The Hezbollah and Israel

[MKFaizi]

It’s like me saying, “I’m of Muslim descent.” What does it mean? Am I related by blood to every other Muslim through religion? If I have a blood transfusion and the donor is a Buddhist, am I from that day on of Buddhist descent? When you became a Muslim, did you suddenly become of Muslim descent or were you an American Muslim, ex Jew? Were you ever really a practising Jew? Is a practising Jew one who lives in Israel? If a pregnant Christian woman travels to Israel and has her baby there, is that baby a Jew or an Israelite -- on what grounds (ha!) is there no difference? How, exactly, does one retain their Jewishness?

Is today’s young American of Secular descent?

Sorry to cause consternation. I was mulling things over actually. Ruminating.

I think Bert explained "Jew" pretty well. Not speaking of the religion but the bloodline. I am not Jewish. My grandparents were not Jewish in the sense of practicing the religion of Judaism. They were all southerners and Jews who moved to the deep south dropped Judaism and all identification with the religion and culture.

I cannot be an ex-Jew because I was never a Jew. Just some Jewish bloodlines. Muslim does not connote a particular region of origin. Not all Muslims are Paks or Turks or Arabs or Indians. Muslim connotes religion rather than particular regional roots or cultural identification with only one country or region. To Jews, Israel is the motherland. To a Muslim, the homeland may be Saudi Arabia or Iraq or Iran or Lebanon or Kuwait.

Of course, there are Jewish converts to the religion of Judaism. Like most converts, they are zealous in their new found religion and consider Israel to be the Jewish homeland.

It is preposterous to think that if one receives blood from a Jew or a Buddhist he then becomes kin to Jews or Buddhists. However, I have known many Muslims who would not receive blood from a pork eater or an alcohol drinker or blood from a Jew or even blood from a Muslim who did not eat Kosher food. By the same token, there are ignorant whites who would not receive a transfusion from a black.

No, I never practiced Judaism. Would not know how. My Jewish ancesters came down from New York and Connecticut to Alabama long before the Civil War. As a southerner, I was deeply shocked by the Yankee roots. Abominable. Worse yet, we all had to come to the mind numbing realization that George Bush is a cousin. Being half Jew was nothing compared to that shock. No one gave a fuck about being contaminated by Jewish blood -- and I mean these people are from Alabama. The deep shame was the Bush tainting of an otherwise noble bloodline.

My dear Uncle Arthur proclaimed, "Well, I ain't admittin it. I'm jus going to say that I am kin to Martin Luther King."

Good Jewish boy, Arthur Stillman.

The first Jew came to the US in about 1564 brought by Sir Walter Raleigh.

In the mid 1600's, there was an influx of Jews to the US from settlements in Brazil. Many of these Jews settled in Savannah, Georgia and Charleston, South Carolina. The bulk of them settled in New Amsterdam -- New York City. That is from where my family's branch of Jews filtered down to Birmingham in the 1700's, I reckon. They were Stillman's or Styleman's. My mother's maiden name is Stillman. They ceased to practice Judaism. At that time, there were reformed Jewish congregations whose religious practices became more like Christian protestantism. Easy shift from that to leaving Judaism behind completely.

My great great grandfather was a Presbyterian minister who founded a college to educate "Negroes." It still exists close to Birmingham and Condaleeza Rice's grandfather received his education there -- another rueful Bush connection. This is Stillman College.

Jews were present and active all through Colonial America and Jews participated in the Revolutionary War. They also fought on both sides during the American Civil War.

CHARLESTON MERCURY, January 17, 1863, p. 1, c. 1

Mobile, Ala., January 10.
Mobile is a charming place, except in rainy weather, which invariably transforms the city into a kind of muddy Venice. . . On the 8th instant the Hebrew young ladies of this city gave a ball and supper, the proceeds to be given to the 32d Alabama Regiment, who have nobly distinguished themselves in Tennessee. The spacious hall (Temperance Hall) was crowded, and, your correspondent speaks for self, all enjoyed themselves to their heart's content. . . Leigh

When I became Muslim, I did it for the sake of convenience, figuring it would be better for my kids to be raised in one way rather than torn between two ways.

No, I did not become "of Muslim descent." I was a convert, so to speak -- though I did it as a matter of convenience and because I do not give a shit about religion.

My children are not of Muslim descent. They are half Paks or as my son used to say when he was a child -- Pakka Crackkas. They descend from their father from India and Pakistan and Iran. They get the Cracka from me, whether or not I am a pure Cracka. We got the French crap and the big time English crap and the Hebrew crap and a Cherokee great grandmother on my father's side.

I don't think there is such a thing as a pure Cracker. Why I find Dave Chappelle's "White Power" thing such a hoot. You look far enough back or this or that way and you goin' to find some nigga blood or some Hebe blood or I-Talian. The idea of White Power is absurd. Hitler tried it and that motherfucker had more Jew in him than most. Aryan race, hell.

I saw a young woman today with the most beautiful natural blonde hair. Very unusual. Hitler would have kissed her butt. You just rarely see hair like that in the US anymore. It was a nearly white blonde. Highly unusual. So much for the Aryan race.

Anyway, I was merely ruminating upon the fact of distant Hebrew connections and more recent Muslim connections. I know little of Judaism. I know much more of Islam. Despite some blood connection to Israel and blood through marriage to Pakistan and Iran and India, I can take no side. I have no religious attachment to either side.

But the more I look and listen, the less I sympathize with the Israelis. According to the right wing assholes who dominate talk radio in the US, I am supposed to be strictly pro-Israeli and to condemn the "Mohammads" who eat virgins for breakfast and beat their wives and kids and who enforce clitoral removals for all females. I am supposed to fully believe only Republican right wing assessments. If I believe that the war in Iraq was based on lies, I am a liberal. The worst thing in the world is to be condemned as a liberal.

I do not consider myself to be politically liberal. For instance, I do not believe Hillary Clinton will become US president merely because she aspires to it. I think she lacks strength.

I do not frankly give a damn whether gays can marry. Fine with me if they do. I cannot see how this ambivalence makes me a dreaded liberal.

I am told by the right wing press that all other media outlets are part of a liberal Jewish Guardian Socialist Communist conspiracy that intends to destroy family values and capitalism and are pro -Islamist. I am told by the right wing radio press that the left wing print and television press refuses to report anything positive out of Iraq. One rightist wench suggested that a video cam should be placed in the hands of US ground forces in Iraq so that they could freely report the great happy good deeds being done in Iraq for the Iraqi people.

Such ground soldiers are sending videos to YouTube and doing a bang up job. They are not edited by the Commie New York Times or Jew CBS.

Kind of weird how they blame Commie Jews for media bias while stating over and over again the righteousness of Israel.

Far more civilians in Lebanon have died in this recent conflict than Israelis. The Lebanese had no love for Hezbollah. But they now have renewed hatred for Israel and the US.

I do not want to see the US attacked. But it is going to happen because, far beyond Iraq, we are pissing people off. Big time. I have been listening to the conservative right wing press during the day and listening to the left wing commies at night. I do not believe that Israel is merely defending itself nor do I believe it is merely out to destroy Hezbollah.

Looks to me like they are killing civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure. I have great pity for the Lebanese - and not for allegiance to Islam -- many Lebanese are Christian -- nor for alliegiance to Israel or the US. In fact, I think it is my allegiance to the US that repulses me from this killing spectacle. The US blames Syria and looks to Syria to curtail Hezbollah but does not look like we are doing anything to curtail Israel. Israel is a rich country that is made militarily rich by US support. Lebanon is poor.

The entire spectacle is sickening.

I knew things were going to be bad when Bush was elected the first time. It was beyond me to even predict how bad things would be in a second term. I can never forget the wired motherfucker saying he had political capital to spend. Shit for brains is spending it all right and using youth for fodder.

Good Jewish boy, George.

Faizi


.

[MKFaizi]

Bert,

Yes, Semite refers to persons of Mediterranean descent -- ethnic Jews, Arabs, Sicilians.

When my daughter was born, she had a blue mark on her butt that is called a Mongolian Spot. I have not seen her butt in about ten years but, last I knew, it was still there. This is something peculiar to those of Asian descent or other "Semites." It is never seen in Caucasians.

Faizi

[DHodges]

I do not want to see the US attacked. But it is going to happen because, far beyond Iraq, we are pissing people off. Big time. I have been listening to the conservative right wing press during the day and listening to the left wing commies at night. I do not believe that Israel is merely defending itself nor do I believe it is merely out to destroy Hezbollah.

I don't really get the mindless US support of Israel. Sure, they have a strong lobby. Is it just that whole religious thing about Armageddon and Jesus returning and whatnot?

Anyway, it seems to me that the best thing the US could do at this point is denounce Israel and state emphatically that we will not support them in a war of aggression, ever (mentioning Palestine as well as Lebanon). Israel might then have some incentive to seek peaceful solutions.

But I don't think that can happen with Bush as president.

The problem with democracy: rule by the Idiot Majority.

[Jamesh]

I don't really get the mindless US support of Israel.

Don't see why it is mindless. Seems very much like rational support to me. Any country would do the same thing if they were being attacked by rockets. We just tend to think of it differently because it is the old Jew-Arab fued.

Why anyone would support Muslims or Arabs generally who go out of their way to seek war in any way is beyond me. Quite frankly I have almost no doubt that if the Arabs didn't have Israel to get all upetty about they'd find something else - their aggression is mostly caused by their religious beliefs.

Diebert: Israel is an artificial country, it doesn't exist like other nations do.

Rubbish. All countries are artificial. Israel is just one of the more recent creations, though it has existed for long enough to no longer be considered a new country.

[Leyla Shen]

God damn. You sound just like that dickhead, “Spoonman.” Your perception of beginnings is extremely mediocre. Consequently, your reasoning on the subject suffers greatly. It is absolutely mindless support.

“It all began with the Palestinians suicide bombing and sending rockets into Israel…all Israel is trying to do is defend themselves…what‘s the matter with ‘you Alex‘s‘ Jeeez!”

Yeah? Where’s the actual historic evidence to back that up, James?

On what reasonable grounds does Israel have more of a right to exist (by definition!) and continue to expand through military aggression than Palestinians the right -- real life, living people -- to fight to return to their homes by the only means they see available rather than continue to have more and more of their land encroached upon and their homes demolished as punishment?

Quite frankly I have almost no doubt that if the Arabs didn't have Israel to get all upetty about they'd find something else - their aggression is mostly caused by their religious beliefs.

Is that it?

A “Jew” is pure religion and Israel a Theocracy, you hypocrite!

.

[Leyla Shen]

Diebert wrote:

Maybe you could compare the word 'Jew' with how Christendom was equaled in the past centuries with the 'West', or its civilisation and the ethnic background of those involved. Before church and state were separated, somewhat.

"Somewhat" is obvously a generous overstatement!

Even James, who claims he isn't religious, turns out to be quite the Bushian brand of Christian, indeed.

This is one of the things I respect in David. Early on, during admonishments of religion and the religious, I said to him something on the order of, "We are all religious, even you." To which he replied his religion was reason itself. This you can see in discussions with him as with anyone else. A discerning "eye" can spot fundmentalist thinking and its roots miles away.

.

[Leyla Shen]

Dave:

The problem with democracy: rule by the Idiot Majority.

The problem with democracy is calling the thing a democracy when it’s really a plutocratic oligopoly. That is, misidentification. What you think is A is in actual fact is B.

Can there be such a thing as democracy outside of a plutocratic oligopoly?

.

[MKFaizi]

Dave Hodges wrote:

I don't really get the mindless US support of Israel. Sure, they have a strong lobby. Is it just that whole religious thing about Armageddon and Jesus returning and whatnnot?

You got it. It is not the congressional lobby. It is the religious tribal thing -- the division of the tribes of Abraham. It is the archetypal rivalry of Issac and Ishmael.

Faizi

[Jamesh]

On what reasonable grounds does Israel have more of a right to exist (by definition!) and continue to expand through military aggression than Palestinians the right -- real life, living people -- to fight to return to their homes by the only means they see available rather than continue to have more and more of their land encroached upon and their homes demolished as punishment?

Organisational merit. The merit of the power that organisation and the technology that results from such organisation offers.

Quite frankly it is as simple as that. There is never any reason to examine the matter further than this. The history of every group of people who call themselves a country is a result of the same factor - power acheived through rational organisation always wins.

Only if one delves into the idiocy of competing emotions and ego's does one start to take into account the innocents under the control of leaders on both sides.

For the human race genocide has been the most efficient form of eradication of outdated emotional ways of living- it has been the best way to move forward. We cant do genocide these days, but we can minimise the momentum of inane practices of the past being considered as having an equal right to survive.

I know what Hezbollah is all about and the Muslim religion itself - it is solely about the struggle for individual masculine ego domination. I see no reason why it shouldn't be crushed into non-existence.

[Jamesh]

You got it. It is not the congressional lobby. It is the religious tribal thing -- the division of the tribes of Abraham. It is the archetypal rivalry of Issac and Ishmael.

Well no, it is actually about like having more in common with those who are most like us, relative to those who are not like us. Jews readily accept technology, therefore they are like us, and from being like us we have trade, immigration and many other forms of experiences that cause connections.

With the Muslims we really only have our natural distaste for the killing of people. The ties that bind us are not at all strong.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Quite frankly I have almost no doubt that if the Arabs didn't have Israel to get all upetty about they'd find something else - their aggression is mostly caused by their religious beliefs.

You have to try to see this from a broader perspective. If this conflict was not there, another one would be created by all parties involved. There's always this relatively short-lived struggle for dominance or survival that defines the history of human kind.

Israel is an artificial country, it doesn't exist like other nations do.

Rubbish. All countries are artificial. Israel is just one of the more recent creations, though it has existed for long enough to no longer be considered a new country.

What are you talking about? It hasn't even managed to settle its borders yet in the 60 years after it was made!

And even while all nation-states can be called to a certain degree artificial, you have to take a closer look at Israel to see what I'm talking about. This is a state that would not have existed without Jewish settler terrorist groups and some extreme measures and support from first the British empire, the UN, and later up until today the US. There's no other example you could point to that comes even close, apart from slightly older 'constructs' like Iraq, India, Pakistan and many African countries which are nice examples from ticking (and occasionally exploding) time bombs.

And think about the migrants, the 'returning' Jews that created so much tensions over time. Where came this obsession from to migrate to a place that grew so hostile to their presence (first half 20th century)? A colonist in the new world of the Americas would never have made the journey if the situation was even slightly like Palestine in the 20's and 30's. They were looking for freedom and space, opportunities, and not acting out of some misplaced idea of a 'promised land' or ancient homeland. When I used the word artificial, I was pointing to a disconnect with reality, forming some simulated reality, something going against anything that would be called 'natural'. And even when ultimately everything is part of nature, that doesn't mean one cannot make a distinction between roads that lead to ignorance and suffering and roads that do not.

And while you're thinking, check out the Jewish militants and terrorist groups that prepared the rise of Israel. How can one support the foundation of one nation, but deny the same struggle, a few decades later, of the Shi'a Muslims (Hezbollah) and the Palestines (Hamas) to create for themselves a place to live and prosper. The military aspects of these organizations are forming a defence line against a mighty enemy and fight mainly over still disputed (or perhaps "ill aligned") territory and against occupation of their airspace by the Israeli air force as well as various cases on intelligence meddling in Palestinian internal affairs. Basically it's a war zone, nothing to do with terrorism, apart from war being a form of terror - always. And asymmetrical warfare (including suicide bombing) is still no terrorism - it's realism.

The problem with your reasoning Jamesh is not your support for the state of Israel, but your lack of support for other factions who are struggling to make their own state, using basically the same means as Israel once used to get where they are now, and even continue to use to survive. If you want to be neutral, go ahead, but if you don't understand why Hamas and Hezbollah do what they do, you don't understand anything either about how Israel functions nowadays. It's really the same thing with a different coating, the coating of being 'modern' and 'civilized'. A quick body count of 'innocents' can sometimes cure this specific delusion.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

...it is actually about like having more in common with those who are most like us, relative to those who are not like us. Jews readily accept technology, therefore they are like us, and from being like us we have trade, immigration and many other forms of experiences that cause connections.

What makes you think Arabs, Palestinians, Lebanese, or Shi'a Muslims do not 'accept technology' like "us"?

It looks like you're talking about things you don't have a clue about. The economy of Israel (not 'Jews' by the way) is caused by many factors, but I don't think it has to do with any 'willingness' to embrace technology. It has to do with foreign aid and bullying any possible arising competition over many decades. And in that bullying, they are indeed like US and every apemen indeed.

[DHodges]

Can there be such a thing as democracy outside of a plutocratic oligopoly?

While the US government is in many ways dominated by the rich, there is more to it than that, especially when it comes to non-economic issues.

Other than economic factors, people get involved in politics because they believe strongly about something. Being people, the things they believe strongly about are often stupid and/or irrational. They are generally highly religious - or pretend to be.

People who are more moderate - who don't have such extreme beliefs - are less likely to be involved in politics. ("They have shit to do," as Jon Stewart put it.)

So, the US ends up being run by a bunch of crazies, who get all twisted up about issues like gay marriage and flag burning (i.e., stopping people from doing things that are largely symbolic).

When it comes to economic issues, these crazies don't necessarily have any strong beliefs (they are not economists, after all), and so they are easily swayed by lobbyists - the plutocracy you mention, but now with an attractive candy coating or representative democracy.

I've been thinking about this for a while, but I don't have an answer to the fundamental problem - government can be no better than the people running it, and the people who are attracted to politics are exactly the sort of people who shouldn't be running anything.

At one time I came up with the idea of anarcho-fascism - the idea being that you would have a highly militaristic government that would have flashy uniforms and parades and such, but would not be allowed to actually do much of anything beyond organizing parades. But it would be very patriotic.

However, rather than an idea for a government, I think that works better as a metaphor for how government actually works (at times). You've got a bunch of puppets out front, and the real work of running a country is done by bureaucrats.

As to whether a true democracy is possible, I'd say yes - for a small town - but probably is too unwieldy for anything larger.

The question is, is a plutocratic oligopoly really such a bad way to run a country? It may actually be pretty efficient when it comes to allocating resources. But, I'm not really arguing in favor of it - just acknowledging that I don't really have a better idea.

But like anything else, it can only work as well as the people in it - which is why I thing the number one priority of any government should be education. The quality of the people in the government is more important than the exact structure of the government.

[Leyla Shen]

James,

Given Diebert’s accurately targeted, comprehensive reply, I will only add -- at this stage -- one response to a portion of your silly, half-baked ideas.

You wrote:

I know what Hezbollah is all about and the Muslim religion itself - it is solely about the struggle for individual masculine ego domination. I see no reason why it shouldn't be crushed into non-existence.

Are you serious? Oh, I’m sorry. You know all about Muslims and Hezbollah so there’s no reason to examine the matter any further (!). I simply cannot believe you went so far as to try and pull that one on me, James, honestly: and in the same breath as accusing Muslims of "individual masculine ego domination." Wow.

Having been raised by and around Muslims all my life (and “Westerners”), of course I know nothing of the religion and its people compared to your vast armchair experience through maybe a few articles on the internet and “Western” media.

.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Psychology of the Islamic Fundamentalists:

1. It appears that they blame America/Israel for much of the problems in their “motherlands”
2. It appears they have a personal immortality worked out for themselves where they believe that they are good and the opposition is evil so any violent act against the opposition is a good deed and accepted by God.
3. They believe they will be rewarded in heaven by Allah for their moral work here on earth such as shooting missiles into Israeli villages.
4. They consider themselves “freedom fighters”
5. They do not possess a doubt of uncertainty in their thinking, their psyche is pure irrational certainty.
6. They believe their religion is right and everyone else is wrong, similar to all other followers of particular religions.

Perhaps you can think of others.

Now moving on the events in Israel, one can understand the series of attacks/defends on both sides, however both are in the wrong. There is no right group here.

Both sides are deluded. If they were wise, there would be no participation in such a thing.

Having both sides destroy each other is inevitable…

To take a side here is to be deluded.

And it appears Israel is a little more diplomatic and discreet with their brutality, which only makes their immoral behavior more difficult to detect.

Israel has always been the favorite by the western world, perhaps because of the genetic ancestral link, or perhaps because of the guilt the baby boomers still feel from world war II, or god knows why… there are a myriad of reasons working together…

The main thing here is that they are favored and they shouldn’t be.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

dave,

However, rather than an idea for a government, I think that works better as a metaphor for how government actually works (at times). You've got a bunch of puppets out front, and the real work of running a country is done by bureaucrats.

To expand upon this bureaucratic model of government power: I look for who makes policy, allocates resources, and has immunity from responsibility in the case of mistakes to determine where power actually lies. It seems abundantly clear that middle-managers, non-elected civilian advisors and military officials, and highly-trained specialists fit the role nicely. The magic of the system is that when you have a lot of upper-middle-class people making minor decisions, there's nowhere to place blame when things start to fuck up big time.

I would hasten to add that high-ranking elected officials are only figureheads in the popular imagination. They do indeed have power, and what more, accountability in the case of screw-ups. It is their accountability alone that weakens them in comparison to the drones.

The real puppets are the artists, actors, and musicians who pretend that concerts (live-8, woodstock, raves, benefit concerts), magazine interviews, fashion trends, and movies have the power to somehow change policy through slogans and swaying butane lighters.

Somehow, though, I feel safer hidden in a bureaucracy, knowing that anyone with enough brains to effect real change in the system (and hence, affect me directly) is relegated to a dusty library somewhere, or is making my french fries. I can handle paperwork. I can't handle people powerful enough to directly change my life.


cp,

1. It appears that they blame America/Israel for much of the problems in their “motherlands”

This problem dates farther back than even the founding of America and Israel. For over a thousand years, the Middle East has constantly been invaded by Western oppressors. Americans and Israelis are merely the contemporary manifestation of crusader armies out to free the Holy Land from heathen Arabs.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Psychology of the Islamic Fundamentalists:

1. It appears that they blame America/Israel for much of the problems in their “motherlands”

You might be right here that the militants are using the conflict trying to restore some 'old glory' that is only kept alive in their stories of the past. But be aware that this also plays in the hearts of the militarists (the 'War Party') who are in power in Israel and the USA. Same old glory.

2. It appears they have a personal immortality worked out for themselves where they believe that they are good and the opposition is evil so any violent act against the opposition is a good deed and accepted by God.

It's true that these militants don't fear death. They laugh at concerns about 'personal safety' and 'well being' for themselves or any other being. They live and die for what they believe to be true and just, above everything else. It's radical, it's devotional. It's filling the void that nihilism is creating in this world. Be warned that this is just the beginning, it won't stop with Muslim radicals, we will breed likewise extremism in our own cities in all kinds of shaped and forms. Can you see it already beginning?

3. They believe they will be rewarded in heaven by Allah for their moral work here on earth such as shooting missiles into Israeli villages.

I'm sure it's not much different than what Israeli pilots are thinking when dropping their bombs?

4. They consider themselves “freedom fighters”

You forget that they are also considered to be that by a large section of the population of Lebanon, Palestine, Iran and Syria. And Allah knows how much more in other countries. So by democratic measures the militants seem to be right.

5. They do not possess a doubt of uncertainty in their thinking, their psyche is pure irrational certainty.

How is that different from 80% or more of this world's population? The only difference is circumstance they find themselves in. The rationality involved won't be much different.

6. They believe their religion is right and everyone else is wrong, similar to all other followers of particular religions.

Well, you think they are 'irrational' or not? And your analysis is 'rational'? How exactly are you different here?

[MKFaizi]

Jamesh is extremely ignorant. I get the impression that he must listen to the Savage radio show who talks about the Mohammads who eat virgins for breakfast and beat their children.

I can tell you that Pakistanis love technology. They love to watch Bollywood movies and without VCRs or DVDs, they could not do that so easily. They love telephones, clocks, cameras -- any kind of electronic gadget. Crazy about technology. Yes, they even like cameras and cellphone cameras and home videos -- despite the old belief that a picture is something evil.

My cousin called me from Pakistan on an internet phone several years ago. Took him a few months to get through but one day the connection worked and we spoke. I am sure the technology is better now.

They love email and they love fax machines. I have received many emails and faxes from Pak relatives over the years.

Even the Qaeda types love the internet and cell phones. Duh..I mean, where have you been, Jamesh? Most terrorist communication occurs on the web. Remember chatter? The first web cam beheading?

Ossama loves technology and video. Dude is always putting out a new tape or something -- audio or video. Real ham -- get it -- hahahah.

And Iran and Pakistan are both hep on nuclear technology.

Where in Allah's name did you get the idea that Muslims do not like technology?

You need to stop listening to the Savage dude. Limbaugh makes me gag, too, but compared to Savage -- well, he's a class act. Like, he at least has some intelligence and wit.

I love Limbaugh's allusion to the Drive by Media. I do not entirely agree with the notion but there is enough truth to it to make it laughable.

I think you should make it a point to become acquainted with a few rag heads. It would be a good educational experience for you.

Of course, there are Islamist terrorists and their fanaticism is appalling and their fanaticism can incite others to fanaticism. But this is not because any Muslim hates technology.

Bushie is fond of saying that they envy our democracy. Bullcrap. It is proven that Pakistan functions better under marshall law than any attempt at democracy. They don't want freedom. They want ipods.

You are entitled to your opinion but before you voice your opinion I recommend strongly that you silence your asshole. Ever read Burroughs story of a man who had a talking asshole? You might find it interesting -- better than Kafka.

Before I stop, I am compelled to say that I read a couple of days ago that 6000 Iraqis died over the past two months of the war. Six thousand people in only two months.

So called freedom is a nice idea. But I reckon that if I was Iraqi I might settle for the end of war.

So much like Vietnam. Vietnam was a pretty nasty place, I gather, after the Americans left and the communists took over. But it seems to be all right now. Children are not being killed over and over again. There is an undisturbed infrastructure.

The only thing that can be said of war is that it enforces understanding. It is my hope that twenty years from now, Muslim countries and Western countries may better understand each other. War often causes an eventual melding of cultures.

The US dropped atomic bombs on Japan and Japan became a friend of the US and a technological power.

I hate to see what is going on in Lebanon and Israel. But, Inshallah, when enough blood is shed, shit might stop until the next big thing.

I just heard and I am not surprised that American evangelical Christians are very happy about events in the Middle East because they consider this to be the beginning of Armageddon.

Could be. Just kind of makes me sick to think of Jerry Falwell gloating over this. If I was God and it is a damn good thing I am not, I would call off Armageddon soon as I might see Falwell's gloating LDL ridden pork fed cholesterol fat face.

GOD-PSYCH!!!

Sickening to think that these pompous, ignorant assholes actually think that God is putting on a show for them.

Beam me up, Scottie.

Faizi

[lightsmitten]

I think we should let the Palestinians and the Israelis annihilate each other. Why put so much emotional investment in the animosities between two Semitic tribes on some alien continent? We should strictly adhere to a policy of utter indifference.

[MKFaizi]

Last I knew, the median income in Israel was more than twenty six thousand dollars compared with about six thousand dollars in Lebanon.

Israel was re-formed after WWII by Jews who had been living elsewhere -- Germany, Austria, and the US, for example -- technically advanced cultures. They brought their technology and education with them. After the 1940's, even more Jews educated in the west moved to Israel.

The contrast between the denizens of Israel -- many fresh from western culture and western education -- and the inhabitants of Syria or Libya is sharp. Many of these Israelites had long been assimilated into western techno-culture.

I never fully read the novel "Exodus" because it was too fictional for my tastes. But I have vague recollection of descripton of Palestinians confronting the first western Jews who came to reclaim the promised land. They immediately knew there was no way for a primitive people to cast out these foreigners -- alien beings.

Kind of makes me think of a photo from a news magazine a few years back when the US invaded Afghanistan. Picture of a US special forces soldier standing next to some Afghan people. Afghanistan is so backwoods that Pakistanis feel superior to them -- kind of how Virginians feel superior to West Virginians.

Anyway, the special forces dude looked like something out of Star Wars standing next to these primitive, tribal people.

The difference between Israel and the rest of the Middle East is the influx of western culture and technology that was there from the beginning -- in the late forties. Stranger in a strange land, indeed.

Jamesh, your ignorance of fairly recent history is also shown in your supposition that Islam makes the people aggressive by the nature of the religion.

I reckon you must be blonde, poor devil.

Are you not aware of the British Empire? Iraq was not Iraq until it was made Iraq by the British. They did a fine job of slicing the pie as usual.

Kind of like they did in India. They split the Punjab in two and they made East Pak and West Pak. They put the huge largely Hindu-Jain-Singe subcontinent between the two Paks. Doomed to failure. East Pakistan became Bangladesh in the 1970s.

My point is that it is hard to reconcile Muslim aggression with British rule that lasted hundreds of years and used the people as slaves for hundreds of years.

I will grant you that Gandhi's passive resistance cast the British out of India but he could not have done it without the Muslims fighting the other way.

Most of the middle east and much of the far east was dominated by British or French or other rule for hundreds of years.

Then, in the early or mid 20th century, imperial rule by Europe ended.

I certainly do not belittle or doubt the suffering of the Jews in Germany. I do not doubt the holocaust. But, despite the demise of millions in death camps, many western educated Jews survived to re-establish Israel in the 1940's.

Those newcomers to the region not only had education on their side but they had strong ties to the western countries from where they came.

The US alone has pumped billions of dollars into Israel due to their advanced likeness to us.

That likeness has everything to do with religion but it has more to do with transplantation. Israel is a western transplant.

Faizi

[MKFaizi]

Bert wrote:

There's always this relatively short-lived struggle for dominance or survival that defines the history of human kind.

Absolutely true. When I was a kid, the EVIL ONE was the Soviet Union and the threat of nuclear war.

That ended.

Then, the Great Satan was Iran. Then, the Great Satan was Qaeda. Then, the Great Satan was Iraq and, then, Iran, and Syria.

In about ten years -- maybe twenty years -- this Muslim thing will be behind us.

Then, something else will pop up for hate and fear.

Faizi

[Ryan Rudolph]

Diebert wrote:

Can you see it already beginning?

Yes, It appears as many more humans face the truth of life and mature psychologically, the ones who are unable to catch up may continue to self-destruct at faster rates.

It seems a necessary step in the evolutional process. As a biologist if one watches a tiny cell form, at the last moment of its creation, millions of parts that are not needed self-destruct giving the cell it’s unique form.

This appears to be the trajectory of humanity.

Diebert wrote:

I'm sure it's not much different than what Israeli pilots are thinking when dropping their bombs?

I suspect the Israeli pilots are thinking something like this: “Civilians attacked, soldiers captured, Must defend! Must defend! Be a hero!”

Diebert wrote:

You forget that they are also considered to be that by a large section of the population of Lebanon, Palestine, Iran and Syria. And Allah knows how much more in other countries. So by democratic measures the militants seem to be right.

Yes, apparently the hezabollah are notorious for their generous social programs in southern Lebanon to care for their own, they even have space in Lebanese parliament although they do not take the Lebanese government seriously. Iran and Syria seem to be the pocketbook behind their generosity and brutality.

Diebert wrote:

How is that different from 80% or more of this world's population?

No difference, probably more like 95% of the population.

Diebert wrote:

Well, you think they are 'irrational' or not? And your analysis is 'rational'? How exactly are you different here?

My analysis appears to be rational. To criticize all organized religions as irrational is rational, but to belong to one particular organized religion and criticize all other organized religions is irrational, there is a difference because one is sane while the other is insane.

[MKFaizi]

Come down from the mountain, already. If you want to wax enlightened, kick your butts upstairs. We talkin worldy matters here, old sons.

Way ya'll talkin, I reckon you 'bout to grow wings and sprout halos.

Damn.

If I was a forum moderator, I would kick ya'll's holier than thou hind ends up to Quinnland. Ya'll think you can come down to the hinterlands and hide because any thing goes down here. You ain't going to get kicked up. No, you can come down here and wipe your enlightened asses anywhere you want and fucking get away with it because you are not overtly discussing loftier ideas. But you are and you know it -- logic this and logic that; the clicking of tongues; condescension growing out of ya'll's every pore.

For you, it's a free ride. The hypocrisy makes me sick.

Faizi

Well, pompous fool notions of enlightened superiority don't float in ghetto world.

[Dan Rowden]

Hah! Look what I found!

[MKFaizi]

Cool. I thought I had a fleeting glimpse of it yesterday.

But I think the discussion has advanced intellectually from this thread. Tighter.

Faizi