Reacting to the incursion, chief negotiator for the Palestinian Authority Saeb Erakat said: “What this will do is undermine the peace process.” The Palestinian Authority is the government of President Mahmoud Abbas.
Is that what they have over there? A peace process? Processed peace, which is just as much real peace as processed meat is real meat.
Or perhaps it’s a spelling error and he said “piece process” which consists of Hamas raining down missiles from Gaza and trying to blow Israel to pieces.
Idiots. The second the cease fire was over they started firing lobbing artillery at Israel. What did they THINK was going to happen?
PAD
• 
That is fascinating stuff. Why do you think suicide bombers became more common in the last decades? (No irony or sarcasm here, I’m truly curious, Hombre Malo)
Incidentaly, I’d say Norway’s is a more successful society than the US. Taking into account general material prosperity, equality, personal freedom, and peace.
By the way, I’m done talking to you, Jeffrey. For a guy that is fond of accusing people of demonizing the Palestinians, you’re very eager to demonize your opponents, saying PAD and others are sadists that are “amused” by slaughter, and your constant comparisions of Israel to Nazi Germany. I now wonder if your hatred of Israel isn’t because you see something of yourself in the way they treat the Palestinians? We project unto others what we dislike about ourselves.
If nobody here has a beef with the Palestinians, as as differentiated from Hamas, is there some mysterious reason the wholesale killing of the Palestinians, very much as differentiated from Hamas is so extremely amusing to so many people here?
If you would please point out specific examples of commenters displaying extreme amusement resulting from the death of innocent Palestinians, it would clarify things. A few copy-and-pastes would work.
And if you would be so kind as to answer my earlier question to you:
Early reports indicate that Hamas had guys firing mortars from the UN school. Let’s assume that’s true: Shouldn’t Hamas be lambasted for such actions?
that would help too.
Thank you!
Worse, I’d imagine; without the whole Israeli /Arab conflict the world would probably pay as much attention to the Palestinians as they did the Kurds.
Funny you should mention that. Jeffrey Goldberg at The Atlantic was just recalling an amusing related anecdote. A Kurdish leader complained to him that his people were cursed by geography — namely their proximity to Kurd-hating Arabs. He said the Kurds were cursed because they didn’t have Jewish enemies — only with Jewish enemies would the world pay attention to their plight.
By the same track of though, the USA is a failed culture if you compare it to Norway, where personal freedom and wealth distribution is paramount to none (except maybe Iceland before the banking colapse).
No, because I would rate a major part of a culture’s success as being based not on wealth distribution but on opportunity. I’m not arguing that Arab cultures have failed because Scrooge McAkbar has a pool full of money and won’t share. I judge it a failure because it’s very unlikely that an exceptionally bright Arab child from a poor family will be able to advance his status in life (unless he moves to, say, America).
And I have no problem giving our Norwegian friends full props for their success. I’m not hung up on claiming the USA is the best place on Earth, though it’s probably the best fit for me personally. I’d find the lack of diversity in Norway a bit hard to take but I feel the same way about Iowa. And at least you can get good seafood in Norway.
Rene: I can only especulate. For one, I think education beign in the hands of religiously funded charities (not demonizing them, I dont know their actual curriculum, but I mistrust most saudi “charities”) may have helped imbue a segment of the palestinian society with a sense of mystical martyrdoom. Also, the worse the situation gets, the easier it is to convince someone to throw his/her life away. Its not so much a matter of poverty but a matter of lack of options.
But everything I can think of is not so much a “reason” (if there is anything close to that) but a factor. I have heard of young brilliant people doing it. The first female suicide bomber if I recall well, was a nurse, of all professions. If you look at Mohammed Atta, the 9-11 “leader” of sorts, he wasnt poor, had access to a good education and could freely move anywhere in the world he wanted. Kurds (now that they are mentioned) also carried suicide attacks against civilian population, yet the PKK is non religious. So did the Viet Cong…just throwing some examples. Maybe, as horrible as it sounds, anyone can do it given the right stimuli, the right frame of mind.
Bill Mulligan: “No, because I would rate a major part of a culture’s success as being based not on wealth distribution but on opportunity”
Incidentally, studies show that upward mobility (your chances to die better off than you were born) is also better in Norway than in the USA, contrary to the common belief. But then, as of late most western european countries rate better in Upward mobility than the USA. Youd be surprised about the diversity too. I was, at least in Oslo.
(I mention Norway so often because Ive been seriously contemplating to emigrate there for a couple of years…)
Anyway… “I judge it a failure because it’s very unlikely that an exceptionally bright Arab child from a poor family will be able to advance his status in life”
The mentioned Upward Mobility… What you say is true, there is little chance for improvement in a young palestinian’s life. But again that is part of the context, not the culture. Arab/palestinian culture rewards brilliance as much as any other agricultural society. Arabs respect intelectuals and fund educational projects, and were traditionally much more meritocratic than europeans. So the present day low rate of upward mobility must be a consecuence of the situation, not of an inherent cultural flaw.
Israeli arabs are basically identical culture-wise, and I am sure they dont share this lack of upward mobility with their cousins across the green line.
Arab/palestinian culture rewards brilliance as much as any other agricultural society. Arabs respect intelectuals and fund educational projects, and were traditionally much more meritocratic than europeans.
Hmmm, I’m not sure I’d agree. From what I’ve seen a greater emphasis would be put on, say, hiring a family member than hiring the best person for the job. And it’s hard to seriously believe that Arab societies are meritocratic when, in some of them at least, the entire female gender is so fundamentally devalued.
What you say about upward mobility in the USA may be true but at least a part of it could be due to the gains made by previous generations. It would be very difficult for me to show the same level of upward mobility my father did-thanks to him my sisters and I started at a much higher level than he did. (And I’ve long maintained that it’s very hard to measure such things–I may make, adjusted for inflation, less than my father did at the same age–but I can buy stuff with my money that was impossible for him to do. 30 years ago, you would have had to be a multimillionaire to have access to the toys and gadgets I, a modest teacher, have now. So is income the best way to judge relative quality of life or is it what the income can get you?).
What you say is true, there is little chance for improvement in a young palestinian’s life.
I would say the same for far too many in Egypt, Syria, Jordon, etc. Again, there’s a reason so many come over here and it isn’t because of a lifelong dream to drive a cab.
Rene, the best argument I can make for some people being amused by slaughter is that PAD began this topic with his limitless amusement that Palestinians were being slaughtered. Gosh, why would I ever think that just because he was sneering at these deaths he thought Palestinian death was a good joke? It is a puzzlement. Now, I don’t think it’s funny, but you shouldn’t confuse me with PAD. He would probably back me up on this particular point.
I think the reasons are more in the line of higher education beign more expensive in the USA and social safenets scarcer. Students in the USA may have to pay loans for years while in Europe you finish your education not owing a dime. The need to pay those loans force many to find a job, sometimes just any job, making it very hard to think about entrepreneurial ventures. And later in life chances are you have a family, and merely the economic requirements to keep your kids provided for and healthy also makes risky business…well, more risky.
Its true european regulations and taxes were traditionally a hinderance to individual entrepeneurs, but they payed off in the long run. Social safenets make risk-taking less risky. Its harder to end up destitute and no matter what you do, certain living standarts like health care wont be affected. In the region I live, you even get goverment grants to start a bussines and buy machinery. It is true that regulations and taxes makes it harder to become a millionare, but much easier to become your own boss.
Regarding women status in the Arab countries… the situation of women is linked to the economical outlook of the society they live in. As much as we like to think it was our enlightened thinking that empowered women, industrialization has much more to do with it. Agricultural societies value women as homemakers and caretakers. Back when european societies where less active in crafts and trade than arab ones, arab women had it better than european ones. Wherever you see arab societies industrializing and becoming less agrarial, you also see arab women having more power. So, again, a change of context changes society, proving there is nothing fundamentally flawed in the arab culture in that field too.
“Again, there’s a reason so many come over here and it isn’t because of a lifelong dream to drive a cab.”
Well, upward mobility, though declining, is still much better in the USA than in most arab countries. Remember what I wrote about the problem of industrial development in the Free trade era, so pile that with a nearly total absence of social safe nets and you can tell risk taking entrepeneurs have it hard there, so they move to the place where they perceive there is a better chance to improve their lot.
But the key is they move. Didnt they believe in the value of education and hard work, they wouldnt. They would stay where they are or move where they perceive the state would care for them the most. Yet they move, work and try, and they take that decision with a culturally arab frame of mind. So stagnant social stratification is not part of their culture but, again, part of the context they live in now.
Spain share a border with an arab speaking country, Morocco. We received a great deal of inmigration from there but slowly it has been down to a trickle. Political aperture since the death of Hassan II and the development of local industries is transforming moroccan society from an agrarial one to a tertiary&services one, in a process that mimics that of my own country 50 years ago. The generation that migrated to Europe and now own homes and bussines there (meritocracy) is now sending money to the family back home to pay for education and investments (gregarious family ties).
Jeffrey… while I think PAD is wrong to assume allways the best posible behaviour/intentions from the IDF given the circunstances, I havent perceived amusement nor sneering on his texts. At the same time, I have perceived a great deal of ampty rethoric and namecalling from yours.
Bill Mulligan –
I’d find the lack of diversity in Norway a bit hard to take but I feel the same way about Iowa.
Hey, I resemble that remark! 😉
El hombre Malo –
If you look at Mohammed Atta, the 9-11 “leader” of sorts, he wasnt poor, had access to a good education and could freely move anywhere in the world he wanted.
The same was true of those involved in the British terrorist attack a couple of years ago as well, if I’m not mistaken.
While it’s easy to say that ‘poor Palestinian = why not become a suicide bomber?’, it certainly does not explain those that have become suicide bombers that are not poor, that are educated, and are from countries such as Saudi Arabia, which are not under threat of war or invasion, such as Gaza or Lebanon.
And speaking of Lebanon, I see a report this morning that militants there are now launching rockets into Israel. *sigh*
>”Put it another way: anybody who supports what Israel is doing right now makes as much sense as Byrne does there, and shows as much disregard for innocent people’s lives.”
Or one could also read Byrne as saying that the RAF could easily have flattened the city/country if it had wanted to, but deliberately chose not to. Ditto Israel which has stood up to three or four of its neighbours’ military at a time. Given what it *could* do if push came to shove, its response to date, while serious and lethal, is indeed restrained compared to what it could do. Not much consolation to the dead and injured, obviously, but people do lose sight of this. If Israel were indeed the thugish murderers some people make them out to be (and I’m not saying they are angels, either), Gaza would look like a WW I no man’s land.
>”If in 2003 Israel had gotten intelligence about WMDs in Iraq and decided to invade and bomb the country into the stone age just to be on the safe side, you would’ve been all for it I bet. Because it’s Israel, and Israel can never be wrong.”
They aren’t always right, to be sure, but I’d have trusted them a lot farther than I did the U.S. After all, Israel was right about the Iraqi nuke plant and took out that threat quite effectively.
Remember when I said it was the Left that was more anti-Israel in my experience?
Yesterday, Brazil’s Workers Party (the party of our current President) released a note condemning Israel and explicitely comparing them to Nazi Germany.
Our more left-wing newspaper, “The Hour of the People”, published an editorial calling for heroic Osama bin Laden to attack Israel and avenge the Palestinians. They also called Israel the “Children of Herod”, and “Nazi-Israelis”.
By the way, this paper is really something. I’m never sure if they’re for real or somehow a shrill parody of a leftist newspaper. They once called Bush a “çøçkšûçkër” in a headline.
They also exist to prove that not only Conservatives can be homophobic. One of their pet theories is that homosexuality is a concept created by Decadent Capitalists to undermine the “virile”, “masculine strength” of heroic Third World countries.
Rene, wow, they sound like real pieces of work.
When foreignors say that there is no true “left’ in this country, because what is considered the left here is less leftist than they have, i have to point out that by that reasoning there is no true “right” either. The right wing in many countries is of a nature that would instantly relegate anyone here to the extreme fringe. While we freely toss out terms like “far left” ‘extreme right” etc etc to describe people who are, by and large, fairly moderate in their views, in contrast to Europe and elsewhere. There you can be far left or far right and still wield some power. Some of the countries even have to go so far as to outlaw certain parties–you don’t usually do that unless you see them as a threat. We don’t have to outlaw the nazi party here because they will never ever ever be anything other than a bad joke.
Americans by and large are fairly centrist and like their politicians to be likewise. Obama is a center left guy by our standards and so far has been emphasizing the center pert of that description. Smart move.
Given our lack of affection for extremists it’s hard to understand why people are puzzled by our siding with Israel over its enemies.
>”The fact is that the land of Palestine was occupied by other people when Israel was established. Simply wishing that those people would conveniently disappear into the amorphous mass of the “Arab nations” reduces these people to insignificant brown people who had the audacity to actually have a sense of history and belonging to the particular land they inhabited.”
I’m blatantly admitting to a level of potential ignorance here so correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t most Palestinians nomadic tribes until fairly recently, historically speaking? And, if so, how can you throw nomads out of a home they didn’t, by definition, have?
You are wrong Starwolf. The Palestinians are not Nomads.
The issue is too complicated to discuss here, and the quote you reply to indicates the kind of shallow stupid thinking that would make conversation pointless anyway. So I’ll spare you the long explanation., and the layers of propaganda and counter propaganda.
Here is a link to an English blog by a Israeli-Canadian.
hxxp://lisagoldman.net/
Here is a link to a Palestinian-Canadian blog discussing the conflict. That’s the closer I’ve ever seen a Palestinian going behind the usual narrative.
hxxp://nizos.blogspot.com/2008/07/on-zionism-arabs-and-democracy.html
I don’t sign on to everything either say, but these are points of view worth seeing.
“They also called Israel the “Children of Herod”
Does the left in Brazil usually make allusions to new testament villains when referring to people they dislike, or is it something reserved to Jewish states? (and yes, I’ve read parts of the NT and know Herod’s role in the story).
Bill Mulligan:
I beg to differ… To most european standarts, the Republican party stands way to the right of the mainstream right parties (usually demo-christians) here. We have our share of lunatics, even in the main parties, but the stance on public services and expenditure of the republicans, their jingoism and their corporate ties make their european counterparts look like nuns in comparison.
Most european countries have a pretty diverse political panorama, with two or three main parties, usually very moderate, and a variable group of smaller parties representing local and fringe positions. The main difference with the USA is that since those minor parties can actually get seats in the parlament, they dont dissapear or become anecdotic, like it happens in the USA.
But when those parties dissapear, the people that would vote for them dont simply vanish into thin air. Try look into the ranks of both major american parties and you will find them, and those who harvest their votes. After all, a pretty centrist country wouldnt elect anyone like Ron Paul or Huckabee, and you did.
Regarding the prohibittion of certain parties… the most obvious example beign the nazi party in Germany. First, if you believe that could not happen in your country, you are on the road to actually enable it to happen. I recomend reading about The Third Wave experiment, but its pretty well known. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave)
Second, political parties in europe receive public money, depending on their representation, to finance their activities. So it became clear that any party that would explicitly try to exterminate or harm part of the society shouldnt be allowed to enter the system. After all, that would make a german jew finance the propaganda of an antisemitic party.
In my country there is a law that requires every political organization to renounce explicitly violence as a mean to obtain their political goal. One radical nationalist party has been banned because they choose not to. They didnt have the chance to obtain even regional power, but our society found morally indefensible to force terrorism victims to finance terrorist enablers and propagandists.
“Does the left in Brazil usually make allusions to new testament villains when referring to people they dislike, or is it something reserved to Jewish states? (and yes, I’ve read parts of the NT and know Herod’s role in the story).”
This newspaper represents the Brazilian radical left, people who were linked to armed struggled Marxism in the 1960s and 1970s. They’re colorful in the way they insult their opponents. The majority of Brazilian Leftists, while still disliking and distrusting Israel, do not use such labels. But unflattering comparisions between Israel and “evil” countries like Apartheid-Era South Africa are common.
Rene, the best argument I can make for some people being amused by slaughter is that PAD began this topic with his limitless amusement that Palestinians were being slaughtered.
——————————-
Jeffrey, nowhere in this opening post do I detect amusement at the slaughter of innocent Palestinians. I see incredulity and bitter humor, but all of it directed at Hamas and its agents.
I think you’re reading far too much into this.
Sasha: “Jeffrey, nowhere in this opening post do I detect amusement at the slaughter of innocent Palestinians. I see incredulity and bitter humor, but all of it directed at Hamas and its agents.
I think you’re reading far too much into this.”
No, he reading what he wants to read into it and he will continue to do so for as long as this thread exists. It’s what he does. It doesn’t matter what a reasonable reading of something would allow most people to walk away with. For Jeffrey the arguments that Israel has the right to respond to Hamas in this fashion or PAD’s header, despite no one talking about what great fun this is or even coming close to that, reads to Jeffrey as people here finding amusement in the slaughter of innocent Palestinians. He has to read it that way so that he can argue with any point made no matter how solid or sane it may be.
He always does this. It’s why so few people here regularly or seriously debate anything with him anymore.
El Hombre Malo, I may well be wrong here, but I recall instances where some pretty far right people in Europe got way more success than I think they would have here. A party as openly racist as The National front or British National Party would not get much traction here. An anti-Semitic holocaust denying xenophobe like Jean Marie Le Pen would not be in a runoff for president here.
I realize that this may be due to the nature of elections in Europe and elsewhere, which is one reason I rather like our system–nuts get marginalized. You’re correct that the supporters of said nuts are still around–here they had a choice between McCain, who they thought was a Manchurian candidate traitor and Obama who they thought was a secret Islamic communist. Must suck to be them.
After all, a pretty centrist country wouldnt elect anyone like Ron Paul or Huckabee, and you did.
I don’t consider either of them to be extremists, even though I disagree with both on a number of issues. Your mileage may vary.
Regarding the prohibittion of certain parties… the most obvious example beign the nazi party in Germany. First, if you believe that could not happen in your country, you are on the road to actually enable it to happen. I recomend reading about The Third Wave experiment, but its pretty well known. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave)
Yeah, well, I’d recommend walking around the country and seeing how many Nazis you can scrape up. the proof is in the pudding–you CAN be a nazi here. You CAN vote for nazis here.
But nobody does. Their numbers are pathetic.
The only reason to outlaw a political party is if you are afraid that they will become powerful enough to do harm. I don’t think that the neo-nazis in Germany or France have that many followers. If I’m wrong, those countries are in worse trouble than we know.
Second, political parties in Europe receive public money, depending on their representation, to finance their activities. So it became clear that any party that would explicitly try to exterminate or harm part of the society shouldnt be allowed to enter the system. After all, that would make a german jew finance the propaganda of an antisemitic party.
One more reason to oppose public financing, I guess. I have no problem with going after people who are committing violence but outlawing a party that advocates the violent overthrow of the government is what McCarthy was trying to do. Was it right to go after the communist party? And when you say you can ban a party that tries to “harm part of society”, well, that’s kind of open to interpretation, isn’t it? Broadly interpreted one could use that to suppress any party that disagrees with you on tariffs or advocates more taxes on the rich.
I guess I just think it’s best for society if people are trusted to make these choices. yeah, they can make bad choices but I think there’s a greater danger in letting politicians have too much power in deciding who can or can’t join their ranks.
This newspaper represents the Brazilian radical left, people who were linked to armed struggled Marxism in the 1960s and 1970s.
Which means, I guess, that they would be outlawed in El Hombre Malo’s country. No great loss but I still think it’s better to have what might sometimes be uncomfortable degrees of freedom.
My impression is that PAD finds people who deplore the killing of Israelis wise and noble defenders of a noble state set down in the midst of barbarians (and beneficial to his friends and family, which certainly proves their point), but those who deplore the killing of Palestinians niggling little crypto-fascists who hang on to a ridiculous dream of Palestinian statehood (and whose goals are not AT ALL good for the Israeli real estate market).
That sounds like a bunch of racist crap to me. Dead Arabs have families who mourn them just as much as dead Jews – but who have a lot more practice at it, of course.
Jeffrey, you tolerate your own inconsistencies and strawmen like someone who’s spent the last 2 years feeling a post away from making a debate-kill. As long as we can refer to your contradictions and invective, we will never be disappointed by such as kill, and you will always be disappointed by its absence. Your persistence in grinding on the combine of your own disappointment demonstrates your practice in enduring it.
This not-at-all-ambiguous observation that your disappointment with your life, at the end of your youth, underscores everything you say here bears repeating. I still believe if you can end the disappointment omnipresent in your life, we will all benefit. Take whatever insight from my observation you can in realizing a solution to your dilemma.
Not to pick on Italy, but this article at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5474090.ece kind of indicates what I’m talking about. A few highlights:
Outrage over proposal to boycott Jewish-owned shops
(Richard Owen, Rome)
Jewish leaders in Rome today expressed outrage over a trades union proposal to “identify and boycott” Jewish-owned shops in the Italian capital amid fears of a resurgence of anti-Semitism linked to Israeli actions in Gaza
…He said his union had already urged its members to boycott Israeli products, and boycotting Jewish-owned or Jewish-run stores was a logical next step.
He said he and his supporters were drawing up a list of Jewish shops, “though it might be better to publish a list of streets in which a majority of the shops are Jewish and ask people to avoid those streets when shopping”.
…Ignazio La Russa, the Defence Minister, who is a leader of the right-wing Alleanza Nazionale, said that to counteract the use of the cathedral square as an “open air mosque”, an open air Catholic mass should be held to “reclaim” it for Christianity.
Mr Alemanno and Giorgia Meloni, the Minister for Youth, who are both leading members of Alleanza Nazionale, came under fire from the Left today for attending a ceremony in a Rome suburb honouring three members of an ultra-right youth group gunned down by extreme leftwingers in 1978.
Ms Meloni said that she and Mr Alemanno were opposed to “all political violence”. Three hundred far-right activists making the stiffed-armed Fascist salute later gathered at the site of the killing in the Tuscolano district to commemorate the three “martyrs of Via Acca Larentia”.
For all the kookiness that we have in the USA, this sort of thing would not get very far. Unions marching down the road to Kristallnacht, high ranking politicians at goosestepping rallies…WTF?
I’ve been sitting this one out due to other more important demands on my time. I would like to chime in with one observation, though: I don’t think it’s worth arguing any further with Jeffrey Frawley, any more than it was worth arguing with Rob Brown. I suspect their remarks have less to do with any true political or philosophical convictions, and more to do with unspoken — and very possibly unconscious — personal agendas.
Think of it this way: what if you beat someone resoundingly at checkers, only to have him declare that he is the winner because you took all of his pieces? Would you argue endlessly with him about the rules of the game, or write him off as an idiot or a loon and walk away? I suspect you’d do the latter, and do it quickly.
Just a thought, folks.
I gotta go. Before I do, though, I’d like to thank PAD for letting this discussion continue despite certain people abusing it. A few people have taken the opportunity to get beyond the talking points, and have given food for thought. That alone makes this a very worthwhile thread.
‘Night, all.
My impression is that PAD finds people who deplore the killing of Israelis wise and noble defenders of a noble state set down in the midst of barbarians (and beneficial to his friends and family, which certainly proves their point), but those who deplore the killing of Palestinians niggling little crypto-fascists who hang on to a ridiculous dream of Palestinian statehood (and whose goals are not AT ALL good for the Israeli real estate market).
Well, you apparantly have a perception problem. If you re-read some of PAD’s posts, it should be obvious that he doesn’t like the deaths of civilians in general (including Israeli and Palestinian) and that he’s not utterly opposed to a Palestinian state.
That sounds like a bunch of racist crap to me. Dead Arabs have families who mourn them just as much as dead Jews – but who have a lot more practice at it, of course.
I’m sure you would agree that dead Jews have families that mourn them — and have an awful lot of practice at it as well.
Bill Mulligan: I agree, european multiple party system allows for more ugly surprises. Le Pen never got more than a 20% backing in France, yet he managed to be second in the first voting because the left vote disseminated too thin (the french have a system where all parties compete first and then a second voting is taken to selcet the winner between the two most voted candidates). That made for a hard candy to swallow for those left wing voters who had to vote for Chirac (demo-cristian right). Still, that kind of shakedown work fine to prevent both voters and politicians taking things for granted.
the american system, you say, marginalizes nuts… that is, depending on who you consider a nut or an extremist. Nader seems a pretty consistent politician to me, maybe not presidential material but no doubt a voice worth hearing in congress or senate. In Germany the green used their 10% representation to back social-democrats and, in turn, affect policies. In the USA 2.8 million voters got the green party nothing except beign called nuts. All while real nuts might very well thrive within the two major parties.
When I said “nuts are still around” I meant in office. You have Ron Paul having periodic meetings with supremacists groups, Michele Bachmann demanding a purge of “anti-american” elements, Sarah Palin using racial prejudice (“he’s not like us, y’know”) or even the president of your country stating creationism deserves equal time as evolution in the classrooms. As you said, the definition of what’s extremism and nuts may vary.
And you wouldnt find many nazis here too, not even with our history… But you should know it can happen anywhere, and believing you are inmunne to that kind of phenomena only make you more vulberable to it. 10 years before Hitler rose to power, nazis where a fringe group, even with the Versailles peace and the espartakist revolution still candent.
And when it comes to the media… I have yet to find someone as extremist and intolerant in Spain as Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly or that Savage guy. Nuts I say.
“One more reason to oppose public financing, I guess.”
I would agree, except without it the risk of the whole political process becoming controlled by corporate interests is too high.
” I have no problem with going after people who are committing violence but outlawing a party that advocates the violent overthrow of the government is what McCarthy was trying to do”
Well, McCarthy problem is he identified all communist and socialist movement with revolutionaries, a message much of the american people swallowed. A Democracy has every right to stop a group of people from imposing their views through violence.
“And when you say you can ban a party that tries to “harm part of society”, well, that’s kind of open to interpretation, isn’t it?”
Actually, no. I meant literally that… parties that state their willingness to eliminate whatever individual they deem “dangerous”, “impure” or “deviated”. High taxes may sting but you are still alive to vote in the next elections and change things. A bullet in the back of your head is not so considerate.
For the record, I actually disagree with that law in my country. Mostly because it was tailored to specifically ban the political wing of ETA. I believe that, as henious as their ideology, rethoric and messages are, you can only stop violence beign used as a political tool if you leave the door open for them using the same way as everyone. Violent groups feed on the feelings of aggravation of their backers so banning their political organizations only reinforces those feelings. But still, I also understand the moral indignation of the terrorist victims forced to finance their shameless aggresors.
“Which means, I guess, that they would be outlawed in El Hombre Malo’s country”
It depends. With a past like my country’s you can find many democratic organizations with a violent past. But most have renounced violence as a political tool or dissapeared. After all, try to remember both Brazil and Spain endured military dictatorships.
El Hombre malo–I’ve enjoyed the discussion. Spain is one of the relatively few European countries I’d like to visit (no offense to the others, but they’d be far down on a list that begins with a return to the Galapagos and then some trips through Asia and some Island nations. My former father in law, the late Chandler Brossard, wrote a well received book called The Spanish Scene–ever read it? (probably hard to find now, though it wouldn’t surprise me to discover that he is better known in Europe).
Mike, I post what I believe to be true. If your own posts have some murkier intent that has nothing to do with me. Most normal people (and even I) express themselves in this way. Whether or not PAD sees things my way has no effect on my rapidly disappearing youth or my satisfaction with my life.
Then be sure to visit. We’re a lovable bunch over here, once you get over our weird meal hours and noisy manners. And Ive been told there is much to see here. While other plundered their colonies to finance industries, we did it to build churches and palaces, so we ended up with a lovely scenery. I certainly liked it in your country myself (more in NY than in LA… tho my three hour stop in Bangor was…interesting).
I didnt know Mr.Brossard book, I am sorry. For what I’ve seen is way out of print and the topic (spanish theatre) is not one I read often about. But reading what foreigners have written about my country is one of my hobbies (honestly… you often find more honesty in the misconceptions of an stranger than on whatever a native has to say… less bias I guess). I will ask my more literate friends about the book and will be alert should I have the chance to read it.
Bill,
The same Chandler Brossard that was an editor for the New Yorker?
One and the same. Have you read any of his books? Who Walk in Darkness and The Bold Saboteurs would be the two I’d recommend, though the nonfiction The Spanish Scene is quite good as well.
Sadly, he’s probably best known now for the feud he had with Anatole Broyard. Remind me to tell you about that one some time.
Micha – Thank you. Another example of people (myself in this case) doing best not to listen to just any unverified sources. I’ll look up those sites you suggest. Again, thanks for setting me straight.
Micha – Oops, too early in the morning. Went back and reread … I know Palestinians are not currently nomads. I’d written that I thought they USED to be. But I may well be wrong there, too. So, off to look at those sites.
I’m not sure whether a multi-party system encourages more extremism than a bi-party system.
In a multi-party system, a group that is loved by 10% of people but hated by 90%, like some white supremacist European parties, can actually get some people in congress.
On the other hand, in a bi-party system like in the US, you may have extremists becoming a powerful voice in one of the two big parties, and then you have many voters forced to choose between an extremist and a guy from the “other side”.
I mean, if the US had multiple powerful parties, Bush and McCain would never be in the same party at all. Or Clinton and Howard Dean.
Bill,
I think I read a part of Who Walk in Darkness years ago, but nothing else. I just knew the name from The New Yorker because I used to be a big fan of their cartoons and crosswords and the name sort of sticks out.
I don’t expect every author, artist, musician to believe in what I do – but Peter your apparent lack of empathy towards the people of Gaza is disappointing.
Israel broke the Cease Fire on November 4 that killed 6 Palestinians. Seriously – google it – it is a fact.
No sane person condones violence. The rockets attacking Israel are wrong, the attack on Gaza is wrong. There is no dispute there, but I think wider consideration is needed.
The Gaza Strip is 650 sq km. To give that some context Calgary, a city in AB Canada is 726 sq km.
Now fence it off, restrict movement, electricity, basic medical services – all which were limited and substandard during the cease fire.
Now bomb it. They can’t even escape. There is no where to run – they are fenced in!
The Palestinian death toll since this new attack started is 778 PEOPLE at least 200 CHILDREN and more than 3000 wounded.
This is terrorism, this is deplorable – do you understand that this type of action breeds hatred and more violence. Israel literally fostered the creation of Hamas. Again, just google it, the information is there – over and over again, sourced and resourced.
Peter and anyone on this thread who thinks that Israel has any possible justification for this attack. Simply read up on the facts, consider the tolls of the dead, look at the pictures of the dead children.
If you can really take the time to become knowledgeable about the situation and still have no compassion then I seriously have no idea what the hëll is wrong with you.
Jerry,
Chandler was an interesting man, to say the least. Very difficult, as brilliant people often are. I don’t think he treated my ex-wide very well at all, but there can be no denying his talent. He deserves more attention than he has–it wouldn’t surprise me to see him be rediscovered at some point (although I fear we are fast coming to a time when books are very much a niche industry. How many kids today read for pleasure? Far too few.)
Rob Brown: That’s bûllšhìŧ, Luigi. If you voted for George W. Bush four years ago, or if somebody you know did, that doesn’t make them responsible for everything he did subsequently.
Luigi Novi: Of course it does, provided that they had the ability to make an informed decision. If someone runs on a platform of freedom, and then suddenly reveals after getting into power that he’s a communist dictator, well, then that’s different. But if voters had plenty of info on which to base an informed decision that a given candidate is an incompetent, blinded-by-religion neocon hawk—and they certainly did with Bush—then they are indeed responsible for that President’s actions.
ME: Sorry Luigi, but your argument is still bûllšhìŧ! Politicians campaign on many issues, and some will be more petinent to people than others.
For example, Policitian A’s manifesto, I agree with apart from Point X (which I vehemently disapprove of). Compare that to Politician B who’s manifesto I largely disagree with but share the vision with regard to Point X.
Were I to vote for A, it would be completely delusional for you to hold me responsible for A’s actions with regard to point X.
Real world scenario, in the UK, Tony Blair’s government lost a lot of seats in regional by-election, because people made protest votes against the War in Iraq then. However, in the General Election, where there were a lot more considerations at stake, Blair’s Governemnt stayed in power.
Rob Brown: That’s bûllšhìŧ, Luigi. If you voted for George W. Bush four years ago, or if somebody you know did, that doesn’t make them responsible for everything he did subsequently.
Luigi Novi: Of course it does, provided that they had the ability to make an informed decision. If someone runs on a platform of freedom, and then suddenly reveals after getting into power that he’s a communist dictator, well, then that’s different. But if voters had plenty of info on which to base an informed decision that a given candidate is an incompetent, blinded-by-religion neocon hawk—and they certainly did with Bush—then they are indeed responsible for that President’s actions.
ME: Sorry Luigi, but your argument is still bûllšhìŧ! Politicians campaign on many issues, and some will be more petinent to people than others.
For example, Policitian A’s manifesto, I agree with apart from Point X (which I vehemently disapprove of). Compare that to Politician B who’s manifesto I largely disagree with but share the vision with regard to Point X.
Were I to vote for A, it would be completely delusional for you to hold me responsible for A’s actions with regard to point X.
Real world scenario, in the UK, Tony Blair’s government lost a lot of seats in regional by-election, because people made protest votes against the War in Iraq then. However, in the General Election, where there were a lot more considerations at stake, Blair’s Governemnt stayed in power.
For what it’s worth: There seems to be some question as to the truth of the claim that the Bad Guys were frieing from the Gaza school that was mortared by Israaeli troops: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7823204.stm
Not forgetting the casualities and victims on the israeli side, not forgetting Israel is still the more humane contender in the conflict…
…the knesset have rendered illegal two arab parties with seven seats in the assembly, at the request of Avigdor Lieberman, leader of a right wing party who was born in Russia.
Among the crimes of the arab representatives, in the words of Kadima, the governing party who backed the initiative, was traveling to Siria and Lebanon… where, incidentally, they have relatives who have never been allowed to return to Palestine or Israel.
EL Hombere malo, I saw that story. One account stated that Central Elections Committee determines Balad, United Arab List-Ta’al parties ineligible to run in February 2009, on grounds that they don’t recognize the state and call for armed conflict against it.
As I said above, I’m very much against banning political parties, even if they are made up of loathsome people with evil intent. Banning seldom works and the fact that you do it indicates to me a fear that they will attract enough people to win. Given that you stated that there is a law that requires every political organization to renounce explicitly violence as a mean to obtain their political goal it would seem that the Israelis have a similar setup.
Now it may be that they are applying it incorrectly–maybe these Arab parties HAVE explicitly renounced violence–but that just shows the danger of even having such rules on the books.
If the parties have not renounced violence then I can’t see where you would have any objection to this action. I, on the other hand, do.
Bill Mulligan, try remember I personally object these kind of laws, even in my own country. I simply corrected your assumption they exist to prevent extremists from winning, at leasts in the case I know best.
I dont know if Israel have similar laws, But Avigdor Lieberman has been proposing this measure for years and it is now it has been approved. Have these parties embraced violence since the last time the measure got rejected? (last year).
On top of that, Mr.Lieberman’s party advocates for the removal of all arabs from Israel, be it willingly or forcibly if needed. So, whatever the grounds for the arab parties banning might be, it seems defending ethnic cleansing does not make an organization elegible for such measures.
El Hombre Malo–You’re absolutely right, I forgot that you had explicitly said you did not support those laws. My apologies.
And I agree, any organization that stumps for the forced removal of citizens is in no position to decry violence.
Well, now that Israel is seeing the UN as a lawful enemy (or now that it just doesn’t care, if that’s more accurate# and blowing up its headquarters, as well as the previous schools, why in the world did I ever think it was acting like an unlawful aggressor? Let me think…
Oh, MOST appropriate to kill over a thousand Palestinians many hundreds of them children, because they react aggressively when they’re locked in a cage. If the Palestinians aren’t worth our worries, let us remember that repeated attacks on UN installations obligates UN members #of which both the US and Israel number themselves) to pound on the aggressor’s skull until he stops acting like such an áššhølë. Breach of international peace and wars of aggression are specifically the sort of things the UN was set up to stop. Gosh, isn’t it convenient that the US has a veto on the Security Council? If that were not so, why – somebody might feel like making Israel conform to international law and its own treaty obligations, and who would ever want THAT?
BBC News headline this morning:
“Air strike kills Hamas minister: Hamas Interior Minister Said Siyam has been killed by an Israeli air strike in Gaza, says Hamas television.”
AP article about Israel bombing UN building in Gaza Strip:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians
“It is absolutely true that we were attacked from that place, but the consequences are very sad and we apologize for it,” Olmert said. “I don’t think it should have happened and I’m very sorry.”
Well, at least he’s finally waking up to the fact that indiscriminately bombing the šhìŧ out of any place in Gaza where attacks are coming from is perhaps is A Very Bad Thing.
Amid all the military action taken against Gaza by Israel, Gaza militants fired 24 rockets into Israel today. One hit a car, seriously injuring a child, according to ABC World News Tonight with Charles Gibson. Now that an Israeli child has been seriously injured, I wonder what criticism, if any, will be leveled at Hamas, and if none, how many such children (and adults, for that matter) have to be injured before such criticism occurs.