MySpace Organizes Sudan Fundraiser

tanman writes to tell us CNN is reporting that MySpace is sponsoring a series of 20 concerts as an effort to raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan. From the article: "The concerts will take place October 21. Artists include TV on the Radio in Philadelphia, Alice in Chains in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Ziggy Marley in Medford, Oregon, Citizen Cope in Seattle, Gov't Mule in Spokane, Washington, and Insane Clown Posse in St. Petersburg, Florida."

Comments

I only hope

[holdenholden]

I only hope that the concerts will not be broadcast from the profiles of 400 million users simultaneously.

Re:I only hope

[bblboy54]

Damnit! We better break out the lottery balls and round up the horses.... If nothing else clogs the tubes, that will!

Fox?

[eurleif]

Couldn't Fox (MySpace's owner) raise a lot more awareness with their news network than they could with concerts?

Re:Fox?

[nickhart]

IF Fox were to do anything about Sudan it would be to push for an invasion, not relief. Of course, invasions don't bring peace, only more devastation.

ICP

[tyleroar]

All the ICP fans I know are huge fans care very deeply about humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan. (Oh shit, is that funny because ICP fans don't care about that, or because there are no ICP fans?)

Re:For those of us who aren't geography geniuses..

[eln]

Unfortunately, Sudan exists in that giant blind spot the developed world seems to have south of Europe and west of the Middle East. Sure, we have these benefits which do some good, but meanwhile the governments of the most powerful and wealthy nations in the world are willing to do nothing more than prop up dictatorial regimes by lending them money their countrymen will never be able to repay, while trying to decide what is the least amount of aid they can get away with while still looking like they care.

The way the west has dealt with Africa since pretty much the beginning of time is shameful, and it doesn't look like it's going to improve any time soon.

1994 called

[BeeBeard]

It wants its music back. But keep that Insane Clown Posse CD. 1994 said you could just keep that.

Re:1994 called

[Savatte]

Forget about Sudan, I feel bad for Florida. This is a disaster from which they may never be able to recover.

Great.

[AndyAndyAndyAndy]

So now I can hear from every teenager out there about how important things are in Sudan. And how much it means to them personally. "Hey, put this in your profile if you care about the Sudan cause! But don't forget to comment up. Because it means so much to me." Puke.

Re:Great.

[rm999]

Yeah, I really hate it when kids care about world matters and politics.

I bet you you'd be just as dissapointed if those same teens didn't care at all.

Re:Great.

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at how many people care about what is happening in Palestine? There are marches and protests all around the world, with TONS of coverage. Now compare the plight of the average Palestinian versus the average Sudanese refugee at the hands of the janjaweed militias. Palestinians are effectively living like kings in comparison, Darfur has 100x as many dead from killings in the past year as in the past 50 years in Palestine, over 10x as many refugees pushed out of Sudan compared to Palestine. Sudanese people are living in the shittiest conditions you could imagine in refugee camps, being routinely raped, murdered, brutalized in many other ways and PRACTICALLY NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THEM!.

It's super trendy to care about Palestinian rights, while the world turns a blind eye to a whole peoples living in far worse conditions, suffering far greater terrors with far FAR less media coverage, and very few people caring.

It's sad how right wingers claim to care about the poor Iraqis terrorized under Saddam, the left wingers claim to care about poor Palestinians terrorized by Israel, but not one peep from either of these crowds about Sudanese being routinely killed, raped, brutalized by the Janjaweed.

Re:Great.

[AndyAndyAndyAndy]

Not really, no. The problem is none of them actually care / know what the fuck they are talking about. The vast majority know what they are told from outlets exactly like myspace and from others. Point is, kids "care" so much as they look a bit more interesting to their peers. There are very few who are actually concerned and involved with these issues.

Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if these kids were engaged and involved. It's just not happening.

Re:Great.

[rm999]

Your basic argument is that kids think acting like they are involved in world politics is "cool." Err... no. I was a child just a few years ago, and I recall nothing of the sort. The people who cared about politics did so because it was in their personalities. Just because they are young and often misguided in how to go about it (holding parties instead of listening to NPR) does not mean they are not trying.

I used to agree with what you are saying regarding Tibet, but I actually found that kids under 21 knew more about Tibet than the typical adult due to "Free Tibet" campaigns. They really do pick something up. Kids can't do much about anything in politics (they're not even allowed to vote), but that doesn't mean we should look down on them for trying. Remember, it sounds corny, but they are the future. By holding concerts and other crap that appeals to kids, this stuff is being made accessible to the youth.

And it's not like older generations are much better.

Re:Great.

[AndyAndyAndyAndy]

But again, you're posting on /.
Chances are, you were/are the exception. And it's not a better-than-you thing, I'm 20. And not claiming to be an exception too, but I can safely say I have a good perspective over the typical myspace 15 year old. I've been there, I've grown up. There are plenty of teens out there that replaced me though.

Re:Great.

[glesga_kiss]

Now compare the plight of the average Palestinian versus the average Sudanese refugee at the hands of the janjaweed militias.

The BIG difference is that in Sudan, our own countries aren't on the "bad guys" side. That's why many of us a livid about the Palestine issue. See the cluster bombs that depopulated the south of Lebanon? The ones which were mostly dropped the day before the ceasefire in a callous "hurry while we still can" way? The ones where over 30% now lie unexploded and are killing/maiming today and will be for decades? Well guess what? Your country made them and mine provided the logistics to get them to the warzone. Both of us financed them. The blood is on OUR hands and I have to ask, what the fuck are you doing about it?

On the other hand, Sudan is a civil war. Technically it's their own affair, but I regularly use Sudan to make "liberate Iraq!" nutjobs STFU. We have some bizare rationale for choosing our fights. It's not hard to figure out that it's down the three R's of evil: religion, revenue & racism. Sudan has none of these and won't even get a mention on the news.

Re:Great.

[Mr. Underbridge]

The BIG difference is that in Sudan, our own countries aren't on the "bad guys" side.

Wait, so the "good guys" side in the Palestine conflict is the one setting off bombs in shopping malls and buses in Israel, right? Gimme a break. This one's a little tough to turn into a black-n-white kind of issue.

Re:Great.

[paralaxcreations]

and that growing up has to start somewhere.

For some it's NPR. For others, it's a concert where between sets they inform you of what's going on "out there," and hand out flyers with more information and a URL.

It's hard for kids to really, truly care about something if they don't even know it's going on. Already, I'm sure there are a lot of kids that now know there's a problem in Sudan when previously they didn't, just because they heard about this concert. And with luck, even 5% of them will take the initiative to educate themselves further, and that's considered a win.

The seeds gotta be planted sometime. Hook em while they're young.

Re:Great.

[buckysphere]

I'm laughing my ass off b/c I know the teenagers of which you speak. They have no clue just how ridiculous they look and sound. They have absolutely no idea about the issues, but because some nutjob rockstar or some nutjob wacko granola teacher of his/hers talks about it with such fake-ass passion, it MUST be the way to be. The absolute height of narcissism... I mean how many Janeane Garofalo-wannabes or Angelina Jolie-wannabes do we f'in need in this country? And they are so easy to pick out of the crowd by their non-conformist uniforms (as contridictory as they are)...you know, the Che Guevara t-shirt and/or bumper stickers or the Free Tibet t-shirt and/or bumper stickers or the tye-dyed crap or the urban camo crap...well, the list goes on and on. How can they be taken seriously when they are so freakin' comical. Soon the bumper stickers and t-shirts will be replaced by little foreign babies on their hips a la Angelina Jolie. Please, someone HAS to write a comedy sketch for SNL about this...oh wait, they wouldn't because they are all about the same sh*t. What a wacky wacky narcissistic world we live in. If it weren't so damn comical it would be tragic and almost scary.

Re:Great.

[glesga_kiss]

Wait, so the "good guys" side in the Palestine conflict is the one setting off bombs in shopping malls and buses in Israel, right?

What you need to ask yourself is this: why is killing someone using a 22 million dollar GPS guilded missle any different that using 22 dollar IED strapped to someone chest? I really want to understand your rationale here. You mention people setting off one bomb in Israel, meanwhile they are dropping thousands of mines over CIVILIAN areas in Lebanon, depopulating the area which was the intention of the whole incursion (buffer zone). Normally we use the term "ethnic cleansing" for that sort of thing, if it were an enemy of ours.

All sides have arseholes and it is insane to judge the whole country based on a handfuls desperate actions. I can tell you right now, if you were to kill anyone in my family, I'd want revenge too. Bloody, drawn out, painful revenge that the UK government would not approve of. But that's no excuse for killing innocent people ever. And this is where your argument breaks down...the Isrealis consistently attack civilians. Their presence in the West Bank is designed to destroy life and stop the former country developing an ecomomy. Border patrols operated by an occupying force that is brought up to fear and despise you is no life.

Part of the issue here is that both sides are brought up in a cradle of fear of the other. Children in Isreal are issued gas masks at a very young age in the same way that they made your parents duck & cover. Is it reasonable precaution or just propaganda? The more I learn about these programs, the more I lean towards the latter explaination. Until we stop indoctinating the next generation in fear and hatred, then this will go on indefinately.

This one's a little tough to turn into a black-n-white kind of issue.

Exactly. Both sides are at fault, the Isrealis just have far greater resources and we are supporting them. If my government was helping suicide bombers, I'd be pissed about that too. But the fact of the matter is that we blindly aid the Isrealis as they morph into the exact same extremism that wanted to exterminate them in WW2. It's assine and must stop now.

Re:Great.

[glesga_kiss]

You are George Galloway AICMFP.

George Galloway is a sleazy wanker that I cannot stand one bit. I've seen him speak (he used to be based in glasgow) and did not like his style one bit. I will give him credit for the congress thing however, that was priceless.

Re:Great.

[Mr. Underbridge]

What you need to ask yourself is this: why is killing someone using a 22 million dollar GPS guilded missle any different that using 22 dollar IED strapped to someone chest? I really want to understand your rationale here.

I didn't. I said the Palestinians weren't "good guys," and that the situation over there doesn't have a protagonist. I never said the Israelis were saints. That said, if I were to rank things, I'd say that targeting military installations is lower on the asshole list than targeting civilians, including children. Note that I won't be forced into defending Israel's actions, but I reserve the right to condemn someone blowing up schoolchildren.

How much Israel targeted civilians in Lebanon has been rather hotly debated. I'd put a lot of the blame on Hezbollah for hiding their military resources in civilian areas. In fact, I'd say that the real tragedy is that Lebanon has been pulled into this thing for no real reason. Hezbollah is not its friend, though it will pretend to be.

but the fact of the matter is that we blindly aid the Isrealis as they morph into the exact same extremism that wanted to exterminate them in WW2. It's assine and must stop now.

Not going to argue with you there. But there needs to be fundamental shifts on all sides, and Israel needs to be recognized diplomatically by its neighbors if peace is to exist. That said, I don't think the bulk of Israel wants the Palestinians wiped out a la the Jews in WWII. So I'd hold off on the overused Nazi comparison here just a bit.

Politics goes in cycles. Palestine had its chance when Barak was offering a rather good deal that most of the international community agreed was a good deal. Arafat refused. Then a few years ago the car bombings started again, and Israel was driven toward a hard-line regime. The point is, Arafat could have had peace if he'd wanted it. I think the plight of the Palestinians will improve when they cease choosing terrorists (Arafat, Hamas) to lead them.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate if...

[Baloo Ursidae]

...MySpace did a series of benefit concerts for children lured by sexual predators over the Internet, given that they seem to facilitate it more than anyone these days?

Re:Wouldn't it be more appropriate if...

[arthurpaliden]

Preditors will find picking s very hard on MySpace with statistically only about 300 active myspace users, 0.001173185961207483%, that identify themselfs as 13-15 year old girls. You would have better luck standing at a bus stop.

Marketing

[elucido]

How much money will actually make it to the Sudan?

I don't see how having a concert or two is in any way related to solving real world problems. What? You going to party your way to a better environment?

This is a perfect way to sell tickets and raise profits. It will be like Live8.

Re:Marketing

[supremebob]

Not that it really matters... Any aid that gets to Sudan will probably end up being hijacked by African warlords anyway.

Re:Marketing

[roseblood]

They aren't working to get money to Sudan. They are working to "raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan."

So it goes like this:

1) Get a cause
2) get a band
3) sell tickets to band
4) get some thing to the venue to "raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan." [think posters, a few hippies manning an info booth, the band making a brief comment about "the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan."]
5) ???
6) profit (if the band can fill the venue with paying customers)

Re:Marketing

[SQFreak]

It's a publicity stunt, of course, for MySpace and News Corp. The difference between this and Live 8 is that the locations they scheduled (with the exception of Philadelphia and Seattle) are pretty small and the bands aren't that popular. Not as popular as the Live 8 bands, anyway. The point is, it's pointless, yet I still want to know why they picked the cities they did (partially because I'm from one of the smaller ones).

Re:Marketing

[elucido]

Exactly, you cannot give aid to governments, you can only give to individuals, and you have to be precise about it. You give to individuals who want to start businesses.

Re:Insane Clown Posse

[riff420]

uhh, armor? i can't imagine that clown makeup has an armor rating above 0.

Re:For those of us who aren't geography geniuses..

[xappax]

The west doesn't provide foriegn aid/intervention out of the infinite goodness of our charitable heart - we do it for relatively practical reasons. We want to help the economies of undeveloped nations grow and become more stable, so that first world countries (via transnational corps) have better access to the potential natural resources and cheap labor.

However, poverty, corruption, and strife are so endemic in many parts of Africa that the financial and political investment needed to stabilize and repair the developing nations is far higher than would be "practical" from a business standpoint. Since we can't easily fix the situation, the best alternative is to ignore it as much as possible, and hope that nobody notices this inconsistency in our supposedly humanitarian Western policies.

So, yes, while preventing millions of deaths a year and bringing entire societies out of the dark ages might seem like the "right" thing to do, it really isn't, when you think like a politician or a CEO.

Re:Lame

[BeeBeard]

Yes, it's like the Cold War is happening all over again, only this time we're exporting crappy bands to Russia to undermine you. Oh wait, St. Petersburg FLORIDA?? I don't know what to tell you. Maybe it's your penance for costing us the 2000 election?

By the way, I may be the only person around who has been to every city mentioned in the post. My favorite out of that group was probably Winston-Salem. I really felt like I was in flavor country.

Cheers!

Doesn't Matter

[PWill]

MySpace still sucks. This is just like the crap that WalMart and the tobacco do. They do a few nice things, and then publicize the hell out of them, to make them look better. I bet they spend more money publicizing the event than they actually donate...

Re:Doesn't Matter

[RexRhino]

They do it as a token effort to make people like you happy. Of course those companies could care less about doing charity. They are companies, and they basicly are a social tool used to provide products and services in exchange for money, in order to make a profit. That is the function they serve in society. There are also charities, and they are social tools used to provide aid or further some humanitarian goal in a non-profit manner.

Some people, of course, think that because charities are a good thing (charities help people), that companies should behave more like charities. This is of course, like saying that because a saw cuts wood, and cutting wood is good, a hammer should cut wood too. In reality, like a hammer and a saw, both the company and the charity are social tools that provide specialized functions to society. When you insist that a company should behave like a charity, the results aren't going to be good, because a company is not a charity. A company is a company. Making a company do charity is like making a hammer to cut wood... you might be able to cut wood with a hammer, in a very messed up and crude fashion.

In a sensible society, we would realize that companies and charities are two seperate tools, and they work best when each serves society in the way it was designed to serve society. But, some people don't really understand the purposes of companies and charities, or maybe they think that companies are evil, so token charity acts by companies have become normal.

It would be much better if companies, instead of donating to charity, would simply pass the money that they would have spent on charity back to the consumers in lower prices (after all, the money that companies give to charity come from the consumer in the first place), and then let people donate directly to the non-profit charity that they want.

Re:Doesn't Matter

[buckysphere]

Probably the most sensible reply that I have read in a long time...I just knew that /. consisted of more than just a bunch of uber-liberal idiots that hate big companies and hard-working people and you proved that point. You made my day.

Let me rephrase this for you

[BearRanger]

The way the west has dealt with Africa since pretty much the beginning of time is shameful, and it doesn't look like it's going to improve any time soon.

The way *Africans* have dealt with Africa is shameful. Sure, we can blame colonialism for many of Africa's problems, but we're more than 40 years on from the last of Europe's colonial possessions. At some point the Africans themselves have to reject corruption, violence and tribalism and begin to work cooperatively for a better life for themselves. No amount of charity on the part of the west can help them with this.

(And yes, I know Africa is a continent and that not all African countries are in this predicament. Still, why have Europe's former Asian colonies done so much better?)

Re:Let me rephrase this for you

[xoyoyo]

>> Still, why have Europe's former Asian colonies done so much better?

I would say because they are different sorts of colonies. Our Asian possessions tended to be fairly organised nation states before we got there, and our colonialism was more about the control of trade and overseeing the local administration than the wholesale resource stripping we indulged in in Africa. That's not to say that we didn't rip the locals off for what we could, we just couldn't get away with as much as we could in Africa. In Asia therefore we allowed stored wealth to build up: we couldn't treat the people simply as machinery to extract raw materials as we did in Africa (the Belgian Congo being the most notorious example). When the empires were gone therefore there was an economy still running. In Africa we extracted it all and stuck the cash back home, where our no-longer-subjects wcouldn't get their hands on it.

In Africa we imposed nations and borders on the local tribes (sometime squishing antagonists into a single state, sometimes cutting tribes in two) and administered directly. Under the wonderful White Man's Burden we basically gave ourselves largesse to treat the locals as we wanted as we were civilising them along the way.

As to the period of time between decolonisation and now: actually it's just over 26 years since the last European decolonisation (Zimbabwe). The peak year was 1960, which is more than 40 years ago, but there are plenty of examples of decolonisation leading up to the late 70s. I think the point you're making is that forty years should be plenty time to get your nation up and running. I would have thought the experience of the United States, which took nearly 100 years to settle its internal politics and free a sizeable percentage of its population would have shown that politics runs a bit slower than expectations.

Think about the children damnit!

[the_last_rites]

Oh great in addition to being malnourished most underaged kids in Sudan will now have to live with the fact that they're going to be in the radar of Myspace predators now

Re: ICP (RFC2186)

[thib_gc]

Insane Clown Posse is also one of the reasons why nobody takes the Internet Cache Protocol seriously. I used to have "Experience working with ICP" on my resume but I have switched to a more conservative "Experience implementing ICP (RFC2186)".

Because when I think Humanitarian Relief Efforts..

[dreemernj]

I think Insane Clown Posse, juggalo bitches.

MySpace needs the PR.

[Kadin2048]

Sure, but that assumes that the point is to actually do something in Sudan, and not improve the tarnished image of the online service that they forked out a bunch of dough for, and are currently burdened with. It's a little bit of a Hail Mary, but hey, when you've got a web site that most people only know of because they've seen it on the news in the same sentence with "pedophile," you can't really go wrong.

Why would News Corp give a damn about people in Sudan? Here's a hint: they don't.

The only reason they're raising money for people in Sudan is that it's the least-offensive cause some focus group could come up with. Right now, MySpace needs the most heart-warming, family-friendly but not totally-unhip image resuscitation that money can buy.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[Turn-X Alphonse]

In the news in the UK (not all owned by the same guy who owns Fox and The sun) Youtube and Myspace is the new poster child of the internet. Very rarely does a day go by when youtube is not mentioned on something or Myspace is mentioned. It's even got to the point where live quiz shows have hosts giving out their Myspace URLs and giving away free gifts to random people on them.

While in the US it's "kekeke pedos" here in the UK it has a positive image and is doing "good things"

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

While most of what you speek is probably true, the Fox news channels have been talking about the sudan problems, releif efferts, and possible military actions for a while now. It gets mixed in with all the other problems in that continental area over the last 30 or so years.

The problems seem to be with releif organizations wanting the UN to actualy do something about it. This conflicts with the UN's current agenda of "bitch about yet another US led war" or "something the US has done to destroy the world" or sit around obstructing plans of action while terroist friendly and hostile third world countries get one of the most devestatingly capable military weapons availible or trying to line the pockets of companies associated with the leaders of the UN. Of course, if the UN was concerned about the area(which they should be), they would just send a letter or 400 letters declaring how upset the world comunity are. So it isn't like it would matter too much.

I say the best efforts to help in that area might be a military action by one of the worlds leading super powers. If that isn't possible for whatever reasons, the money for food and cloathing/shelter should go to supporting a private army of mercenaries dedicated to swift insertion actions againt the controling government who is allowing it and exiting the country. Add this to measures to take out thier air capabilities and command centers. If they retaliate by stepping up the violence, take it a step further and set up a fortified perimitor around the refuge camps, arm and train the refugies and release them to defend themselves. Keep them as part of the private army and pay them with the free food and supplies intended for them in the first place.

It sounds harsh but then so does making sure a person had a full meal before they got killed, raped, mutilated, tortured and anything else hapening.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[motank]

burdened with, what're you talking about? myspace, regardless of all the sex predator stalking high school shooting kidnap stories, is one of the most popular websites on the internet. no one that actually uses the website seems to care that there might be criminals running around. i hardly doubt fox is regretting the buy.

anyways, this is all just myspace trying to be hip by "caring" about something young people think is cool to care about, and the pet humanitarian cause for the fall semester is sudan. everyone can agree that genocide is bad so why not get together for a rock concert? mtv's been doing this for ages, actually all these media companies have been doing it for ages.. why is anyone surprised?

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

Why would the UN do anything? They could not stop the US from invading iraq. They could not stop israel from setting lebanon back fifty years and displacing a million people.

Didn't the president say he was going to free the people of the world from tyranical leaders and deliver democracy to the world?

Maybe the rest of the world is just waiting for bush to follow through on his word. Why bother doing something when bush promised to do it. He promised in front of the entire world and he is a man of god. He would not lie. He says god speaks through him (yes that's an actual quote).

I love it when the people think the UN is the shits when it comes to darfur but a yoke when it comes to iraq.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[buckysphere]

Why would the UN do anything? Great question with an easy answer...

They won't. The UN is the largest pile of shit that has ever existed. To call them a useless organization or an anti-US organization would be accurate but neither of those descriptions capture the true essence of that organiztion, hence the "pile of shit" comment.

"Pile of shit" is quite a fitting description of the UN. That is, unless you happen to be one of the many anti-US crackpots (well, I should say temporary anti-US crack pots, because we all know that, eventually, all will have to thank the US for saving their whiney asses from _______). To disagree with that fact is to ignore history and to have absolutely no foresight.

I can think of a many other ways to utilize the UN building in NY. I say we never allow another one of those anti-US pieces-of-shit (Wow, that word is awesome, huh? Not only does it accurately describe the UN but it can also be used to describe many other anti-US fscktards.) back into our country to speak about our country or our leaders the way the little monkey-fucker from Iran did or the way Chavez's crazy ass did. Or, if we do allow it to happen, he/she should be returned to his/her respective country is many, many, many, separate but easily identifiable pieces.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[joe 155]

ah, you've fallen into the old trap - pretty much all that comes out about mySpace is from Rupert. None of his papers are allowed to report the bad news about them, like "child sexually molested by old person after using MySpace"... He owns so many of the newspapers that it can be hard to keep track, but they have pretty much been ordered to keep pushing it as often as possible, I think it's been in the times about 40 times in the last 6 months...

Still, the Telegraph is spending huge amounts of money online too so maybe they have a vested interest in seeing people think the internet is a safe and sensible place and not just full of "come here young children and look at PONIES!!!11!"

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

OK the UN is a pile of shit.

So stop asking the UN to do something in Darfur. Bush promised to the entire world that he was going to end tyranny and deliver democracy to people, get on with it.

Stop trying to enforce UN resolutions. UN is shit. It doesn't matter what the resolutions are, what they say, who they are targetting.

Stop going to the UN everytime anybody does something you don't like. North Korea tested a bomb? Don't go to the UN and get a resolution to increase sanctions. Those people are already starving, starving more of them won't help at all. Just go and invade like you did in Iraq.

Be man, stop acting like a whiny child and complaining to mommy every time iran or north korea does something you don't like.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

Why defend israel anonymously?

Are you really that ashamed of your position?

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I haven't fallen for the trap. I don't watch news on anything but the BBC late at night and I don't read the news papers. So all in all I don't think I have :)

But yes I know what you're saying. It's one big circle jerk with 1 man at the helm.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[buckysphere]

I would give anything if the US WOULD stop running to the UN every time she or any other country "scrapes her knee".

I think the US shouldn't even acknowledge the UN's existance. At every turn, the UN is slapping the US in the face and many Americans (I hope most...) are finally starting to realize this fact and we don't appreciate it very much. After all, we see how much we give from our own pockets to every fricken' country/problem/person/wish around the globe and then we are told that we are total shite by not only each country separately, but also collectively by the a-holes at the UN...on our own soil, I might add!

I agree - we should stop "complaining to mommy". After all, in this case, "Mommy" is a drunken whore who is as worthless as the "Johns" she is in bed with. I say Nuke the f*ck out of Iran, North Korea, Iraq, and the little bitches who complain afterward...until...

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

Are you implying his defense is flawed? Or just that he posted anonymouslyt has some hidden meaning? It apears that everything he said was true to some extent so the fact that he said it secretly shouldn't mean anything.

BTW, I'm not afraid to defend Isreal. After all Isreal is the result of the existance of the middle east as it stands now. This idea of destroying Isreal or that they stole land is contrary to actual facts about the middle east in the way it is made up today. This "hip" idea of isreal being "evil invaders" is a new idea considering the history of Isreal and the middle east. As a matter of fact, most people I talk with don't even know how Isreal was started, why it was started and the reasons why the legitimacy of Isreal is tied to the legitimacy of almost every other country in the middle east.

After Isreal kicked ass in war with it's surrounding countries ( a war that Syria is trying to re-enact) people took sympathy for the losers. The losers noticed this and played with the truth and most people think Isreal is bad now. Hell most people think Isreal was started because hitler killed some jews. Of course it is easy to hate a person or country when your only know part of the truth. It is like saying "bill killed a person last night" only to find out that he slid on ice, crashed into a telephone pole and someone had a heart attack two blocks away and couldn't call for help. That really make him a cold blodded killer. And such is most the shit said about Isreal.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

If you didn't post anonymously then I might take up the arguement. There is no sense in trying to hold a conversation with a coward.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Are you implying his defense is flawed? Or just that he posted anonymouslyt has some hidden meaning? I"

I didn't address his points because he as posting anonynously. There is no sense in trying to have a conversation with a coward.

The fact that he chose to defend israel anonymously does indeed have some meaning. Not hidden either.

"It apears that everything he said was true to some extent so the fact that he said it secretly shouldn't mean anything."

True to some extent?

"This idea of destroying Isreal or that they stole land is contrary to actual facts about the middle east in the way it is made up today."

They didn't steal the land. The UN stole the land and gave it to israel.

"Hell most people think Isreal was started because hitler killed some jews."

That was a major contributing factor for the creation of israel.

"And such is most the shit said about Isreal."

Thirty year occupation of 3.5 million people. A system of partheid. State sanctioned torture. Tens of thousands locked up without charges or trials including hundreds of childen. A couple of thousand people killed every year. Etc, etc, etc.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

I didn't address his points because he as posting anonynously. There is no sense in trying to have a conversation with a coward.

Ok, I guess convienience and the expectation of the reply not being one sided is a good enough reason.

The fact that he chose to defend israel anonymously does indeed have some meaning. Not hidden either.

Yep, it could mean that he didn't have an account, knows that a lot of people at this site has an anti-Isreal slant and didn't want all the negetive Karma following him around from the flaim mods and such, He lives in a place that makes him fear free speech on this topic, or that he has some other reasons that we don't know about. It could also be a setup just so someone could post something implying a hidden meaning or that the comment is less valid because the posting anoymously. We just don't know but would be fools to asume it carries a negetive association.

True to some extent

yep, Hezbollah claims rights to the Shebbah Farms are but no respectably entity agrees with them. They brought this up durring the negotiations of the cesse fire worked out in the UN. Also, His account also ommits that within a few hours of Hezbollah kidnapping Isreali soldiers, and before Isreal's counter attack, Hezbollah contacted the UN asking for protection from Isreal. And some people say that the UN gave them help in the form of secure comunications proigramed with Isreali security codes taken from Isreal's participation in IFOR and other UN led humanitarian projects. This is why Isreal wasn't able to hit Hezbollah missle sites and why Hezbollah was able to place them in cities were Isreal would gain the most negetive coverage.

They didn't steal the land. The UN stole the land and gave it to Israel.

No, It was the legue of nations who did it when they used the british submited Balfour Declaration. This was a remapping of countries and boundries of the ottman empire that was defeated durring WW1. Article 22 of the covenent of the legue of nations (wich is simular to a UN resolution unanimously agrees apon)

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war [World War I] have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilization and that securities for the formance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

Article 22 goes on to adopt the Balfour Declaration wich defined the news boundries including the state of Isreal, provided for the protection of these teritories and creation of infrastructure such as civil governments and defense. Palistine started trying to squeze Isreal out by limiting it's imegration and attempting to conrtol land that Isreal had rights to stating religious reasons.

"Hell most people think Isreal was started because hitler killed some jews."

That was a major contributing factor for the creation of israel.

No, WW2 and hitler was a major factor in the imegration into Isreal. This scared surrounding countries mostly for religious reasons and they presented Isreal with hostilities. You probably know what happened after that. If not, look it up because it doesn't make Isreal out to be the bad guy as ignorant people commonly suggest (not that Isreal hasn't ever done anything bad, it has).

Thirty year occupation of 3.5 million people. A system of partheid. State sanctioned torture. Tens of thousands locked up without charges or trials including hundreds of childen. A couple of thousand people killed every year. Etc, etc, etc.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"yep, Hezbollah claims rights to the Shebbah Farms are but no respectably entity agrees with them. "

No they don't Syria does. UN agrees.

"His account also ommits that within a few hours of Hezbollah kidnapping Isreali soldiers, and before Isreal's counter attack,"

True, it also neglects to mention various incursions into lebanon by israel too. Ayway you are right. Israel killed a thousand people, displaced a million people, destroyed billions of dollars worth of infrastucture, dropped a million cluster bombs because hezbollah kidnapped two soldiers.

"Hezbollah contacted the UN asking for protection from Isreal. And some people say that the UN gave them help in the form of secure comunications proigramed with Isreali security codes taken from Isreal's participation in IFOR and other UN led humanitarian projects."

Some people say? Who. Let's see those links and judge whether that's a credible claim or not.

"No, It was the legue of nations who did it when they used the british submited Balfour Declaration. This was a remapping of countries and boundries of the ottman empire that was defeated durring WW1. Article 22 of the covenent of the legue of nations (wich is simular to a UN resolution unanimously agrees apon)"

Right. There was no israel. Then there was israel. The people who used to live there got their land taken away.

"No, WW2 and hitler was a major factor in the imegration into Isreal. This scared surrounding countries mostly for religious reasons and they presented Isreal with hostilities. You probably know what happened after that. If not, look it up because it doesn't make Isreal out to be the bad guy as ignorant people commonly suggest (not that Isreal hasn't ever done anything bad, it has)."

I suppose you could choose to believe that the holocaust had nothing to do with the formation of israel. That's your option. To me that makes you no better then a holocaust denier though.

Anyway yes israel got attacked. Yes Israel won. Then for the next thirty years they proceeded to run an apartheid state in palestine.

"So to recap, Paslitine, lebenon, syria and most of the other countries in that area only exist by the same rights Isreal does."

Only one of those states runs an apartheid regime. TO be fair they have many things in common too though. All of them torture people and all of them lock up people without trials or charges.

"Are your sure? or did someone just tell you this without telling you the entire story? "

Yes I am sure. Go look it up. Israel does indeed occupy palestine. Israel does indeed torture people in their prisons. Israel does indeed have tens of thousands of palestenians locked up without charges or trials.

I am shocked at your ignorance of the above. I take that back. You are not ignorant of those facts, you know them perfectly well. You just have found a way to justify that somehow. Somehow in your mind apartheid and occupation is OK in this case. Torture is OK in this case. Locking people up without charges or trials is OK in this case.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

No they don't Syria does. UN agrees.

??what? they as in Hezbollah or any respectable entity? And sure, everyone with more credit then a "machine gun, rockets and hostages association" believe syria too.

True, it also neglects to mention various incursions into lebanon by israel too. Ayway you are right. Israel killed a thousand people, displaced a million people, destroyed billions of dollars worth of infrastucture, dropped a million cluster bombs because hezbollah kidnapped two soldiers.

Well, don't forget to mention Hezbollah's rocket attacks wich escelated the situation to end up in what you mentioned. It isn't as if it was a responce only to "kidnapping two soldiers". This is the one sidedness i was complaining about in my previous post. It makes one side look worse then the other by neglecting certain relevent facts. It allows something to be justified or demonished acordingly and people tend to blive it. Something I don't understand is why you would have picked something so televised and recent to present onesided. It isn't as if we would forget the impact of what was going on, Everyone thought it was WW3 and the end of the world. they payed close attention to it.

Some people say? Who. Let's see those links and judge whether that's a credible claim or not.

the Israeli army. And i'm going to pull one of your stunts and say look it up for yourself. Nahh, slashdot covered it and it was eventualy divulged in there. But tere are other sources availible too. Seriously, do a search for it. And yea, it wasn't the UN directly saying "here, take these radios and her is the codes." It was someone associated with an action Israel assisted the UN on and saying "we can hear everything, give these to Hezbollah". Some people claim Hezbollah had it before they even kidnapped the soldiers.

Right. There was no israel. Then there was israel. The people who used to live there got their land taken away.

Wrong. There was no Palistine or Israel, then there was a Palistine and Israel. The people in the area were servants to the ottoman empire and wasn't able to create a society of thier own or protect it without the help of the british, the legue of nations and even the "zionists". And for your information, the palistine Jews had the protection and mandate in the same very article that gave palistine, syria and most of the other countries in the area legal standing at the time. Israel was eprated from palistine around '47 after the muslums declared gihad on them and started a genocide simular to hitlers. The UN, seperated the two in an attempt to keep peace between the different religions.

But thats neither here nor there, the fact is that Israel was created by the same means as palistine and many of the countries in that area. They both have the same right to exist and would be under the same control if it wasn't for the aggresion of one against the other. It turned out that one side picked a fight it didn't win and now is the bitch of the other side. If the palistinian people weren't the aggresors in the first place, they might still control the jews, or at least thier own country.

I suppose you could choose to believe that the holocaust had nothing to do with the formation of israel. That's your option. To me that makes you no better then a holocaust denier though.

It is fucking history not a personal belief. Jesus!. Let me explain this one more time before i suggest you pick up a history book or take a trip to wikkipedia. After WW1, palistin and israel were created as one country. after WW2 palistine muslums decided to jihad againts the jews and kill them for no reason other then thier religious convictions. Then the UN seperated the two under the conditions that the muslums continue to have unrestricted access to r

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Well, don't forget to mention Hezbollah's rocket attacks wich escelated the situation to end up in what you mentioned. "

The rocket attacks started after israel bombed the airport killing lots of civillians.

"It isn't as if it was a responce only to "kidnapping two soldiers". "

That's what you said. Are you backtracking now?

"It makes one side look worse then the other by neglecting certain relevent facts. "

It certainly makes you look worse.

"the Israeli army. "

You consider them an unbiased and credible source?

"Wrong. There was no Palistine or Israel, "

Here let me make this simple for you. There was some land. There were people living on that land. That land was taken away from those people and given to israel.

"They both have the same right to exist and would be under the same control if it wasn't for the aggresion of one against the other."

Israel has not recognized the right of palestine to exist.

"It is fucking history not a personal belief. Jesus!."

Once again. Denying that the holocaust had nothing to do with the creation of israel is no different then denying that the holocaust never happened.

"And yes, I don't have any problem with a country keeping land captured in a war they didn't start. To the victors goes the spoils of war."

Civilized countries eventually make the people they conquer citizens. Even china!. Israel has instead chosen to run an aprtheid state. It will eventually give it up just like south africa did. Eventually all nations look in the mirror and face their ugliness. It has taken israel a long time and it will probably take another generation of war, torture, cruelty, and killing but it will eventually happen.

First people like you will need to grow old and die. The war pigs will all have to die but their children will set things right.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"In Israel, Arab citizens can freely vote, create political parties, and serve in the parliament. "

Nevertheless they can be denied housing, jobs, and even the right to drive down jerwish only roads. Anyway what about the arabs in the west bank and gaza?

"In Israel, Arabs enjoy the same freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of thought, and freedom of religion as everyone else"

And yet they are not allowed to live in jewish only neighborhoods, they are not allowed to buy land or houses in certain sections. Needless to say any of them can be grabbed at any time and jailed without a trial or charges.

"In Israel, Arabs can worship as they please. Try holding a Christian service in your private house in Saudi Arabia. You will be arrested, beaten, and thrown in jail. In many Arab states, a Muslim converting to another religion is sentenced to death."

Yes israel is better the saudi arabia. I am sure they are so proud of that.

"The fact that you call Israel an apartheid state without mentioning far, far worse abuses by other states in the middle east clearly identifies you as a hypocrite."

Maybe I expect more from them then being better then syria. I guess I am mistaken. They seem to be perfectly happy with being better then syria and saudi arabia and have stopped aiming too much higher then that.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

The rocket attacks started after israel bombed the airport killing lots of civillians.

SO, they were part if the situation and contributed to the Isreal responce. What are you trying to say? All that damage because two people were kidnapped when the reality was more then that?

That's what you said. Are you backtracking now?

Are your daft? Or do you actualy belive the crap your spewing? I feel like i'm having a conversation with a kid. If I have to explain why the sky is blue on every sentence, your obviously not capable of understanding what your saying. That does exaplain alot though

I will try one last time to convey a though that even you should be able to understand. You said

it also neglects to mention various incursions into lebanon by israel too. Ayway you are right. Israel killed a thousand people, displaced a million people, destroyed billions of dollars worth of infrastucture, dropped a million cluster bombs because hezbollah kidnapped two soldiers.

in talking about the entire situation after the discusion was only talking about the starting of it. This was done in an attempt to make it apear that Israel over reacted. So I added that the incursions and damage to infrastructure were an effect of escelation on both sides. The end results didn't become what it is just because two "soldiers were kidnapped" as you would like top belive. It happened because Isreal retaliated then Hezbollah escelated the stakes with rocket attack and israel retaliated then Hezbollah esceltated again and the end result is the damage you stated. This is exactly the one sided skipping the facts tpye of argument your side tends to have. It totaly misses the entire issues at hand. I'm pretty sure it is done on purpose but it is likley your side just cannot grasp the complexity of the situation.

You consider them an unbiased and credible source?

Yes i do, and even more so when other members of the world back them up. I showed a link to the slashdot sotry were it mentioned the others making the same claim. But this is the exact same "i don't know what i'm talking about but will to repeat something someone else said" type arguemnts i have pointed out to you. Good job at following the line in ignoring all the evidence that doesn't support your stance.

Here let me make this simple for you. There was some land. There were people living on that land. That land was taken away from those people and given to israel.

Wrong.. Jesus Chirst!, pick up a fucking history book. Go look at an online encyclopedie that doesn't have "down with israel" in the the tittle.

There was some land. It was under control of an empire. People lived there. WW1 happened and the empire was no longer. The western world drew maps of boundries and created states or countries. Isreal and palistine were the same state chartered within the same covenent that made palistine. The people who lived in that area continued to live in that area. Then a group of people that went to the same churches declaered Gihad and started slaughtering people who didn't goto thier church. The same groups of people that said palistine is able to exist as a country, although using a different name now, drew a border saying you are now seperate but have to let everyone goto religious places. So now there are two countries out of one because of genocide and musum agression and inability to get along. Nobody took the land and gave it to someone else that wasn't already there! It was people already there being seperated from people wanting to kill them because of thier faith!

You demonstrated that your incapable of looking at the facts that don't support your cool little argument. The fact is, Isreal was seperated from palistine and given to the people living there because of religious prosecution and aggression against them. It was never taken

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"That is quite different. Are the west bank and gaza part of Israel? "

Yes. Israel conquered that land during a war.

"Under the Oslo accords signed with Arafat, they are to be turned over to the Palestinian Authority with the eventual goal of establishing a Palestinian state."

That was supposed to happen a long time ago. Still hasn't and never will.

"Does Israel occupy Gaza? "

Yes. They control the borders, the airspace, they collect taxes, they control the ports, they control the water supplies. They recently turned off the electricity and started a campaign to starve the 1.2 million people living there. They have been very good at it too. The people over there are suffering unbelieavablly.

"As for the west bank, how did Israel come to control the area? "

Why is that question important? I say a better question to ask is "how come a democracy has been running an apartheid regime for thirty years and how long can they keep it up"?

"But Israel's neighbours have been at war with Israel since day 1, and they still are at war with Israel (aside from Egypt & Jordan). There are large numbers of well-funded Arabs & Muslims who try very hard every day to kill Israelis."

I agree with your that israel is hated by it's neighbors. In fact it's hated a billion muslims all over the world (a significant percentage of humanity). The only place where israel is liked is the US. The rest of the world eiterh hates them actively of merely dislikes them.

Maybe they should ask themselves why they are hated so passionately by so many people.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

Sigh arguing with an israel apoligist is always a futile experience, I don't even know why I try.

Anyway like I said. You war pigs will eventually die, your progeny will set things right.

"Third, you are using aparthied state in the wrong context. I know it sounds good and makes your look smart when you use big words like this. The problem is that it doesn't fit in the sence you are using. Israel is not an apartheid "state"."

That was Nelson Mandella who used that word. I think he might know a thing or two about apartheid.

"he only suggestion of segregation or racism is in the occupied territories not the state."

There are jewish only neighborhoods and jewish only roads in israel too but you are right I am talking about the 3.5 million people suffering under israeli occupation.

"This is significant in that territories are treated seperatly from the state."

Why?

"Also, security reasons might mandate this type of treatment in those territories."

Ah I see. The only way israel can secure it's population is by running an apartheid regime in the occupied territories.

It's amazing to me how the apologists will excuse any behavior no matter how vile when it's done by israel.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"the West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel. "

In that case israel needs to stop building on that land and needs to stop collecting taxes on the people living there.

"Arafat was offered a pretty good deal by Barak, "

No he wasn't. He was offered a deal but it was not "pretty good".

"You conceded in one of your earlier posts that there are many countries with far worse human rights records with Israel. "

Yes there are countries with worse human rights records.

"And yet, those other countries are not hated to the extent that Israel is."

That's not true. Countries with worse human rights records are hated as much if not more so then israel. North Korea, Sudan immediately come to mind. South africa when it was still running apartheid was also hated universally.

"By what rational basis can so many hate Israel and not hate others? There aren't any."

That question was an intelligence test and you failed it. Israel is hated for the same reason south africa was, sudan is, north korea is, libya was, etc. It's nation which treats humans worse then animals. It runs an apartheid regime. It has state supported torture policies. It locks up people without trials and charges.

All of these things are immoral and wrong.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Depends what you call "pretty good" - admittedly, it's a vague term. Arafat was offered 97% of the land he sought. My point was that instead of continuing to negotiate for the remaining 3%, the PA launched intifadah 2.0."

He was offered what's commonly refered as the 67 borders nation. That is he was offered a series of closed off reservations where palestenians were to live separated from their relatives by israeli controlled land and roads. These reservations were designed to make sure that all commerce and travel happened under the control of israel. In order to cross the street the palestenians had to go through an israeli checkpoint.

On top of that virtually all the water supplies were to be under israeli control. The palestenians at any time could be killed by israel simply shutting off the water supply.

Finally all of east jerusalem would remain under israeli control and of course the right of return was abolished.

This deal was "pretty good" for the israelis who would continue to enjoy their subjugation, humiliation and torture of the palestenians but it sucked for the palestenians themselves.

"Somehow I missed the divestment campaign where universities and churches are lobbied not to do business with Libya."

Did you miss the part where libya was bombed? Did you miss the part where south africa was boycotted and disvested?

The campaign against israel which although is noble is very weak because the israelis have very successfully deflected all critisim of this policies by calling people racist whenever they object.

"The vast majority of those who criticize Israel are silent on far, far worse abuses of human rights. The fact that they are silent on far worse abuses leads to only one conclusion: they are not motivated by human rights, but something else."

That's simply not true. By the way what do you call people who find a way to rationalize and excuse all behavior by israel?

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

Sigh arguing with an israel apoligist is always a futile experience, I don't even know why I try.

Somehow This position doesn't surprise me. I can understand your frustration when the fact doesn't support the claims. Anyway, I'm not what you would call an Israel apoligist either. I'm someone who doesn't like seeing the bashing based on lies. If you could put out a position against isreal that didn't manufacture facts or neglect other facts, I wouldn't give a damn at all. Istead, you are trying to manupulate what has happened to suport your own beliefs.

This is simular to making a claim the "johny left the yard" knowing it will get him in trouble, but neglecting to clearify that you or someone else was chasing him with a ball bat screeming "i'm going to kill you" when he left the yard. Some how i don't think leaving the yard would still get him in trouble now as it shouldn't. But you could still go around and spout half truths like johny left the yard and didn't get in trouble.

Anyway like I said. You war pigs will eventually die, your progeny will set things right.

You better hope not. Like I said, we are the only people stoping people like you from becoming someone's bitch and being overrun.

That was Nelson Mandella who used that word. I think he might know a thing or two about apartheid.

And you are a fucking moron. Mandela, asuming we are talking about the same person, used it in describing a segregate rule were it was based on race and law. Your using it to describe a situation were it is segregated because ethnic people are sticking together and living out outside the controled areas of the israeli army. You are using it wrong! But like everything else you got wrong, this doesn't surprise me. I'm wondering if you are doing it purposly or if it is just repeating what someone told you. Anyway, get a fucking histroy book and read it.

There are jewish only neighborhoods and jewish only roads in israel too but you are right I am talking about the 3.5 million people suffering under israeli occupation.

See above.. In order to be aprtheid, it has to be set in laws based on races. Clealy is isn't. it isn't being used corectly and is probably just being thrown out for the effects it can create.

"This is significant in that territories are treated seperatly from the state."

Why?

Because the state doesn't make all the rules imposed in the territory. Some rules are made on the spot by military personel as well as different governing factions like the PLO itself. Also, New and disputed territories have an element of security that needs to be considered.Do you think that an lsraeli citizen would feel safe living in the middle of displaced palistinians? with hamass running the shots? Anyways, you were using the word apartheid incorectly so i guess it doesn't matter. BTW, race doesn't equal nationality or religion.

Ah I see. The only way israel can secure it's population is by running an apartheid regime in the occupied territories.

I tell you what. Your obviously not using the term apartheid corectly so post your definition so we can be on the same page about it. Asuming your intending it to mean what the dictionary, encyclopedia, and nelson mandela thinks it means, no it isn't the only way to keep something secure. But, i'm not sure israel is acting as an apartheid regime in the territories. Seriously, The race cards and racism has been overplayed so much that it almost carries no effect anymore. The idea of calling something or someone racist used to carry such a negetive impact but now it doesn't even shock those it supposedly destroys. I think we have come a long way in life when we are past the effects of throwing racism claims out to demonize some one or something when in fact they don't exist. Of course we still se

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Yes, there was a widespread boycott campaign against south africa. Aside from that, there haven't been any except for Israel."

That makes sense because they are the only two countries which were (are) running an apartheid regime.

"Yes, Libya was bombed by the US military, and the US was condemned by many for doing that. Like I said, somehow I missed the divestment campaign where universities and churches are lobbied not to do business with Libya."

There was a worldwide sanctions against libya. Were you net aware of that? It was illegal to invest in the libyan economy in any way were you not aware of that?

Anyway bombing and sanctions are much worse then protests and calls for divestment.

"Really? There have been hundreds (if not thousands) of UN resolutions condemning Israel's human rights record, far more than any other country - that is an objective fact."

None have passed in the last couple of decades. People keep trying to raise the same issues over and over again but the resolutions never get past the US veto. That's why there are so many. Besides I don't see how you expect to run an apartheid regime for thirty years without expecting some scorn.

"I would call them hypocrites. Like most of those who condemn Israel."

Well then you are a hypocrite. Either way that's not too big a deal. In the grand scale of sins hypocracy rates pretty low in my book. Consistency is the hobgoblin of the small mind and all that jazz. Whenever I hear that word being thrown around it's by somebody who can not analyze complex situations and sees the world in black and white.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"I can understand your frustration when the fact doesn't support the claims."

The problem is that I am dealing with a person who has no perception of reality. Lets start here.

True or false.

1) At one time there was no israel.
2) Then there was israel.
3) The people who lived in the land that israel occupies lost their land.

Let's see if you can answer that. If you can then we can go into all the rest.

"I find most of what israel has done to be more justified then what thier oposition has done. "

Yes. You are an apologist for a nation which keeps 3.5 million people under occupation.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

1: true
2: true
3: false Isreal was started at the same time other countries in the area were started(including palistine). It's inhabitants were people living in that area (citizens of that land). Isreal was originialy an international city/teritory inside palistine under palistine control until the palistinians started slaughtering it's own people(read gihad). At that time israel was seperated from palistine and granted status or recognized as it's own country. Nothing was taken from anyone except the control of Israel and that was rested into the hands of the citizens of israel. It was still run by people who were born and raised there. No one was displaced. At best, it was a civil war with help from outside forces.

If you are trying to refere to the territories Israel occupies today, that was land taken durring a war started by the other countries(read part of the gihad). Although israel did make the first strike in one of those wars, the acts of aggresion leading to that war were all one sided and most if not all honest historians see the first strike as a defensive measure that was neccesary. But I guess this point is mute. With the exception of one territory, Israel has attempted to give the lands back to thier respective people under the condition of a guarenteed peace between them. Those people have time and time again started hostilities like rocket attacks, sponsord suicide bombings and other acts of aggresion. It is as if they want the peace to fail in order to not get anything back just so they can create people like you for thier support base.

You cannot expect people to understand that holding territoriesis bad either. The enitire world is shaped based on the conquering and holding of territories. It wasn't untill WW2 did we start giving the land back. And that was basicly because the winners weren't the agressers. Russia went the oposite way with Berlin and kept parts of Germany under thier control so of course we had to demonize them. This isn't the case in israel were the lands they control are a direct result of military action against them in part of the "Gihad" waged. Compound this with thier attempts to return control of the occupied lands being failed by violence from the people benifiting from getting thier land back and i don't see how you could blame them. If all this other stuff wasn't true, then I could see your point better and probably support you in the process. This doesn't mean I support israel, It just apears this way when making sure the truth was know.

Yes. You are an apologist for a nation which keeps 3.5 million people under occupation.

When stating the truth and including the whole set of facts so the entire story can be heard becomes apologizing, then there is nothing to apoligize for. History isn't fibbing, You admit to that by not questioning anything offered as fact. Instead you try to ommit and play on peoples ignorance in order to press your point. It works inly in that context. You may be a victom of ignorance or you may perfectly well know the truth and attemping to play on others ignorance. Either way, you seem to be convince in your posistion because of half truths and lies.

This conversation was started when you attempted to detract value from someones position because they posted anonymously. You then continued to spout half truths and make generalized claims neglecting the whole story. Alas, we are here, still discusing your inability to read a history book and misconcetpions of real facts. It doesn't matter if you dislike israel. It doesn't matter if you dislike them because they predominatly jewish. It doesn't matter if you don't like them because they won wars and control lands they didn't. It doesn't matter that you don't like israel for whatever reason. It does however matter if the reason is real or made up. I does matter if you have to ignore several facts in order to make one fact look evil. It does matter that you have to rely on tactics like claiming some statment isn't legit becau

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

Well since you failed the first test there is no need to discuss this any further.

Do me a favor though, say that the holocaust had nothing to do with the formation of israel one more time. That's so cute and makes me laugh every time.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

Failed what test? the test to see if i was dumb enough to ingore history and repeat whatever you claim?

I can see you wanting to shy away from the conversation. It doesn't support your claims so you don't want to acknowledge it. Good job there. Go troll somewere else, Mkay..

Do me a favor though, say that the holocaust had nothing to do with the formation of israel one more time. That's so cute and makes me laugh every time.

Please tell me how something that happened 10 to 15 years after the formation of Israel directly influenced israel's formation. It did influence the country and politics it has today but that is hardly the formation of israel now is it.

Again, and any history book will back this up so I urge you to quit looking like an ignorant buffoon and read a history book, The area called isreal was designated directly after WW1. It was the result of the ottoman empire breakdown and the counrties and borders were remaped, renamed and the result is geographicly what we see today. The holocaust happened in 15 to 20 years later in WW2. I know it isn't what you want to hear but we cannot go back and change histroy just because you want to paint something in a bad light.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Failed what test? the test to see if i was dumb enough to ingore history and repeat whatever you claim?"

The test where you were dumb enough to insist that not one human being was displaced as a result of the formation of israel.

And you also failed the test when you claimed that the holocaust had zero influence on the creation of israel.

Two for two. You are an idiot.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

Wow. your an idiot. Have you look at a history book like I suggested? The holocause has influenced Israel as the state it is today but israel was formed well before it happened. It was formed, controled and inhabited by the people who lived in that area at that time.

I guess your test is to see if someone would forget history and jump to your logic because "you said so". Abs for your information, I didn't say no one was displaced, I said israel was populated by people who lived in that area. Israel was formed after WW1 because of the colapse of the ottoman empire. The mere fact of the ottoman empire being gone and palistine rule taking over might have caused people to leave. But the people who stayed were native to the area and Israel was populated by native people with thier own imigration policy and everything.

Now, I have explained several times were you are wrong, Why your wrong, as well as told you how to verify it. I suggest you pick up a history book, actualy read it (or the parts on israel) and then come back with who is an idiot statments. You must be looking in the mirror or something.

Listen, I'm not trying to change your mind on israel. You can hate it all you want. There is no problem with you being an antisemite. I would expect it after reading your posts. But at least get the facts right and hate a country for reason that are true or shut the fuck up about the false one when in public. You are an embarassment to the human race in general when you ignore historic fact in order to misrepresent the truth and spread your anti semitic ways.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

You have stated your opinions. Alas they are severely detached from reality.

"You can hate it all you want. There is no problem with you being an antisemite. "

If hating israel makes me an anti semite then israel must be a racist state. I can be a racist for hating israel only if israel is a racially pure state.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

You have stated your opinions. Alas they are severely detached from reality.

You see, what I stated wasn't opinions. It was fact. Thats what makes you and idiot and possibly an anti semite. I'm telling look it up in a history book. Everything I told you about israel and it's formation is there as i stated it happening. This takes your way things happened and makes them "opinion" that happens to be "wrong" as well as "detached from reality".

If hating israel makes me an anti semite then israel must be a racist state. I can be a racist for hating israel only if israel is a racially pure state.

Hating israel doesn't make you an Anti semite. And the purity of a state has nothing to do with racism. It is the constant denial of facts and lieing about certain other facts in order to push your hatred. If you made your same position availible using real, factual information and still held the same opinion, you would just be someone with an opinion. As i stated before, I'm not trying to change your opinion, just setting the record of facts straight. You choose to ignore them in favor of your made up reality and continue to spout untruthful accusations.

Could it be because your blinded by your own hatred? Or are you just brainwashed into believing what someone told you when indoctinating you into the hate group. Or are you doing it out of malice for other reasons? I don't know and I don't know you even know you are wrong. Thats why I Keep telling you to look it up from a reputible source. But your refusal to do so indecates you are either not looking it up on purpose or your hatred is so deep, your afraid of the truth.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"Hating israel doesn't make you an Anti semite."

You are right of course. Only a tiny percentage of israel are semites. On the other hand the vast majority of palestenians are semites.

hating israel makes you a pro semite.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

lol.. I see know, You weren't trying to advance a position of hate thru inacurate facts, You were attempting at humor thru tolling me and seeing how and if I would responde.

BTW, hating or disliking someone, coutry or groups of people doesn't automaticly make you anything except a person cabable of hate. If is the other actions involved that tend to be racist, anti semetic, or whatever the cute buzz words of the day is.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

"lol.. I see know, You weren't trying to advance a position of hate thru inacurate facts, "

SO are you saying that the majority of the people who live in israel are semites and the majority of the people living in palestine are not semites?

Last I checked that was not the case. Once again it is you who lack a grasp of reality.

The reality is that as a race the people living in israel are overwhelmingly caucasian.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

SO are you saying that the majority of the people who live in israel are semites and the majority of the people living in palestine are not semites?

Man you like to read a whole lot into things that aren't there. And i understand why you do it. Your agument doesn't last verylong without doing tricks like this.

I'm saying the majority of people living in Israel are semitic and nothing about the palistinian people.

Last I checked that was not the case. Once again it is you who lack a grasp of reality.

Check again. And this time read the whole definition. As a matter of faxct, I will give you a couple links. definition 2 says jews but, lets look again. Wiki says right off the bat, It referes to people speaking a laguage from a language family and hebrew is one of them. Israel has two official languages, Hebrew and arabic. SO yea, that makes the semitic.

Oh yea, lets include websters and princetons definitions so you don't think I just picked obscure publications that agreed with me.

The reality is that as a race the people living in israel are overwhelmingly caucasian.

And this has nothign to do with anything. It is just another one of your attempts to cloud the matters at hand by selectivly ignoring certain facts no matter how relevent in order to support your position. Now, If you really didn't know what semite ment, then I suggest you open a history book a learn something. If you did, And i suspect you do, then chose an arena for spouting half truths and inacuracies that doesn't invole the expectation of inteligence. Nothing i have said is false, it is all there and availible for you to look up and discover for yourself. I would suggets you do so. Me tellng you the truth is really no different then whoever told you lies and half truths in the first place. Except i have told you the whole truth and didn't do it to make you belive as i do, just to be honest about the hate your spewing.

I would have posted back sooner but I just didn't feel like having a battle of truth and fiction with someone too lazy to open a history book or look further then the "Getting people to hate Israel handbook". I know it is shocking that your relaity as you know it, is false to some extent. But don't let that hold you back, You can look at the whole story and still hate or dislike Israel. Just do it for real reasons and not one concocted with the sole purpose of gaining support from less inteligent people. I'm sure there are enough real reasons to have a grudge against them without making shit up. Pick one of the real reasons.

What you have cited so far is for the most part grossly inacurate and lacking facts relevent to the interpretation of real events. This thread started because you were trying to incinuate that a person posting anonymously and supporting Israel didn't have any credit because it was anonymouse. Like everything else in this thread, when called on it, you got it wrong. I imagine you are either some highschool kid that doesn't know enough to be repeating what he has heard or a colledge student with some prfofessor trying to gain attention for an upcomming book so he takes the liberal racist attitude to guarentee air time on the evening news. Of course you could just be some asshat in a hate group somewere but i would prefere to give you the benifit of doubt. Seriously though, Books are your friend, reference books are really good to read, even if you don't understand it all. look this shit up and get the whole story!

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[killjoe]

All I know is that you called me a racist for disagreeing with the policies of israel. I am merely trying to point out that I have nothing against the semitic people. In fact I am all for the creation of a nation for the semitic people of palestine.

The vast majority of the people in israel are causasians from around the globe. Very few are semites.

BTW learning a language does not change your race. Neither does adopting a religion.

Next time you call somebody racist pay attention. I love the semitic race. I think they are great people who deserve better then they are getting from the citizens of israel who are occupying them.

It's israel that is anti semitic. It is israel that is killing the semites by the bucketload every year. I love the semitic race.

Re:MySpace needs the PR.

[sumdumass]

All I know is that you called me a racist for disagreeing with the policies of israel. I am merely trying to point out that I have nothing against the semitic people. In fact I am all for the creation of a nation for the semitic people of palestine.

I called you a racist because you continued to cite false, inacurate and partial information as the reasons you dislike israel. You were acting the same as a Klansman who cites "nigger are dumb" for thier reasons of hating minorities. Ironicly, Those dumb niggers are usualy smarter then the Klansman.

But I offered the truth, gave enough acutate and fully corect citations of histroical facts and told you were to look for the real truth. I didn't give you a link so you would see things my way, I wanted you to see things your way but at least have the "whole truth" in doing so. If your not a racist, great, the world will be a better place because of your actions (even if i don't fully agree with some of your other opinions)

The vast majority of the people in israel are causasians from around the globe. Very few are semites.

This is true until the last part that is false. But that alone doesn't amount to a hill of beans when considering if someone should or shouldn't be in that area. In the beguining we all came from the same place.(biblicly or scientificly we are all the decendants form the same initial forms ) Probably Africa or Asia and evolved into who we are today. So we all are realated and all belong to the same areas of the world to a degree.

BTW learning a language does not change your race. Neither does adopting a religion.

Definitions are what we use to understand the context and meanings of words used to comunicate ideas and thoughts. I didn't make that definition up and it is common enough to be used that way in several dictionaries. It also has been defined in that way for several years longer then either of us has been alive. I'm not sure that i'm ready to discard one of the popular meanings of a word in order to make your statment corect.

Next time you call somebody racist pay attention. I love the semitic race. I think they are great people who deserve better then they are getting from the citizens of israel who are occupying them.

Well, deserving respect and whatever else is sort of a two way street. Israel has made several consessions in attempts to make peace, it is met with violence and attacks against inocent civilians. The most recent was 5 or so tunnels into egypt found to be weapons coridoors and some of the rockets used to kill inocent civilians were found in them. But if you think one side is getting a raw deal, that good, it is an opinion. My problem isn't with you having an opinion, It is with the half truths and completley inacurate statments used to support it.

It's israel that is anti semitic. It is israel that is killing the semites by the bucketload every year. I love the semitic race.

Well considering that by definition, Israel is populated mostly by semitic people, I doubt it vould be considered anti-semitic. Maybe barbarian, ruthless and cruel, i'm sure there are pletny of name that could fit into it. But historicly, Israel's killing arabic's and other semitic people has mostly been a defensive stand. Sure there are times of varying differences but It was the other side that started slaughtering native jews that caused israel to become a country of it's own. It was Egypt, syria and palistine who invasded them after this happened. It is violent factions of people in the surounding areas that halts the peace process and gives them thier freedoms back.

Not this again

[Tablizer]

I already gave all my money to some e-mail dude in Africa who promised to pay me back once I filled out some paper-work for him. He never did.

Sudanly - Billy Ocean

[marko123]

I used to think Darfur was just a fairy tale
Until that genocide until that first smile
But if I had to do it all again I wouldn't change a thing
Cause this war is everlasting

Sudanly "gangaweed" has new meaning to me
There's beauty up above and things we never take notice of
You wake up Sudanly you're in poverty

Girl you're everthing a man could rape and more
One thousand words are not enough to say what I feel inside
Holding dismembered hands as we walk along the shore
Never felt like this before now you're dying in Darfur

Each day I pray this love affair would last forever
There's beauty up above and things you never take notice of
You wake and Sudanly you're at war

Every little bit helps

[pauljuno]

Although I think that the organizers are attempting to hitch a ride on a hot-topic issue that celebrities are rallying around, I still believe that it's a good cause and deserves our attention. It's such a shame that organizations like the UN seem unable/unwilling to address these types of problems globally, I'm starting to wonder whether or not the UN still has a place on issues like this. It seems that US billionaires are doing more good in Africa than entire countries, and even small companies are trying to help in their small ways. The US may still suck according to most people in other countries, at least I believe we're still trying to do good, even when the attempt is very naive.

Re:Every little bit helps

[chill]

No, every little bit doesn't help for Sudan. Food and relief supplies get to the people who need it only when the Sudanese gov't wants it to. That is to say, almost never. Please explain to me why this deserves our attention. No, I will not accept "so someone will DO something" as an answer.

Do WHAT?

In Sudan it is the government inflicting this genocide on its own people. They are not interested in stopping.

The genocide in the Sudan will stop only with one of three possible outcomes:

1. The Sudanese gov't accomplishes what they are trying to do, and butcher the vast majority of animist and christian peoples in the south. They would need to eliminate them totally as a political and social entity, so I'm talking 95%+ here.

2. A revolution, overthrowing the existing gov't. They tried, and this isn't going to happen. Even if it did, it would be chaos and you'd end up with another Somalia.

3. An invasion, overthrowing the existing gov't. This would need to be done by someone with a backbone and the wherewithal to actually do it right. This leaves out both the U.N. and the A.U. And by "do it right" I mean real 19th-century colonial rule. An iron fist to whip their asses into shape, forcibly establish law and order and then set up a good educational system and get an entire generation into school.

Can you actually see a #4, or are you truely advocating #3 by raising awareness in the U.S. that we just say "enough is enough" and transfer all our troops from Iraq to Sudan?

  Charles

Re:Every little bit helps

[Kangburra]

This leaves out both the U.N. and the A.U.

What's the A.U?

Re:Every little bit helps

[chill]

African Union, a regional force made up of troops from different African nations. The theory is "locals" would be more palatable than former "colonials". They already have a small number of troops in Sudan to help police the issue. However, they have been trying to increase this number but have been thwarted by the Sudanese gov't. Sudan militarized a couple of ports and prevented their entry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6033231.stm

Re:Every little bit helps

[Kangburra]

Thank you. I guess using my country code stopped me guessing another abbreviation.

Re:Every little bit helps

[packeteer]

Are you really saying that we should get behind Myspace' fundraising becuase the UN wont provide aid to Sudan? Where is the closest place for me to puke. This is exactly what they are trying to convince you to feel and its silly to go along with it.

What needs to happen...

[JoeLinux]

I too, concur that this is a tragedy of epic proportions, but, I think, is being ignored by both sides of the aisle for political reasons.

The Right, unfortunately, knows that our military cannot support serious actions to halt the genocide that is happening. As typically strong supporters of our military, they don't want to see the military face losses on top of what they are incurring in Iraq. Such an act could quickly become a political lightening rod.

In order for the Left to support such an action, they would have to support invading a sovereign nation whose official ties to terrorism are only hints and whispers, and without official UN approval, which is exactly their protest against the Iraq Invasion. Even with knowledge that the Iraqi government was killing their own citizens, The Left opposed invasion. To suddenly support a Darfur excursion would end up making them look like extreme hypocrites.

Also, the lesson we learned from Vietnam is that in order to win the war, we would have to wage war on the "tail" side of the agressors, drawing their front-line troops away to defend their home turf. That turns in a CQB (Close-Quarter Battle), which inflicts heavy losses on an invading force. Or we carpet bomb the mostly muslim north, allowing for the (pardon me for saying this) anti-US Muslim propaganda machine to run at full tilt again.

Remember, these conquering forces have many 10-year-old boys with AK-47s. All you have to do is take away the gun, and suddenly, "THE UNITED STATES MILITARY IS KILLING MUSLIM CHILDREN" shows up on CNN.

Then there will be protests at a University, but that's ok.

If I might suggest a situation for history to repeat itself, I propose Kent State.

I support evacuation. The issue I see is that any provisions sent to the region would just as likely end up feeding conquering Janjaweed forces as hungry Christians.

After evacuation, our forces could carpet bomb at will, knowing that any movement in the area was hostile invaders.

In my opinion, the Sudanese Government is attempting genocide. The ironic part is that it is mostly African (Read: Black) population that is bearing the brunt of this, and the Arab population is causing it. I think this is a problem of politically correct crisis. You can't support one side without appearing biased against the other. No politician will touch it, so no action will happen.

Which is truly unfortunate.

Of course, there is a solution to all of this, and I think it should be widely deployed after evacuation:

But, I wonder how the people who were opposed to the Iraqi Invasion are going to react. Are they going to admit that invading Iraq for the reasons stated were acceptable after all, or simply wait for the UN to draft up a strongly worded letter to the Sudanese government?

Joe

Re:What needs to happen...

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>...admit that invading Iraq for the reasons stated were acceptable after all,

Humanitarian assistance was not one of the reasons stated. Nor was Saddam's ghastly human rights record a reason for the invasion: he was just as bad back at the time of the handshake.

>Then there will be protests at a University, but that's ok.

>If I might suggest a situation for history to repeat itself, I propose Kent State.

The people who moderated this up may be unfamiliar with the event he is proposing to repeat. In 1970 the National Guard opened fire on students at Kent State. Not "opened fire on protestors", because they killed and wounded people who were nowhere near the protest. William Schroeder's entrance wound was in the lower back, and his exit wound was in the upper body. This is because he was lying on his face when he was shot, having hit the dirt as he'd been trained to in the ROTC.

Re:What needs to happen...

[RexRhino]

You are thinking too much about the Left, and the Right, and forgetting about other points of view.

Like what about the people who couldn't really care one way or another about Iraqi attrocities, or Sudanese genocide? People who feel the U.S. military should stay out of all conflicts that are not a direct response to an attack or stopping an eminent attack on the United States?

Many of the people opposed to the invasion of Iraq, are just as opposed to doing anything in Sudan. Not everyone opposed to the Iraq war is some bleeding heart hippie. What about the people who believe that if you aren't willing to nuke them from orbit (it is the only way to be sure!), then U.S. should stay out!

Re:What needs to happen...

[Stalyn]

First off it should be noted that the majority of victims in Darfur are Muslim and this is a case of Arab vs. African violence.

The US doesn't want to send troops because their soldiers would just end up becoming the targets. So instead of pacifying the situation it would only become worse (see Somalia 1993). The UN had promised 20,000 troops in the area but Sudan openly objected and declared that such a force would be seen as invaders. The UN then backed down with the hope the AU would increase its forces and extend its stay.

As far as your argument that the "Left" would appear as hypocrites for a supporting an excursion into Darfur because they opposed the invasion of Iraq, I don't understand your line of thought. Darfur and Iraq appear to be two very different situations.

Re:What needs to happen...

[dfenstrate]

Great post, but you forgot one critical thing that guarantees no one will stick their necks out for those being slaughtered:

They don't matter.

It's harsh, but true. What is going on is a strictly local affair in a place with few if any Europeans, no significant resources that the world still needs, and is too poor to fund terrorist misadventures outside their own border.

No one has any material interest in seeing this stopped. It's morally questionable to put the sons and daughters of any nation on the line to fight in a conflict that the mother country won't benefit from at all.

I say 'questionable' because a moral argument could be made for intervening, and a moral argument could be made for staying out.

The folks who cry out for intervention also need to remember that the only way we can be sure to stop this genocide is to kill enough of the aggressors that they know we're serious. Simply showing up has been proven, time and time again, to not do the job.

Re:What needs to happen...

[packeteer]

The Right, unfortunately, knows that our military cannot support serious actions to halt the genocide that is happening. As typically strong supporters of our military, they don't want to see the military face losses on top of what they are incurring in Iraq. Such an act could quickly become a political lightening rod.

In order for the Left to support such an action, they would have to support invading a sovereign nation whose official ties to terrorism are only hints and whispers, and without official UN approval, which is exactly their protest against the Iraq Invasion. Even with knowledge that the Iraqi government was killing their own citizens, The Left opposed invasion. To suddenly support a Darfur excursion would end up making them look like extreme hypocrites.

You frame the arguement in a simplistic way. You say that the right is trying to do what is best but for political reasons they would be shot down. According to you the left on the other hand constantly lives in fear that they will be exposed for the hipocrits they are. I think its obvious that this is an unrealistic scenario but it seems like you took your best chance to call leftists hipocrits without them actually doing anything to back up your arguement.

Also, the lesson we learned from Vietnam is that in order to win the war, we would have to wage war on the "tail" side of the agressors, drawing their front-line troops away to defend their home turf. That turns in a CQB (Close-Quarter Battle), which inflicts heavy losses on an invading force. Or we carpet bomb the mostly muslim north, allowing for the (pardon me for saying this) anti-US Muslim propaganda machine to run at full tilt again.

What are you smoking? We did not learn how to win in vietnam. We fought an unwinnable fight and its not like we now know how to win. Apparently by our actions in Iraq we learned nothing and want to make the same mistakes over again.

You go on to propose using ultra-expensive and ineffective bombs in "wide deployment" to kill people is going to win a vietnam like situation. You also say that Students who are peacifully protesting should be shot? I'm just baffled at how ignorant and bullheaded you are.

Re:What needs to happen...

[packeteer]

The Original poster's home URL leads to a list of files which include an image of a dead student at Kent State and the text "pwn3d". How does this guy get modded +5?

Re:What needs to happen...

[dfenstrate]

We would benefit greatly from protecting the weak and innocent from murderous aggression in Darfur.

We would not benefit materially, and probably not even politically. If you don't have either of those things, real-world concerns tend to trump moral idealism.

We can do better

[delirium of disorder]

Want to listen to better music and still help the people of Sudan? Check out the Genocide in Sudan compilation. All proceeds go to UNICEF and The UN Refugee Agency. Or you could donate directly to UNICEF, the UN Refugee Agency, or the UN world food programme

Next year: Murdoch Family Bake Sale

[Kadin2048]

Well yeah -- I mean, if they really wanted to send money to Sudan, you'd think that one of the brain surgeons there at News Corp would realize that it's a little ridiculous for a giant multinational corporation with $25 billion in revenue to sponsor a fucking fund raiser, in order to get regular folks to send in a couple of bucks here and there, as if they were the Pigs Knuckle, Arkansas Rotary Club ... if the goal of the whole process was "let's send money to Sudan," Rupert Murdoch could probably just cut a check out of his petty cash fund and be done with it.

As they are not doing that and are conducting a fund raiser, however ironic, I think it's safe to assume that the ultimate goal of the process is not, in fact, sending money to Sudan.

As to what the real motive might be, I'll leave that up to you to consider.

Re:Next year: Murdoch Family Bake Sale

[LeedsSideStreets]

It probably goes without saying that the same criticism could be applied to most charity events featuring wealthy celebrities and such. They could all just write checks, but instead go for the free publicity and image boost for just showing up.

Sure, Murdoch probably doesn't personally care about the Sudan, but I'd rather MySpace did this instead of some other worthless PR stunt for image damage control.

As with the vain celebrities, I'll take the right thing for the wrong reason over no right thing at all.

If it were the other way around

[Anonymous Coward]

That is, if it were the Christians killing the Muslims in Sudan, there would be no such fundraiser. Shame.

Re:If it were the other way around

[RexRhino]

Actually, yes... It was Christians (or at least former-Communists who were traditionally Christian) killing Muslims in the former Yugoslavia (at least that was what the propoganda said), and there were similiar fundraisers.

So quite clearly the fundraiser for Christians killing Muslims came first.

Worthless.

[ravenshrike]

Until the bastards in Khartoum are ousted from power.

Makes perfect sense.

[Kadin2048]

While in the US it's "kekeke pedos" here in the UK it has a positive image and is doing "good things"

Explaining why this "fund raiser" is being conducted almost exclusively in the U.S. (It would be exclusive, except for a show in Toronto.)

From TFA:

The concerts will take place October 21. Artists include TV on the Radio in Philadelphia, Alice in Chains in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Ziggy Marley in Medford, Oregon, Citizen Cope in Seattle, Gov't Mule in Spokane, Washington, and Insane Clown Posse in St. Petersburg, Florida.

Other concerts will take place in Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco, California; Melbourne, Florida; Atlanta; Louisville, Kentucky; St. Paul, Minnesota; Reno, Nevada; Baltimore; Asheville, North Carolina; Charleston, South Carolina; Milwaukee; and Washington, D.C.

A Canadian show will take place in Toronto.

MySpace's Response...

[thesimplicity]

"Is the Sudan a two-door or four-door, and does it have a dock for my iPod?"

Sudden fundraiser

[mh101]

I misread that as "MySpace Organizes Sudden Fundraiser", and was expecting to read that MySpace is in financial troubles and needed to raise some money fast.

Ahem - IT'S AN AD

[mcrbids]

Look, corporations *never* operate benevolently. Those that do go out of business pretty quickly. They are always out to make a profit.

This fundraiser is not about being nice. It's a deal that they're making with you: They'll do this fundraiser to raise money for a good cause. They're doing it for publicity. You may or may not bite and send some money to Sudan. Who cares?!?!

It's all about profits, and that's not a bad thing - the profit motive is what creates incentive for XYZ corporation to pay attention to little, itty, bitty you. (en masse) So, appreciate the good cause! Send a little money if you approve! The sooner you do away with the "good corp - bad corp" routine, the sooner you can get on to seeing things as they really are.

Gosh...

[photomonkey]

If only putting an "I support the Sudan thingy" icon in your profile could enter you to win concert tickets AND the option to buy a rubber-ish wrist bracelet in a fashionable color for $3.99, then people would REALLY support the whole Sudan thing and look cool doing it. Plus, good ol' Rupert might be able to make a few bucks in addition to helping their PR image.

When it WAS the other way around...

[patio11]

... in Bosnia, not only did they get nice little fundraisers, they got a US-lead military campaign. Which was about the only effective part of the operation (and I'm being generous calling it effective), since the UN, as per usual, let the genocide continue in the supposedly safe areas right under their nose. Now the area is mostly lawless, overseen by a toothless UN agency whose only mandate is protecting their mandate, and has a growing Islamic terrorist problem.

All in all, a pretty successful international peacekeeping operation by historical standards. By the way, have you heard about Kosovo in your newspaper in the last, oh, 5 years or so? The answer is probably a "no" for the same reason you hear about Darfur fairly little: it just isn't that useful as a talking point against the US. If you want to get some worldwide attention for Darfur, screw the little MySpace singalong: figure out a way that it reflects badly on Bush and I guarantee you AFRICANS DYING BY MILLIONS AS DUBYA YAWNS will be the headline of half the papers in the free world.

Re:For those of us who aren't geography geniuses..

[RexRhino]

Don't forget the foreign aid and intervention is not nessicarily going to have the effect intended. We could be sending aid, and it could be going to a dictator (actually, this is how it happens and it is usually by design, but it can happen by accident or ignorance too). We could subsidize the wrong parts of the economy or the wrong industries and end up killing self-sustaining industries for whatever industry someone in Europe or the U.S. thinks is good for that country (and doesn't compete with European or U.S. economic interests). It is called "paternalism", and it is usually a disaster.

The fact is, the West does not have the skills to fix Africas problems... and we are not trustworthy enough not to use foriegn aid or intervention to further our own interests. So in the meantime, if we can't help Aftrica, we can at least try not to mess them up worse. Leave Africa alone, and keep our hands and noses out. No country has ever gone to war or bore resentment towards another country for not giving enough aid or intervention. At the same time, plenty of countries have grown to hate the countries that they were once dependent on. Paternalism is a nasty thing.

The West should have a strict non-intervention policy with Africa. It is better not to do anything for the time being.

Re:Lame

[Jack_the_Tripper]

By the way, I may be the only person around who has been to every city mentioned in the post.

That's funny. Been to pretty much every city in the country...You tend to get around in this truck driving biz.

Re:Insane Clown Posse

[SeaFox]

uhh, armor? i can't imagine that clown makeup has an armor rating above 0.

No, but it does have a psyc attack factor of +6, and is a prerequisite to building the Dream Twister in Alpha Centauri.

Re:Lame

[xtype2.5]

I'm from Winston-Salem you insensitive clod!

it's rather telling that...

[Ender Ryan]

It' rather telling that you find --> this <-- funny.

You seem so eager to kill people. Are you certain there is not something terribly wrong with you?

Deja Vu...

[Skippyboy]

Does anyone remember something called "We Are the World"? Ever wonder how that turned out? Look up "USA for Africa" on Wikipedia. Seems to me that something similar will probably happen with this. Most of the money/food/medicine/etc will end up in the hands of the government cronies, and very little will help the people.

Re:Deja Vu...

[buckysphere]

Exactly!! How dare you use logic and facts on /.? I mean, the nerve... I will never send another dollar anywhere except to my own bank account. Literally, every time that I fell for any of these bullshit give-money-to-whomever schemes, it turned out to be ridiculously corrupt and served only the interests of some tyrannical leader. And we have some f-holes calling for us to send more money? Are they f'in nuts? Why, yes...yes they are.

Major Powers Keep UN down.

[arthurpaliden]

Unfortunatly the UN is powerless to do anything meaningful because the major world powers do not want a precident set that can then be used against them in regards to their own internal problems.

Local vs National

[boyfaceddog]

Raising money for Sudan is fantastic and I wish everyone all the luck they can handle with this.

On the other hand, This may be one of those watershed events when our culture changes course. In this case it may signal a (very slight) shift from music being national to music being regional. If the USA or even the world can watch a concert without the musicians moving around, then all music becomes local.

Re:Lame

[BeeBeard]

*Cash impression* You've been everywhere, man...

Laudable goals and everything...

[argStyopa]

But WTF good will 'raising awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan' do for ANYONE?

What, someone's going to feel all guilty and donate another $5 in aid that can be sent to Sudan for the gov't to either take for the military or give to the janjaweed?

All the compassion in the world doesn't help for crap unless someone is willing to man up and kill bad guys. And frankly, if you have to kill *lots* of bad guys (because, say, previous generations/governments couldn't or wouldn't come to grips with the problem), some good guys/gals/kids are going to get killed in the crossfire.

The 'enlightened' Western world has to understand this calculus and either shit or get off the pot: either quit whining about humanitarian crises or DO something about them. Because the whinging PLUS inaction just makes you look like the effete, useless busybodies you are.

Re:For those of us who aren't geography geniuses..

[rynthetyn]

Much of the time, foreign aid ends up doing little more than giving foreign aid workers the chance to live in luxury while the people they're supposed to help are starving. Sure, that's a cynical view of all of it, but the reality is that massive amounts of cash thrown at a situation rarely do anything significant to fix the problem. There are good development models that can provide long term solutions, however, those take far more time and effort than simply having a bunch of celebrities running around making statements. If you aren't careful, you can actually make the situation worse for people in the particular region you're trying to help. I'm all for international aid, my sister even has a degree in community development, but you've got to have more than just good intentions. The combinitation of unintended consequences and relief workers who see their job as a way to get rich (and you can do quite well for yourself if you work for certain agencies) can wreak all sorts of havoc.

sudan...really?

[AtomRiot]

perhaps they should worry about people in the US first. Not to knock the sedanese but think about it. If we can get americans off the streets and into jobs, they could get a computer and a myspace account and then start browsing and makeing myspace (fox) money through adds so the monies spent wouldnt be a total loss and would turn into a gain.

An actual solution for Darfur

[ROFLcoptor]

Seriously, hire a PMC. Blackwater USA has already offered a brigade:

There's little question that companies like Blackwater could be more effective operationally than the African Union, which has been hampered by its peacekeepers' lack of command and control experience. Private military companies boast a roster of former special forces officers and law enforcement officers who are accustomed to volatile conflict and post-conflict areas like Sudan.

Blackwater also subjects all of its personnel to an impressive array of extra training-whether they're training to work in Baghdad or the firm's North Carolina headquarters. They take classes in international humanitarian law, leadership, ethics, regional awareness, and ''customs and traditions." They've recently approached Amnesty International about teaching human rights education classes. And the International Peace Operations Association boasts that its code of conduct was written by human rights lawyers.

The industry also claims that it's far cheaper than its multilateral or military counterparts. ''We offer the ability to create a right-sized solution-which creates a cost savings right off the bat," says Taylor. By contrast, Brooks notes, ''NATO is insanely expensive; it's not a cost-effective organization. Neither is the [African Union]. Private companies would be much, much cheaper. When we compared their costs to most UN operations, we came up with 10 to 20 percent of what the UN would normally charge."

I can hear the argumends against this post right now (i.e. PMC are bad, they are answerable to no one, etc) but you should keep in mind doing nothing is worse. Remember, the standard is not perfection - the standard is the alternative.