Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Like anybody who fits Author: JeffF [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 10:37:23 10/01/01 Mon In reply to: Mark7 's message, "Like the Mossad? or the CIA?" on 09:24:53 10/01/01 Mon Certainly a state(nation) can commit terrorist acts and the fact that Israel is in a defensive war against terrorists does not justify Sharon's actions in Lebanon or any other terrorist act committed against the civilian population. If they want to try Sharon for war crimes in Lebanon, that's ok as long as it's out in the open and all crimes committed by anybody in the Mideast war are charged. It is however at best amusing and at worst sickening that people would choose to blame Israel, our fellow victim of terrorism for the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon. "Give me a break Jeff. Just don't talk to me about morality from God." You're the one who keeps bringing it up, Mark. My post didn't mention morality. Since you brought it up, I will say that blaming the victim is IMO one of the most immoral actions in the world. As for US alliances, we are going to overlook the human rights abuses in Chechyna and in some of the Central Asian countries if these countries side with us, so I don't totally disagree with you. We've made it a habit at times to ignore one countries human rights abuses to fight another country. One more point Mark, Have you actually read Bin Laden's Fatwah? The Palestinians are mentioned, but that is not his main concern. He wants the US out of Saudi Arabia and the other gulf countries and if he is behind the attack, that's the primary reason. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Stop putting words in my mouth Jeff Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:19:50 10/01/01 Mon Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that the victims of the NY tragedy are to be blamed. I believe that whomever is behind this attach should be brought to justice. And that if a foreign government is behind it, the US should declare war on that foreign government. But I haven't seen anything that links Osama Bin Ladin to this attack, other than Cheiney's "belief in his heart". Osama Bin Ladin deserves his fate because he has been indicted for the bombing of the US embasy some years back. But we don't know for sure who is the mastermind for this attack and the Bush administration says that we don't need to know, and may never know. Also, the Bush administration is lying to the US people by saying they are wagging a "war on terrorism". Unlike Clinton, who lied about sex, Bush lies about murder, just like all conservatives. We are not waging war on terrorism, we are waging war on Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban only. And after we finish with him, we will still have to face the rage and anger of the Palestinians for us aiding Israel in their terrorist acts. And GW is not going to do anything to stop the murder of civilians in the occupied territories, the collective punishment, the Mossad assassinations, the torture in Israel, so the cycle of revenge will continue, because they have no alternative but to fight. And since Israel with the help of the US is militarily stronger, they will have to resort to terror. And we will answer with our terror, so there will be more terror. You call this a war on terrorism, I call it a price for stupidity. The war on drugs was not won with the killing of Pablo Escobar, nor will the war on terrorism be won with the killing of Osama Bin Laden. What will stop the cycle of terror will be for us, Americans to tell our government to shape up and pursue policies of justice and fairness in the middle east and elsewhere. What is morraly wrong with telling your government that you expect to cut aid to a country with no respect for human rights? You talk like a communist. The communists used to condemn anybody who dared to question the government and its actions. And Bush talks like a damn communist when he tells us there are enemies everywhere, yet we need not know who they are or who we are at war with. And nobody has yet exlained to me how is our government's aliance with Israel benefiting America and its people. America needs peace, not wars of conquest and ethnic cleansing. Israel needs to expand its territory and settle more Jews from Eastern Europe. They way it does this, is by terrorising the civilian population, buldozing confiscated property and building settlements in violation of the UN charter. We are aiding this process with weapons, money and w knowhow. We are angry that the Taliban allied itself with the Arabs, but we don't admit that our government is an ally of those who for the last year killed hundreds of Palestinians in cold blood, many under 18 years of age. How is it good for me to pay of an Appache missle shot by Israel into the West bank? How can the average American believe that we can continue to pay for the Israeli weapons that kill their children and not have to face the rage of their parents? How dare YOU Tell ME that I have no right to hold my government accountable for the blunders they continue to make? Shame on you. How is this good for the avarage American citizen?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Reading Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:16:26 10/02/01 Tue You know damn well that you're the number one expert at putting words in other people's mouth, but you could try and actually read the messages you respond to. I didn't say you blamed the people in New York. I said you blamed the people in Israel, our fellow victim of terrorism. What you should have learned from this attack is what Israel goes through on a smaller scale on a daily basis. The kind of fear you see in America is the kind of fear that the Israelis have always had to live with from the attack on the schoolchildren of Maalot in the late 70s straight through the disco bombing last year. And Israel is not the main issue any way. I ask again if you've actually read Bin Laden's Fatwah? It's clear that his first goal is getting the US out of Saudi Arabia and the gulf states. "Osama Bin Laden deserves his fate because he has been indicted for the bombing of the US embasy some years back" Now, you're wrong the other way. Nobody deserves their fate for being indicted. He should be tried and convicted if there is the evidence for both the embasssy bombing and the current situation. The only good point in your post is that we should be shown the evidence that Bin Laden is responsible. Foreign leaders who have seen it seem convinced(Blair, Putin) so there may well be evidence there, but on this point, you are correct. There is no reason not to show it to the American people. "Bush lies about murder, just like all conservatives." Can you ever post without over statement? All conservatives are not like Bush any more than all liberals are like Clinton. For the record, I was a supporter of McCain and don't have a particularly high opinion of Bush. For that matter, there are conservatives who lie only about sex. "We are not waging war on terrorism, we are waging war on Bin Ladin and the Taliban only" That's a half truth. We are certainly not waging war on every terrorist organization in the world. However,it is more than just Bin Laden. Yesterday, a Pakistani hijacker who killed two Americans in 1996 was arrested and brought to this country. We are basically waging war on any terrorist organization or country that has directly hurt America. "What is morally wrong with telling your government that you expect to cut aid to a country with no respect for human rights?" Well, that would certainly save us a lot of money. Do you realize that we would have to cut aid to most of the countries we send it to if we use that criteria? "How dare you tell me that I have no right to hold my government accountable for the blunders they continue to make?" Never said any such thing. Still putting words in my mouth. You can say anything you want and you can tell the government anything you want. Just don't think that you can do it without getting a response. I have the same right to hold the government accountable from a different viewpoint. BTW- we are not angry that the Taliban alligned itself with the Arabs. Most of the Arab governments wish the Taliban would go away. Remember the Arab leaders have their own fear of terrorism and Egypt, Syria and others have outlawed terrorist organizations in their midst(the Moslem brotherhood for example).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Yeah, quite logical Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 19:48:54 10/02/01 Tue Let me see if I understand your point of view. According to what you are saying, all we need to do is to kill Osama Bin Ladin and overthrow the Taliban, and the issue of terrorism will be dead. You are saying that we should continue to give 3 billion dollars to Isral, so they can continue to build settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, and continue to shoot American missles from American helicopters to stone throwing Palestinians, because that has nothing to do with terrorsim at all. And you are also saying that once Osama and the Taliban are gone, we would have won the war on Terorism just as we won the war on drugs when Pablo Escobar was killed. Plus, you are telling me that you are not putting Israel's interests before the interests of your own country. And to top it all off, you are telling me that Israel is a victim, although it rejected every UN resolution and it is in violation of all norms of international behavior. You are telling me Israel is a victim when it imposes collective punishment, when it tortures prisoners, when it buldozes Arab homes as retaliation, and when it let's murderers of Palestinian children free. You are telling me that the US government should continue unconditional support military, financial and moral, should continue to veto the UN, continue to shield Israel from international sanctions, regardless of how many human violations are in the occupied territories, and that will have nothing to do with terrorism. And that the Palestinian who's house has been buldozed and who's 12 year old son was killed by American paid and made weapons in Gaza should have anything to be upset with the US. And if he is/ he is a terrorist. You are telling me that you helping this noble cause of settlements in the occupied territories is good for America, and every virgin Christian 18 or 19 year old boy from Ohio and Kentucki should go die for in some God Damn forsaken war. Very very interesting. Well, we do have quite a difference of opinions. I have been told I am unAmerican, but it seems to me, I am the one who has the interests of America at heart. You should check where your's are.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: You still can't read Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:48:06 10/03/01 Wed "Let me see if I understand your point of view." Considering that the only thing you said that I'm telling you that I actually said is that Israel is a victim, and the only other accurate thing you said is that we have a difference of opinion. I would say you don't come close to understanding my point of view. I'll try to clarify, just in case you want to respond to something I acutally said. I'll number my points. 1. We made a mistake supporting the Taliban against the Russians when it was convenient. It's important that we don't rush into alliances with other dictators now that we will regret later in order to beat our immediate enemy. 2. A deliberate attack on civilians is never justifiable no matter the political aims. The people at the Trade Center and the people at the Pentagon(we here in the DC area lost people that day too)were just going about the day to day business of going to work. The people on the planes were just ordinary people flying. NOTHING can justify the attacks. 3. People who want to know why it happened should read Bin Laden's Fatwah. The reasons he hates America are there in his own words and primarily relate to our policy in the gulf. Unless you've actually taken the time to read what he said, you're just talking off the top of your head. 4. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East which makes her our natural ally. In case you haven't noticed, when King Hussein died, Jordan had a new king as successor. Assad's son took over in Syria. Israel is the only country in the area with elected leaders. 5. It's in Isreal's best interest to let the Palestinians have an independant state on the West Bank, but this will not cause peace unless the rest of the Arab world signs off on it and unless borders are guaranteed by the US and European countries. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just a part of the wider conflict which is between Israel and the Arab dictatorships. 6. As far as Bin Laden, I think it would be better to capture him and put him on trial than just to kill him. The world and Americans need to see the evidence and make sure we have the right guy. If he's killed, I won't lose any sleep over it, but a trial would be better. And I never said you were unAmerican. Still putting words in my mouth.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Israel is no democracy. It is a THEOCRACY. Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:59:21 10/03/01 Wed We agree in this one. We shouldn’t embrace Saudi Arabia and Pakistan just because it is convenient today. 2. A deliberate attack on civilians is never justifiable no matter the political aims. The people at the Trade Center and the people at the Pentagon(we here in the DC area lost people that day too)were just going about the day to day business of going to work. The people on the planes were just ordinary people flying. NOTHING can justify the attacks. No, a deliberate attack on civilians for political means is never justifiable. It is not justifiable in the case of the WTC, it wasn’t justifiable in the case of the Belgrade TV station and hospitals hit, it wasn’t justifiable iwhen the bridges over the Danube in Belgrade were hit. It isn’t justifiable when the Israeli Army shoots missiles from Apache helicopters into Nablus killing women and children. It is wrong when Palestinian homes are demolished randomly in retaliation. That is terrorism also, even if it's done by uniformed thugs with little hats on the tips of their heads instead of unshaved thugs dressed in dirty bedspreads. Yet the moral outrage for those crimes is lacking in America. And that’s why nobody can agree as to who is the terrorist and who is the freedom fighter. Because your simplistic definition in above post does not apply. The Pentagon is a military target, and the Belgrade TV station was full of civilians, yet our men in uniform are not terrorists, they are freedom fighting gentlemen officers. And THEIR freedom fighters are always the terrorists. I say terrorism is fought only when you and I are outraged at the terror unleashed by OUR freedom fighter. The other, is simply good old fashion war. 3. People who want to know why it happened should read Bin Laden's Fatwah. The reasons he hates America are there in his own words and primarily relate to our policy in the gulf. Unless you've actually taken the time to read what he said, you're just talking off the top of your head. I don’t speak Arabic, and frankly, I doubt I can find an accurate English translation. For some reason, I cannot believe our support of Israel has nothing to do with it. 4. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East which makes her our natural ally. In case you haven't noticed, when King Hussein died, Jordan had a new king as successor. Assad's son took over in Syria. Israel is the only country in the area with elected leaders. It may be a democracy for you, because you are Jewish. But if you are Arab, it is a democracy just as South Africa was during the apartheit era. The occupied territories are the Bantustans. Israel is no democracy. Israel is a THEOCRACY. Citizenship is given only to one religious and ethnic group, qualification for converting to Judaism is in the hands of Orthodox Rabbis, many of whom are just as mad and bloodthirsty as Osama Bin Ladin and Jerry Falwel. Iran has elections also and it doesn’t make it a democracy. Religious fundamentalism Islamic, Jewish or Christian excludes democracy. There is no such a thing as a democratic religious state. Plus, Israel has specific problems. There are 1.8 million Arabs who are hostages at gunpoint and have no right in the land where they were born. That is no democracy, and remember that I learned more than creationism in school. Tell that story to idiot uneducated Bible brainwashed rednecks. They will believe you. 5. It's in Isreal's best interest to let the Palestinians have an independant state on the West Bank, but this will not cause peace unless the rest of the Arab world signs off on it and unless borders are guaranteed by the US and European countries. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just a part of the wider conflict which is between Israel and the Arab dictatorships. I do not believe Israel wants peace. If it did it would have withdrawn the settlements. Israel wants land, and maybe that is why they elected Sharon, the terrorist of Palestinian women and children in Lebanon as prime minister. And I believe you know Israel wants expansion. Sharon is just the Jewish version of Milosevich. But you will never see him tried at the Haga, just as you never saw Ben Gurion for setting British soldiers on fire alive. 6. As far as Bin Laden, I think it would be better to capture him and put him on trial than just to kill him. The world and Americans need to see the evidence and make sure we have the right guy. If he's killed, I won't lose any sleep over it, but a trial would be better. I agree. Bin Laden dead is a martyr. It will do nothing to deter terrorism, and a lot to incite it. I would much prefer Bin Laden in front of a jurry. And I never said you were unAmerican. Still putting words in my mouth. True, you never did. Your buddy, Ethan said something about being sick of people with my oppinion, bla bla bla. Since I cannot reply to his post, I picked on you, knowing you two share so many things in common. You can tell him, I am sick of people like him, who believe America should be the big immoral bully, and who put the interests of Israel above the interests of his own country. The aliance with Israel has brought the US little benefit and lots of problems and grief. Terrorism is a direct consequence of our immoral behavior towards the Palestinians, like it or not. Military response will not frighten men ready to die for what they believe in. It never did throughout history. It never will. America needs to change it’s policy towards Israel and Palestine if it wants peace and prosperity. If America wants war, terror, murder and revenge… well, you have Ethan’s posts on DP, GW Bush’s speaches about cruciades, Bin Laden’s Jihad, Israel’s settlements, and suicide bombers. I hope the reason of the American people will prevail over the greed and moral culpability of our politicians, and America will change it’s foreign policy. But frankly, I am skeptical. From what I see, we need more hurt before we learn to reason as a nation. I blame teaching positive thinking to the exclusion of critical thinking.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Some agreement, some disagreement Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 06:59:53 10/04/01 Thu "It is wrong when Palestinian homes are demolished randomly in retaliation." This may surprise you, but I agree with that. In fact, I'd take it a step further. It's also wrong when the house of the widow and family of the terrorist is destroyed in retaliation. Leaving people homeless doesn't help anything and only feeds revenge desires. But the bigger problem is that it condemns people without a trial. "And that's why nobody can agree on who is the terrorist and who is the freedom fighter. Because your simplistic definition in above post does not apply. The Pentagon is a military target and the Belgrade station was full of civilians, yet our men in uniform are not terrorists, they are freedom fighting gentelmen officers." Says who? I repeat - any DELIBERATE attack on civilians for political aims is a terrorist attack regardless of who commits it. If we knew there were civilians in the television station,than that was a terrorist act regardless of whether it was committed by soldiers. What's next? Are you going to tell me the Mai Lai massacre wasn't an act of terrorism because it was committed by our soldiers? Rubbish. "For some reason, I cannot believe our support of Israel has nothing to do with it." Certainly, neither you nor I come in without having some preconceived notions. I'll admit that Schremmer's link has somewhat changed my mind(don't know if you've looked at it but he did put a link to an earlier interview with Bin Laden on IS- since I know you still read there sometimes, I think you may have seen it). Bin Laden does mention Israel there among a number of other things. I'm still reading some of it. It's quite long. "It may be a democracy for you because you are Jewish. But if you are Arab, it is a democracy just as South Africa was during the Apartheid area." Give me a break, Mark. This may be true of the so-called occupied territories, but this is not true of Israel proper. There are many Arab citizens of Isreal. There are Arab members of the Knesset and Arabs vote in all Israeli elections. "Citizenship is given only to one religious and ethnic group." False. There are Christian citizens and Moslem citizens and others. "I do not believe Isreal wants peace." I could debate that, but that's not what I was saying anyway. I was saying that it's in her best interest. A permanent state of war is never in a country's best interest. Peace is in the best interest of the security of the citizens of Israel as long as it is a just and lasting peace. Remember that almost nobody has been killed in actions between Isreal and Egypt since the peace treaty of 1978, proving that even a cold peace is in a country's best interest. Living in a state of suspicion is preferable to actuallly killing each other. "Sharon is the Jewish version of Milosevich. But you will never see him tried at the Haga." I would have no objection to a war crimes trial as long as any party in the Middle East who was accused of war crimes was tried, as in the Balkans. If it was just a one sided vendetta against Israel, I would fight it at all costs. Also, the tribunal could not include any members from Arab countries or Israel. It would have to have at least the appearance of neutrality. "Your buddy Ethan said something about being sick of people with my opinion, bla bla bla." I like Ethan, but we have different starting points in life. He was in the military in Vietnam while I didn't see the point of that war(and still don't). Like a lot of people who were in Vietnam, he tends to be skeptical of the peace crowd and protestors. For me, it's more complicated. The current situatation is very different from Vietnam. Whether we are fighting a war with a point depends on what we plan to accomplish. If we plan to simply kill Bin Laden, that is not enough. If we plan to ally with other thugs like the President of Pakistan,we will likely regret it later. That doesn't mean we should do nothing. Freezing the assets of terrorists has been a good move. If we want to start shutting terrorism down, we have to get at the money that finances it. I hate to agree with Iran, but this time the leaders there may be right that it would be better to let Bin Laden be arrested by the UN and tried before an international tribunal, rather than just blown away by the US and made a martyr with his followers screaming for more blood. Get every terrorist in Afghanastan and his followers elsewhere might still act. So, I am conflicted. Basically, I don't want us to do nothing, but I don't want us to rush blindly into anything that will make the situation worse either.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: The Pentagon is a military target. Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:25:26 10/04/01 Thu The Pentagon is a military target. I was very surprised that it was hit. Anybody with some military training would know that command and control targets are the first to be hit. When Mathias Russ in 1991 I believe landed a Cessena plane in the Red Square in Moscaw, we laughed our as$ of at the stupid Russians. The Russians replied that they flanked the little plane with MIGs and just didn't want to shoot it down. Well, the Pentagon in my mind should have learned something from it. But back to terrorism, if the Pentagon is not a military target, how come the Belgrade TV station was? See, our definitions of terror and terrorism are muddy and inadequate. To us Americans, our brave men and women in uniform flying multy million $ F16s, B1s and so forth cannot be terrorists. But if you were a sound technician working for the Belgrade TV station, things would look very different. They would be terrorists, and the Sound technician could hardly be called a "military target". I do think we need an international agreement about terrorism, much like the Geneva convention regarding modern war, conditions for prisoners of war and so forth. Because frankly I cannot distinguish the thug in uniform from the one without uniform. And I certainly cannot make the difference between Jihad and Cruciade. Both are holy wars made by mad men. But I have a tip for all my fellow Americans who never learned much about the dark age history of the middle east and Islam. The Muslim did win the last Cruciades. It took them 500 years to do it, but they did end up winners. I believe the last cruciade was in 1444 at Varna, a portcity in today's Bulgaria. Mohamed the 2nd took the throne when his father (I forgot his name, maybe Murad?) died in battle. Also dead in battle was the king of Hungary and most of the elite of Christian Europe. The Turks had a fiest after the war, executing over 30,000 prisoners of war by decapitation. It took them about 3 days to do it. In 1453, the same angry Mohamed the 2nd took Constantinopole, today's Istambul, and made St. Sophia cathedral in Constantinopole into a mosque. Legend has it that he put an oath at Varna to take the city which was considered just as holy for Christianity as Rome. Istambul is to this day a Turkish city, and Sophia a mosque. Something to consider for would be cruciaders.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: International agreement Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 13:08:49 10/04/01 Thu I have no objection in principle to your idea of an international convention on terrorism, but how would different nations agree on a definition? You say our definition of terrorists and terrorism are muddy and inadequate. Maybe, but what do you propose that an international convention use as the basis of an agreement?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: It's called Human Rights Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 21:34:16 10/05/01 Fri If we support only these governments and organizations with genuine beliefe in respect for human rights, we will win against terrorism. We cannot win against terrorism by blaming the French for their reluctance to jump on our military expeditions and aiding the dictatorship in Pakistan because it is convenient at the moment. All we are doing is helping one thug instead of another. Yes, it has it's practical inconveniences, but if Sharon would have been at the Hague in the same cell with Milosevich, Arafat and maybe some triger happy of our own proud men in uniform, there will be less thugs to follow around the world. Plus, I am really concerned that Congress may pass some antidemocratic laws in the name of "security", laws that will open the gates for official government terror, like in WW2 with the Japanese, or in the McCarthy era with the red scare. There is no terror greater than government terror, and no terrorist so potent as the terrorist in uniform. To give you a recent example, by numbers, Osama is nothing compared with Radovan Karadich of Bosnia. Even little thugs like George Armstrong Custer would rank up there close with Osama, if you take into consideration the number of civilian victims killed.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Hey Mark Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 15:14:39 10/04/01 Thu I hope you don't mind, but I posted your idea about the international agreement on terrorism on IS in answer to Pietro in Ari's algebra thread. This is different than attacking you when you can't defend yourself, since I thought this was an idea worth exploring or at least talking about and I'd like to hear what Pietro(and possibly others) has to say about it.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: One more point Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:50:58 10/03/01 Wed Even if Israel was at peace with the Palestinians and with all the neighboring countries, that still wouldn't mean there was peace in the Middle East. In case you haven't noticed, the Arab states also have a tendency to fight each other: The gulf war, Syria's occupation of Lebanon, the Iran-Iraq war etc.