Just look through yesterdays headlines or past 20 years of headlines
Fox News headlines don't make neither an accurate nor fair description of the world they claim to depict.
That talk is old. Hamas fires hand made rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel. I calculated the kill ratio of these weapons from the casualty numbers of the last Gaza massacre (yes, because in a war, both sides are supposed to have military power. Hamas really doesn't) and it was about 400:1. This means that Hamas had to fire at least 400 rockets to get one casualty. I'm including military and civilian casualties, including one Israeli that died from a heart attack from being scared of the explosion of a rocket. Do I need to name the weapons the IDF has at its disposal (funded by the American taxpayer btw)?
You are delusional. Israel is digging its own grave. Israel has no friends. It's nothing but a PR nuisance that every executive has to deal with, because it has a powerful lobby that has the US and the UK politians by the balls. But while the lobby managed to get those two into wars with Iraq and Afghanistan that didn't have any serious military power - both being crippled by both international sanctions and recent conflicts - the two powers still managed to lose those wars. Iraq is plunged in civil war, and the US is going to retreat from Afghanistan with the tail between the legs, without achieving absolutely nothing: as soon as Americans pull out, the old status quo is going to become the new status quo in Afghanistan.
You are insane if you even think the US and NATO are going to risk a war with Turkey (that has considerable military power and, more importantly, military experience as they've been engaging in active ops against the PKK for the last decades, and is a NATO ally thus forcing every other ally to defend it in case of an unprovoked attack) and Egypt, risking turning the whole Middle East into an anti-American riot, jeopardizing the geo-economic interests of Anglo-American corporations.
Israel is doomed. The artificial threat of terrorism that was created to divert attention from the colonization process that is being carried on Palestine by Jewish settlers no longer convinces. It just doesn't work anymore. People are fed up of having to undress at airports, of not having cell coverage in the subways, of living in constant fear, and they're starting to realize that it's all because a country whose very existence is questionable, doesn't give a shit about no one else except themselves, doesn't make the slightest effort for even attempting to negotiate a solution to the very mess it itself created, while at the same time murdering even foreign citizens from allied nations with an army equipped with weapons funded by those very allied citizen taxpayers. At the same time, millions of Israeli citizens are realizing that their state not only doesn't give a fuck about allied nations, it doesn't give a fuck about them, it's own citizens.
Mark my words: Israel is doomed. Not that it will go without a fight. Unfortunately, it will probably make a lot more innocent victims before it finally collapses, especially because it's going to be fighting mainly itself. But it will collapse. And you know what? I don't think a lot of people gonna miss it and it's arrogant, dick-like attitude towards the rest of the world.
This accurately describes every middle eastern country that has been trying to remove the Jews for the past 70+ years
Perhaps you'd care to provide some reference for this claim? Because it sounds like BS. No, actually, it is BS. It's funny that tools like you never see fit to mention the fact that Zionists actually tricked, deceived and forced Eastern European Jews after WW2 to migrate to what is know known as Israel, by telling them that they we're to be moved into the US.
You talk about propaganda machines, yet you're nothing but a mindless parrot of the largest propaganda machine probably ever set in motion in the history of mankind, funded by the American taxpayer. There is anti-US propaganda due largely to the fact that the US unconditionally supports Israeli policy, something that she doesn't do even with her closest ally the UK. Unconditional support to Israel has been detrimental to the interest and national security of the US and pretty much every civilized country in the world including, ironically, Israel itself. Arab states don't provoke Israel into violent confrontation. It's the other way around. You didn't see the Turkish navy killing Israeli civilians in international waters. But I saw Israeli commandos murdering nine Turkish civilians and one American in international water. The whole world did. I also saw the Israeli army bulldozing Rachel Corrie and shooting a UK civilian in the head the next day or two.
This bullshit doesn't cut it anymore. I really don't know what you stand to gain by spilling this nonsense, but if you truly believe it, then let me tell you that if Israel and, to a larger extent, the US have a problem with terrorism, it's mainly due to shills like you that blindly refuse to acknowledge the plain fact that Israel is not the least interested in promoting peace in the region, as evidenced by her refusal to stop illegal settlements. I bet you also think Norman Finklestein is a self-hating Jew.
PS: When I say Israel, I mean the Israeli state, ultra-orthodox segments of society and their Zionist lobby in the US. There are people in Israel that see the issue quite clearly, and struggle for a truly fair and balanced solution to the conflict. Obviously, you're not one of them.
No. They got killed because they were in the way. Converting wouldn't have saved them. In fact, nothing could have save them, except the measure of the extent to which their invaders were civilized.
Maybe you should look up the term, "justice" and see what it's all about
AFAIK, in most civilized countries, "justice" implies a proper, unbiased and free trial.
I think this was a great opportunity for the US and the West in general to show that they have the moral high ground and condemn this "state vigilante justice" like someone said above. Instead, all TVs shown people all over Western countries celebrating as if it was a reason of great joy. Worse, the leaders of those countries did pretty much everything but jumping around in joy too.
Lets not forget that if Osama had blood on his hands, as far as Muslims are concerned, the West has it's own hands drenched in it. Now they look at us and think: "They talk a lot about human rights, but when it comes down to it, they're no different of anybody. They kill when, where and what they want", and they're right, because we conveniently ignore basic human rights when it suits us. Like the US now did. To think that it is for a good reason, no matter what that reason is, makes us as bad as all those we condemn. Of course it would be a lot harder to try Bin Laden and condemn him in court (if he was to be considered guilty at all, lets not forget about presumption of innocence - another basic right we conveniently ignore sometimes) than to blow his head off in Pakistan, but it would have sent a clear message: a democracy will search, capture and force all criminals to answer for their crimes in front of a judge, and that is the right way to do it. But, instead, we just put a bullet in his head. Many more of them may now be thinking that they'd like their country to do the same to some Westerners, namely the ones that sent the Tomahawks that hit their houses in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Iraq, even if by mistake, and why shouldn't they? After all, that's what we do anyways...
The world is safer now? I seriously doubt it. It's probably become more dangerous.
Or are you saying that day the massive number of experiment required to support those theories were all, not only demonstrated, but fully understood by you, on that same day?
You can make leaps of faith, and I certainly did. But, what I read made sense. It was logical. Also, the problem is not when you can make leaps of faith. It's when you have to, because there simply is no other way. And in science, you never have to. It's incredibly easier if you do, but you can choose not to, and arrive at the same conclusions.
Try explaining relativity to a ten year old. At the end of the discussion, IF he believes you, its strictly because he's surrendered himself to your expertise
Actually, I was twelve when I first read a book on Einstein and Relativity. The only thing you really have to believe at that time is that there can be no speed greater than that of light. Which you can verify later anyway. If you settle on that, the rest is pretty much understandable conceptually: if speed doesn't budge, then something else will have to, it so happens to be space and time. Not the details, not the math, but the high level description of restricted Relativity is pretty much understandable allright. I had far greater difficulty in understanding what the fuck it meant that "Jesus died for our sins": "Hum, the guy died because I stole some gum yesterday? But he died 2000 years ago, or so they say... *scratches head*"
Well, first of all, let me thank you (no sarcasm now) for a reasonable response. It seems quite more productive now to actually have a discussion with you. Which is really more than I can say about most people that take your side on this issue, if it makes sense to take a side at all.
I think we both explained our views elaborately already and that is a good thing. Others can come, read, and make up their own mind. And your last post actually made some sense and seems to me quite reasonable. I'll therefore just address one issue I think undermines your whole line of thought. I'm not advocating that Israelis (Jews, whatever) are any worse than anyone else. Nobody's perfect. But I do really think that on this issue you're far, very far, from being right. And that worries me, because you seem quite a reasonable person, and I'm inclined to believe that you are actually being honest. So:
UN wants Israel to respect it? they should do something, and that thing is probably stopping Iran first, with force if it's needed,because they gonna bomb the world with nukes with their "holy war" shit, and no body seems to care. Israel won't stand on the side, and let that happen, cause we will be first to get it, and it doesn't matter if you're the US the EU or the UN.
This, my friend, is bullshit. Utter and complete bullshit. Iran is a hostile country to Israel, that much we agree. But Israel is also a hostile country to Iran, that is fact. So what? There are plenty of hostile countries to other countries. Hell, you can probably say that all countries are hostile in some way or another to all other countries. But it is one thing to say this, but another completely different thing is to say that country X wants to "nuke the whole world because they're fanatics".
That's something I've never seen any Iranian official ever say. And I do pay attention , trust me. It's like that other issue about the president of Iran wanting to "wipe Israel off the map". That was a bad translation. Intentionally bad, as it was Memri (check it out on Google please) that produced that translation, and it's quite obvious it's purpose is to advance Israel (or maybe not, I'll explain further along) agenda.
My point is this: You, the people of Israel (well, most people anyway) are being manipulated. By whom? By certain ones amongst yourselves, but especially abroad. What might be called "the Jewish lobby". So what is this Jewish lobby? For starters, the fact that it is Jewish is probably a coincidence, but a fact nonetheless, however, it's not composed of Jews only, many right-wing Christians also make part of it. And I'd say it's a bunch of people that actively profits from the current power and influence it has in Europe, US, and Israel. This might seem far-fetched but it's not. All you have to do is watch US foreign policy closely. But you need to put your Israeli and Jewish pride away while you do it, because that's what they feed on. So what should you look for in US foreign policy? In short: Israel.
Let me explain. If you look closely you see that the US always takes a position supportive of Israel. But that's only an illusion. What the US (and Europe and Israel) does really, is take a position supportive of the so called American-Jewish lobby (see AIPAC). So if the Department of State wants to take a harder approach on Israel in order to force Israel to take less hard-line positions, this lobby immediately pressures the US government and Houses to change that position. But if it is Israel that decides on taking a less hard-line position by herself, guess what the lobby does? It doesn't support Israel on that! It again pressures the US gov. and Houses to make Israel take more hard-line positions. So the outcome is always the same: US putting pressure on Israel to become more and more hard-line.
So these people want you to actually believe that the whole World hates you, Israel, the Jews, whatever it takes to further their cause. But in the long run, this is not in the i
Well, this may come as hard to believe, but a tobacco banning law was enacted a couple years back in my country. Shortly after, I read on a major weekly newspaper an interview of the head of social security. When asked about this issue - costs vs. profits of tobacco to the government, and why didn't the government totally ban the thing as it was so costly for society - he replied something extraordinary: he said that people often think that smokers cost a lot to the state budget, but if they were to ban tobacco altogether, the social security system would collapse in a couple of years. Apparently, the people that die from lung cancer allow the state to save a lot of money that would have to be used in pensions and other retirement benefits to those same persons.
This can be extrapolated to alcohol I suppose. As a smoker, I've always wondered why is it that I have to pay more and more money to smoke, when everybody says its bad for everyone. If it's bad for everyone then ban the thing! I'm all for that. But now I know. Fucking hypocrites... To think that a state official comes up in public and says: "hey, smoking is bad for you, but we can't ban it because otherwise we'd have to support you for a lot more years, so you'll just have to pay more for it and eventually hide yourself because we have to give the impression that we're actually doing something to stop people from smoking!" is just mind-boggling...
what you call "disregard" i call just standing for it's self, we won't take every crap US, EU or UN has to throw at us. it's only 60 years ago EU was a Concentration Camp for Jews, and about the same time ago, Black people in the US were still slaves. while the UN did very little to actually solve any conflict since it's creation. so who are you to teach us the rights and wrongs? nobody asked you to "scramble" or "apply damage control" - but it's just probably the right thing to do.
You won't take crap from anyone heh? Who would've said.. Oh, that's right! I said it in my post. I was apparently right. Except that what you call crap is actually called dialogue, negotiation and compromise (and also billions of dollars - is that crap you don't take also? Figured not...) in the civilized countries. But that doesn't really interest you now does it?
So, sixty years ago there was a concentration camp for Jews you say. Well, for starters, nobody's talking about Jews. I though we were talking about Israelis. Unless you think that both are actually the same. But then I find it hard to understand how can the Palestinians live better occupied by a state and people that would never accept them as citizens, because they're not of the same race or religion or whatever it is that makes one a Jew.
And the concentration camp wasn't only for the Jews. You seem to forget about Roma, Communists, and all the other people that also suffered with that. You don't see them occupying other people's land and resorting to violence because of that now do you? What gives you the right of hijacking those people's suffering to advance your cause?
And don't you dare mentioning the Black people. Because they've endured suffering that you can't possibly imagine, for many times the time your country has existed as so. They have endured centuries of slavery and cultural destruction at the hands of many people and nations. Yet they aren't colonizing other people's land. Neither do they use that to make them special victims nor to extort money from others on baseless claims. Even when the ones that colonized their land and made them slaves still keep sucking out their resources they still don't act like your people and your country do. Maybe you have something to learn from them. Let me ask you this: If the Palestinians happened to be black, would that stop you from taking their land just because it was written in some book and you happened to need some? Probably not. Which makes you as bad as those that took the Black People's land.
why should Israel spend even more money on "less lethal defense mechanisms"?
Well, because for starters, it isn't your money. It's mostly the American taxpayers money. So you have a responsibility in spending it for productive ends and not for killing innocent children, women and men. You don't see the American taxpayers money going to Hamas do you? Perhaps that's why they have to literally manufacture their own defense mechanisms. Maybe the US should cut you off as well so that perhaps you could find more productive ways to spend the money your country can generate by itself.
so who are you to teach us the rights and wrongs?
And who are you to teach the Palestinians right from wrong then? Why should they bow to your will when you bow to no one's?
But still you avoid the important issues, as most of your people do. When in doubt, call on the concentration camps and the right of Israel to do anything it wants to. Word to the wise: you now have the upper hand, and the hijacked support of the government of the most powerful superpower in the World. It would seem that nothing can stop you. But no upper hand lasts forever. And when you loose it, people will judge you for the actions you took when you had it. I can guess what judgement they will pass... But then you'll come crying that people persecute you and hate you. No shit... But I guess that's the way you like it huh? An eye for an eye right? I can only feel sorry for the Israelis and Jews that don't share your pride and selfishness and the blindness they bring. For they will also pay for the crimes you are now committing, and that is a real shame.
HAMAS just shoot rockets at Israel as this some kind of child game, but it's not a game. and in many cases, it's actually children who shoot the rockets (and miss, because they didn't read the manual? or don't know to read?)
Maybe it's because those rockets are about as basic as one can make them and they lack sophisticated target acquisition and navigation systems? I'm sure that if they had Tomahawks they wouldn't miss so much. Also, the allegation that it is children that fire those rockets is, as far as I've ever seen, just that: an allegation. I've never seen footage of children firing the aforementioned rockets. Or ever seen any Hamas element admitting so. Anyway, even if it is children that fire the rockets (why would people that are willing to sacrifice their lives in a suicide attack put their own children at risk before themselves is something I find mind-boggling and very hard to believe without hard proof) and that those rockets could eventually hit a kindergarten, that is no justification to kill those same children. I'm sure that with all the money Israel spends in weaponry, Israelis could find less lethal defense and deterrent mechanisms. After all, that's what 1st countries do.
I think you (Israelis in general and the ones that govern them in particular. I don't know about you, and I know that there are exceptions - which aren't anywhere as listened to as they should and as the war hawks are) just don't give a crap about the Palestinians and their children. After all, in the diplomatic level, Israel doesn't really give a crap about anyone or anything else, be it UN resolutions or the interests of its biggest ally and financer, or of its most important regional ally, which Israel effectively managed to alienate by unjustifiably killing nine of its citizens. Anything Israel (or Israeli-linked interests) does, becomes a PR nightmare that Americans and Europeans have to scramble to contain and apply damage control to. But I guess you don't really see that, do you? Israel can get along by applying the same recipe it does always: acuse inconvenient critics of anti-semitism and Israel hating. Even falling on the absurdity of accusing Jews and Israeli citizens of that, when they voice their criticism (internationally, as the press in Israel, truth be told, is actually quite free) of how Israel behaves as a country.
Until you people realize that what people hate is not Israel but Israel's atitude of complete disregard for anyone or anything else but their own (short term) selfish interests, or until the West and the US force you to, this is just going to keep going. And everyone, be it Palestinians, Israelis, Americans, Europeans, etc will keep suffering all the consequences of that. Once again, thanks a lot for that.
I know Palestinians people did suffer a lot (so did the Israelis), but look around us, look at Egypt, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, i promise you, the Palestinians in occupied territories have a lot more rights, freedom and are safer then citizens in this countries.
Seriously, I sometimes can't for the life of me figure if you people are just plain delusional and believe this or if you're lying consciously.
Palestinians did suffer a lot you say. First, I would say "Palestinians do suffer a lot". Secondly, exactly how much land, or relatives have you, or any of your ancestors lost in Israel at any time? Can you provide us with that info?
Thirdly, it's not just Palestinians we're talking about. Last time I did the math, the retribution ratio applied by the government and military of Israel has been roughly 1:400 i.e. for each Israeli casualty (civilian or otherwise), Israel makes 400 opfor casualties (civilian or otherwise). That would include mostly Palestinians and Lebanese in the recent years. Also, what kind of justification have you to give the people of Turkey for the nine Turkish citizens your IDF murdered on the assumption that they we're carrying weapons to Gaza, when all that was found in the boat was kitchen knifes and broom handles? Not to mention stripping European citizens that were on the same boat of all their property and documents, and never returning them? Or running American citizens over with bulldozers e.g. Rachel Corrie or shooting them in the head (see BBC's Dispatches on Gaza)? Were they also security threats to Israel?
Palestinians are seeing their land colonized by foreigners. Which is what most of the Israelis really are to the land they now occupy. They are long past the thinking with brains phase. It's pretty much desperation only that drives them. The failure of your government and society to understand this and apply a suitable solution that would demand compromise of both parts is what has thrown the world into the mess it is now with terrorism. Because of that reckless atitude and the complacency of the US and Europe towards it, no one can travel anymore without being subjected to frisks and detectors and bagage restrictions and x-ray machines. Thanks a lot for that. What I find ironic though is that your heroic founding fathers, never hesitated to blow things and (their own) people up to further advance their cause. Perhaps they didn't blow themselves up like the Palestinians sometimes do. Perhaps they should've. But that's not really convenient to talk about, now is it?
with instead fighting Israeli citizens, a fight they can't really win.
Why don't you people just occupy the damn thing once and for all and have the courage to openly assume that that is what you really want and that you won't stop at nothing to achieve it?
Have you people even considered that they didn't make an atomic device because they don't want to?
They're people too you know? They want to live their lives like everybody else. They don't because, in their eyes, a foreign-backed foreign power is usurping what used to be their land. So they take violent action against whom they perceive as their enemies and its supporters. But that doesn't mean they'd be willing to detonate nuclear weapons because of that. Why would they contaminate the land they claim as theirs with radiation? Not to mention destroying most it in the detonation itself?
When are people going to understand that terrorism is not a mental condition? It's a way of fighting. Normally used when you're at a very disproportionate disadvantage. Give them a force comparable to the IDF and watch terrorism decline sharply. Hell, why doesn't Israel use their nuclear weapons then? They have them. Because they're the good guys? Or maybe because they don't want to destroy what they're trying to obtain?
Well, I can't see how not to wipe entire cities of someone who's already willing to cease hostilities and instead showing them that you can wipe them can be idiotic. Specially considering that the US had the obvious advantage by completely controlling the Japanese air space.
Anyway, the attack on Pearl Harbor was far from being a blunder. It was the best option given the circumstances. It was a brilliantly executed and planned strategic move, given the assumption that the US would enter the war sooner or later.
The same reasoning could be applied to the German attack on Russia. Even more so when you consider that Russia (and Britain for that matter) only managed to get by with the enormous material and financial support from the US.
The real blunders as far as I'm concerned were the Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars by the US, and the invasion of Afghanistan by the USSR. Those were/are wars that were bound to be doomed at their very inception, because in those cases, sheer military power wasn't enough. It was like fighting flies with elephants.
Besides, hadn't Japan already offered peace before the two detonations? Let's get real here. No one in their sound mind wouldn't surrender to a weapon like the A-Bomb, especially at that time. Almost all the scientists involved in making the bomb preferred to make a demonstration to Japan, before actually deploying the weapons in real targets. The only reason the bombs were detonated was to warn USSR that America (or Harry Truman, as you prefer) had a shiny new apocalipse device, and wouldn't hesitate to use it. Prevent the loss of life, my ass.
It was a moot effort anyway, and the Russians were already working on the same thing, and wouldn't take long for them to showcase their toy as well.
So, in the end, only the Japanese lost with all this. Japanese civilians, women and children got conscientiously and mercilessly slaughtered (not to mention the consequences of radiation which can be seen still today, but I'll concede they might not be understood completely at the time) just for the Russians to see. That is the truth, whether you like it or not.
Yes, I know. I sometimes get carried away, because I feel people don't get how important this whole issue is.
As for your quote, remember that while there doesn't seem to be a motive for Iraqis to slander Islam, there sure are motives for them to claim they're catching terrorists. Money and equipment from the US might very well be dependent on that they do capture terrorists (it probably doesn't really matter whether they can actually prove that the people they capture are terrorists). So there's probably a strong incentive for the military and government to make these kinds of claims. Nothing that hasn't happened before.
Nevertheless, I'm not claiming there aren't terrorists in Iraq, or even that they don't resort to sometimes brutal and abject means of recruiting. I am saying that such claims should be thoroughly scrutinized, because they are serious accusations that can spark/fuel prejudice and stereotyping which in turns leads to more violence, etc. Ultimately, we end up suffering with that. Not only are we more likely to be the victims of a terrorist attack, we also get our rights stripped in name of security...
you're free to believe that the allegations are bullshit
Of course I am. But believing is not the point here. Like you said, you gave me five citations. Well, the only one with a modicum of credibility, clearly states that the allegation linking rape with suicide attacks was not independently verified. The others are echoes and offshoots of Israeli propaganda. So your citations prove or support nothing. So the allegations you reported on your first post are still baseless. At least in the way they were stated.
Ruthless people will exploit anything for their benefit. Islam is just another religion. There are better religions perhaps, but definitely not its older cousins Christianity and Judaism. We should actively resist the idea of Islam being a cause for terrorism. It's not. Christians have resorted to terrorism many times to advance their cause. Jews founded their country on it. But we seem to forget all that.
Persisting on that path will only bring the Western countries more headaches and possibly even worse consequences. The last thing we want is to start a war with Muslims. If we do, we can expect it to be very, very long. Trust me, my country's been there, done that. Nevertheless there are specific interests which seem bent on trying everything they can to debilitate and ruin Western/Muslim relations. You can see that in Europe's political speech. Something unthinkable 5 years ago, is now openly stated by UK, France and Germany officials: Multiculturalism has failed. Europe is beginning to adopt a harder stance on Muslims, restricting their freedom and criminalizing them as terrorists. This is a path to disgrace.
The Muslims resent Israel and its policy against Palestinians, furthermore, they don't understand how the US, despite all the sweet talk about liberty etc., continues to unconditionally support the Israeli policies, despite blatant violations of both human rights and UN Resolutions. This sparks anger against the US and, since Europe follows the US and Israel, against Europe. Yet people act as if their anger comes out of nowhere! As if they are only crazy people with a sudden wish to blow themselves up.
What I fear is that, once again, Europe will become a battleground. I'd bet someone is wanting Europeans to do their dirty work of destroying Muslims and, as so, is pitching Europe against Islam.
This is why I must react so strongly to such allegations. They originate more from fear-mongering than from objective facts. And that is dangerous.
There was no independent verification of the claims that rape was used as a means to turn women into suicide attackers.
from the Digital Journal article:
USC University Professor Stanley Harris MD writes in his treatise Military Male Rape, Homophobia, and Gay History that “during the past 3500 years, the traumatic rape of Judaeo-Christian military men by their enemies may have contributed to the development of cultural homophobia.” Rape, according to this author, was done as a way of punishment, torture, coercion and a host of indignities that brought about an abhorrence and fear of homosexuality. So not only Islam has had strong aversion to homosexuality and has perpetrated violence against gays, according to Harris.
Not all leaders and their followers of Islam believe homosexuality should be treated negatively. Imam Muhsin Hendricks maintains contemporary Muslim scholars should revisit the Quran and the teachings and laws of Islam and examine the context in which the texts were written, He declares the “prophet Muhammad never dealt with homosexuality in a direct way. Neither did he call for the punishment or persecution of homosexuals.”
and from Hyscience.com:
Today, on an article by Hana Levi Julian titled "Rape to Recruit Suicide Bombers," on IsraelNN.com, more gruesome, despicable, details have surfaced as to how this cookie-baking, "lovable," Jihadist granny and her Islamist terrorist mentors operated - all of them assuredly true Paragons of "Koranic morals and decency," and the faithful followers of Mohammed's teachings - Piss be Upon Him! - raping young Muslim women to traumatize them into becoming the willing human weapons of mass destruction, carnage, and murder, of their world-conquering Jihadist schemes,
Well, IsraelNN.com? Hardly the source of unbiased, accurate and objective information about Muslims is it?
Research like yours? Thanks, but no thanks.
When are the news about Muslims making human lampshades and shrunken heads of baby Jews gonna come out? What about they eating them for breakfast?
There's an acronym for labeling this kind of allegations: FUD
Yes, that's definitely an issue. Of course, I'm not in the business of making laws or whatever. I'm not even saying that my thoughts are better than any other. The real issue here (like someone posted in reply) is the environment in which most offenders live. That's what makes them probable candidates for prison. The point I was trying to make is that prisons don't solve the problem that makes people go to prison. Nowadays, prisons are just dumpsters. Expensive, dangerous dumpsters of people that somehow failed to observe the rules. Rules that might very well be unjust in the first place.
There's got be a better system. The ideal scenario would be to somehow make people observant of the rules. But today, we do that by making disrespecting the rules bear very negative consequences for those that do it. This is wrong. The Crime doesn't pay approach has failed. It pays. And pays well. We should be shifting to something like Lawful pays. But that's going to be hard to change for as long as people are living in poverty ghettos. So how does one change that?
Again I'm going to suggest something which I thought of, but it's really just a starting point for a broader discussion. If environment makes you, then change the environment. But what's the environment? I'd say that, grosso modo, the environment is the people. So change the people around, and you change the environment. For example, instead of making social housing neighborhoods, why not rescue derelict of abandoned buildings, rebuild them, and house people there? Disperse poverty amongst richer people. It'll make the poor people see what's really like to be "rich". What's it like to live a normal, working life. Also, most people will help poor people if they're there to help. I mean, no one can reasonably expect people to go into the poor neighborhoods offering jobs or food, except for NGO's. But if you would have someone needing help in your building or street, maybe you'd go and offer some help, or suggest a job you know of, or offer some food or medicine. Or even watch the kids while their parent(s) go to their job, or even just to have a chat and a cup of coffee. This is the help most people need to get on track.
By isolating poor people, we're taking away the community from them. The Christian ideal of poor charity is bogus. When people are fighting for their lives, they tend to care only about themselves. Only after they provided for themselves are they going to help their next. At least this is the scenario we should be working with. Anything better than this is not realistic. So put the poor people living with the rich people. Because rich people are the ones that can (and will, I believe) help. (by "rich" I mean "richer")
While it very well could require more staff, I think it's worth it.
Also, GP says that the people in the system do not have enough integrity, but they still don't have it now, so I don't really see that it would be much worse.
I think the current penal model in the West has two issues that we really need to deal with: a) efficiency and b) retribution . And I think they're closely related.
I've given some thought to this and I think that first, we have to separate violent offenders from non-violent. Violent people are the hardest to deal with and in the most serious cases, I think there's really no choice but to lock them up, although it raises the question of how's it going to be when they're released. (At least in countries with no life sentences).
But non-violent (or less seriously violent) offenders, don't really need to spend their whole day just doing nothing, hanging around with other criminals, inevitably exposed to even worse influences than themselves. They can be doing something useful for both themselves and society.
I thought up something along these lines: All elegible (non-violent) offenders, would have to exercise a mandatory occupation, and be assigned a base salary (leveled with minimum wage where it exists) but they will not be able to touch the significant part of it until the end of the sentence. All expenses would be payed for by the offender (taken from base salary).
In fact, sentences might become a value that the offender would be condemned to generate through work, instead of a time length. Each offender could server his/her sentence at a preferred pace.
I know this is quite vague and some points are quite difficult like, how to assign an occupation to each offender? How to make them work? How to stop it from becoming slavery?
These are difficult questions but I think the pros really out-weight the cons: Offenders wouldn't be losing their time while in jail, they'd be doing something productive to themselves and society. Finishing their sentence, they'll have something to live on while trying to find a new job outside. Which would be easier since they haven't just spent 5 or 10 years doing nothing, but instead learned and gained expertise on some trade all those years. And, in case the sentence was wrong and the condemned person is actually innocent, he's in a much more favorable position because the time served was not a complete waste. The state would apply a suitable multiplier to the base salary, and that person could at least look at the time being locked as an intensive period of work with substantial dividends. Might not be much, but it's definitely better than the current situation.
This is just my two cents, but I think it's clear that our penal system is obsolete. It is the most obsolete system implemented in our societies. In it's essencial form, it dates back centuries ago. Someone commits a crime? Jail him.
This doesn't work anymore. A lot of people, especially those that grow up and live in poor neighborhoods and live amongst crime every day, no longer face prison as a punishment. They face it as something they'll just have to endure someday, for whatever reason. They adopt a "stoic" perspective and they just take it. Once they're out, it's business as usual. It's a price they're willing to pay for keeping up with their illegal activities. Furthermore, while inside they get to share experience and knowledge and status with fellow "stoics", possibly finding new partners and contacts in the crime world and building reputation. That is, they're are doing the exact oppose of what they should be doing in prison: rehabilitate. Instead they're sinking even more in crime. At the taxpayers expense.
We should be weary of slavery sure, but we shouldn't let that stop us from improving and changing the system. Just locking people up solves nothing. We need to change people. And people do change. There are plenty examples out there. Prisons should be transformed into schools as much as possible, special schools allright, but schools nonetheless. Places where learning happens.
I'm replying so make sure no one reads your bullshit and thinks it's true.
First and foremost, you are not a troll. You are an asshole. And you think you're spilling out uncomfortable facts in your post?
That's what we hear everyday from neo-con, far-right extremists in America and Europe. The only uncomfortable fact in all of it, the only fact actually, is that it's all bullshit and FUD. You extrapolate and entire heterogenous group that extends from Morocco to Indonesia based on absolutely nothing. Pedophilism, racism, genocides... I'm actually used to see that... in Western or by Western civilizations.
Of course, no society has ever survived 10% infiltration of mohamedans. (...) Sometimes so many genocides were comitted that any trace of a recognizable culture was gone (ie : most of central and eastern Africa, Pakistan when it became muslim, even large regions of Europe sustained centuries of constant muslim attacks and infiltration... )
Well, Muslims dominated my country, the whole peninsula where it's located in fact, for ~700 years. That didn't stop both we and the Spanish from still talking a Latin language. It didn't stop the Iberian Peninsula from becoming a stronghold for the Catholic church and Inquisition, from burning people in crosses and other atrocities. It didn't stop us from enslaving large numbers of Africans throughout the Discoveries age and beyond. In fact, one could say (and indeed it is said) that the Muslim occupation of Iberia started a local golden age, from which you can still see the mosques (now churches) in Cordoba and Toledo, or the magnificent Alhambra palace. But you can still see the Romanic churches in Braga (former Bracara Augusta) or Coimbra that date from before the occupation. So, no cultural erasing happened, no genocide happened.
The Moorish culture is part of our culture. It's part of us in our language, our architecture, our way of life. So fuck you and your bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about. Crawl back into whatever fear-monger-and-xenophobe-harboring hole you crawled out of. You think the world is full of brainwashed morons like you? Think twice.
Also, you mention something about the Mufti meeting with Hitler... You want really uncomfortable facts? How about this: Hitler cutting deals with Zionists, offering free and safe passage to Palestine in exchange for commercial activities with Germany, among other things That's something you Muslim hate-spreaders never mention, perhaps don't even know, like the effective tools and sock-puppets you actually are.
Stop slandering people you know nothing about.
Get a brain instead. And use it.
We need to wake up and realize that religious fundamentalism of every stripe is the root cause of most of the world's problems, and then effectively deal with it.
I disagree. This is a fallacious way of seeing the problem. The root cause of most of the world's problems is a mix of misunderstandings, inevitable cultural xenophobia, and intentional mischief. Religious fundamentalism feeds and thrives on this cocktail.
So, killing all the fundamentalists (I'm not saying that you're saying), isn't going to solve any problem at all. And neither will trying to discredit them. It only aggravates the problem. Makes more people join their ranks.
If you want to get rid of fundamentalism - be it religious or otherwise - you have to get rid of the causes for it. You have to make sure you clear misunderstandings; explain people that, while it's normal to distrust different cultures (and it is), it's to everybody's benefit to be at least somewhat open to learn about them; and expose and criticize mischief when we see it.
Nothing like this is being made. Western news and politicians seem to want to convey the message that fundamentalists appear out of thin air, and are different from everybody else. As if they're almost not humans. As if these politicians actions have nothing to do with the alleged surge of fundamentalism across the World.
In fact, I watch Al-Jazeera English, and read it on the web. And I got to say that, apart from perhaps the BBC, it makes western news organizations look like a joke. They touch issues that western outfits don't even dare to touch and, most importantly, issues that western outfits don't give a shit about: How people live in Gaza, Darfur, secret jails in China, Tibet, Somalia pirates, everything western news media sweeps under the carpet. They have quality shows like Witness (roughly the same format of BBC's Dispatches), Frost over the World (in which Sir David Frost interviews interesting guests), or Empire, that are very worth watching.
"Biased" my ass. When tools say "biased", they really mean - though without knowing it - free of most western lobbies influence, especially the Israeli lobby. That's that. And Israeli top officials are interviewed all the time there. So this isn't even about Israel. It's about the subservience and really poor quality and independence of western news outfits, with Americans leading, and Europeans following closely behind.
Slashdot Mirror
Just look through yesterdays headlines or past 20 years of headlines
Fox News headlines don't make neither an accurate nor fair description of the world they claim to depict.
That talk is old. Hamas fires hand made rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel. I calculated the kill ratio of these weapons from the casualty numbers of the last Gaza massacre (yes, because in a war, both sides are supposed to have military power. Hamas really doesn't) and it was about 400:1. This means that Hamas had to fire at least 400 rockets to get one casualty. I'm including military and civilian casualties, including one Israeli that died from a heart attack from being scared of the explosion of a rocket. Do I need to name the weapons the IDF has at its disposal (funded by the American taxpayer btw)?
You are delusional. Israel is digging its own grave. Israel has no friends. It's nothing but a PR nuisance that every executive has to deal with, because it has a powerful lobby that has the US and the UK politians by the balls. But while the lobby managed to get those two into wars with Iraq and Afghanistan that didn't have any serious military power - both being crippled by both international sanctions and recent conflicts - the two powers still managed to lose those wars. Iraq is plunged in civil war, and the US is going to retreat from Afghanistan with the tail between the legs, without achieving absolutely nothing: as soon as Americans pull out, the old status quo is going to become the new status quo in Afghanistan.
You are insane if you even think the US and NATO are going to risk a war with Turkey (that has considerable military power and, more importantly, military experience as they've been engaging in active ops against the PKK for the last decades, and is a NATO ally thus forcing every other ally to defend it in case of an unprovoked attack) and Egypt, risking turning the whole Middle East into an anti-American riot, jeopardizing the geo-economic interests of Anglo-American corporations.
Israel is doomed. The artificial threat of terrorism that was created to divert attention from the colonization process that is being carried on Palestine by Jewish settlers no longer convinces. It just doesn't work anymore. People are fed up of having to undress at airports, of not having cell coverage in the subways, of living in constant fear, and they're starting to realize that it's all because a country whose very existence is questionable, doesn't give a shit about no one else except themselves, doesn't make the slightest effort for even attempting to negotiate a solution to the very mess it itself created, while at the same time murdering even foreign citizens from allied nations with an army equipped with weapons funded by those very allied citizen taxpayers. At the same time, millions of Israeli citizens are realizing that their state not only doesn't give a fuck about allied nations, it doesn't give a fuck about them, it's own citizens.
Mark my words: Israel is doomed. Not that it will go without a fight. Unfortunately, it will probably make a lot more innocent victims before it finally collapses, especially because it's going to be fighting mainly itself. But it will collapse. And you know what? I don't think a lot of people gonna miss it and it's arrogant, dick-like attitude towards the rest of the world.
This accurately describes every middle eastern country that has been trying to remove the Jews for the past 70+ years
Perhaps you'd care to provide some reference for this claim? Because it sounds like BS. No, actually, it is BS. It's funny that tools like you never see fit to mention the fact that Zionists actually tricked, deceived and forced Eastern European Jews after WW2 to migrate to what is know known as Israel, by telling them that they we're to be moved into the US.
You talk about propaganda machines, yet you're nothing but a mindless parrot of the largest propaganda machine probably ever set in motion in the history of mankind, funded by the American taxpayer. There is anti-US propaganda due largely to the fact that the US unconditionally supports Israeli policy, something that she doesn't do even with her closest ally the UK. Unconditional support to Israel has been detrimental to the interest and national security of the US and pretty much every civilized country in the world including, ironically, Israel itself. Arab states don't provoke Israel into violent confrontation. It's the other way around. You didn't see the Turkish navy killing Israeli civilians in international waters. But I saw Israeli commandos murdering nine Turkish civilians and one American in international water. The whole world did. I also saw the Israeli army bulldozing Rachel Corrie and shooting a UK civilian in the head the next day or two.
This bullshit doesn't cut it anymore. I really don't know what you stand to gain by spilling this nonsense, but if you truly believe it, then let me tell you that if Israel and, to a larger extent, the US have a problem with terrorism, it's mainly due to shills like you that blindly refuse to acknowledge the plain fact that Israel is not the least interested in promoting peace in the region, as evidenced by her refusal to stop illegal settlements. I bet you also think Norman Finklestein is a self-hating Jew.
PS: When I say Israel, I mean the Israeli state, ultra-orthodox segments of society and their Zionist lobby in the US. There are people in Israel that see the issue quite clearly, and struggle for a truly fair and balanced solution to the conflict. Obviously, you're not one of them.
. For example worker bees can't reproduce, yet they may be considered alive. Also women past menopause and kids are alive yet they can't replicate
No. But their genes can (they do in queen bees, and adult humans), and that's what matters.
Also you can't make "ability" to evolve as part of the definition of life.
Indeed. Evolving is not so much an ability as it is a consequence of inexact replication.
No. They got killed because they were in the way. Converting wouldn't have saved them. In fact, nothing could have save them, except the measure of the extent to which their invaders were civilized.
Now who's the barbarian?
Maybe you should look up the term, "justice" and see what it's all about
AFAIK, in most civilized countries, "justice" implies a proper, unbiased and free trial.
I think this was a great opportunity for the US and the West in general to show that they have the moral high ground and condemn this "state vigilante justice" like someone said above. Instead, all TVs shown people all over Western countries celebrating as if it was a reason of great joy. Worse, the leaders of those countries did pretty much everything but jumping around in joy too.
Lets not forget that if Osama had blood on his hands, as far as Muslims are concerned, the West has it's own hands drenched in it. Now they look at us and think: "They talk a lot about human rights, but when it comes down to it, they're no different of anybody. They kill when, where and what they want", and they're right, because we conveniently ignore basic human rights when it suits us. Like the US now did. To think that it is for a good reason, no matter what that reason is, makes us as bad as all those we condemn. Of course it would be a lot harder to try Bin Laden and condemn him in court (if he was to be considered guilty at all, lets not forget about presumption of innocence - another basic right we conveniently ignore sometimes) than to blow his head off in Pakistan, but it would have sent a clear message: a democracy will search, capture and force all criminals to answer for their crimes in front of a judge, and that is the right way to do it. But, instead, we just put a bullet in his head. Many more of them may now be thinking that they'd like their country to do the same to some Westerners, namely the ones that sent the Tomahawks that hit their houses in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Iraq, even if by mistake, and why shouldn't they? After all, that's what we do anyways...
The world is safer now? I seriously doubt it. It's probably become more dangerous.
Or are you saying that day the massive number of experiment required to support those theories were all, not only demonstrated, but fully understood by you, on that same day?
You can make leaps of faith, and I certainly did. But, what I read made sense. It was logical. Also, the problem is not when you can make leaps of faith. It's when you have to, because there simply is no other way. And in science, you never have to. It's incredibly easier if you do, but you can choose not to, and arrive at the same conclusions.
Try explaining relativity to a ten year old. At the end of the discussion, IF he believes you, its strictly because he's surrendered himself to your expertise
Actually, I was twelve when I first read a book on Einstein and Relativity. The only thing you really have to believe at that time is that there can be no speed greater than that of light. Which you can verify later anyway. If you settle on that, the rest is pretty much understandable conceptually: if speed doesn't budge, then something else will have to, it so happens to be space and time. Not the details, not the math, but the high level description of restricted Relativity is pretty much understandable allright. I had far greater difficulty in understanding what the fuck it meant that "Jesus died for our sins": "Hum, the guy died because I stole some gum yesterday? But he died 2000 years ago, or so they say... *scratches head*"
Well, first of all, let me thank you (no sarcasm now) for a reasonable response. It seems quite more productive now to actually have a discussion with you. Which is really more than I can say about most people that take your side on this issue, if it makes sense to take a side at all.
I think we both explained our views elaborately already and that is a good thing. Others can come, read, and make up their own mind. And your last post actually made some sense and seems to me quite reasonable. I'll therefore just address one issue I think undermines your whole line of thought. I'm not advocating that Israelis (Jews, whatever) are any worse than anyone else. Nobody's perfect. But I do really think that on this issue you're far, very far, from being right. And that worries me, because you seem quite a reasonable person, and I'm inclined to believe that you are actually being honest. So:
UN wants Israel to respect it? they should do something, and that thing is probably stopping Iran first, with force if it's needed,because they gonna bomb the world with nukes with their "holy war" shit, and no body seems to care. Israel won't stand on the side, and let that happen, cause we will be first to get it, and it doesn't matter if you're the US the EU or the UN.
This, my friend, is bullshit. Utter and complete bullshit. Iran is a hostile country to Israel, that much we agree. But Israel is also a hostile country to Iran, that is fact. So what? There are plenty of hostile countries to other countries. Hell, you can probably say that all countries are hostile in some way or another to all other countries. But it is one thing to say this, but another completely different thing is to say that country X wants to "nuke the whole world because they're fanatics".
That's something I've never seen any Iranian official ever say. And I do pay attention , trust me. It's like that other issue about the president of Iran wanting to "wipe Israel off the map". That was a bad translation. Intentionally bad, as it was Memri (check it out on Google please) that produced that translation, and it's quite obvious it's purpose is to advance Israel (or maybe not, I'll explain further along) agenda.
My point is this: You, the people of Israel (well, most people anyway) are being manipulated. By whom? By certain ones amongst yourselves, but especially abroad. What might be called "the Jewish lobby". So what is this Jewish lobby? For starters, the fact that it is Jewish is probably a coincidence, but a fact nonetheless, however, it's not composed of Jews only, many right-wing Christians also make part of it. And I'd say it's a bunch of people that actively profits from the current power and influence it has in Europe, US, and Israel. This might seem far-fetched but it's not. All you have to do is watch US foreign policy closely. But you need to put your Israeli and Jewish pride away while you do it, because that's what they feed on. So what should you look for in US foreign policy? In short: Israel.
Let me explain. If you look closely you see that the US always takes a position supportive of Israel. But that's only an illusion. What the US (and Europe and Israel) does really, is take a position supportive of the so called American-Jewish lobby (see AIPAC). So if the Department of State wants to take a harder approach on Israel in order to force Israel to take less hard-line positions, this lobby immediately pressures the US government and Houses to change that position. But if it is Israel that decides on taking a less hard-line position by herself, guess what the lobby does? It doesn't support Israel on that! It again pressures the US gov. and Houses to make Israel take more hard-line positions. So the outcome is always the same: US putting pressure on Israel to become more and more hard-line.
So these people want you to actually believe that the whole World hates you, Israel, the Jews, whatever it takes to further their cause. But in the long run, this is not in the i
Well, this may come as hard to believe, but a tobacco banning law was enacted a couple years back in my country. Shortly after, I read on a major weekly newspaper an interview of the head of social security. When asked about this issue - costs vs. profits of tobacco to the government, and why didn't the government totally ban the thing as it was so costly for society - he replied something extraordinary: he said that people often think that smokers cost a lot to the state budget, but if they were to ban tobacco altogether, the social security system would collapse in a couple of years. Apparently, the people that die from lung cancer allow the state to save a lot of money that would have to be used in pensions and other retirement benefits to those same persons.
This can be extrapolated to alcohol I suppose. As a smoker, I've always wondered why is it that I have to pay more and more money to smoke, when everybody says its bad for everyone. If it's bad for everyone then ban the thing! I'm all for that. But now I know. Fucking hypocrites... To think that a state official comes up in public and says: "hey, smoking is bad for you, but we can't ban it because otherwise we'd have to support you for a lot more years, so you'll just have to pay more for it and eventually hide yourself because we have to give the impression that we're actually doing something to stop people from smoking!" is just mind-boggling...
what you call "disregard" i call just standing for it's self, we won't take every crap US, EU or UN has to throw at us. it's only 60 years ago EU was a Concentration Camp for Jews, and about the same time ago, Black people in the US were still slaves. while the UN did very little to actually solve any conflict since it's creation. so who are you to teach us the rights and wrongs? nobody asked you to "scramble" or "apply damage control" - but it's just probably the right thing to do.
You won't take crap from anyone heh? Who would've said.. Oh, that's right! I said it in my post. I was apparently right. Except that what you call crap is actually called dialogue, negotiation and compromise (and also billions of dollars - is that crap you don't take also? Figured not...) in the civilized countries. But that doesn't really interest you now does it?
So, sixty years ago there was a concentration camp for Jews you say. Well, for starters, nobody's talking about Jews. I though we were talking about Israelis. Unless you think that both are actually the same. But then I find it hard to understand how can the Palestinians live better occupied by a state and people that would never accept them as citizens, because they're not of the same race or religion or whatever it is that makes one a Jew.
And the concentration camp wasn't only for the Jews. You seem to forget about Roma, Communists, and all the other people that also suffered with that. You don't see them occupying other people's land and resorting to violence because of that now do you? What gives you the right of hijacking those people's suffering to advance your cause?
And don't you dare mentioning the Black people. Because they've endured suffering that you can't possibly imagine, for many times the time your country has existed as so. They have endured centuries of slavery and cultural destruction at the hands of many people and nations. Yet they aren't colonizing other people's land. Neither do they use that to make them special victims nor to extort money from others on baseless claims. Even when the ones that colonized their land and made them slaves still keep sucking out their resources they still don't act like your people and your country do. Maybe you have something to learn from them. Let me ask you this: If the Palestinians happened to be black, would that stop you from taking their land just because it was written in some book and you happened to need some? Probably not. Which makes you as bad as those that took the Black People's land.
why should Israel spend even more money on "less lethal defense mechanisms"?
Well, because for starters, it isn't your money. It's mostly the American taxpayers money. So you have a responsibility in spending it for productive ends and not for killing innocent children, women and men. You don't see the American taxpayers money going to Hamas do you? Perhaps that's why they have to literally manufacture their own defense mechanisms. Maybe the US should cut you off as well so that perhaps you could find more productive ways to spend the money your country can generate by itself.
so who are you to teach us the rights and wrongs?
And who are you to teach the Palestinians right from wrong then? Why should they bow to your will when you bow to no one's?
But still you avoid the important issues, as most of your people do. When in doubt, call on the concentration camps and the right of Israel to do anything it wants to. Word to the wise: you now have the upper hand, and the hijacked support of the government of the most powerful superpower in the World. It would seem that nothing can stop you. But no upper hand lasts forever. And when you loose it, people will judge you for the actions you took when you had it. I can guess what judgement they will pass... But then you'll come crying that people persecute you and hate you. No shit... But I guess that's the way you like it huh? An eye for an eye right? I can only feel sorry for the Israelis and Jews that don't share your pride and selfishness and the blindness they bring. For they will also pay for the crimes you are now committing, and that is a real shame.
HAMAS just shoot rockets at Israel as this some kind of child game, but it's not a game. and in many cases, it's actually children who shoot the rockets (and miss, because they didn't read the manual? or don't know to read?)
Maybe it's because those rockets are about as basic as one can make them and they lack sophisticated target acquisition and navigation systems? I'm sure that if they had Tomahawks they wouldn't miss so much. Also, the allegation that it is children that fire those rockets is, as far as I've ever seen, just that: an allegation. I've never seen footage of children firing the aforementioned rockets. Or ever seen any Hamas element admitting so. Anyway, even if it is children that fire the rockets (why would people that are willing to sacrifice their lives in a suicide attack put their own children at risk before themselves is something I find mind-boggling and very hard to believe without hard proof) and that those rockets could eventually hit a kindergarten, that is no justification to kill those same children. I'm sure that with all the money Israel spends in weaponry, Israelis could find less lethal defense and deterrent mechanisms. After all, that's what 1st countries do.
I think you (Israelis in general and the ones that govern them in particular. I don't know about you, and I know that there are exceptions - which aren't anywhere as listened to as they should and as the war hawks are) just don't give a crap about the Palestinians and their children. After all, in the diplomatic level, Israel doesn't really give a crap about anyone or anything else, be it UN resolutions or the interests of its biggest ally and financer, or of its most important regional ally, which Israel effectively managed to alienate by unjustifiably killing nine of its citizens. Anything Israel (or Israeli-linked interests) does, becomes a PR nightmare that Americans and Europeans have to scramble to contain and apply damage control to. But I guess you don't really see that, do you? Israel can get along by applying the same recipe it does always: acuse inconvenient critics of anti-semitism and Israel hating. Even falling on the absurdity of accusing Jews and Israeli citizens of that, when they voice their criticism (internationally, as the press in Israel, truth be told, is actually quite free) of how Israel behaves as a country.
Until you people realize that what people hate is not Israel but Israel's atitude of complete disregard for anyone or anything else but their own (short term) selfish interests, or until the West and the US force you to, this is just going to keep going. And everyone, be it Palestinians, Israelis, Americans, Europeans, etc will keep suffering all the consequences of that. Once again, thanks a lot for that.
I know Palestinians people did suffer a lot (so did the Israelis), but look around us, look at Egypt, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, i promise you, the Palestinians in occupied territories have a lot more rights, freedom and are safer then citizens in this countries.
Seriously, I sometimes can't for the life of me figure if you people are just plain delusional and believe this or if you're lying consciously.
Palestinians did suffer a lot you say. First, I would say "Palestinians do suffer a lot". Secondly, exactly how much land, or relatives have you, or any of your ancestors lost in Israel at any time? Can you provide us with that info?
Thirdly, it's not just Palestinians we're talking about. Last time I did the math, the retribution ratio applied by the government and military of Israel has been roughly 1:400 i.e. for each Israeli casualty (civilian or otherwise), Israel makes 400 opfor casualties (civilian or otherwise). That would include mostly Palestinians and Lebanese in the recent years. Also, what kind of justification have you to give the people of Turkey for the nine Turkish citizens your IDF murdered on the assumption that they we're carrying weapons to Gaza, when all that was found in the boat was kitchen knifes and broom handles? Not to mention stripping European citizens that were on the same boat of all their property and documents, and never returning them? Or running American citizens over with bulldozers e.g. Rachel Corrie or shooting them in the head (see BBC's Dispatches on Gaza)? Were they also security threats to Israel?
Palestinians are seeing their land colonized by foreigners. Which is what most of the Israelis really are to the land they now occupy. They are long past the thinking with brains phase. It's pretty much desperation only that drives them. The failure of your government and society to understand this and apply a suitable solution that would demand compromise of both parts is what has thrown the world into the mess it is now with terrorism. Because of that reckless atitude and the complacency of the US and Europe towards it, no one can travel anymore without being subjected to frisks and detectors and bagage restrictions and x-ray machines. Thanks a lot for that. What I find ironic though is that your heroic founding fathers, never hesitated to blow things and (their own) people up to further advance their cause. Perhaps they didn't blow themselves up like the Palestinians sometimes do. Perhaps they should've. But that's not really convenient to talk about, now is it?
with instead fighting Israeli citizens, a fight they can't really win.
Why don't you people just occupy the damn thing once and for all and have the courage to openly assume that that is what you really want and that you won't stop at nothing to achieve it?
Have you people even considered that they didn't make an atomic device because they don't want to?
They're people too you know? They want to live their lives like everybody else. They don't because, in their eyes, a foreign-backed foreign power is usurping what used to be their land. So they take violent action against whom they perceive as their enemies and its supporters. But that doesn't mean they'd be willing to detonate nuclear weapons because of that. Why would they contaminate the land they claim as theirs with radiation? Not to mention destroying most it in the detonation itself?
When are people going to understand that terrorism is not a mental condition? It's a way of fighting. Normally used when you're at a very disproportionate disadvantage. Give them a force comparable to the IDF and watch terrorism decline sharply. Hell, why doesn't Israel use their nuclear weapons then? They have them. Because they're the good guys? Or maybe because they don't want to destroy what they're trying to obtain?
*sigh*
Well, I can't see how not to wipe entire cities of someone who's already willing to cease hostilities and instead showing them that you can wipe them can be idiotic. Specially considering that the US had the obvious advantage by completely controlling the Japanese air space.
Anyway, the attack on Pearl Harbor was far from being a blunder. It was the best option given the circumstances. It was a brilliantly executed and planned strategic move, given the assumption that the US would enter the war sooner or later.
The same reasoning could be applied to the German attack on Russia. Even more so when you consider that Russia (and Britain for that matter) only managed to get by with the enormous material and financial support from the US.
The real blunders as far as I'm concerned were the Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars by the US, and the invasion of Afghanistan by the USSR. Those were/are wars that were bound to be doomed at their very inception, because in those cases, sheer military power wasn't enough. It was like fighting flies with elephants.
What was wrong with just showing them the bomb?
Besides, hadn't Japan already offered peace before the two detonations? Let's get real here. No one in their sound mind wouldn't surrender to a weapon like the A-Bomb, especially at that time. Almost all the scientists involved in making the bomb preferred to make a demonstration to Japan, before actually deploying the weapons in real targets. The only reason the bombs were detonated was to warn USSR that America (or Harry Truman, as you prefer) had a shiny new apocalipse device, and wouldn't hesitate to use it. Prevent the loss of life, my ass.
It was a moot effort anyway, and the Russians were already working on the same thing, and wouldn't take long for them to showcase their toy as well.
So, in the end, only the Japanese lost with all this. Japanese civilians, women and children got conscientiously and mercilessly slaughtered (not to mention the consequences of radiation which can be seen still today, but I'll concede they might not be understood completely at the time) just for the Russians to see.
That is the truth, whether you like it or not.
Friend, you are projecting.
Yes, I know. I sometimes get carried away, because I feel people don't get how important this whole issue is.
As for your quote, remember that while there doesn't seem to be a motive for Iraqis to slander Islam, there sure are motives for them to claim they're catching terrorists. Money and equipment from the US might very well be dependent on that they do capture terrorists (it probably doesn't really matter whether they can actually prove that the people they capture are terrorists). So there's probably a strong incentive for the military and government to make these kinds of claims. Nothing that hasn't happened before.
Nevertheless, I'm not claiming there aren't terrorists in Iraq, or even that they don't resort to sometimes brutal and abject means of recruiting. I am saying that such claims should be thoroughly scrutinized, because they are serious accusations that can spark/fuel prejudice and stereotyping which in turns leads to more violence, etc. Ultimately, we end up suffering with that. Not only are we more likely to be the victims of a terrorist attack, we also get our rights stripped in name of security...
you're free to believe that the allegations are bullshit
Of course I am. But believing is not the point here. Like you said, you gave me five citations. Well, the only one with a modicum of credibility, clearly states that the allegation linking rape with suicide attacks was not independently verified. The others are echoes and offshoots of Israeli propaganda. So your citations prove or support nothing. So the allegations you reported on your first post are still baseless. At least in the way they were stated.
Ruthless people will exploit anything for their benefit. Islam is just another religion. There are better religions perhaps, but definitely not its older cousins Christianity and Judaism. We should actively resist the idea of Islam being a cause for terrorism. It's not. Christians have resorted to terrorism many times to advance their cause. Jews founded their country on it. But we seem to forget all that.
Persisting on that path will only bring the Western countries more headaches and possibly even worse consequences. The last thing we want is to start a war with Muslims. If we do, we can expect it to be very, very long. Trust me, my country's been there, done that. Nevertheless there are specific interests which seem bent on trying everything they can to debilitate and ruin Western/Muslim relations. You can see that in Europe's political speech. Something unthinkable 5 years ago, is now openly stated by UK, France and Germany officials: Multiculturalism has failed. Europe is beginning to adopt a harder stance on Muslims, restricting their freedom and criminalizing them as terrorists. This is a path to disgrace.
The Muslims resent Israel and its policy against Palestinians, furthermore, they don't understand how the US, despite all the sweet talk about liberty etc., continues to unconditionally support the Israeli policies, despite blatant violations of both human rights and UN Resolutions. This sparks anger against the US and, since Europe follows the US and Israel, against Europe. Yet people act as if their anger comes out of nowhere! As if they are only crazy people with a sudden wish to blow themselves up. What I fear is that, once again, Europe will become a battleground. I'd bet someone is wanting Europeans to do their dirty work of destroying Muslims and, as so, is pitching Europe against Islam.
This is why I must react so strongly to such allegations. They originate more from fear-mongering than from objective facts. And that is dangerous.
There was no independent verification of the claims that rape was used as a means to turn women into suicide attackers.
from the Digital Journal article:
USC University Professor Stanley Harris MD writes in his treatise Military Male Rape, Homophobia, and Gay History that “during the past 3500 years, the traumatic rape of Judaeo-Christian military men by their enemies may have contributed to the development of cultural homophobia.” Rape, according to this author, was done as a way of punishment, torture, coercion and a host of indignities that brought about an abhorrence and fear of homosexuality. So not only Islam has had strong aversion to homosexuality and has perpetrated violence against gays, according to Harris. Not all leaders and their followers of Islam believe homosexuality should be treated negatively. Imam Muhsin Hendricks maintains contemporary Muslim scholars should revisit the Quran and the teachings and laws of Islam and examine the context in which the texts were written, He declares the “prophet Muhammad never dealt with homosexuality in a direct way. Neither did he call for the punishment or persecution of homosexuals.”
and from Hyscience.com:
Today, on an article by Hana Levi Julian titled "Rape to Recruit Suicide Bombers," on IsraelNN.com, more gruesome, despicable, details have surfaced as to how this cookie-baking, "lovable," Jihadist granny and her Islamist terrorist mentors operated - all of them assuredly true Paragons of "Koranic morals and decency," and the faithful followers of Mohammed's teachings - Piss be Upon Him! - raping young Muslim women to traumatize them into becoming the willing human weapons of mass destruction, carnage, and murder, of their world-conquering Jihadist schemes,
Well, IsraelNN.com? Hardly the source of unbiased, accurate and objective information about Muslims is it? Research like yours? Thanks, but no thanks. When are the news about Muslims making human lampshades and shrunken heads of baby Jews gonna come out? What about they eating them for breakfast?
There's an acronym for labeling this kind of allegations: FUD
[citation needed] or bullshit
Yep, I'd say you're right. See reply above.
Yes, that's definitely an issue. Of course, I'm not in the business of making laws or whatever. I'm not even saying that my thoughts are better than any other. The real issue here (like someone posted in reply) is the environment in which most offenders live. That's what makes them probable candidates for prison. The point I was trying to make is that prisons don't solve the problem that makes people go to prison. Nowadays, prisons are just dumpsters. Expensive, dangerous dumpsters of people that somehow failed to observe the rules. Rules that might very well be unjust in the first place.
There's got be a better system. The ideal scenario would be to somehow make people observant of the rules. But today, we do that by making disrespecting the rules bear very negative consequences for those that do it. This is wrong. The Crime doesn't pay approach has failed. It pays. And pays well. We should be shifting to something like Lawful pays. But that's going to be hard to change for as long as people are living in poverty ghettos. So how does one change that?
Again I'm going to suggest something which I thought of, but it's really just a starting point for a broader discussion. If environment makes you, then change the environment. But what's the environment? I'd say that, grosso modo, the environment is the people. So change the people around, and you change the environment. For example, instead of making social housing neighborhoods, why not rescue derelict of abandoned buildings, rebuild them, and house people there? Disperse poverty amongst richer people. It'll make the poor people see what's really like to be "rich". What's it like to live a normal, working life. Also, most people will help poor people if they're there to help. I mean, no one can reasonably expect people to go into the poor neighborhoods offering jobs or food, except for NGO's. But if you would have someone needing help in your building or street, maybe you'd go and offer some help, or suggest a job you know of, or offer some food or medicine. Or even watch the kids while their parent(s) go to their job, or even just to have a chat and a cup of coffee. This is the help most people need to get on track.
By isolating poor people, we're taking away the community from them. The Christian ideal of poor charity is bogus. When people are fighting for their lives, they tend to care only about themselves. Only after they provided for themselves are they going to help their next. At least this is the scenario we should be working with. Anything better than this is not realistic. So put the poor people living with the rich people. Because rich people are the ones that can (and will, I believe) help. (by "rich" I mean "richer")
While it very well could require more staff, I think it's worth it.
Also, GP says that the people in the system do not have enough integrity, but they still don't have it now, so I don't really see that it would be much worse. I think the current penal model in the West has two issues that we really need to deal with: a) efficiency and b) retribution . And I think they're closely related.
I've given some thought to this and I think that first, we have to separate violent offenders from non-violent. Violent people are the hardest to deal with and in the most serious cases, I think there's really no choice but to lock them up, although it raises the question of how's it going to be when they're released. (At least in countries with no life sentences).
But non-violent (or less seriously violent) offenders, don't really need to spend their whole day just doing nothing, hanging around with other criminals, inevitably exposed to even worse influences than themselves. They can be doing something useful for both themselves and society.
I thought up something along these lines: All elegible (non-violent) offenders, would have to exercise a mandatory occupation, and be assigned a base salary (leveled with minimum wage where it exists) but they will not be able to touch the significant part of it until the end of the sentence. All expenses would be payed for by the offender (taken from base salary).
In fact, sentences might become a value that the offender would be condemned to generate through work, instead of a time length. Each offender could server his/her sentence at a preferred pace.
I know this is quite vague and some points are quite difficult like, how to assign an occupation to each offender? How to make them work? How to stop it from becoming slavery?
These are difficult questions but I think the pros really out-weight the cons: Offenders wouldn't be losing their time while in jail, they'd be doing something productive to themselves and society. Finishing their sentence, they'll have something to live on while trying to find a new job outside. Which would be easier since they haven't just spent 5 or 10 years doing nothing, but instead learned and gained expertise on some trade all those years. And, in case the sentence was wrong and the condemned person is actually innocent, he's in a much more favorable position because the time served was not a complete waste. The state would apply a suitable multiplier to the base salary, and that person could at least look at the time being locked as an intensive period of work with substantial dividends. Might not be much, but it's definitely better than the current situation.
This is just my two cents, but I think it's clear that our penal system is obsolete. It is the most obsolete system implemented in our societies. In it's essencial form, it dates back centuries ago. Someone commits a crime? Jail him.
This doesn't work anymore. A lot of people, especially those that grow up and live in poor neighborhoods and live amongst crime every day, no longer face prison as a punishment. They face it as something they'll just have to endure someday, for whatever reason. They adopt a "stoic" perspective and they just take it. Once they're out, it's business as usual. It's a price they're willing to pay for keeping up with their illegal activities. Furthermore, while inside they get to share experience and knowledge and status with fellow "stoics", possibly finding new partners and contacts in the crime world and building reputation. That is, they're are doing the exact oppose of what they should be doing in prison: rehabilitate. Instead they're sinking even more in crime. At the taxpayers expense.
We should be weary of slavery sure, but we shouldn't let that stop us from improving and changing the system. Just locking people up solves nothing. We need to change people. And people do change. There are plenty examples out there. Prisons should be transformed into schools as much as possible, special schools allright, but schools nonetheless. Places where learning happens.
I'm replying so make sure no one reads your bullshit and thinks it's true.
First and foremost, you are not a troll. You are an asshole. And you think you're spilling out uncomfortable facts in your post?
That's what we hear everyday from neo-con, far-right extremists in America and Europe. The only uncomfortable fact in all of it, the only fact actually, is that it's all bullshit and FUD. You extrapolate and entire heterogenous group that extends from Morocco to Indonesia based on absolutely nothing. Pedophilism, racism, genocides... I'm actually used to see that... in Western or by Western civilizations.
Of course, no society has ever survived 10% infiltration of mohamedans. (...) Sometimes so many genocides were comitted that any trace of a recognizable culture was gone (ie : most of central and eastern Africa, Pakistan when it became muslim, even large regions of Europe sustained centuries of constant muslim attacks and infiltration ... )
Well, Muslims dominated my country, the whole peninsula where it's located in fact, for ~700 years. That didn't stop both we and the Spanish from still talking a Latin language. It didn't stop the Iberian Peninsula from becoming a stronghold for the Catholic church and Inquisition, from burning people in crosses and other atrocities. It didn't stop us from enslaving large numbers of Africans throughout the Discoveries age and beyond. In fact, one could say (and indeed it is said) that the Muslim occupation of Iberia started a local golden age, from which you can still see the mosques (now churches) in Cordoba and Toledo, or the magnificent Alhambra palace. But you can still see the Romanic churches in Braga (former Bracara Augusta) or Coimbra that date from before the occupation. So, no cultural erasing happened, no genocide happened.
The Moorish culture is part of our culture. It's part of us in our language, our architecture, our way of life. So fuck you and your bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about. Crawl back into whatever fear-monger-and-xenophobe-harboring hole you crawled out of. You think the world is full of brainwashed morons like you? Think twice.
Also, you mention something about the Mufti meeting with Hitler... You want really uncomfortable facts? How about this: Hitler cutting deals with Zionists, offering free and safe passage to Palestine in exchange for commercial activities with Germany, among other things That's something you Muslim hate-spreaders never mention, perhaps don't even know, like the effective tools and sock-puppets you actually are.
Stop slandering people you know nothing about. Get a brain instead. And use it.
We need to wake up and realize that religious fundamentalism of every stripe is the root cause of most of the world's problems, and then effectively deal with it.
I disagree. This is a fallacious way of seeing the problem. The root cause of most of the world's problems is a mix of misunderstandings, inevitable cultural xenophobia, and intentional mischief. Religious fundamentalism feeds and thrives on this cocktail.
So, killing all the fundamentalists (I'm not saying that you're saying), isn't going to solve any problem at all. And neither will trying to discredit them. It only aggravates the problem. Makes more people join their ranks.
If you want to get rid of fundamentalism - be it religious or otherwise - you have to get rid of the causes for it. You have to make sure you clear misunderstandings; explain people that, while it's normal to distrust different cultures (and it is), it's to everybody's benefit to be at least somewhat open to learn about them; and expose and criticize mischief when we see it.
Nothing like this is being made. Western news and politicians seem to want to convey the message that fundamentalists appear out of thin air, and are different from everybody else. As if they're almost not humans. As if these politicians actions have nothing to do with the alleged surge of fundamentalism across the World.
In fact, I watch Al-Jazeera English, and read it on the web. And I got to say that, apart from perhaps the BBC, it makes western news organizations look like a joke. They touch issues that western outfits don't even dare to touch and, most importantly, issues that western outfits don't give a shit about: How people live in Gaza, Darfur, secret jails in China, Tibet, Somalia pirates, everything western news media sweeps under the carpet. They have quality shows like Witness (roughly the same format of BBC's Dispatches), Frost over the World (in which Sir David Frost interviews interesting guests), or Empire, that are very worth watching.
"Biased" my ass. When tools say "biased", they really mean - though without knowing it - free of most western lobbies influence, especially the Israeli lobby. That's that. And Israeli top officials are interviewed all the time there. So this isn't even about Israel. It's about the subservience and really poor quality and independence of western news outfits, with Americans leading, and Europeans following closely behind.