U.S. got between Israel and Arafat......

[sarettah]

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/b...breaking_8.html (http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_8.html)

U.S. stopped Israeli raid to seize Arafat

SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Monday, September 15, 2003
The United States has prevented Israel's military from capturing the headquarters of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat.

U.S. government sources said the Bush administration sent a harsh message to Israel to suspend plans to capture Arafat's headquarters in Ramallah over the weekend. The sources said the had military planned to raid the so-called Muqata'a on late Friday and capture Arafat.

..................................................

The U.S. sources said the Bush administration was alarmed by the Israeli entry into Ramallah on Thursday. An Israeli military force captured a PA ministry about 300 meters from Arafat's headquarters and established a command post for the capture of the Muqata'a.

.................................................. ..

Powell and Rice sent Israel a message, the sources said, that the United States regards any move to exile Arafat as harmful to Washington's interests in the Middle East, including the roadmap for a Palestinian state. At the same time, U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer met Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and warned of an international backlash to Arafat's exile.

[XXXManager]

Roadmap :) heh. Thats funny :agrin:

anyway, I highly doubt that Israel will notify the US about the exact time a raid on Arafat headquarters would take place.

on another note...
Its funny to see how the US tries to kill Saddam and Bin-Laden and protects Arafat. Do you also find it "funny"? :unsure:

[sarettah]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 05:01 PM
on another note...
Its funny to see how the US tries to kill Saddam and Bin-Laden and protects Arafat. Do you also find it "funny"? :unsure:
Nopers, I don't find it funny...

while I do not necessarilly agree with the rational, The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is viewed by Washington as a "civil war"... Their definition of terrorism requires the terrorists to strike outside of their particular country...

So, therefore, by their rationale, Arafat is not a terrorist because the PLO does not operate outside the boundaries of Israel-Palestine....

Although they did finally back off and declare Hamas to be terrorist...

My feelings on the Israeli-Palestinian issue are somewhat mixed. As I have stated before, I respect the hell out of Israel for what they have accomplished. At the same time though, I can sympathize with the Palestinians to a certain extent (I often compare them to the plight of Native Americans here)...

As far as the tactics used, the car bombings etc, again, while I do not agree ever with killing civilians or with terrorist type actions, I understand that in many of their minds they are using the available materials to get as much damage done as they can. They can not fight against tanks and machine guns with rocks and sticks.

It is a sad situation and when finally their is a solution found, it will take many generations before all the hatred has dissipated.

[slavdogg]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 05:01 PM
on another note...
Its funny to see how the US tries to kill Saddam and Bin-Laden and protects Arafat. Do you also find it "funny"? :unsure:
Yes considering how Arafat killed 2 US doplomats and was the first terrorist to attack Americans decaded before Bid Laden was fucking donkeys in Afgany caves.

[slavdogg]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 15 2003, 07:10 PM
, The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is viewed by Washington as a "civil war"... Their definition of terrorism requires the terrorists to strike outside of their particular country...

So, therefore, by their rationale, Arafat is not a terrorist because the PLO does not operate outside the boundaries of Israel-Palestine....
did you just make that up ??

[Mike AI]

Arafat is a terrorist and should have been killed decades ago.

He should be killed immediately!

[sarettah]

Originally posted by slavdogg@Sep 15 2003, 07:16 PM
did you just make that up ??
Nopers..... That is the official rationale I believe and I will find refs for you if you want (probably will anyway, like usual...)

[XXXManager]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 16 2003, 12:10 AM
1. while I do not necessarilly agree with the rational, The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is viewed by Washington as a "civil war"... Their definition of terrorism requires the terrorists to strike outside of their particular country...

2. So, therefore, by their rationale, Arafat is not a terrorist because the PLO does not operate outside the boundaries of Israel-Palestine....

3. Although they did finally back off and declare Hamas to be terrorist...

4. My feelings on the Israeli-Palestinian issue are somewhat mixed. As I have stated before, I respect the hell out of Israel for what they have accomplished. At the same time though, I can sympathize with the Palestinians to a certain extent (I often compare them to the plight of Native Americans here)...

5. As far as the tactics used, the car bombings etc, again, while I do not agree ever with killing civilians or with terrorist type actions, I understand that in many of their minds they are using the available materials to get as much damage done as they can. They can not fight against tanks and machine guns with rocks and sticks.

6. It is a sad situation and when finally their is a solution found, it will take many generations before all the hatred has dissipated.
hmm??

Sorry for numbering your text.. its easier to address that way.

1. Who told you that????
Their definition of terrorism is not different than the Israeli one at all.
Its only uncomfortable for them that Israel has its own agenda first - namly: Israel. The US government likes Israel to be quiet on the expense of Israeli lives, because it helps (so they think) US interests. Strategically I disagree and think the US is weakening itself by not being honest and calling a duck a duck. US should stick to its values and not be ambivalent.

2. Again - who told you that? PLO is a terrorist organization and so is almost every other palestinian organization. The fact that PLO is the "political" front of the terror organization it really is (Called Fatah and Al-Aqsa brigades) it mearly a cover up.
Also - when a US citizen tried to blow up an airplane with a shoe - they called him what?

3. Indeed. And so did the European union - finally

4. We are not talking about the palestinians. We are talking about Arafat.
Do you claim Arafat is the average palestinian?
He has more money than all the people who post here altogether (including all the other message boards out there). He lives a happy rich life in a lurious house. He flies (used to) all around in his fancy helicopter and jet while his people desperately search for work and food. He rather continue the conflict than have piece and finally some comfort - when the palestinians you aer referring to would sign a peace treaty decades ago.

5. What?? I wouldn't address that statement really beside saying this..
You do realize you justify the 9/11 that way. don't you?

6. Right and wrong. Well.. Right because it is sad. But wrong because - it depends what you call the solution. But when the future generation is fed hatred, the solution is nowhere close. Generations will only get you further from the end.



Last edited by XXXManager at Sep 16 2003, 12:51 AM

[XXXManager]

Originally posted by sarettah+Sep 16 2003, 12:25 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sarettah @ Sep 16 2003, 12:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--slavdogg@Sep 15 2003, 07:16 PM
did you just make that up ??
Nopers..... That is the official rationale I believe and I will find refs for you if you want (probably will anyway, like usual...)[/b][/quote]
No you wouldn't
Whenever there is a "civil war incident" in Israel by Fatah or Al-Aqsa brigades (namly PLO) the state department says he regrets that innocent people were killed by terrorists.
I guess the state department is proof enough as to the "official" rationale

[sarettah]

damn, I am looking up various shit at the state department and you guys hit me with 5 or 6 more.....lolol...

anyway... I am going to eat dinner and then I will address more stuff.. But the OFFICIAL definition of terrorism prior to 9/11 was:

from:
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2419.htm

Patterns of Global terrorism - 2000

No one definition of terrorism has gained universal acceptance. For the purposes of this report, however, we have chosen the definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f(d). That statute contains the following definitions:

The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

The term "international terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country.

The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.

The US Government has employed this definition of terrorism for statistical and analytical purposes since 1983.

************************************************** *****


so perhaps I spoke too loosely when I stated:

"Their definition of terrorism requires the terrorists to strike outside of their particular country...

So, therefore, by their rationale, Arafat is not a terrorist because the PLO does not operate outside the boundaries of Israel-Palestine.... "

and should have stated that the PLO and Arafat as their leader are not a Terrorist Group by their definition..... Because using the definition prior to 9/11 a terrorist group had to practice international terrorism.

I am being called to dinner and if you ever want to see a terrorist, watch my Jen when dinner is ready and I don't come...

I will bring in the current definition at that point....


But waiting for fucking pdfs to load is a pain in the ass and most of this stuff is located in pdfs....



Last edited by sarettah at Sep 15 2003, 09:00 PM

[sarettah]

5. What?? I wouldn't address that statement really beside saying this..
You do realize you justify the 9/11 that way. don't you?

No, I do not justify anything with my statement. My statement stands as is.
I did not agree or condone the actions. Understanding something does not condone the action or make a sympathetic ear. As far as the 9/11 situation that is TOTALLY different. The palestinians have a fair claim to the territories in dispute. They are fighting a war within their own country. The 9/11 attackers attacked a sovereign nation outside of their borders. Saying it is the same thing is akin to the U.S. not having the right to the revolutionary war and the southern states not having the right to fight the civil war. What goes on within a countries borders, by it's citizens is largely an internal matter.

My statement was:

"5. As far as the tactics used, the car bombings etc, again, while I do not agree ever with killing civilians or with terrorist type actions, I understand that in many of their minds they are using the available materials to get as much damage done as they can. They can not fight against tanks and machine guns with rocks and sticks."

[XXXManager]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 16 2003, 01:14 AM
so perhaps I spoke too loosely when I stated...

...So, therefore, by their rationale, Arafat is not a terrorist because the PLO does not operate outside the boundaries of Israel-Palestine....

and should have stated that the PLO and Arafat as their leader are not a Terrorist Group by their definition..... Because using the definition prior to 9/11 a terrorist group had to practice international terrorism.

Wrong again.

As you yourself quoted - The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

So it has nothing to do with international.

Second - and I dont fully know what to make of this sentence which means nothing to me gramatically
"The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism. "
Even if - this sentence it to be considered to mean anything - The PLO can claim that they are not a group. They are for sure terrorists - because by the first definition quoted they do engage in terrorism.
The last quote claims (I say again - it don't really say anything clear) that unless you are engaged in internaitional terrorism - you may be a group of terrorists but you are are not a "terrorist group".. dumb definition if you ask me.
Are you sure you quoted it right?

Anyway - even with this loose definition, the palestinian authority is not part of Israel. Even according to Israeli law.
Also - by that definition, even if the PLO bombed a resurant in new york, they would not be a terrorist group because they can claim they don't have what is defined as a "country"?

I say - stay away from semantically confusing quotes.
By all means and purposes - PLO and every other group today in the palestinian authority you might have heard, is - officially and otherwise - considered by the US as a terroristic group (or if you want - a bunch of terrorists... to avoid the term group ;))

[sarettah]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 08:59 PM
Are you sure you quoted it right?

straight cut and paste from the state departments report....

Since they are not by the state departments own definition a "terrorist group" they do not show up on the State Departments list of Terrorist Organizations...

That IS the rationale used from 1983 through 9/11/2001...

Whether you want to believe it or not... It is fact and there is plenty of supporting documentation.....

As far as the PLO and ALL palestinian organizations being "terrorist" groups, the same rationale is used by the palestinians and other groups to lavbel Israel as a terrorist nation....

"premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. "

Would accurately define sending tanks into refugee camps....

Now...Let me make one thing totally, perfectly clear.....

I am not the enemy here... I support Israel and most of it's actions...

BUT I am a realist....In order to solve any problem, you must be able to understand both sides of the issue. I understand the Israeli side of the equation, I also understand the Palestinian side of the equation.... There are some that are right on both sides and there are some that are wrong...

To believe it is a one way street, that only one side is right in any way in this whole thing is to guarantee that the whole thing never gets settled....

Whether we like it or not, Arafat was elected to represent the Palestinian Authority... The PA is designated to represent the Palestinian people in their negotiations with Israel.... If Arafat is taken out by anyone except himself or the Palestinian people you will see violence in Israel and the Middle East like never before....

edited in:

here are the groups identified as terrorist in the 2000 report

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2450.htm




Last edited by sarettah at Sep 15 2003, 09:21 PM

[Almighty Colin]

Power politics. The US needs to appease it's Arab strategic "partners". Not much more to it than that.

[sarettah]

These are the new defintions of terrorism from the state department immediately after 9/11/2001.

http://usembassy.state.gov/lahore/wwwhircaterror.html

The debate over the definition of Terrorism is as old as the term itself. There are several elements that run through the many definitions of terrorism. Under United States law terrorism is "the use of force or violence against persons or property in violation of the criminal laws for purposes of intimidation, coercion or ransom." The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) categorizes terrorism in the United States as one of two types--domestic terrorism or international terrorism. Domestic terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are directed at elements of American government or population without foreign direction, while international terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are foreign-based and/or directed by countries or groups outside the United States or whose activities transcend national boundaries. Long a danger to life and property on a local scale, only lately has terrorism been recognized as a strategic threat to the internal stability--and even survival--of countries. Terrorism is now seen as a threat to the security of the whole international community, particularly as terrorists have increasingly shifted from "conventional" to "unconventional" terrorism. Over the past decade unconventional terrorism has come to be regarded the most threatening of all terrorist tactics. This type of terrorism can be categories as follows:

.........................................

[sarettah]

The global report on terrorism for 2001 uses the same definitions as the 2000 report

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2001/.../html/10220.htm (http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2001/html/10220.htm)



Colin, I saw you slip that post in there...lol....

[sarettah]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 07:50 PM
4. We are not talking about the palestinians. We are talking about Arafat.
Do you claim Arafat is the average palestinian?
He has more money than all the people who post here altogether (including all the other message boards out there). He lives a happy rich life in a lurious house. He flies (used to) all around in his fancy helicopter and jet while his people desperately search for work and food. He rather continue the conflict than have piece and finally some comfort - when the palestinians you aer referring to would sign a peace treaty decades ago.


6. Right and wrong. Well.. Right because it is sad. But wrong because - it depends what you call the solution. But when the future generation is fed hatred, the solution is nowhere close. Generations will only get you further from the end.
4. I believe I addressed this in my little part theree about elected by, etc... If I need to go further, let me know....

6. I believe that the ultimate solution is going to have to be two seperate sovereign nations....

edited in:

If I missed anything, let me know....




Last edited by sarettah at Sep 15 2003, 09:30 PM

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Colin@Sep 15 2003, 09:12 PM
Power politics. The US needs to appease it's Arab strategic "partners". Not much more to it than that.


Correct!!

You get a dancing Veggie!

:cdance:

[sarettah]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Sep 15 2003, 09:31 PM
Correct!!

Ok Mclaughlin .................




:yowsa:

[XXXManager]

I explained to you why you are wrong, according to your own quotes. That has nothing to do with what I believe or not believe.
As to the PLO - PLO was not formed in Israel. Therefore it is international and qualifies to be "international" and therefore - by your quote - a group.
If it is not in some list of someone - and I wish if possible to see which list you refer to - it is because they have some hidden (or otherwise) agenda.

Secondly - Several palestinian terrorist organizations located in Israel - including Hizballah, Hamas, Izadin el kasam and others - are in the "list" of the US as terrorist organizations even before the 9/11. That is also a fact.
Check out the list at the link you yourself brought:
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2450.htm
So the argument you have brought forward seems strange and unclear to me and basically invalid.

As to the definition you bring forward that may call "Israel" (I guess you mean the Israeli army (or IDF)) terrorist organization...
When I was 15 years old, I was with a group of friends who littered the classroom floor with stuff before a class and caused the class to start late... Our teacher called us terrorists. Since then I learned not to take the words of a madman too seriously. If someone can not see the difference between IDF and a terrorist organization, I for one would not bother explaining to them the difference unless I knew them and cared about them personally.
What some palestinians call or categorize IDF is not my concern.

"premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. "

That would qualify also the actions of the UN in the balkans, the actions of the US in.. well... everywhere, the actions of Russia in... well... everywhere on their side of the globe, china etc... Hell :) even a rock concert - as terror according to this definition ;)
I see this as a loose and unclear definition of the term terrorism but it will do for now...

As to IDF specifically
1. it is foremost tactically driven rather than politically driven.
2. etrated against combatant rather than noncombatant

As to you specifically, I do not know what your views are, so I do not refer to you specifically but only what you say. I am quite sure you are not the enemy though.

you claim one needs to understand both sides.. and that you do. I do not want to sound well.. harsh.. but what makes you think you understand the sides? I dont things the sides understand themselves...

Claiming that someone understand things and he has therefore the key to solve problems :) well... that is a bit far fetched..

"Whether we like it or not, Arafat was elected to represent the Palestinian Authority... The PA is designated to represent the Palestinian people in their negotiations with Israel.... If Arafat is taken out by anyone except himself or the Palestinian people you will see violence in Israel and the Middle East like never before...."
Elected? What made him elected? Do you know who was the other candidates in the PA elections? Do you know it was only one person? Do you know no one really knew that person? Do you call that elections? Like Saddam is elected in Iraq? LOL. they both won remarkably their "democratic" elections. 90-99% of the votes.
Do you also know when were the elections? about what? 10 years ago? oh.. more? right..
The PA is representing the Palestinian people? That is a joke. and you would understand the joke if you knew enough about both the Palestinians and their "leadership" (imho).
"If Arafat is taken out by anyone except himself or the Palestinian people you will see violence in Israel and the Middle East like never before...." yeye - We have heard threatening prophecies like that before.
Btw - where was that logic before taking out the leader of Iraq?
and the leadership of Afghanistan?
Do you think that Arabs in the middle east will suddenly stop loving Israel as they do now?
When you have people dying every day you stop caring so much about cynical politics and start thinking about why a "leader" who supports terrorism and stopped representing his own people for so long still being feathered by counties like the US and EU and start thinking why such an obstacle for a possible peace arrangement is not removed for the benefit of all sides.
As for the roaring "violence in the middle east".. I guess you consider your own country's action in the Middle East love making?
Remember - I am not the enemy here either.
I only call things as I see them as well.

Facts are (my facts of course - others may disagree) -
Most Palestinian groups are terrorist. Even if they have "nice" political fronts.
Chances are - if you negotiate a peace treaty with a terrorist or terrorist organization you will fail.
If you are in a position where you face a terrorist - shortest route around it is not to wait for him to remove himself (as you saw in Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Cuba, ....) but to remove him.
Claiming that your enemy calls you a terrorist and therefore your claim that he is a terrorist is invalid - requires you to be very unconfident person for it to stick. ("you" doesn't mean anyone specific)
When you have cancer, you don't have to worry about getting cancer (but about curing it). Same for violence. (now add "middle east violence to that fact).
Poor people don't make their leader legitimate. The whole issue if "Palestinians are miserable" and therefore Arafat is a legitimate person is based on ill logic.

[sarettah]

truce......

XXX...I don't know where you are.... I assume Israel ?? (or very close)

If so, then you are inside...looking out....

I am outside looking in... 2 very different viewing points....

As I said... I very much support the right of Israel to exist....

I will leave it at that because I am tired of arguing with someone that I don't think I really disagree with very much.....

I will have to answer this though....

"Claiming that someone understand things and he has therefore the key to solve problems well... that is a bit far fetched.."

I do not claim to have the answer... I just know that to settle any dispute you have to understand the positions that both sides are coming from... That is the starting point.

If you never get to the starting point, you never get to the ending point...

and yes, Arafat has created the problem of never wanting to get to the ending point....

[[Labret]]

Where did the IDF come from again?

The remnants of the Haganah. Which were what?

Jewish terrorists that fought the British and Palestinian population.

Funny how a nation founded on terrorism cries so much about terrorism.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 15 2003, 10:57 PM
Where did the IDF come from again?

The remnants of the Haganah. Which were what?

Jewish terrorists that fought the British and Palestinian population.

Funny how a nation founded on terrorism cries so much about terrorism.
And the U.S. wasn't built upon terrorism against the native population ?

[XXXManager]

sarettah: I don't know if you know about [Labret] but a word of advice... The best way to deal with his arguments is ignore them :)

The inside/outside issues is irrelevant. It like I will tell you that you can't really see the issue with Iraq or Afghanistan because you are in the US.
I honestly don't understand where people came up with this argument that people from "within" can not view things for real.

As to your observation.. Every kid in the area knows exactly where the Israelis and where the Palestinians "come from". There is no need to be an outside "observer" from a far away country who's average interest in the subject and the region as whole can be summed to 20 minutes a week. (true though that some individuals pay much ,more attention than an occasional article in the newspaper or a show on TV).

Last note: There is no need for a truce. We are not at a battle and not even a fight. We are just having a friendly conversation and exchange of views. It is a healthy thing and much appriciated (at least on my part).

[Joe Sixpack]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 09:39 PM
sarettah: I don't know if you know about [Labret] but a word of advice... The best way to deal with his arguments is ignore them :)
Ignore them? Because he might have a point?

Why not just answer the question?

[Buff]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 15 2003, 09:57 PM
Where did the IDF come from again?

The remnants of the Haganah. Which were what?

Jewish terrorists that fought the British and Palestinian population.

Funny how a nation founded on terrorism cries so much about terrorism.
You mean Jewish defenders who fought against the Arab rioters, you stupid, mendacious, piece of shit:

The Haganah

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The underground military organization of the yishuv in Eretz Yisrael from 1920 to 1948. The Arab riots in 1920 and 1921 (q.v., see also Tel Hai) strengthened the view that it was impossible to depend upon the British authorities and that the yishuv needed to create an independent defense force completely free of foreign authority. In June 1920, the Haganah was founded.

During the first nine years of its existence, the Haganah was a loose organization of local defense groups in the large towns and in several of the settlements. The Arab riots in 1929 (q.v.) brought about a complete change in the Haganah's status.

It became a large organization encompassing nearly all the youth and adults in the settlements, as well as several thousand members from each of the cities.

It initiated a comprehensive training program for its members, ran officers' training courses;

Established central arms depots into which a continuous stream of light arms flowed from Europe.

Simultaneously, the basis was laid for the underground production of arms.

During1936-1939, the years of the Arab Revolt, were the years in which the Haganah matured and developed from a militia into a military body. Although the British administration did not officially recognize the organization, the British Security Forces cooperated with it by establishing civilian militia (see Jewish Settlement Police—J.S.P., and also, Jewish Auxiliary Police—ghafirs). In the summer of 1938 Sepcial Night Squads—S.N.S. were extablished, under the command of Captain Orde Wingate (see also Plugot Sadeh, Yitzhak Sadeh).
During the years of the riots, the Haganah protected the establishment of over 50 new settlements in new area of the country (see Homa Umigdal—Stockade and Watchtower Settlements). As a result of the British government anti-Zionist policy, expressed in the White Paper of 1939, the Haganah supported illegal immigration and organized demonstrations against the British anti-Zionist policy.

With the outbreak of World War II, the Haganah was faced with new problems. It headed a movement of volunteers, from which Jewish units were formed for service in the British army (see Jewish Brigade Group). It also cooperated with British intelligence units and sent its personnel out on various commando missions in the Middle East. Another example of this cooperation was the dropping of 32 Jewish parachutists in 1943-44 behind enemy lines in the Balkans, Hungary and Slovakia. Europe (see also Hannah Szenesh, Enzo Sereni, Havivah Reik).

At the same time, the Haganah further strengthened its independent basis during the war. A systematic program of training was instituted for the youth of the country. In 1941, the Haganah's first mobilized regiment, the Palmach came into being. At the end of the war, when it became clear that the British government had no intention of altering its anti-Zionist policy, the Haganah began an open, organized struggle against British Mandatory rule in the framework of a unified Jewish Resistance Movement, consisting of Haganah, Irgun Zevai Le'umi - Etzel, and Lohamei Herut Yisrael—Lehi.

Haganah branches were established at Jewish D.P. [displaced person] camps in Europe and Haganah members accompanied the “illegal” immigrant boats. In the spring of 1947, David Ben-Gurion took it upon himself to direct the general policy of the Haganah, especially in preparation for impending Arab attack. On May 26 1948, the Provisional Government of Israel decided to transform the Haganah into the regular army of the State, to be called “Zeva Haganah Le-Yisrael”—The Israel Defense Forces.

[Buff]

Originally posted by Joe Sixpack+Sep 16 2003, 12:11 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Joe Sixpack @ Sep 16 2003, 12:11 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 09:39 PM
sarettah: I don't know if you know about [Labret] but a word of advice... The best way to deal with his arguments is ignore them :)
Ignore them? Because he might have a point?

Why not just answer the question?[/b][/quote]
He's a fucking idiot. He wants to justify muslim terrorism. Fuck him.

[PornoDoggy]

Buffy, gimme a break. You mean Jewish defenders who fought against the Arab rioters, you stupid, mendacious, piece of shit:


They did that, yes. They also carried out other activites. Have you ever heard of the King David Hotel?

Were they terrorists? Yes. Is that ALL they were? Hell, no.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by Joe Sixpack@Sep 16 2003, 01:11 AM
Ignore them? Because he might have a point?

Why not just answer the question?
Because, just like you, Labret has a past history that we have all seen ?

[sarettah]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 16 2003, 12:39 AM
The inside/outside issues is irrelevant. It like I will tell you that you can't really see the issue with Iraq or Afghanistan because you are in the US.
I honestly don't understand where people came up with this argument that people from "within" can not view things for real.

As to your observation.. Every kid in the area knows exactly where the Israelis and where the Palestinians "come from". There is no need to be an outside "observer" from a far away country who's average interest in the subject and the region as whole can be summed to 20 minutes a week. (true though that some individuals pay much ,more attention than an occasional article in the newspaper or a show on TV).

Last note: There is no need for a truce. We are not at a battle and not even a fight. We are just having a friendly conversation and exchange of views. It is a healthy thing and much appriciated (at least on my part).
I am not trying to imply that people from outside can view anything more clearly then inside.... In fact, I think it probably the reverse of that..

You are there.. I am many miles remote seeing what I see on CNN/ABC/CBS or reading in the KC Star or on the Internet....

The news I have available has been washed, rinsed, inspected, rejected, neglected prior to being placed in front of me....

When 9/11 happened here, I was watching it live on TV... raw, unedited.. Much the way the Israeli and Palestinians see what is happening over there on a daily basis....

It is much more real in that context....

and yes, it is a friendly conversation... It was getting too fast for me...lol...I am old fucker, not so fast at the keyboard anymore, ya know....





:agrin:

[sarettah]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 16 2003, 02:30 AM
Buffy, gimme a break. You mean Jewish defenders who fought against the Arab rioters, you stupid, mendacious, piece of shit:


They did that, yes. They also carried out other activites. Have you ever heard of the King David Hotel?

Were they terrorists? Yes. Is that ALL they were? Hell, no.
Like the saying goes....

One mans Freedom Fighter is another Man's Terrorist.....

[[Labret]]

You mean Jewish defenders who fought against the Arab rioters, you stupid, mendacious, piece of shit


Then why did they largely target the British? Let me spare you the humiliation of making up some retarded shit. Because they tried to stop all the illegal immigration. If would be no different if the beaners started waging a terrorist war against the United States with the goal in mind of taking over California.

And why were the Jews being attacked by Palestinians again?

Oh thats right, they were immigrating illegally and seizing other people land. Why? Because they have an old book that justifies their killing and siezing of other peoples land.

idiot.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 16 2003, 04:19 AM

[[Labret]]

And the U.S. wasn't built upon terrorism against the native population ?


Did you not hear me call the founding fathers terrorists earlier?

Thats why you dont hear me crying about 9-11. What comes around, goes around.

And anything that kills off a couple thousand Americans cant be a bad thing can it? Well, cept to the economy.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 07:19 AM

And the U.S. wasn't built upon terrorism against the native population ?


Did you not hear me call the founding fathers terrorists earlier?

Thats why you dont hear me crying about 9-11. What comes around, goes around.

And anything that kills off a couple thousand Americans cant be a bad thing can it? Well, cept to the economy.
I don't complain about 9-11 either. Now, that that's over, can we give some more? Is it our turn or their turn?

[[Labret]]

hmmm, well after two years of the "War On Terror", I am inclined to believe its their turn.

I would like to see an actual effort on their behalf to put the word terror back in terrorism. Perhaps a dirty nuke in the Mall of America, or simultaneous truck bombings of elementary schools all over the country. Something that really makes you sit back and say "holy shit". Or god forbid some kind of massive biological attack on an urban area. I say they target New York City again. The audacity of attacking that shithole a third time I think would seriously put a damper on George W's election campaign. So see... terrorism can be a good thing.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 16 2003, 04:37 AM

[Almighty Colin]

I say fuck this whole taking a turn pretense. Let's mount a sustained war.
Bush is a pussy. He needs to tap more into the sick side of human nature - like the kind that exists in my mind - and really match holy war with holy war. From sand into glass and desert into oil shares.

[Buff]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 06:36 AM
hmmm, well after two years of the "War On Terror", I am inclined to believe its their turn.

I would like to see an actual effort on their behalf to put the word terror back in terrorism. Perhaps a dirty nuke in the Mall of America, or simultaneous truck bombings of elementary schools all over the country. Something that really makes you sit back and say "holy shit". Or god forbid some kind of massive biological attack on an urban area. I say they target New York City again. The audacity of attacking that shithole a third time I think would seriously put a damper on George W's election campaign. So see... terrorism can be a good thing.
We fucked your boys up, pussy. They can't mount any more terrorist attacks, because we kicked the shit out of them. Your middle eastern asssnackers have become our bitches.

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Colin@Sep 16 2003, 05:45 AM
I say fuck this whole taking a turn pretense. Let's mount a sustained war.
Bush is a pussy. He needs to tap more into the sick side of human nature - like the kind that exists in my mind - and really match holy war with holy war. From sand into glass and desert into oil shares.

I would agree to that, however, they are the only ones actively killing Zionists. I have to have priorities. If you promise to target Israel as well, fire away Captain.

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Buff@Sep 16 2003, 06:14 AM

We fucked your boys up, pussy. They can't mount any more terrorist attacks, because we kicked the shit out of them. Your middle eastern asssnackers have become our bitches.

My boys uh?

Lemme explain something to you, and not that I expect you to even remotely understand this sort of policy as it is neither black nor white, left nor right... rub those last few brain cells together and contemplate this a bit.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Much the same way the American Nazi Party befriended the Nation of Islam (that would be nigger muslim terrorists to you Buffy), the same way Finland fought for both and against the Nazis during World War II, or even how the United States embraced Saddam when he turned on Iran, as well as the "Freedom Fighters" of Afghanistan that fought the evil Russians that eventually became the Taliban and Al Queda... is how I look at the world.

I care about as much about sand niggers as you obviously do about reading and higher education.

However, they like to kill Americans and Zionists. That I like. Make that I love. So... the enemy of my enemy is my friend. For the time being.

Again, I dont expect you to understand as it does not fit with your view of left and right and will probably cause you much bewilderment and frustration. Its ok though, we dont actually expect you to understand.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 16 2003, 06:56 AM

[Almighty Colin]

Labret,

Why are "the Zionists" your enemy?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:26 AM
Its ok though, we dont actually expect you to understand.
Also, who is "we"?

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Colin@Sep 16 2003, 06:27 AM
Labret,

Why are "the Zionists" your enemy?

Oh that is a long rant. Ill make this brief, I had a 11 page discussion with Serge on this one a few months ago on GFY, but I have class in 45 minutes.

First and foremost I hate the hypocrisy. Terrorists crying about terrorists. Partially the same reason I hate Americans. Always crying about genocide when their own holy book details several instances of them committing genocide in the name of their "God". Then they have the audacity to use this book as some sort of claim to a piece of land. Israel stands for kneejerk reactionary politically correct horseshit. Point out they are hypocrites and full of shit and you get a nice label. Case in point, Mike AI calls me a National Socialist (nazi more specifically), Buff thinks that I am obviously lefty pro Militant Islam. I am concerned at how I can be both a leftist neo nazi and fan of radical Islam. These jerkoffs just simply prove my point. I am getting off track.

Israel is just the height of arrogance and ignorance. The cult of Israel nauseates me. Not to mention I am no fan of monotheism. I want them all dead, I just want Israel to go first.

Not coherent, not long enough, but I have to go. Back later.

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Colin+Sep 16 2003, 06:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Sep 16 2003, 06:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--[Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:26 AM
Its ok though, we dont actually expect you to understand.
Also, who is "we"?[/b][/quote]

The people who supply me with tinfoil hats.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:40 AM
Oh that is a long rant
Now that you've explained who needs to go, who should survive?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]+Sep 16 2003, 09:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ([Labret] @ Sep 16 2003, 09:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -Colin@Sep 16 2003, 06:29 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--[Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:26 AM
Its ok though, we dont actually expect you to understand.
Also, who is "we"?

The people who supply me with tinfoil hats.[/b][/quote]
I hear they're selling in bulk.

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Colin+Sep 16 2003, 08:34 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Sep 16 2003, 08:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--[Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:40 AM
Oh that is a long rant
Now that you've explained who needs to go, who should survive?[/b][/quote]

You know what puzzles me, is why you ask me a lot of questions on topics that you have watched me debate a hundred times on GFY. Short memory or looking for inconsistencies over time?

Who should survive? Good question, I guess we will just see whats left when I am done.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 16 2003, 09:45 AM

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 12:35 PM
You know what puzzles me, is why you ask me a lot about questions on topics that you have watched me debate a hundred times on GFY. Short memory or looking for inconsistencies over time?
Actually, I've read very little of those threads.

With all the posting I do in a day, you think I have time to READ too?!

[sarettah]

Jesus was a capricorn
He ate organic food
He believed in love and peace
And never wore no shoes

Long hair, beard and sandles
And a funky bunch of friends
Reckon we’d just nail him up
If he came down again

’cause everybody’s gotta have somebody to look down on
Who they can feel better than at any time they please
Someone doin’ somethin’ dirty decent folks can frown on
If you can’t find nobody else, then help yourself to me

Eggheads cussing rednecks cussing
Hippies for their hair
Others laugh at straights who laugh at
Freaks who laugh at squares

Some folks hate the whites
Who hate the blacks who hate the klan
Most of us hate anything that
We don’t understand

’cause everybody’s gotta have somebody to look down on
Who they can feel better than at any time they please
Someone doin’ somethin’ dirty decent folks can frown on
If you can’t find nobody else, then help yourself to me

[XXXManager]

Originally posted by Joe Sixpack+Sep 16 2003, 06:11 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Joe Sixpack @ Sep 16 2003, 06:11 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--XXXManager@Sep 15 2003, 09:39 PM
sarettah: I don't know if you know about [Labret] but a word of advice... The best way to deal with his arguments is ignore them :)
Ignore them? Because he might have a point?

Why not just answer the question?[/b][/quote]
You too apparently do not know Labret

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 16 2003, 04:44 PM

You too apparently do not know Labret


After running through bullshit decoder, read: "He has handed me my ass so many times on GFY in the last two years I have given up."

[XXXManager]

One disadvantage this board software has is not having "Ingore user" feature.
It wasn't really necessary though, until this Labret "fella" arrived.
Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?

[sarettah]

Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 17 2003, 06:51 AM
One disadvantage this board software has is not having "Ingore user" feature.
It wasn't really necessary though, until this Labret "fella" arrived.
Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?
Hey XXX...

Yeah, I was well aware of Labret's posting style and what appear to be his "favorite" issues....

But, I also usually adopt a wait and see attitude when a person goes from one board to another..... If they keep up the profile then I either go to war or ignore.....

About the only real complaint I have on Labret right now would be about hoew he has to drop to name calling in what otherwise are intelligent posts...

But I will wait and see :)

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by sarettah+Sep 17 2003, 04:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sarettah @ Sep 17 2003, 04:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--XXXManager@Sep 17 2003, 06:51 AM
One disadvantage this board software has is not having "Ingore user" feature.
It wasn't really necessary though, until this Labret "fella" arrived.
Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?
Hey XXX...

Yeah, I was well aware of Labret's posting style and what appear to be his "favorite" issues....

But, I also usually adopt a wait and see attitude when a person goes from one board to another..... If they keep up the profile then I either go to war or ignore.....

About the only real complaint I have on Labret right now would be about hoew he has to drop to name calling in what otherwise are intelligent posts...

But I will wait and see :)[/b][/quote]

Keep up the profile? You one of them people with board personas? You an actor?

Dont "wait and see". Let me have it.


Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?


Lensfag banned me for exposing his ineptitude.


About the only real complaint I have on Labret right now would be about hoew he has to drop to name calling in what otherwise are intelligent posts...


The end result of educating white trash.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:40 AM
I have class in 45 minutes.


Are you in grad school now?

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by Colin+Sep 17 2003, 04:47 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Sep 17 2003, 04:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--[Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:40 AM
I have class in 45 minutes.


Are you in grad school now?[/b][/quote]

Sorta kinda. I have been accepted, I just have not started on my thesis. I am spending the semester gathering up the required 500 level credit hours and working with my advisor on a more focused approach to my topic.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 17 2003, 04:57 AM

[sarettah]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 17 2003, 07:35 AM
Keep up the profile? You one of them people with board personas? You an actor?

Nopers... with me, what you see is what you get... usually :yowsa:

By that statement I meant that I don't carry what a person does on one board to other boards....

I do not base my opinions of folks on what I have seen on GFY.... I base my opinion on what I see here....

So, no attack is in order by any means.....

I do wonder though, how anyone who is obviously as intelligent as you are can spout hatred towards a group of people...... Towards governments, fine.... Towards establishments, fine....

I tend to take each person as a seperate entity... I don't blame all white folk for how native americans have been treated... I don't blame all the Jewish people, or even all the Israelis for that matter, for how the palestinians have been treated.. I don't blame all the palestinians or moslems for their reaction to Israel....

People tend to be the same the world over from what I can tell.. There are assholes everywhere, but there are good folk too... None of us is in total control of our own situation... None of us controls the government we live under or the actions of that Government whether they were elected or forced upon us...

[Buff]

Originally posted by [Labret]+Sep 17 2003, 06:56 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ([Labret] @ Sep 17 2003, 06:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -Colin@Sep 17 2003, 04:47 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--[Labret]@Sep 16 2003, 09:40 AM
I have class in 45 minutes.


Are you in grad school now?

Sorta kinda. I have been accepted, I just have not started on my thesis. I am spending the semester gathering up the required 500 level credit hours and working with my advisor on a more focused approach to my topic.[/b][/quote]
Sociology, no doubt.

[[Labret]]

I do wonder though, how anyone who is obviously as intelligent as you are can spout hatred towards a group of people...... Towards governments, fine.... Towards establishments, fine....


I dont see how intelligence and hatred have any correlate. I dont see how anyone could get an education and not be angry. As if the more uneducated you are, the more acceptable it is to be hateful? And the smarter you are the more unacceptable hatred is? If anything, the more I learn, the angrier I get. By the time I am a Phd, I will be living in the mountains mailing pipe bombs to MTV executives. How anyone could sit and around and watch the tacit acceptance and lemming like maintenance of the status quo without damn near frothing at the mouth, I cannot fathom. And again, I dont hate everyone, I hate very select groups of people. I loathe the herd mentality and anyone (like Buff) that wants to stand up and moo louder than the rest in his herd in some misguided attempt at individualism, will be shown the respect the deserve. Which in my eyes is none. My enemy is not based on race or religion, my enemy is ignorance.

As for my apparent hatred and use of profanity. When arguing with someone like Buff, you need to argue at their level. You need to weave your criticism with colloquialism that they will understand. I am not saying I am above it all, I am as white trash as they come, I am quite comfortable talking like a biker. In fact I prefer it. But I digress. You would not be able to argue with Buffy any other way. Any attempt I made to inject simple logic into an argument was met with more prose steeped in metaphor and simile and utterly lacking in any substantive content. It is all merely to cover his shortcomings. It may dazzle some and give the impression that he knows anything at all, but to me its utterly transparent. Its nothing new. I have argued with Colin several times on GFY and you will never read me calling him an ignorant bitch or insinuating he blows goats. Just as you will never read him calling me names. To argue with someone like Buffy, the sheeple, or anyone on GFY for that matter, you are gonna have to drop down to their level. Could you imagine Buffy arguing with a Phd? What a clusterfuck that would be. It would be like watching the Special Olympics, absolutely hilarious, but at the same time tragic and heartbreaking.

I dont think Buffy is utterly worthless, in fact I find some of his work absolutely hilarious. Judging from his sample clips on Chatroom Romeo, he certainly is not lacking in charisma and self confidence. But while these may be his strong points, they are also his worst enemy.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 17 2003, 02:18 PM

[Buff]

Could you imagine Buffy arguing with a Phd? What a clusterfuck that would be. It would be like watching the Special Olympics, absolutely hilarious, but at the same time tragic and heartbreaking.

Well most university academics are leftists and many of them have degrees in abject tripe like Sociology, so yes, I completely agree: very few PHDed intellectuals could stand up to the barrage of logic and wisdom which I would levy at them.

But to date the only PHDs I've crushed since graduating from college are:

1. Noam Chomsky: In a lengthy email exchange we had about his leftist views and how he could possibly reconcile his hatred for free markets with his several expensive vehicles including a sports car and a boat. I owned him (and did all the research on his personal assets myself).

2. Paul Krugman: Another email debate -- he conceded that expansion of the money stock is inflationary, backpeddling from all of his published positions.

3. My father: He thinks that people like you might still exist if we didn't subsidize the breeding of the masses via the welfare state. I proved that idiots like you would never be born were it not for the federal government's ability to distort incentive structures on such a massive scale, because your retard parents wouldn't be able to afford to feed themselves, much less live long enough to fuck and reproduce.

[[Labret]]

Well most university academics are leftists


Why is that? Why are universities not bastions of conservatism?

I'll gladly spell it out for you.

Lets define conservative.

"Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. "

Ahhh yes, basically... lets maintain the status quo. Change is bad. For a conservative there is no reason to get an education. After all, all the answers and lessons in life are to be found in the past. Change bad, stasis good. Dont question, just accept.

And again with your buzzword of the week, "leftist". Everyone not to the right is on the left... right Buffy? You are either conservative, or a liberal? Right? Please explain it to me.



and many of them have degrees in abject tripe like Sociology


I am guessing that is aimed at me. I would be amazed if you knew what sociology was. Regardless, I have two undergrad degrees. One in physical anthropology and one in *gasp* sociology. Compare and contrast. That should be a hoot.

The study of human social behavior, especially the study of the origins, organization, institutions, and development of human society.
Analysis of a social institution or societal segment as a self-contained entity or in relation to society as a whole.

Completely unworthy of study right Buffy? You gotta wonder about a guy who attempts to denigrate another individual for getting an education. It is obvious that Buff is no fan of education. Books bad. Tv good.


1. Noam Chomsky:


This. This is the icing on the cake.

Buff, mental giant, destroyed the man that is considered to be the worlds leading giant in the field of linguistics, MIT professor, and one of the leading political dissidents of the 20th century. Author of I dont know how many critically acclaimed books. A man that spends his life eating other Phds for lunch, got his ass whomped in an email debate with Buff.

You are fucking delusional. Just because you emailed Chomsky's office and called him a leftist douchebag, does not constitute an "owning".


3. My father: He thinks that people like you might still exist if we didn't subsidize the breeding of the masses via the welfare state. I proved that idiots like you would never be born were it not for the federal government's ability to distort incentive structures on such a massive scale, because your retard parents wouldn't be able to afford to feed themselves, much less live long enough to fuck and reproduce.


Perfect example of what I was explaining to Sarettah. Utterly void of substance, groundless, and baseless. I dont even know where to start on this one. Let me see if I got this straight. You believe that the welfare system breeds liberalism? Could you flesh this one out a little more for me? I bet the logic behind it is stunning.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 17 2003, 02:23 PM

[sarettah]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 17 2003, 02:50 PM
I dont see how intelligence and hatred have any correlate. I dont see how anyone could get an education and not be angry. As if the more uneducated you are, the more acceptable it is to be hateful? And the smarter you are the more unacceptable hatred is? If anything, the more I learn, the angrier I get.
There is a direct correlation in my mind. But first as in any conversation, terms must be defined. Anger is not hate. Anger may manifest itself in hateful ways, but it is not hate.

I just realized that I could write a 1000 page thesis on this and still say nothing important. I hate when I can't verbalize what is running through my head.

I will be back later, gonna write some thoughts down first because this is an important subject as far as I am concerned.

[aeon]

Originally posted by [Labret]+Sep 16 2003, 06:40 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ([Labret] @ Sep 16 2003, 06:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Colin@Sep 16 2003, 06:27 AM
Labret,

Why are "the Zionists" your enemy?

Oh that is a long rant. Ill make this brief, I had a 11 page discussion with Serge on this one a few months ago on GFY, but I have class in 45 minutes.

First and foremost I hate the hypocrisy. Terrorists crying about terrorists. Partially the same reason I hate Americans. Always crying about genocide when their own holy book details several instances of them committing genocide in the name of their "God". Then they have the audacity to use this book as some sort of claim to a piece of land. Israel stands for kneejerk reactionary politically correct horseshit. Point out they are hypocrites and full of shit and you get a nice label. Case in point, Mike AI calls me a National Socialist (nazi more specifically), Buff thinks that I am obviously lefty pro Militant Islam. I am concerned at how I can be both a leftist neo nazi and fan of radical Islam. These jerkoffs just simply prove my point. I am getting off track.

Israel is just the height of arrogance and ignorance. The cult of Israel nauseates me. Not to mention I am no fan of monotheism. I want them all dead, I just want Israel to go first.

Not coherent, not long enough, but I have to go. Back later.[/b][/quote]
one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...

One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.

One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord. Of course, some form of neo-paganism could be forced on everyone...then you'd have a bunch of twits screaming about druids and the old ways...wouldn't that be fun - theological penis envy based on reconstructed/contrived religions let loose.

It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...shame muslim's don't understand that when they load their kids up with explosives...who's really screaming about "holy war/promised land?"...and who's sending their children off to die for a theology...

is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.

best of luck -
aeon

[Buff]

I am guessing that is aimed at me. I would be amazed if you knew what sociology was. Regardless, I have two undergrad degrees. One in physical anthropology and one in *gasp* sociology.

Ding ding ding. Most people would consider that a lucky guess on my part.

It's not -- I can smell you fucking leftards a mile a way. You reek. You smell like a sewage treatment plant infested with dead skunks.

I announce my retirement from this thread -- nothing trumps your admission that you have your degree in sociology (except that you went to public grammar and high school).

I win.

[Dravyk]

Originally posted by Colin@Sep 16 2003, 11:35 AM
The people who supply me with tinfoil hats.
I hear they're selling in bulk.
Hmm. Have to remember to buy stocks in Reynolds Aluminum. I see an upward trend.

[PornoDoggy]

Yo, Buffy ... just what in the hell does the fact that [labert] went to public schools have to do with anything?

Imagine that ... someone who claims to have "owned" Noam Chomsky has to resort to insults that mean something only to himself and like minded elitists, and is too much of a pussy to continue an exchange with a mere physical anthropology/sociology double major.

For shame, for shame ... You are a walking poster child for the arguement that any extra opportunities offered by private schools can be wasted if there's not much to work with - if in fact you did attend private schools.

[[Labret]]

one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...


Secular?

"the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty"

Zionism advocates theocracy plain and simple. Theocracy is the opposite of secular.


One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.


A secular state justified in the Torah? Why would it be? You do know what secular means right?


One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord.


Propagation of a religion via force. The brand of Christianity you see today was a result of the early church's complete and total annihilation of competing sects, such as the Gnostic, the Monophysites et all. After the Council of Nicaea, anyone group that did not adhere to the Nicean Creed was outlawed and dealt with by force. Christianity had its warlord, he was called "The Pope". You did things his way, or no way. Remember a guy called Martin Luther's reaction? Xtianity was spread by force, period. Judaism was not concerned with spreading the faith at all. Judaism belonged to the Jewish people and them alone. You did not convert the defeated, you destroyed them entirely. The Torah is replete with stories of God demanding genocide of entire peoples. No interest whatsoever in converting them. In the early days you did not convert to Judaism, you were born into Judaism. Although they did seem to have an affinity for little virgin girls.

Point being, all monotheism has its roots in force of one kind or another. Hence why I have an intense dislike of it. "mono", one. There can be only one, everyone else must die.

My favorite quote:


Numbers 31:1-18: "...And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded moses, and they slew all the [adult] males. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones...And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses...And Moses was angry with the officers of the host And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Ba'laam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Keep the little girls for yourself after you wipe out the entire population. Nice. Elohim is a god of looooove.


It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...


I'll go for that I guess, although social darwinism is a tough point to argue. I can use your argument to justify slavery as well. You are walking a slippery slope with social darwinism.


is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.


I think it is a combination of a whole lot of factors. I think it is largely theological. The Quran makes it quite clear what should happen to those that attack Islam.

Lock some Catholics in a room with a bunch of good ol southern boy evangelical Christians and lets see who comes out alive. I am not even quite sure what the point of your last comparison was.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 18 2003, 02:44 AM

[[Labret]]

Imagine that ... someone who claims to have "owned" Noam Chomsky has to resort to insults that mean something only to himself and like minded elitists, and is too much of a pussy to continue an exchange with a mere physical anthropology/sociology double major


You flatter Buffy with the elitist statement.

Sad isnt it? I guess I should be flattered that I presented a tougher challenge than Chomsky.


I announce my retirement from this thread



http://www.detroithardcore.com/owned.jpg



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 18 2003, 02:49 AM

[sarettah]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 17 2003, 05:51 PM
I will be back later, gonna write some thoughts down first because this is an important subject as far as I am concerned.
Sorry I din't get back to this thread last night....

Not gonna finish it today either...lol....



If you want to do an owned pic...go right ahead... although the one you posted on Buff is the first I have ever seen over here at Oprano.....Usually just see those at GFY.....

:yowsa:

[aeon]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 18 2003, 02:43 AM

one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...


Secular?

"the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty"

Zionism advocates theocracy plain and simple. Theocracy is the opposite of secular.


One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.


A secular state justified in the Torah? Why would it be? You do know what secular means right?


One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord.


Propagation of a religion via force. The brand of Christianity you see today was a result of the early church's complete and total annihilation of competing sects, such as the Gnostic, the Monophysites et all. After the Council of Nicaea, anyone group that did not adhere to the Nicean Creed was outlawed and dealt with by force. Christianity had its warlord, he was called "The Pope". You did things his way, or no way. Remember a guy called Martin Luther's reaction? Xtianity was spread by force, period. Judaism was not concerned with spreading the faith at all. Judaism belonged to the Jewish people and them alone. You did not convert the defeated, you destroyed them entirely. The Torah is replete with stories of God demanding genocide of entire peoples. No interest whatsoever in converting them. In the early days you did not convert to Judaism, you were born into Judaism. Although they did seem to have an affinity for little virgin girls.

Point being, all monotheism has its roots in force of one kind or another. Hence why I have an intense dislike of it. "mono", one. There can be only one, everyone else must die.

My favorite quote:


Numbers 31:1-18: "...And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded moses, and they slew all the [adult] males. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones...And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses...And Moses was angry with the officers of the host And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Ba'laam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Keep the little girls for yourself after you wipe out the entire population. Nice. Elohim is a god of looooove.


It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...


I'll go for that I guess, although social darwinism is a tough point to argue. I can use your argument to justify slavery as well. You are walking a slippery slope with social darwinism.


is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.


I think it is a combination of a whole lot of factors. I think it is largely theological. The Quran makes it quite clear what should happen to those that attack Islam.

Lock some Catholics in a room with a bunch of good ol southern boy evangelical Christians and lets see who comes out alive. I am not even quite sure what the point of your last comparison was.
I'm no good at piecing qoutes - so bear with me.

Zionism began as movement to afford peoples included, either willingly or unwillingly, within the Jewish community a nation seperate from Europe. Zionism can't argue for a theocratic state for the reason's I mentioned previously. Unfortunately, any country with a majority of the population belonging to one particular faith will be overly concerned with that theology. The present conflict isn't between Jews/Muslims - it's a contrast in world views...wouldn't matter if it was north dakota...Islamic ideals will never mix with western philosophy. To even engage in debate their has to be a common paradigm...The soviets/US hated each other - we never nuked each other because of a common paradigm...self-preservation.

I'm afraid I do know what secular means...unfortunately, any time the word "Jewish" enters into a debate the definitions become rather blurry in order to justify positions...to say one is Jewish is based on canonnical criteria...yet people call themselves Jewish Atheists - it's a contradiction to define one's self by a criteria you dismiss...it gets muddy...

Nicea took the cult of Yoshua to a formalized statement of him as the Mosiach...essentially the beginnings of Pauline Christianity - and presented a codified theological base as the new Israel which excluded the remnants of the mystical/prophetic schools still operating - for obvious reasons. As far as any pope being a warlord...that's debatable on whether it was the religious leaders being puppets of the state or vice versa. BTW - to some extent gnosticism and the other esoteric cults still have remnants (namely coptics).

Qouting the Tanach gets very tricky...there are two points overlooked generally. The Jewish concept of "G-d" is all encompassing - that means the Divine is love/hatred/peace/war/pain/pleasure - there is no other. To say only good things come from above is an absurditity to the observant Jewish mind. This isn't pantheism - it's an absolute monotheism wherein the divine is not bound by one aspect...that would be limiting the concept and necessarily make the divine no longer divine. Jews will say "G-d does what G-d does because that's what G-d does". Also with the Tanach it should be noted the literal relevance of anything aside from the 613 Mitzvo is questionable - Jewish theology is not literal in it's interpretation of anything other than Mitzvo. Midrashim (stories)...even within Torah are considered to be examples of what happens when you do/don't do Mitzvo. No one in their right mind believes the world was created in 7 days...

The sunni shia comment was simply to point out within the Islamic world - the notion of quietly debating differences over a pipe isn't the norm (which isn't limited to Islamic thought - but muslims have a tendancy to hold grudges for a long time - ever called a Kharajijte - best to stay away from whoever called you that & their family for generations). The two main branches of Islam have been killing each other for centuries - obviously it's better to kill someone else...

Moreover - I'm not really arguing a position of darwinism & I'm certainly not taking the position that might = right...more a statement of reality. History has demonstrated the ones with the biggest guns usually win in military conflict. Certainly not taking it to the extreme of only the strong/superior survive.

best of luck -
aeon

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by aeon@Sep 18 2003, 07:34 AM
The present conflict isn't between Jews/Muslims - it's a contrast in world views.
Yeah, each side's world-view is that "this land is my land and it's not your land".

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 17 2003, 07:42 PM
Yo, Buffy ... just what in the hell does the fact that [labert] went to public schools have to do with anything?



I would be honest to god surprised if Buffy did not graduate from public school himself. He exhibits all the classical traits of a typical public school graduate.

I should follow that up with an explanation. The public school system is only designed to create mindless little automatons. It is nothing more than societies way of enculturating you into consumer society and preparing you to be another cog in the industrial machine. Public school does not, and I am not saying private school does, teach critical thinking skills nor does it introduce any alternative viewpoints. But again, that is not what it is there for. Its only job is to produce workers and consumers.

Back when the industrial revolution began sweeping across Europe and the United States, the factories needed a large workforce. Since 98% of the population was agrarian they found it increasingly difficult to keep these people working long steady hours. Your typical agrarian individual had no concept of working by the clock, or working to accumulate material wealth. They only knew how to work long enough in order to get what they needed to survive. Nothing more was needed. If you could get away with working 4 hours a day on a very small farm, why the hell would you work 14 hours a day? There was no large scale consumer society, if you needed anything else you simply bartered for it. I am getting off track. So this new class of factory workers found the idea of working in a factory 14 hours a day to be absurd. They only wanted to work long enough to get what they wanted and be done with it. Henry Ford had this same problem, Ill come back to this in a minute.

Slowly but surely this gave rise to a small consumer class that needed to purchase its goods from producers in order to survive.

This is where the idea of public school comes in. Child labor was a huge problem during this time. Not only were children forced to work in dangerous conditions, expanding populations in these new industrial centers created competition for work. Then comes the enemy of Buff, the lefties come in and fix this problem by creating child labor laws. More adults are available for work now, and children are not working 12 hour days in dismal conditions.

But what the fuck do we do with all these kids? Enter the school system.

Brilliant idea actually. We will take all these children, regiment them according to the clock, enculturate them how we see fit, and when we are done... bingo, instant working class. Barely educated (esp by todays standards), used to working by the clock, and minds pumped full of whatever the ruling class saw fit.

Its no different than getting an education here. You are shown what is right, what is wrong. Who is right, who is wrong. What happens if you break the rules of the ruling class. Why it is good to follow the herd.

Back to Henry Ford. So what does Henry do to keep these lazy hick bastards working? Instead of paying them a minimum wage, he pays them an astounding wage for the time. What does all this extra money do? What do you do with extra money? You spend it. Henry Ford created a class of consumer employees. The more you make, the more you buy. And one need only look to examples of people in this industry to see what money and material wealth create. Its just creates more need, more want. Commodity fetishism it is called, and most of you are stricken with it. You got the Brad Shaws, the Lensmen, the MikeAI, people just obsessed with gathering up material possessions. Why? Because it is their identity. They cannot exist without it. It fills a void. It makes them who they are. They sleep better at night knowing they have more than the next guy.

Shit, time for class. Until next time faggarios. I didnt bother to spell check, have a ball Buffy.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 18 2003, 07:08 AM

[aeon]

Originally posted by Colin+Sep 18 2003, 04:40 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Sep 18 2003, 04:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--aeon@Sep 18 2003, 07:34 AM
The present conflict isn't between Jews/Muslims - it's a contrast in world views.
Yeah, each side's world-view is that "this land is my land and it's not your land".[/b][/quote]
it don't matter if it's real estate or who's gonna leave the tip.

best of luck -
aeon

[PornoDoggy]

That was almost predictable ... [labert]'s opinions on public schools don't seem too much different that [buff]s. Just a bit more evidence that they are cut from the same cloth ... main difference I see is who they identify as the antagonists and protagonists.

[[Labret]]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 18 2003, 07:46 AM
That was almost predictable ... [labert]'s opinions on public schools don't seem too much different that [buff]s. Just a bit more evidence that they are cut from the same cloth ... main difference I see is who they identify as the antagonists and protagonists.

Give me a fucking break, I think you need to seriously re-read what I wrote.

Buffy only feels public education is bad because it doesnt cost as much as his. His view is nothing more than the end result of the same consumer mindset that I have been discussing for the last 3 days. If it costs more, it is better.

His ideas, or lack thereof, come nowhere even remotely close to why I feel public education is a joke.

His idea is based on some consumer class system, mine is actually the end result of countless people conducting research.

Cut of the same cloth. Seriously. Pull your head out.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 18 2003, 11:35 AM
mine is actually the end result of countless people conducting research.

Selected bits and pieces of various studies and history actually.

There are many reasons why there are public schools in the U.S. while the reasons you gave are indeed valid, they do not cover all of them and possibly not the vast majority of them.

Many colonies established public schools to teach kids the bible and the proper puritanical mindset.

Native Americans were forced into Mission schools and then later Federal boarding schools as a way to "breed the savage" out of them.

Vocational schools were established to place control over workers in the hands of the factory owners instead of the Union apprentice programs.

and many were established for the reasons you have stated.

However, as with anything, they have evolved. Many offer a very poor education and barely equip a person with the knowledge to survive in the real world. Some have excellent programs with the goal of preparing students to continue onward in their educational pursuits and often feed students into the various ivy league colleges.

The same can be said of private schools.

I know that I went to a public school in New York and received a fairly good education. I graduated in 1973. Our graduating class was close to 50% college oriented with SAT scores that were quite high (we had 2 students, twin brother and students with 1600s) I was somewhere around the middle of the class gradewise with SATs above 1300.

Since the public school systems are controlled at the state/local level predominantly, there is no one reason that they exist and there is no one standard level of education emerging from them.



Last edited by sarettah at Sep 18 2003, 11:49 AM

[PornoDoggy]

I don't think my head is anywhere but on straight.

Regardless of the rationale that either of you use to justify your obvious contempt for public education, I do think they are remarkably similar.

The most obvious common characteristic is the elitist attitude that BOTH of you share. It doesn't matter if that elitism is based on a feeling of class superiority or a pseudonihilistic attitude of greater "enlightenment" - it's the same thing wrapped up in a different package.

[sarettah]

What I got out of it was:

Buff believes the worng thing for the wrong reasons....

and

Labret believes the wrong thing for the right reasons....

:blink:

[PornoDoggy]

I really don't see much difference in substance between the two of them on education.

[wig]

Seems to me education is what you make it for the most part.

If you are inclined to question things, to contemplate, to perform any form of critical thinking and to research, you are likely to form a more educated and balanced philosophy.

It may still differ from others, but you will be less indoctrinated.

Of course, as an example, if you go to Catholic school you are going to be nudged towards Jesus as the answer and if you go to Gov't school you are going to be nudged towards government as the answer.

IMHO, the type of school has some degree of influence, but not as much as the mindset of the individual.

Sheeple will be sheeple no matter what school you send them to.

[sarettah]

I am actually inclined to believe that individual teachers have much more influence than the particular school does...

There are some very mediocre teachers in both private and public schools and there are some excellent teachers in private and public schools...

All it takes is one great teacher at the right point in time to turn a person on to loving learning...

and all it takes is one really rotten teacher at the right point in time to destroy one's love of learning....

[dantheman]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 18 2003, 03:21 PM
I am actually inclined to believe that individual teachers have much more influence than the particular school does...

There are some very mediocre teachers in both private and public schools and there are some excellent teachers in private and public schools...

All it takes is one great teacher at the right point in time to turn a person on to loving learning...

and all it takes is one really rotten teacher at the right point in time to destroy one's love of learning....


sare, I concur :salute:

edit, just so ya all know......puplic school grade school, puplic HS, puplic college............RTR :rokk:



Last edited by dantheman at Sep 18 2003, 03:27 PM

[wig]

Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 18 2003, 03:21 PM
I am actually inclined to believe that individual teachers have much more influence than the particular school does...

There are some very mediocre teachers in both private and public schools and there are some excellent teachers in private and public schools...

All it takes is one great teacher at the right point in time to turn a person on to loving learning...

and all it takes is one really rotten teacher at the right point in time to destroy one's love of learning....
Sare, I agree with that as well. :okthumb:

I was speaking in general, but if you drill down there are sure to be instances like you pointed out.