Angela Merkel & could name many more.
I'm glad you find defense ok now.
If some have used aggression and called it defense, it wasn't defense.
Much as I agree with you on some matters, you're political views are fairly alien *to me*, and if you start seeing denigration in a simple naming of things, then I cannot discuss anything at all with you since your statements are rooted in your more general convictions.
I'd rather hear your "family story", anyway.
THE PAVILION ANNEX
Moderator: Moderator
-
FrankChurch
- Posts: 16283
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
How many Chomsky postings do I have to post before you understand? haha. Jan, you are something.
I don't mean that in a bad way.
I don't mean that in a bad way.
-
FrankChurch
- Posts: 16283
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
I will challenge you on that.
So, ah, can the Palestinians defend themselves from Israeli aggression? What do you think, Jan?
So, ah, can the Palestinians defend themselves from Israeli aggression? What do you think, Jan?
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
francis
neither war, or any form of aggression, are illogical ("mislogic" has yet to/soon to be entered into our lexicon ) or unreasonable.
war, predation, or any other manifestation of subordination,are often only the means to achieve survival, through competition or control.
as distasteful and heartbreaking as it would be,you will eat your own children to raise their siblings in a more advantageous environment.
all this was to avoid a one liner... or two
it is what it is
get over it
neither war, or any form of aggression, are illogical ("mislogic" has yet to/soon to be entered into our lexicon ) or unreasonable.
war, predation, or any other manifestation of subordination,are often only the means to achieve survival, through competition or control.
as distasteful and heartbreaking as it would be,you will eat your own children to raise their siblings in a more advantageous environment.
all this was to avoid a one liner... or two
it is what it is
get over it
follow your bliss,mike
-
Lori Koonce
- Posts: 3538
- Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
- Location: San Francisco California
- Contact:
Re:
And Lori, why didn't your grandfather go home, and where would that have been?
Jan
Just saw this a few minutes ago, didn't mean to ignore you.
Home for Grandpa Kunze was Dresden Germany. I don't know the exact time frame he was a POW, but we all know what happened to Dresden in the end.
With the clarity that only hindsight can provide, it seems like he made a very wise decision.
Lori
Lori, too bad you don't know much about the story.
Dresden is a good place to come from.
I have a "boring" family history, so I was waiting for someone else to volunteer. Geographically speaking, one half of my family is from Northern Germany (Hamburg and Lubeck), the other half is from a village in France, a village in Prussia (now cut off from Germany), and Aachen. My father thinks we also have some Russian ancestry but there's no proof. My aunt emigrated to the US after the war.
Dresden is a good place to come from.
I have a "boring" family history, so I was waiting for someone else to volunteer. Geographically speaking, one half of my family is from Northern Germany (Hamburg and Lubeck), the other half is from a village in France, a village in Prussia (now cut off from Germany), and Aachen. My father thinks we also have some Russian ancestry but there's no proof. My aunt emigrated to the US after the war.
-
markabaddon
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:24 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
OK Frankie, I am back in the Forums after a lengthy hiatus and am disappointed that you have not yet evolved to the point where you blindly defend the Palestinians.
Those people who you say cannot protect themselves from Israeli aggression have killed over 10,000 Israeli civilians during the current Intifadah. I would say that is a fairly substantial loss of life, wouldn't you? Or do those bodies not count because they are Jews?
As I have said many times before, Israel does not have clean hands in this conflict. They have done horrific things like bulldozing houses when Palestinaians are still inside and have fired rockets into civilian areas because terrorists are located there. These actions disgust me, however, on balance the Israeli crimes are far outweighed by the numerous atrocities committed by the Palestinaians.
Those people who you say cannot protect themselves from Israeli aggression have killed over 10,000 Israeli civilians during the current Intifadah. I would say that is a fairly substantial loss of life, wouldn't you? Or do those bodies not count because they are Jews?
As I have said many times before, Israel does not have clean hands in this conflict. They have done horrific things like bulldozing houses when Palestinaians are still inside and have fired rockets into civilian areas because terrorists are located there. These actions disgust me, however, on balance the Israeli crimes are far outweighed by the numerous atrocities committed by the Palestinaians.
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristrocratic forms. No gov't in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, gov't tends more and mroe to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class
-
FrankChurch
- Posts: 16283
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Mark, where in the world did you get that casualty count from? That seems awful high to me.
Israel killed at least 20,000 people alone in 1982 in Lebanon.
Once again--I will say it till I am blue--I never mentioned the term "Jew" or "jews," I use the term Israeli or elite element of Israel--the state, not the people--some being Jewish, Christian and Arab. This fight has nothing to do with Jews but with aggression and defense against said aggression.
Obviously the biggest nitwit knows that the Jews have taken hell for a few thousand years, as have Christians, Muslims, women, blacks, etc. Victimhood does not give you the moral right to play by different rules. Israel is doing what the Stalinists did in Russia, purging the country of real socialists, Anarchists, dissidents. It started with the ethnic cleansing of the arabs in 1947 and the continued abuse, torture and murder since then. Israelis have seen car bombings and suicide attacks, as defense against aggression and the illegal occupation, dumb attacks, criminal attacks, but in the eyes of Hamas, defensive attacks. They are crimes as are Israeli crimes. Sure, string up the Hamas bullies, but you must also put Israelis in prison. The two state solution is the only way. Arabs offer Israel a viable state, they refuse. First there was the Arab league proposals in 2002, then what was called the Geneva Accords, in 2005, created by Israeli doves and Palestinian peace groups. Both so far have been rejected by Israel. Go tell the caged bird.
The violence is on both sides but the context matters, as does the amount of victims on the other, plus the way rules for each are brokered. Israel has a solumn right to use violence, the arabs don't and must take it. Those are immoral rules and will not hunt.
Israel killed at least 20,000 people alone in 1982 in Lebanon.
Once again--I will say it till I am blue--I never mentioned the term "Jew" or "jews," I use the term Israeli or elite element of Israel--the state, not the people--some being Jewish, Christian and Arab. This fight has nothing to do with Jews but with aggression and defense against said aggression.
Obviously the biggest nitwit knows that the Jews have taken hell for a few thousand years, as have Christians, Muslims, women, blacks, etc. Victimhood does not give you the moral right to play by different rules. Israel is doing what the Stalinists did in Russia, purging the country of real socialists, Anarchists, dissidents. It started with the ethnic cleansing of the arabs in 1947 and the continued abuse, torture and murder since then. Israelis have seen car bombings and suicide attacks, as defense against aggression and the illegal occupation, dumb attacks, criminal attacks, but in the eyes of Hamas, defensive attacks. They are crimes as are Israeli crimes. Sure, string up the Hamas bullies, but you must also put Israelis in prison. The two state solution is the only way. Arabs offer Israel a viable state, they refuse. First there was the Arab league proposals in 2002, then what was called the Geneva Accords, in 2005, created by Israeli doves and Palestinian peace groups. Both so far have been rejected by Israel. Go tell the caged bird.
The violence is on both sides but the context matters, as does the amount of victims on the other, plus the way rules for each are brokered. Israel has a solumn right to use violence, the arabs don't and must take it. Those are immoral rules and will not hunt.
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
I will argue with Jan that my story is more boring than his. My parents are from Canada, my father's parents from Kentucky. This makes me a Canadian Hillbilly. The End.
At least Jan had the sense to be born in a foreign country.
At least Jan had the sense to be born in a foreign country.
-
markabaddon
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:24 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Frankie,
My number came from either Ha-aretz or the Red Cross, cannot remember which. Where did you get your numbers about Lebanon from? And were those numbers the total casualties committed by Israelis or did you include the massacres between Muslim and Christian in those figures. Remember Ariel Sharon was under international indictment not for anything he did, but because he had knowledge of a planned massacre of Muslims by Christians and did nothing to stop it nor report it to UN troops. Does not mean that he is directly responsible for those deaths
As for your terms, c'mon Frank get real. You are talking about a Jewish state, whose dominant religion is Judaism, with other religions being only marginally represented in government. On the Palestinian side, you have a similar relationship, substituting Islam for Judaism. Draw distinctions all you want, but they are false and you damn well know it
As for your claims of ethnic cleansing in 1947 they are false. There were isolated cases where Arab farmers were threatened to move off their land, this is true, but the overhwleming majority left on their own because they were told that once the Jews were killed they would receive all their land.
The 2002 solution broke down over a little thing called recognizing Israel's right to exist. Gee, I wonder why they would not be thrilled to help create a nation when that new country's stated goal would be to kill every Jewish man, woman, and child in Israel? Israel has long tried to negotiate with the Palestinains over a two state solution (the current Netanyahi administration excepted, that dude is crazy), but they have insisted that peace happens first, then a state could be a viable option. Where is the problem in that?
My number came from either Ha-aretz or the Red Cross, cannot remember which. Where did you get your numbers about Lebanon from? And were those numbers the total casualties committed by Israelis or did you include the massacres between Muslim and Christian in those figures. Remember Ariel Sharon was under international indictment not for anything he did, but because he had knowledge of a planned massacre of Muslims by Christians and did nothing to stop it nor report it to UN troops. Does not mean that he is directly responsible for those deaths
As for your terms, c'mon Frank get real. You are talking about a Jewish state, whose dominant religion is Judaism, with other religions being only marginally represented in government. On the Palestinian side, you have a similar relationship, substituting Islam for Judaism. Draw distinctions all you want, but they are false and you damn well know it
As for your claims of ethnic cleansing in 1947 they are false. There were isolated cases where Arab farmers were threatened to move off their land, this is true, but the overhwleming majority left on their own because they were told that once the Jews were killed they would receive all their land.
The 2002 solution broke down over a little thing called recognizing Israel's right to exist. Gee, I wonder why they would not be thrilled to help create a nation when that new country's stated goal would be to kill every Jewish man, woman, and child in Israel? Israel has long tried to negotiate with the Palestinains over a two state solution (the current Netanyahi administration excepted, that dude is crazy), but they have insisted that peace happens first, then a state could be a viable option. Where is the problem in that?
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristrocratic forms. No gov't in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, gov't tends more and mroe to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class
-
FrankChurch
- Posts: 16283
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Mark, you try me, you really do.
The figures on Lebanon come from Robert Fisk, the go-to guy on the middle east, among many others including John Pilger, Chris Hedges, Gilbert Achcar, my Noamie.
Sharon did support the Sabra and Shatila massacres.
There are good books on the ethnic cleansing issue, from experts in the region, most especially Benny Morris, the LEADING Israeli historian. He even did an interview where he said that the Palestinians should have been completely cleansed.
Some further study:
http://www.amazon.com/Ethnic-Cleansing- ... 1851684670
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitbeck01272007.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHFXRcdFoCw
Pappe is a leading historian in Israel. He is Jewish, not arab. There are many arab experts, but I wanted to prove that many Jews agree with me.
I already dealt with "Israel's right to exist." No state has a right to exist, since states are created, largely by colonialism or by force. We stole land from Mexico, called it America, now we have to nod our heads when dumb Americans talk about our legitimate borders. A farce.
Borders are arbitrary.
Arabs are not happy with a Jewish state, but they are willing to hold their noses, if the Palestinians can have a viable state. Hamas and Hizbollah are not happy with it, but they are willing to accept it. The main point of contention is with right of return for arabs. Israel is afraid of an arab majority, overriding the power of a strong Jewish state. The arabs are willing to negociate that as well. Israel tends to make excuses, mainly because their crazies control the culture. The Settlers are saying they will not move. Nuttenyahoo is pro-settlements.
Pappe makes a good point: Imagine if you told Nigeria it had to partition itself into a half French state. There is no way the African population there would go for that. There are many similar thought balloons.
The reality now is the reality now: either we have a two-state solution on the Green Line or endless war, possible nuclear war. I know my option.
The figures on Lebanon come from Robert Fisk, the go-to guy on the middle east, among many others including John Pilger, Chris Hedges, Gilbert Achcar, my Noamie.
Sharon did support the Sabra and Shatila massacres.
There are good books on the ethnic cleansing issue, from experts in the region, most especially Benny Morris, the LEADING Israeli historian. He even did an interview where he said that the Palestinians should have been completely cleansed.
Some further study:
http://www.amazon.com/Ethnic-Cleansing- ... 1851684670
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitbeck01272007.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHFXRcdFoCw
Pappe is a leading historian in Israel. He is Jewish, not arab. There are many arab experts, but I wanted to prove that many Jews agree with me.
I already dealt with "Israel's right to exist." No state has a right to exist, since states are created, largely by colonialism or by force. We stole land from Mexico, called it America, now we have to nod our heads when dumb Americans talk about our legitimate borders. A farce.
Borders are arbitrary.
Arabs are not happy with a Jewish state, but they are willing to hold their noses, if the Palestinians can have a viable state. Hamas and Hizbollah are not happy with it, but they are willing to accept it. The main point of contention is with right of return for arabs. Israel is afraid of an arab majority, overriding the power of a strong Jewish state. The arabs are willing to negociate that as well. Israel tends to make excuses, mainly because their crazies control the culture. The Settlers are saying they will not move. Nuttenyahoo is pro-settlements.
Pappe makes a good point: Imagine if you told Nigeria it had to partition itself into a half French state. There is no way the African population there would go for that. There are many similar thought balloons.
The reality now is the reality now: either we have a two-state solution on the Green Line or endless war, possible nuclear war. I know my option.
-
Steve Evil
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
- Location: Some Cave in Kanata
- Contact:
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Hamas are bad people. I don't deny it, neither should you. Hamas are bad people. So are Hezbollah. If there were no more to it than that, then the issue would be easy. But there is more to it than that. There is so much more to it than that, that we in the west refuse to understand or acknowlege.
Israel was created by kicking all the natives out of the region and keeping them out with fences and walls. The refugees are forbidden their own state on what pathetic little tracts of desert are left to them (shrinking every year as Israeli settlers take more) unless they agree to recognize the theft as legitimate, give up all hope of returning home, accept Israeli control over its airspace, its internal travel, its imports, its tax dollars, every aspect of its citizens lives. Palestinian homes can be demolished with impunity, Palenstians cannot travel freely within the occupied territories, ambulences often can't get through the checkpoints, medical supplies can't get into the country, nearly half the population is unemployed because the economy is shut down at regular intervals. Meanwhile, there are well-maintained roads running through the territories that only Israelis are allowed to use. The west bank has been completely cut off from the Gaza strip. . .
Peace deals are offered strictly on Israeli terms. Calls to recognize Israel's "right to exist" are short hand for relinquishing all claims to all the land forever and accepting permanent second class citizenship in a sattelite state. Would any of us in the west accept these kind of terms? We have the gall to demand they give up the right of return because it would disrupt an artificial religous/ethnic majority?
The conflict didn't start in a vacuum. Israel wasn't just sitting around minding its own business when the bloodthirsty expansionist Arabs decided to attack. It was established by force in a region where millions of people already lived. That's the elephant in the room we're not allowed to address. The conflict is discussed in terms of Jews vs. anti-semites, secular, liberal democracy (but I thought it was a Jewish state?) vs. religious fundamentalism (as if there were none on this side of the fence), western values vs. barbarism, a peaceloving people defending themselves against random acts of aggression. Black and white, good and evil. There is no limit to the indignities brown people should endure to ensure white people's security. The default position we must take in polite company is that when Israel does wrong, it is the isolated actions of a few bad people, or that bad things happen in defensive wars, but when Palestians do wrong, it is because they hate Jews. This is the attitude of politicians and newspaper editors. The burden of proof falls on the supporters of Palestine that they are not anti-semitic. No Palestinian atrocity can be forgotten or overlooked, but no Israeli atrocity can be condemned without reservation. Try it. Select one Israeli atrocity (say, white phospherous) and attempt to condemn it without reservation or qualification. Fur will fly.
Point being: when an entire population is reduced to cattle in a pen, bad things will happen. No amount of moralizing will prevent it. Let's stop pretending that is not what has happened.
Dresden is indeed lovely.
Israel was created by kicking all the natives out of the region and keeping them out with fences and walls. The refugees are forbidden their own state on what pathetic little tracts of desert are left to them (shrinking every year as Israeli settlers take more) unless they agree to recognize the theft as legitimate, give up all hope of returning home, accept Israeli control over its airspace, its internal travel, its imports, its tax dollars, every aspect of its citizens lives. Palestinian homes can be demolished with impunity, Palenstians cannot travel freely within the occupied territories, ambulences often can't get through the checkpoints, medical supplies can't get into the country, nearly half the population is unemployed because the economy is shut down at regular intervals. Meanwhile, there are well-maintained roads running through the territories that only Israelis are allowed to use. The west bank has been completely cut off from the Gaza strip. . .
Peace deals are offered strictly on Israeli terms. Calls to recognize Israel's "right to exist" are short hand for relinquishing all claims to all the land forever and accepting permanent second class citizenship in a sattelite state. Would any of us in the west accept these kind of terms? We have the gall to demand they give up the right of return because it would disrupt an artificial religous/ethnic majority?
The conflict didn't start in a vacuum. Israel wasn't just sitting around minding its own business when the bloodthirsty expansionist Arabs decided to attack. It was established by force in a region where millions of people already lived. That's the elephant in the room we're not allowed to address. The conflict is discussed in terms of Jews vs. anti-semites, secular, liberal democracy (but I thought it was a Jewish state?) vs. religious fundamentalism (as if there were none on this side of the fence), western values vs. barbarism, a peaceloving people defending themselves against random acts of aggression. Black and white, good and evil. There is no limit to the indignities brown people should endure to ensure white people's security. The default position we must take in polite company is that when Israel does wrong, it is the isolated actions of a few bad people, or that bad things happen in defensive wars, but when Palestians do wrong, it is because they hate Jews. This is the attitude of politicians and newspaper editors. The burden of proof falls on the supporters of Palestine that they are not anti-semitic. No Palestinian atrocity can be forgotten or overlooked, but no Israeli atrocity can be condemned without reservation. Try it. Select one Israeli atrocity (say, white phospherous) and attempt to condemn it without reservation or qualification. Fur will fly.
Point being: when an entire population is reduced to cattle in a pen, bad things will happen. No amount of moralizing will prevent it. Let's stop pretending that is not what has happened.
Dresden is indeed lovely.
-
Steve Evil
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
- Location: Some Cave in Kanata
- Contact:
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Shall we move it to another thread before Jan has a stroke? 
-
FrankChurch
- Posts: 16283
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
Yea, they use the anti-semitic shuck as a way to divert the debate. You see this with the ADL, which has become an Israel defense league, who no longer care about actual anti-semitism. Note how they will work with the jew hating religious right, because they support Israel, albiet for awful reasons. They also spy on critics of Israel, creating dosiers on people like Chomskers and Norman Finkelstein. The Jewish lobby had Finkelstein denied tenure at DePaul University. His crime? Implying that some organisations use the holocaust as an excuse for Israeli crimes. It doesn't matter that Finkelstein has his sources vetted to the tee or that Israeli historians give him high marks for accuracy.
They talk about anti-semitism, which is pretty much dead in America, but refuse to talk about our intense anti-arab hatred. Israel even goes as far as denying equal rights to the African Jews. Chomsky talks about the fact that they are put into neighborhoods, away from European Jews.
The history is pretty obvious: After the Holocaust most Jews wanted to go to north America, but the Zionists, who controlled Displaced Person's Camps, made the Jews go to Israel. Then there was the fact that Americans didn't want the European jews to immigrate. There were laws keeping out jews, diverting them to Israel, so that they could be cannon fodder for arabs. The Zionists took over land that Palestinians fled from, not allowing them to come back, in affect a subtle form or ethnic cleansing.
Yea, Mark, I studied what you mentioned further. You are right, Palestinians did flee parts of Israel, but they were not allowed to come back. Still a form of ethnic cleansing, since the land was taken. When you go on vacation, if I were to take your land while you were away, what would you think? I don't even have to bring it up. It answers itself.
Thanks for the double team, Dylag.
Jan can kiss our butts..lol
They talk about anti-semitism, which is pretty much dead in America, but refuse to talk about our intense anti-arab hatred. Israel even goes as far as denying equal rights to the African Jews. Chomsky talks about the fact that they are put into neighborhoods, away from European Jews.
The history is pretty obvious: After the Holocaust most Jews wanted to go to north America, but the Zionists, who controlled Displaced Person's Camps, made the Jews go to Israel. Then there was the fact that Americans didn't want the European jews to immigrate. There were laws keeping out jews, diverting them to Israel, so that they could be cannon fodder for arabs. The Zionists took over land that Palestinians fled from, not allowing them to come back, in affect a subtle form or ethnic cleansing.
Yea, Mark, I studied what you mentioned further. You are right, Palestinians did flee parts of Israel, but they were not allowed to come back. Still a form of ethnic cleansing, since the land was taken. When you go on vacation, if I were to take your land while you were away, what would you think? I don't even have to bring it up. It answers itself.
Thanks for the double team, Dylag.
Jan can kiss our butts..lol
Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41601
Oh, Lord. Oh, Jesus. This is it. The end times. Satire is no longer satire. Imagination is officially dead. Originality has fled to greener pastures. We are now experiencing the creative dead zone of cinema.
VIEWMASTER: THE MOVIE. This is not amusing. This is evil.
Oh, Lord. Oh, Jesus. This is it. The end times. Satire is no longer satire. Imagination is officially dead. Originality has fled to greener pastures. We are now experiencing the creative dead zone of cinema.
VIEWMASTER: THE MOVIE. This is not amusing. This is evil.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests