Debate : 9986


Off-Topic / Debate / 9986

A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

Hey Y'all: I have a series of related comments and questions about how we should remember the holocaust. (And boy, do I have a bad feeling about raising these issues -- but here they come...) Frankly, I just don't get something about Holocaust (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Micah J. Mabelitini

(...) The "6 million Jews"/"12 million people" confusion has been prevalent for a long time. A reasonable speculation would be that the holocaust most primarly did target Jews, and they are also the largest demographic of holocaust survivors, and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Eric Joslin

(...) Several. On almost all of those occasions, they were trying to pick my pocket. No, really. That said, part of the reason that few people remember Gyspies in their holocaust rememberances (or any other time) is because they are still heavily (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Richard, Wow, that was an excellent post! Yes, I agree that we should remember all the victims of the Holocaust. I feel it does justice to the memory of the Jewish victims when we don't single them out, because doing so creates a hipocrisy. When (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) It should be noted that Speilberg is Jewish. This doesn't forgive his ignoring other pogroms, of course, but it is significant. (...) This has been hashed over in this newsgroup before; here's my take (1) on it: (URL) few of those points I've (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) In my view, since the film was about Schindler's List, anyone outside of the direct effect of The List is irrelevant to the film. That's not to say their deaths weren't tragic or aren't signficant, but they are beyond the intended scope of the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) I believe that an omission is a lie. So, to omit the whole history of the Holocaust and focus only on one group of people that suffered and died, and to repeat and repeat only that part of the history (allowing the other stats to be obscured) (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Ah! Now I see where you're coming from. I still hold that, in itself, the film can't be blasted for failing to address matters outside its scope, since to do otherwise would by definition require that everything address everything--a (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Yes! Thanks, I was having trouble recalling his name and didn't want to butcher it. :) (...) Well, I admire any artist willing to use their celebrity status in a positive, non-egocentric way. It breaks my heart when an artist like Spielberg (a (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

I was thinking of not putting anything into this thread. Tough to stay out of though. Lots of good points are being made by all parties and clearly this is a nicely behaved and well reasoned thread, kudos to all posters. (...) Good point. But where (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Or doesn't work, since we keep having wars. :( Yep, the American media does a great job to stir up hatred as to somehow justify it's shameful foreign policy. Omitting facts about the Holocaust by repeating (and repeating) only the figures on (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Whoa. Dude. Freaky. The article number was 1227, but the trailing "7" seems to have been chopped off. Let's see if this works: (URL) that, try this... /off-topic/debate/?n=1227 The disclaimer still stands, though. ;-) (...) Hmm. It's difficult (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Heh heh, I see what you mean. That was a big ol' can of worms! ;^) (...) If you want specifics, I've got doosy for you-- In October of 1990, NBC aired a "special" on Nostrodamis's predictions of world tyrants (by the way, all that Nostradamis (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) I don't remember that special, but--more than just propaganda--it's playing to public expectation. If it had aired two years earlier, no doubt Qaddafi (has anyone ever agreed on an English spelling of his name?) would have been the target. (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Great point, Dave! And that's exactly my point of the media twisting things to suit a political purpose--hence propaganda. (...) I remember it because it ticked me off. I ended up recording it on video. (...) It's not just the lies, but the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Hey, I got another doosy for you, Jeremy! Old skool: Remember when "Amadeus" won a bunch of Oscars back in 1984? We all got familiarized with the "story" of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and how Salieri was jealous and killed him-- 100% pure crap! (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) So did Braveheart, while we're at it, though as a history story it is only slightly more accurate than Mr. Peabody's time travels with Sherman. The only saving grace re: historical value is that neither film claimed to be an accurate (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) WHAT!!! You mean those time travels were made up?! Boy, and to think that I cited those adventures in several college essays! Oops! ;^p (...) Doh! That didn't really happen either?! Wow, I'm batting real low here. Yep, there's a lot of "true" (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) The probelm is we are all to lazy or "busy" to read a book/s about these issues. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) I don't know that "busy" needs to be in quotes, or if it's even a matter of laziness. If I (and countless others) spend 50+ each week working and/or commuting to work, in addition to other immediate responsibilities, I think we can be forgiven (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) But we be forgiven by our families for working >50 hours per week? I read the USA has the longest working week, highest levels of work related stress and the worst divorce rates in the west. (...) 100% correct. In the field I work in everyone (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) That's the US; we don't do anything half-way! If we're going to have a work week, we're going to have the *longest* work week. Ditto stress level and divorce rates! Go team! (...) In my work toward an English degree I was required to buy three (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) And Sagan never said "Billions and billions." 8^) Dave! (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ya, and Yogi Berra nevers said "Deja Vu all over again", right??? <grin> ++Lar (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I'm not saying that big lies don't happen. I'm not defending the media, either. Um, I'm not sure what I'm saying. :-, Shortly after seeing Amadeus, I was made aware of the Salieri conspiracy. The movie was mean, but so what? As a work of (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Okay... I just thought I'd point out that I wasn't trying to negatively criticize anyone specifically for the manner in which they choose to remember the Holocaust. To that extent, I think that I am with Shiri inasmuch as personal accounts (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Sorry, I wasn't trying to pick a fight, either. I certainly didn't receive your words as negative criticism towards myself -- I definitely need to try to express that better in the future. FWIW, I liked the movie. The first time I watched it (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) <just a little tummy tuck> (...) Goodness I missed you, so glad you're back!!! ++Lar (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Comfort food time! ;^) (...) Well, the Pushkin playlet started the snowball (bad, bad Mister Pushkin). (...) "Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money..." (...) Hmmm, I can dig that. (...) Exactly, but how many folks really do that? We've reduced (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Ooh! Thank you Dan! I could go for some good salsa about now. (...) And who are you to turn the heart of the average American? To introduce some new compassion into even a small fraction of your peers...it's a pretty tall order. I hate to (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

Hey Dan, Hi Richard, and Jeremy and Dave. First of all - I want to make it loud and clear that I am *totally* biased. Not only am I 100% Jewish, but my whole family suffered from the Holocaust, I have a very small extended family because most of my (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Hi Shiri! I liked your post very much, especially the part about the personal accounts of Jewish families during the Holocaust. Big numbers can mean nothing if we never hear the personal stories of those who suffered or died. When I read the "Diary (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I find it very ironic that a whole nation apparently solemnly commemorates the WW2 persecution when they themselves are current persecutors. Very ironic. I note that there is currently an economic blockade of Gaza and the West Bank: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) invasions and occupation of land in Egypt, Syria and Lebenon and their occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. On a side note: the USA still maintains sanctions against Cuba, really for no good reason other than because the Cold War generation (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) ...and 10 years after the event Saddam Hussein is being _investigated_ for war crimes: (URL) shall sleep well tonight knowing that Scotland Yard is on the case. Scott A (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) What's to investigate, it's like discovering that bears poop in the woods. The man (and I use word that in only the biological sense) is the scum of the earth. He has been killing off the marsh Arabs in the south and the Kurds in the north (he (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Ah. But a certain NATO country is no friend to the kurds either. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Kurdish people not equal to PKK just like Irish people not not equal to IRA. I hope this would help. And if the film "In The Name of My Father" ((URL) has any truth in it, it is sometimes quite difficult to separate one from the other, huh? (...) (23 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) From imdb: Factual errors: The Guildford 4 & the Maguire 7 were not tried in the same court simultaneously. Factual errors: Guiseppe Conlon & Gerry were never in the same prison. (...) It must be: (URL) differnce is that the public in the UK (...) (23 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Sorry, but both of these were not the main idea behind the film, if I got it correctly. Besides the film was not the main subject here. (...) So at least you already got the main idea, partially..:-) And believe me, public DOES NOT always (...) (23 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

Ooh, Selçuk - now you're talking things I can relate to. What you're describing here reminds me a lot of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that Scott and Dan were condemning earlier. I stayed out of the discussion because I know where those things (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Turkey and Israel are "free to take care of it". However, both have a history of ignoring human rights and murdering civilians in the process. (...) Hmm. And what about the rocket attacks I see your army perpatrate alsmost daily on small (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) That's the way of blood feuds. Or gang-warfare. Or <your phrase of choice here>! Still, a less polemical tone might be more appropriate for someone in Great Britian. Britain is hardly a country without fault, historically speaking. If the sun (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

(canceled) —Scott Arthur

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) That was in the bad old days... most other countries were doing pretty much the same - or wanted to. But sure, I'm still not proud of it. Anyhow, we have rebranded ourselves as the "UK" :-) (...) I view some laws as protection for the poor or (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Heh. It may be sobering to point out that the "brand" of UK was born in 1800, following the forced Act of Union with Ireland. That's when the name becomes valid, and it starts a new era of incredible colonial bloodshed. But I'm not sure all of (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Indeed. But is was not until more recently untail it came into common usage. Most of the the world still refers to the UK as Britain, or more annoyingly England. (...) I do not doubt what you are saying. However, I have to say that the same (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Those have long been a problem. I can agree with respect to "UK" not being the common usage; however, the official usage dates from that period, and in the records it's standard from 1800 even when the records are informal (although the (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Great! So now that your country has the benefits of conquest -- wealth and power -- it is possible for it to show the "kinder and gentler" face of colonialism -- the hypocrisy of the congenial tyrant. I'd just like you to know that other (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I assume you live in the USA. Does your economy, some would argue, not owe a lot to slavery, exploitation of native Americans, pillaging of the developing world by multi-nationals and destruction of the global environment? I could well say to (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Frank Filz

(...) Good thing for most of Europe enough people thought it was moral to fight a war on foreight soil (though I guess in some cases, outside participation was invited). I also don't think we would have the relative peace we have in Europe had we (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I thought for a while that they (the UK) DID declare two independent states... Israel and Jordan. When the UK partitioned Palestine, that was the idea. Jordan was to be one part, and Israel the other. Why didn't that work out? Or, why do the (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: <snip rebuffing-of-Scott-part> (...) I agree. That is definitely the key here. (...) I *completely* agree. I think I came off really different in my last post; don't get me wrong here. I am all (...) (23 years ago, 28-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Well, see? Here is my point: acting defensively is totally ethical from my viewpoint. And that takes me fighting right up to the border -- my line in the sand. Once my would-be conquerors are on the other side of that line I just don't care (...) (23 years ago, 28-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Richard did not rebuff me. He only gave the fact I quoted some context. Or are you saying that this is not true: "Turkey and Israel are "free to take care of it". However, both have a history of ignoring human rights and murdering civilians in (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) He can speak for himself of course, but calling your tone polemic strikes me as a rebuke... and a well deserved one. You've been called on this point before, you are quick to criticise some sides (who deserve criticism, in this case Israel) (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) You are mixing tone and content. In any event, I was happy to have my tone called "polemic": (URL) (...) That is because I am talking about now. You are talking about the past. The UK's colonial past does not make it ok for Israelto torture (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

Snippage, as usual. (...) that I would relish being called a braggart... L0L ) I like the last definition (of a related word) in your cite (thanks for that, by the way, always nice to have a different source than good old dictionary.com) "Her (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I am tempted to say the same about you, but I won't. (...) Hmm. Rather a simplistic argument. (...) You are free to criticise what ever you wish. I am not going to put you in jail for your political views. (...) Nope, that shows my general (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Yes, two of them. I made them already. But for your benefit, since you missed it: 1. You seem to be saying that Israel and the PLO are equally bad. This is incorrect. The PLO is far worse. To say that they are equal shows your bias. 2. The UK (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) In your opinion. Black is black. I am not going to get into a "who is the baddest" debate... it would be rather pointless. (...) You have no idea what I am "willing to acknowledge". As I said before, you are talking about the past. Considering (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Then what are you willing to acknowledge, beyond what we've seen here? There's no reason in this long .debate to think that Larry's wrong on that score. (...) The past should be absolutely crucial in considering "the real world." The problem (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) The point I think I am failing to acknowledge is that Britain’s past is any justification for Israel to torture and murder today. Although, I am sure it would make a very convenient defence / smokescreen. (...) Yes, but considering the past is (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) And that remark doesn't show your bias? Please be so kind as to explain to all of us why the PLO is "far worse"... Dan (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The intifadah. ++Lar (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) And....? I believe intifadah means "uprising" so what are the Palistinians rising up against? Still wondering how the PLO is "far worse" than the Israeli government? Here's some food for thought: (URL) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Is that the thing where Israel have shot dead a bunch of kids, bombed homes and carried out assasinations? How does that show the PLO is "far worse"? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) And we're still waiting to hear his explanation for that statement. While were waiting: (URL) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) And we're still waiting to hear his explanation for that statement. While we're waiting: (URL) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Don't hold your breath. I don't respond to every distortion Scott slings, or even very many of them, actually. (...) by my characterisation of the PLO as far worse. ++Lar (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Well, that's just dandy though it doesn't stand to reason why you'd take the side of the oppressor? If that's your attitude, I can only say that I strongly feel you are choosing to fill your head with the garbage the mainstream media would (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I suppoose that reflects your biased standpoint. If found it rather depressing. I am sure sites are out there which can show the "other side" which would be just as bad. (...) Don't be too hard on Larry on this - he can't help being (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I suppoose that reflects your biased standpoint. I found it rather depressing. I am sure sites are out there which can show the "other side" which would be just as bad. (...) Don't be too hard on Larry on this - he can't help being (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) As I see, you can be quite reasonable when it is for your advantage, right?..:-) Selçuk (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I am always reasonable. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Knowing yourself is nice, but better to leave this to other readers..:-) Selçuk (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) No distortion Larry. Just facts. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Intifadeh (1979) actually refers to the open uprising against Israel by the population, not terrorist actions per se. The people throwing stones and bottles at tanks and soldiers are the symbol of the intifadeh, not snipers or car bombs or the (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Okay, let's assume this is true. It probably is. My question is: so what? Who comes to the table with clean hands? When it comes time to talk of peace there is usually blood on all sides. No side is innocent. No side is able to speak from a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) My point was that perhaps they “should take care of it” without torture etc. (...) As I understand it, to join, Turkey would have to bring its legislation in line with that of the EU. (...) Appearances can be deceptive ;-) (...) I agree. But (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Where the fault is split 60-40 I think you're right. But what if the fault is almost all on one side? (it's not 60-40 in this case but it's not 99-1 either, so this is a hypothetical, I want to know what you think) What then? I come from the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Very noble Larry. Perhaps you could tell us how this can be done? And what about state sponsored/enacted terrorism? Scott A (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Scott: I would turn the question around and ask how you would propose to achieve peace with the state sponsors of terrorism, when those same states have demonstrated irrefutably that they accept the destruction of innocent life as a valid (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Education. (...) It worked for a while in Spain. It is working in NI. It worked in south africa. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Please elucidate; such education as would seem to be necessary requires a fundamental restructuring of one side's world view, and can be perceived as colonial indoctrination by the restructured party. (...) Interesting, but I'm not convinced (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) All of this depends on our definition of "terrorist". The best example I can give us is George Washington. We see him as an American hero, a general who led soldiers against an oppressive British monarchy. Now, the British saw him as a (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Well, this is a very hard question to answer in the hypothetical without more specifics, so I leave it to you to pose a more detailed hypothetical should you choose to do so. Given the real world instance of the nations of Israel and (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) This is a very good point. I took the time on Sunday to watch a programme about a so called "hero of libertarian America" - Rany Weaver. From a UK perspective this guy appeared to nothing better that a moron with a gun. However, I could not (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) How about when one side is a nation that says it wants to exterminate a certain religion's adherents and the other side is an almost weaponless group of members of that religion in the inner city of an occupied capital of a country that nation (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Nonsense. Terrorism can are be perpitrated against a state. Groups such as the IRA worked that killing "bystanders" is bad PR. So they attack the state : Police, Army, & the Post Office(!). Recently the IRA have taken to apologising when (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Frank Filz

(...) And this is the point the Palestinians need to understand. So long as they threaten Israel, Israel can do nothing less than take steps to assure the safety of its people. Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to make sure you are safe from (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) ... by building homes on the land which does not belong to them for immigrants from eastern Europe? The people who were causing trouble in London yesterday were the children of the British middle class. Their idea of suffering is haveing to (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical, not rhetorical... =oP Plus I plead the 5th, or maybe the 9th -- whatever gets me out of the trouble of having to answer this one... (...) Did he really write this? Was this the motivation behind (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Please define "terrorist". Dan (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Good question. I gave my definition in this post: (URL) about the second or third para down. To your point about soldier==terrorist and vice versa, I agree that the perception sometimes runs that way. But that's at least in part an effect of a (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Lar, I read your post about what a terrorist is: "I would tend to say it's a person or group using violence against bystanders as a way to make a political point or get a political outcome." By your definition, here's a list of "terrorists" for you: (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ok, then, there may be some flaw in the definition as that is an unexpected result. Let's dig in a bit. What makes ALL of these guys terrorists? (some might be, I suppose). What is your definition of terrorism? What if we c/as a way/as the (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Sorry, I didn't follow that last bit: "c/as a way/as the primary way/ ??" I am not familiar with all of the internet shorthand yet. To answer your question about my definition of terrorism, I can only say that the popular use of the term (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sorry, that just means this: What if, in the definition wording, we changed "as a way" to "as a primary way"... the shorthand comes in because c/xx/yy/ is an editor command in several old skool line editors to effect a change of xx to yy. When (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Your internal notion is your paradigm of world issues, including what you consider to be a terrorist. You have formed this paradigm through whatever media you've accepted as "the truth"...whether it is ABC, CNN, or newspapers, magazines or (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes: <snip> I appreciate your concern for my morals and my tax dollars. However... I want to stay narrow and not specific to this issue. What is a terrorist? Divorce it from the context. I gave a (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Simple question: Why do you take the side of the oppressor? Divorce that from the context too. Dan (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Three part answer: - I'm not taking sides when I say one side is worse than the other... we are talking shades of black, after all, not black vs. white. - Oppressor is such a loaded word, really. You haven't demonstrated that either side in (...) (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Then, my friend, you are chosing the PLO to be the "far worse" shade when, factually and morally, it is totally opposite. Stop lumping things together and believing the Zionist propaganda about the Intifadah (the uprising of Palistinian (...) (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Wrong: (URL)- That said, I don't ever *intend* to take the side of an oppressor. You (...) Others are. As I understand it, a report is about to be published which will lay much of the blame on Israel: Report condemns Israeli expansion (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) my satisfaction". However under yours: "to govern (people) in an unfair and cruel way and prevent them from having opportunities and freedom" I don't see that being the case with the Israeli governance. (...) Don't intend to try to convince (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Oh, forgot to toss this stick into the hornets nest... turns out that the *PLO*, under *your* definition is an oppressor. The PLO oppresses the very people that it is governing under the limited mandate given it by the Israelis... since its (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) As I said before Larry, both sides are equally bad. (...) The "nightmare" they have voted for is not high taxes, it is the use of helicopter gunships of residential areas. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Spoken like a true Zionist again! Learn the truth and stand up for what's right. Dan (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) One of the purposes of a dictionary is to ensure that words have the same meaning for all of us. Assuming our own meanings on words dilutes the power of language... in my opinion. (...) Really? (...) I am beginning to you lack any thinking on (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: Snip. (...) Both sides are bad. but... (...) the PLO are far worse. That's it. End of point. Saying this does not make me a Zionist. Sorry, Dan, but it just doesn't. Saying that Hitler was worse than (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Spoken like a ture Zionist once more. Don't be a puppet, Larry. (...) Didn't say you were a Zionist, but you are speaking for them. The Israelis stand against basic human rights, the same rights that Americans fought for against the British (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) That's a reach. (...) *Which* invader? Let's see... how about: The phoenicians, the egyptians, the greeks, the romans, the crusaders, the turks, the french, the british. There have been so many, no one has clear title. The zionists just (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) But you obviously favor the Israelis, right? Okay, let's consider the Zionist story regarding Israel as the "home of the Jews" and their claim to distant Semetic bloodlines (fraudulent, by the way). Considering Judaism is a Semetic religion (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

Hi Dan, I've been following this part of the debate and specifically staying out of it, because I can tell when a cool-headed discussion turns into a hot flame war. Although this isn't a full-fledged flame war, it is certainly not a great debate, (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Geez, this is really becoming the thread that would not die! And I can see that some are getting overheated about some of the points being made. MY point would be to suggest that no one will get much closer to peace until everyone concerned is (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Richard, I am very sorry about this debate dragging on but I cannot, with clear conscience, allow certain blatantly Zionist remarks to slide. The moral issue I've maintained is "who invaded who" and "who is oppressing who" and I'll add "who is (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) First, no apologies are necessary. You obviously have some things you wish to express. (...) To be honest, I don't support much of anything outside of U.S. borders. I want to mind my own business in relation to my neighbors, and I want U.S. (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Well said! You, me and Jefferson: "Honest friendship with all who wish it, entangling alliances with none" (...) Although they got a nice piece of change by owning Foxwoods! THAT was shrewd working within the system. :-) (...) Maybe not but (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) This is an oft-quoted snippet, and I have no doubt that it was fine foreign policy for an infant nation two centuries ago, but in an age when we can cross the globe in hours, I think its relevance is more metaphorical than actual. And while (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Couldn't have said it better myself! From what I've seen in my life so far, the sort of "peace" that Israel wants. Dan (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) ::sigh:: I knew I should have left in my qualifier about the Nazis... In my last post I WAS going to include that the nations of the world should have spotted the threat the Nazis represented much earlier on and not have jumped into bed with (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Well, yes and no. The world does not admit of us huddling behind our borders and assuming that distance keeps us safe, but nevertheless there is merit in not getting entangled in alliances quite as much as we seem to have gotten lately. No (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) That's interesting! During last year's debates about Libertopia et al, I tried to envision the type of world that could support a free nation like Libertopia (remember when I oh-so-cleverly coined it Liberama? Ah, such wit!) I still don't know (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Put it this way, when was the last time you were personally threatened by the Lichtenstein Army? Now if Lichtenstein turns into a pocket dicatorship that kind of stinks for the Lichtensteiners but it won't last. Bill Gates could afford to do (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Indeed. (...) It does not have one. They rely on the Swiss for defence. (...) Big business would only do such a thing if there was $$ involved fom them. Individuals would only do such as thing if there was kudos involved. I would rather these (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Got me... I did not know that. Pick some other tiny country as the root of the example then... one that does have a tiny army. How about if we use the Grand Duchy of Fenwick, because that's obviously fictional. This is a fictional example, (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I do. (...) For people "in general" I do. (...) Well, what were his motives? (...) That is the important question. Many things are clearly "wrong" : mass murder etc. But at the other edge of the scale it is harder to tell... but perhaps the (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Heh...:-) I think you don't know much about what could be the cost of a corrupt government to you, perhaps you never have to live with one, generations long. Selçuk (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I suppose these things are all realtive ;-) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

In replying both to Richard and Dan - I agree. We all want peace, and naturally everyone's peace will be on different terms. We cannot change the past, but we can try and deal with what's here. I agree that Israel as it was formed was not a good (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Alsalaam aleikum! Shalom! (...) Actually, the Zionists WERE doing it out of greed and hoodwinked the mass of Holocaust victims worrying about a homeland. No real Jew would ever have supported invading someone's land, murdering, crippling and running (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Shiri Dori

(...) Markhaban, Ahalan (wasahalan), hi, what's up :-) (My knowledge of Arabic consists of, umm, "Markhaban ya talamiz, Ana Mualima Ismi Salma", and, well, I forget the rest... since I left .il without taking high-school Arabic. If I had not had (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Alsalaam aleikum! Shalom! Regarding the link I gave you, perhaps you'll have to wait a little while and try back again. It's something worth reading. More bloodshed today, more Palestinians dead, more excuses from Israel. I'm glad that you at least (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Richard Marchetti

(...) I am perfectly willing to give you the last word, Dan -- but tell me this: what do you propose should happen if you got everything you wanted? I don't want a fantasy, answer with what you would do tomorrow if "fixing" the situation were up to (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

An addendum to my previous posts regarding the Israeli occupation: Although I have used the term "Palestinian" repeatedly to describe the Arabs of that area, I realize that there are certain inaccuracies with the term. The root word is (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Another addendum to my last post: (...) What I meant to say: There isn't a violent "Palestinian" action against Israeli civilians on record since the creation on Israel that matches the Massacre of Deir Yassin. My apologies, I am usually more (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Yet another addendum: (...) I mean "of" Israel not "on." Never type tired... Dan (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) I hadn't thought about the etymology, odd! Even odder, when considering that the inhabitants of Philistia were Mycenaean Greeks displaced by the Dorian Invasions of c. 800BC. :) I do wonder, then, how much of their genetics and culture ended (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Kind of an obtuse way of saying "forgotten" or "ignored". :-) Bruce (for the younger, Michael Collins was the Astronaut from the Apollo 11 moon mission that didn't walk on the moon) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Actually, I was thinking Lindsay was trying to start up another Liam Neeson movie controversy. Dave! (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Heh, actually, that's an interesting link I hadn't thought of. I wonder if we can work Darkman in here too? LFB (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) And let's not forget Krull. Oh wait. On second thought, let's! Dave! (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Ack! Purged from the memory banks. What else have I forgotten? LFB (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Nope. Wrong Michael Collins. See below, it's not obtuse at all. (...) Actually, that's a different Michael Collins. The one I'm thinking of was the one sent in 1922 by Eamon de Valera to negotiate the Good Friday Agreement that created the (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) So, you forgot about the Astronaut? You're just proving my point! ;-) Bruce (sheesh, I shoulda known it was a more esoteric answer...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Yes, but peace on what terms? "Israel sticks to settlement policy" (URL) your country voted for Sharon they did not vote for diplomacy. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Hi Shiri, Alsalaam aleikum! Shalom! I genuinely appreciate the olive branch. :) I try not to generalize, but I'm guilty of trying a few shortcuts in my last post. It seems I unwittingly made a point about generalizations because most, dare I say (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Frank Filz

(...) Oh, now thats a solution. By that generalization, I belive almost NO ONE in the world has any right to live where they live. I doubt ANY population in the world can be documented to be living on land they didn't take from someone else (and in (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) I know many people who shouldn't be trusted with weapons, and most of them aren't police. However, you've hit on an important point, regarding both the necessity of a professional military and the difficulty of reducing it. No one with a stake (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) The people who least want to see a reduction in the military are those who make the weapons. Take a look how much the companies who will work on Son of Star Wars gave Dubya for his election. Scott A (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Ugh! Don't even start me on that ridiculous cash cow! I foresee, shortly after the implementation of this fine umbrella, someone boating up the Potomac with a suitcase bomb or a big tank full of anthrax. I think a real distinction can be (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) See today's WSJ. All the pieces of Brilliant Pebbles have been tested and shown to work (although not as part of an integrated system). Most of them in Clementine, one of the most cost effective civilian space missions ever! According to the (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) But is the intent of the Umbrella to stop attacks by other nations against other nations? That's how Dubya is trying to sell it, but it doesn't sound like any other nation is buying the rhetoric. (...) That's true--my example wasn't especially (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Right. Hence my question, is it our duty to be the world's policeman (in the area of incoming missiles) just because we CAN? I tend to say no. I say build the thing and then announce that there is a 1B USD charge per missile for stopping (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Um, wrong. Yet another reason to question anything coming across the pages of the WSJ. Not that I've read it since they'd declared breatfeeding dangerous to infants... I've been seeing the antiballistic missile development more-or-less behind (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Jeremy... Clementine was a SINGLE spacecraft. No backup. Sure, there was QA performed on components on the ground to put only ones believed to work into it, but all the components worked (for that mission, which of course was to do mapping, (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Oops, I thought we were talking about the missile shield program, not one portion of it succeeding with 99% already-proven technology. Clementine was less about proving technology, and more about PR. Badly-needed PR, I might add, for an (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) You are missing the point! It has nothing to do with defence. It has two objectives: 1. Start a "new" arms race and bankrupt China. 2. Move large amounts of money from US taxpayers to US shareholders. Everything else is salesman’s banter. (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —James Powell

(...) Na, Dave! has it right, all it is going to do is save the attacking country ~ 10 billion dollars or so, on ICBM research as well as Special Weapons (Gas/Bugs/Nukes). It's a farce. An expensive farce, that I don't think will bankrupt China, (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Very good point. However, both arguments assume there is the real risk of an attack. (...) I doubt it will bankrupt China too, especially given the amount of $$ the west is pumping into it! Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ya, Taiwan can sleep well at night, Mainland China has no desire to "take back its rogue province" and all those platforms they're building in the Spratleys are just fishing shacks. Ya, Japan can sleep well at night, North Korea is the most (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) What is that got to do with the USA? (...) What is that got to do with the USA? (...) What is that got to do with the USA? (...) Perhaps to you. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Why make my statement sound so far fetched? Is it any more or less valid than the British finally pulling out of India? With regard to Israel, I wouldn't call my statement a generalization. The specific fact remains that the European Jews ran (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Because after the British "left" India, there were still a lot of Britons who elected to stay, and India still existed. Who would leave if "the greedy Zionists" packed up and "went home" to the places where they--pardon me, their grandparents (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

Thank you for your input, Lindsay, and for presenting the "facts on the ground" point of view about the Israeli occupation. The Zionists would like nothing better than to hold up their children born in Israel as a further claim to the land they took (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) Just for my own clarity, Dan, what would you say to the Jews born in Israel in the last fifty years? While their births don't "entitle" the Jews as a people to usurp land from anyone, I don't understand why the native-born Israelis wouldn't (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) I can't disagree at all with that last prescription. I've been reading very closely articles that point out that even within the territory Israel claims as sovereign, Palestinians and other non-Jewish residents will outnumber Jews within 20 (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Tom Stangl

(...) Um, you're missing the point. If everyone lays down their claim, that INCLUDES your Arabs. <cluephone, ring, ring> -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | iPlanet Support - (URL) A division of AOL (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

Shiri's right. This isn't much of a debate (most that involve Scott A. in some significant way tend not to be) and neither of us are moving much. But I just can't let a couple of points slide. (...) For about the 9th time, no. It is not favoritism (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) The debate has not moved on Larry as you have failed to justify your "far worse" comment. Instead you squirm, muddy the water and make cheap shots like the one above. (...) If the PLO is "far worse" than the Israelis, are the Israelis not far (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Tom Stangl

(...) That's ridiculous. That's like saying "you think the KKK is far worse than the Black Panthers, so you must support the Black Panthers", which is obviously NOT true (in my case, anyways). -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) It's not within the context of Larry's "argument". That's like saying "you think the KKK is far worse than the (...) I have no idea who the Black Panthers are. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Come on Larry, tell us. Tell us how your rights based personal philosophy came up with these tomes of wisdom. Scott A (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Then for the 10th time, YES IT IS when the opinion is biased, gained from pro-Zionist media. What part of that do you not understand? Stop pretending that you are somehow open minded or unbiased about the Middle East. Name ONE Arabic newspaper (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Frank Filz

(...) Well, Dan did bring up Nazi before you brought up Hitler... Frank (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) But it is a point you are not able to justify... or so it appears. (...) The is no loosing or winning here Larry. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Spoken like a true Zionist, Larry. You are allowing yourself to be a puppet for a political group that has turned the same Nazi tactics, that previously oppressed the Jews, on the Palistinian population to get them to bow down. The same (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Daniel Jassim

(...) Oops, sorry if I left you hanging on that question, I thought it was rhetorical. I believe the dictionary would use the literal meaning as "one who instills terror in others." Perhaps a bit too general for an America that prefer's having (...) (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Actually I really can't understand why there is a term like terrorist? We already have enough terms that define the actions of "terrorist" like murder, kidnapping, burglary, plunder, and so on. What is the difference if you killed someone for (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Indeed. You were asked for a definition after your sentenced terrorists to an arbitrary fate. But then it turned out you were a little muddled about what a terrorist is. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 6-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) <snip> Man I hate it when you're right about something! A less polemical tone on the part of US and UK (and Israeli and USSR and etc etc. heck, on the part of all of us) speakers would indeed be a good idea. ++Lar (23 years ago, 28-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) You have a government which systematically abuses human rights and as taken part in the killing of ~6000 civilians in the war you describe. Who voted for them? (...) The IRA has weapons UK, USA and eastern Europe. Bizarrely, some of the (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) 6000 civilians? You are sure right? And systematically?..Wow..You enlightened me..:-) Doc knows my country better than me..:-) I know Turkey has the worst kind of scum as a government for decades but only one thing that I'm sure of exists, (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) See: (URL) counts 4500 civilian deaths. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) You're referring to this bit, I trust: "Both sides were responsible for human rights abuses during the conflict, in which an estimated 4,500 civilians were killed, around 3,000 settlements evacuated or burned down and up to three million (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) One liner, huh? It says 4500 yes. "Background Armed conflict between Turkish security forces and the PKK has continued since 1984 in the southeast of Turkey, which is mainly inhabited by Kurds. Both sides were responsible for human rights (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

You appear to view human rights a luxury which is great if it can be afforded economically. I view them as being rather more fundamental than that. As I said before, Turkey will not get in the EU until it gets itself in order. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) You are completely clueless again. I neither said nor mean anything like that. All I tried to explain is was you are not defending human rights, you are just musterbating. Continue, though. It is quite relieving I believe. And for the EU issue (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) I believe I understand the differnce between defending human rights & and masterbation. (...) You are quite wrong. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) I still didn't get this impression, though. (...) So, seeing that you tend to prefer simple two-three word answers instead of making a point, could you able to explain two simple questions as How and Why? Especially, when and if EU politicians (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) Then perhaps it is you who does not understand the difference (...) Turkey would have to bring its legislation in line with the EU. I read a poll yesterday in the Guardian which said Turkey was the nation which was least likely to join. (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Don't need to read it I already know it. So, could you please reread my post and several other previous ones? I ALREADY said that Turkey is not wanted. I already said that I BELIEVE PUTTING TURKEY IN IS NOT GOOD FOR ANY EUROPEAN COUNTRY RIGHT (...) (23 years ago, 3-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Scott Arthur

(...) That is your opinion. (...) Yes. (...) If Turkey's legislation is not in line with the EU, Joe could take Turkey to court. Read the papers, it happens to EU members when they do not implement legislation. (...) Banning the use use by UK forces (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) I strongly agree. I remember a good sentence from some important personality in history, but can't remember who is him right now. "Death of a person is tragedy. Death of a thousand people is statistics." When you start to think about it as a (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Dave Schuler

(...) I believe that was Stalin, himself no stranger to the deaths of thousands (or millions, as I think the original quote indicated. Dave! (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: A question of remembrance... —Selçuk Göre

(...) Uh-oh... I think it is obvious that I taken it in a very different, actually in exact reverse context..:-) Selçuk (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)