Subject:
|
Re: jumping to conclusions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:04:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1634 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> I said:
>
> "My views on human rights and international law, together with my
> understanding of recent middle-east history, leads me to sympathize with the
> Palestinian people, not with "PLO terrorists". I hope you understand the
> distinction between the two."
>
> You said:
> "Sorry, there isn't one."
I think I clarified that. I said that if they *support* terrorists, they are as
*culpable* as terrorists. Since the PLO represents them, they are in the
unfortunate position of supporting terrorism. They are being woefully misled.
Or
> > is *your* information simply your daily dosage of BBC poured down your throat?
>
>
> No. But a recent report I read suggested that the media tended to have a
> pro-Israeli stance.
Okay, that one made me literary laugh out loud. Not only is it not true, it's a
circular argument at best-- "Newspaper claims newspapers aren't biased".
As an aside, I happen to live in a state whose major newspaper, (and I use that
term loosely) The Minneapolis Star and Tribune, is about the most biased paper
in the US. A different editorial staff from another city even criticized it for
that reason. I'll have to see if I can dig up the sources.
Rather than alleging some sort of international media
> conspiracy,
Not conspiracy, just liberal bias. It's a fact. I have friends in the media,
and they acknowledge it, too. If you want to believe that the media is
unbiased, that's your business, but you'd be wrong.
>
> Who else can they turn to? International law is on their side. UN
> resolutions support them... but still justice has not been served.
The UN Charter called for them to set up their own state *54 YEARS AGO*. What
have they been waiting for!! Oh yeah, the destruction of Israel by their
brothers in other Arab countries. But that never happened, but not for lack of
trying. And the Palestinians can't understand why they aren't embraced by the
Israelis? The Arab world is as much to blame for the plight of the Palestinians
as Israel is.
The Palestinians are where they are by their *own* actions 54 years ago.
Instead of declaring their own state as the Israelis did, they choose to *
attack* Israel. Since the moment Israel was a sovereign state, they have been
under seige by the Arabs. And it has gone downhill for them ever since.
>
> >
> > Let's see the Palestinians take the "high ground". No more terrorism, period.
>
> I assume you mean from both sides?
No, I meant the Palestinians. Read down further why I said that it must begin
with them.
>
> > And let's see an unequivocal acknowledgment from the Arab world of the right for
> > Israel to exist as a sovereign nation.
>
> Is that not what is being offered right now? What has the Israeli response been?
What do you expect their response to be??!! The proof is in the pudding, my
friend.
>
> > It must begin with them, because it is
> > not reasonable for the world to expect Israel to answer terrorist attacks
> > against her citizens with inaction, or to expect them to negotiate peace with a
> > group who is simultaneously inflicting terrorist attacks upon them.
> Nor is it acceptable to allow Israel to kill civilians in the manner they
> do; an Israeli civilian is worth no more/less than a Palestinian.
In what manner is that, exactly? Any Palestinian could be a human bomb, for all
they know... That tends to skew one's perception of a population-- a perception
brought on by that population.
If you
> have studied the "Arab-Israeli dilemma" you will know that Israel has been a
> belligerent nation with a shocking record on human rights since its UDI.
That is B, as in B, and S as in S. "Belligerent nation"? What tripe! Their
violence as a nation can be directly linked to her defending herself against
Arab aggressors.
> Your view appears to be that this is a battle of good v evil - I reject that
> notion totally. I agree that Arafat is a problem, but the same can be said
> of Sharon – both have blood on their hands. Do you deny that?
How can you blame Sharon? He hasn't been leading Israel for that long. Israel
has had the gambit of the political spectrum leading them, from Meir to Begin to
Peres to Sharon. They have been all over the place; Arafat has been in one
place.
>
> Who “started” the current round of violence?
Current schmurrent. Who started the war in '48?
>
> >
> > But I don't believe it will happen, because the Arab world loves its hatred for
> > the Jews more than it cares about the plight of the Palestinians-- it's as
> > simple as that. Unfortunately, the Palestinians are caught in the middle.
>
>
> Your stated view is a generalisation. But why do you think that “hate” exists?
You say so. Hatred exists because of intolerance. This whole thing started
because the Arabs couldn't tolerate a Jewish state.
>
> > Time will tell, and the longer this drags on, the more I will be proven right.
>
> Time will tell. Perhaps this will end when the USA stops funding Israel to
> the tune of ~$2.5B pa. Perhaps that will force Israel to negotiate?
You idiot. We will *never* stop supporting Israel. *Their* allegiance could be
argued to be more valuable than yours (England).
But speaking of funding, let's see the Arabs throw a few billion towards the
Palestinians that *isn't* in the form of weaponry...
-John
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) I just thought that those two lines should be viewed together. No reason... Just because the atrocity is sanctioned by the government, it doesn't make the atrocity (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| (...) You said: 1. “Sorry, there isn't one. “ 2. “The PLO represent the Palestinians.” 3. “Whatever the PLO does, the Palestinians support them.” 4. “Anyone who supports the actions of terrorists is just as culpable as the terrorists themselves.” (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| (...) I said: "My views on human rights and international law, together with my understanding of recent middle-east history, leads me to sympathize with the Palestinian people, not with "PLO terrorists". I hope you understand the distinction between (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
