip. Some of them have already recognised
> Israel. And, as stated previously, the Arab League has proposed to
> normalise relations with Israel in exchange for peace.
>
> Oh, and all terrorist groups are radicals. Read the charter of any
> group, be it the IRA, Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang (Zionist
> terrorist groups), Hamas, or any other group, you'll find some kooky
> stuff there. They have to be radical, otherwise they wouldn't be
> prepared to commit the actions they have undertaken. There is no
> difference between these groups, and many others.
There are differences. I am not endorsing any of those groups.
It is my opinion that the palestinian jihad groups have been used as a
tool by the larger slamic radical entity, to keep the excuse of
Palestinne alive as a veill for thheir obviously worldwide actions.
After all nobody ever made a bombing in Russia and claimed it was for
the IRA.
>
>
>>>The fact that the US has a veto in the Security Council is the only
>>>thing stopping the UN from actually treating the parties fairly.
>>
>>
>>The only thing that keeps the UN from doing what?
>>Do you want them to stand in the middle or something?
>> send blue tannks to fight the IDF.? What?
>
>
> All Council Resolutions regarding Israel have been worded such that
> the US doesn't veto them. This allows for a resolution against Israel
> to pass, but one that is not binding, thus allowing Israel to ignore
> the UN. Peacekeepers are already involved in strained areas, even in
> the extrremely tense Cyprus. The island is divided. I want White Tanks
> in the West Bank and Gaza, and at the borders, and forbid the IDF from
> entering it. I don't want the trigger-happy IDF anywhere near
> Palestinians. Peacekeepers do the job... the IDF clearly doesn't,
> especially as their increasingly brutal actions have actually
> _increased_ the death rate on both sides. You can blame whomever you
> want for this, but the tanks were sent in for security, and there is
> none.
>
If the UN had the will to do this that might be a good idea.
I would tell you though that the Israelis see the UN as very hostile to
them. Granting them a rotating seat on the security council as they do
to other nationns ar some such recognition might faciitaate their
welcoming of such an act , which again might help.