Yes but Israeli soldiers entering refugee camps hunting for terrorists usually don't hit their marks. ;) Anyway my point was that no side is innocent and both of them need to cool off and back down some.

Good points in your second paragraph MagiK. [img]smile.gif[/img] Didn't think of that but that could explain the difference.

Israel strikes back, nobly killing two militants in a West Bank hospital.
____________________________________
NYTIMES:

August 22, 2003
Israel Kills Two Palestinian Militants in West Bank Hospital
By REUTERS


Filed at 1:53 p.m. ET

NABLUS, West Bank (Reuters) - Israeli troops shot and killed two Palestinian militants inside a West Bank hospital on Friday, extending a new spiral of violence that has smashed a cease-fire vital to a U.S.-backed ``road map'' peace plan.

The killings came as tens of thousands of angry Palestinians calling for revenge marched in the funeral of Ismail Abu Shanab, a U.S.-educated Hamas leader who was assassinated by an Israeli helicopter missile strike in Gaza city on Thursday.

Islamist militant groups called off a seven-week-old cease-fire after Israel killed Abu Shanab in an attack that followed a Hamas suicide bombing -- a relapse into tit-for-tat bloodshed that doomed previous peacemaking.

``We love martyrdom and we seek martyrdom,'' Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, another senior Hamas political leader who survived an Israeli assassination attempt in June, told the crowd as it chanted, ``Revenge, revenge!''

Israel threatened more attacks on Palestinian militants. ``This is only the beginning,'' a senior Israeli security source said. ``We plan serious retaliation on the terrorist infrastructure,'' he added.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush's main focus was on restoring Israeli-Palestinian dialogue broken off after the Abu Shanab killing.

Asked if Washington was going to urge restraint, he said: ``We have always said that Israel has the right to defend itself but we have also always pointed out that the parties, including Israel, need to keep in mind the consequences of the actions they take...the effect of those actions on the peace process.''

``All parties have a responsibility to do everything they can to end terrorism. I can't emphasize that point enough. If we are going to move forward in the peace process, terror must end and people must act to dismantle terrorist organizations,'' he told journalists traveling with Bush en route to Washington state.

Bush also announced a freeze on the assets of six Hamas leaders and five groups accused of supporting the group and ordered the Treasury Department to act.

MILITANTS CORNERED, KILLED

In the West Bank city of Nablus, witnesses said three Palestinian militants being sought by Israel were sheltering in a small rooftop room of Rafidya hospital when Israeli forces stormed up and surrounded the building.

They said a shoot-out ensued with soldiers firing into the room, killing two militants and wounding the third. All three were members of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed faction within the mainstream Fatah national movement of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat.

Israeli security sources said the troops targeted militants who had been hiding in the hospital for some time and were wanted for involvement in a suicide bombing in Israel on August 12 and some ambush shootings in the West Bank.

The Brigades claimed responsibility for the bombing, which killed one Israeli, and said it was retribution for army raids for wanted militants that continued sporadically after armed factions declared a unilateral three-month cease-fire on June 29.

Israel renewed search-and-arrest operations in Nablus and other occupied West Bank cities shortly after a Hamas suicide bomber killed 20 people on a Jerusalem bus on Tuesday, an attack that Hamas said avenged recent army killings of Palestinians.

On Thursday, the army reimposed a curfew on the city, one of the largest in the West Bank and a major stronghold of militants who have spearheaded a 34-month-old uprising for statehood.

Osama el-Baz, a special troubleshooting envoy of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, visited Arafat at his West Bank headquarters to deliver what the emissary said was a message warning of impending catastrophe.

``All sides have to take steps to avoid escalation and to implement the road map,'' Baz, who met Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom later, told reporters in Ramallah.

Baz was quoted later on Israel Radio as saying Palestinian Authority leaders requested more time from Israel to pressure Hamas and militant ally Islamic Jihad to stop attacks. He declined to elaborate on proposals discussed.

It's like a soap, it never ends.

I think that sums up the Palestinian viewpoint quite well.

Oh I don't know. The judge would normally take into account factors like provocation etc. If someone steals your property and you attack him in order to reclaim it, you are unlikely to get as rough a ride in court as your 'victim'.

"In 1973, the Mossad believed it had tracked its man to a tranquil Norwegian town called Lillehammer. One evening, the Mossad watched him board a bus with a pregnant Norwegian woman. As they got off at this bus stop, two Israeli agents jumped out of a car and fired 14 bullets. The Red Prince was dead. Munich had been avenged. But there would be no getaway this time. Norwegian police noted the license plate of the hit team's car, traced it to this safe house in Oslo and arrested six Israeli agents. And not only were members of the hit team behind bars, they had killed the wrong man.

The Israelis had killed a Moroccan waiter, Ahmed Bouchiki. He and his wife were expecting their first child in two months."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/...le318655.shtml

Yep - you have to admire acts of terrorism, huh?.

Point taken skunk, but shit happens, we're only humans after all, even the Mossad agents. But no matter how many Israeli screw ups you're trying to mention here in the future, it won't lower my respect for them. I'm just curious, why are you trying so hard to make it look as if the Israeli's are some ruthless horde of aggressors ? Did you take the time to look into the whole story behind all this, or is it that you just don't have any sympathy for them ?

I have a lot of sympathy for Israeli's - I believe strongly that they have a right to the state of Israel as created in 1948 - I just think that they don't have a right to anyone else's country.

They were given a vast expanse of land to establish a nation. Let them keep it, let them defend it. But don't let them expand it by force - others have a right to their own land too.

I don't blame Israel for the 1948 war - and I don't blame the Arabs either. The UN was and remains totally at fault for this mess - they never considered how the Arabs would react to having vast swathes of their land confiscated without recompense.

Israel has an arrogant attitude towards its neighbours because, as a result of its backing from the US, it is more powerful than them. I can also understand a 'siege mentality' from being surrounded by nations which still views the land upon which Israel stands to be their own. That's hard to live with.
But Israel doesn't help because it always ignores the interests of not only its neighbours but just about every other country (with the exception of the US).

What happened with the 1967 water project was a classic example of this - we'll just take the water and to hell with even asking to discuss a fair arrangement to share. Or indeed the example of the assassinations in Europe - to hell with submitting the evidence to the European governments and getting these guys extradited - we'll just send someone in to murder them.

Long term peace starts at the negociation table - the Arab league made a serious offer to Israel four years ago:
"Quit the occupied territories and we will recognise the state of Israel"

That was a major concession on their part - and had Israel accepted, it would have marked the normalisation of relations with its neighbours - but it refused. Why did they refuse?? It would have cost the state of Israel *nothing* to accept the offer and Israel would have had everything to gain from it.

Look at the 'roadmap for peace' - several nations spent the better part of four years of haggling and discussions to come up with the plan. It was judged by all (the US included) to be a fair and just settlement to both sides. The Palestinians accepted the document (with gritted teeth) - Israel tabled over 100 amendments...

So to sum up, I believe that Israel has a right to defend its borders - but I do not believe it has a right to extend them. I also believe that its habit of acting unilaterally in regional issues to be arrogant and its inability to accept compromise to be unreasonable. Finally, if Israel wants to treat 'terrorists' in a brutal fashion - that's understandable. But Israel treats all Palestinians as terrorists and therefore subjects all of them to brutal treatment - and that I find unacceptable.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
A single incident more than 30 years ago...wow you just piled on the evidence there guy...Im so overwhelmed ;) We can count more than 30 bombings by hamas this year alone.....try again.

Ummm you aren't palistinian by any chance are you? Im just curious. You really work very hard for their cause (on this forum at any rate) and I am interested in your motivations and Ideals. Obviously you and I are looking at history with highly different takes on it. I know I am not Jewish, nor Arab. I have no ties to either side one way or the other. So I just calls it like I sees it. Why are you so anti-Israeli? and Pro-Palistinian? If you don't mind my asking....I am seriously not trying to denigrate yourposition...just trying to figure out why we can look at the same situation ahve such vastly different assessments.
</font>

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Oops just read your last post (the one previous to mine....now Ill have to rethink what I asked you, since you clarified a lot in that post. I'll get back to ya [img]smile.gif[/img] Have a great weekend all Im outta here!
</font>

if anything, it would appear that Skunk is pro-humanity and anti-short-sighted-aggression.

Hm, noble thoughts, however this is planet Earth, better get used to it.

Heh heh. Oh I'm used to it man ;) To a degree that I know that staying true to your ideals outweighs practical concerns of life and limb.

Well I think you're getting there johnny. It's the word 'always' that bothers me. Are you aware that jews have been known to own slaves in the past? I would think it was those jews who were doing the stepping upon.

Im still puttin my peace hopes on a small asteroid.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Oh thanks for the wise insight [img]smile.gif[/img] Never would have thought of trying that....good thing people like me (short sighted agressive types) don't rule the world [img]smile.gif[/img] Oops...wait...not only do we...we have for all of recorded history [img]smile.gif[/img] ahhh well....maybe some day homosuperior will evolve.

If your assertion that staying true to the "Higher" ideals out weigh thoe ideas of life and limb were true...you would not survive puberty. Ideals are fine, but do not engender survival in the reality of cold cruel nature AND humanity.

It is nice to want to bring peace...we have spent a considerable amount of time and resources throughout histry trying to bring peace. The only problem is...no two people/states/nations/civilizations seem to agree on any of the particulars [img]smile.gif[/img]
</font>

[ 08-24-2003, 08:57 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

who said anything about peace Magik?

Absolutely correct and history shows this to be true. If Chamberlain had been allowed to continue his diplomacy there would not have been a war in Europe or maybe WW II at all. Diplomacy will always work because humans are basically good and never want to be aggresive.

[ 08-24-2003, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: antryg ]

Well, I'm surprised that it took 95 posts for a WW2 analogy to be thrown out into the open, good restraint there Antryg ;)
People, do as you feel you have to. But if you are going to advocate/suggest/muse over the eradication of an entire people (ie: 'Let Israel wipe the Palestinians off the face of the Earth with American-subsidised weapons and equipment'), at least do them the courtesy of going to their land and experiencing their ways firsthand. Get to know them a little, learn some of their language, partake in a few of their customs. If you still want them wiped out after that, then so be it, either 'they' or you must be incredibly evil for you to desire such a thing afterward. Having ill opinions of people based on what you've heard through the grapevine is one thing, to support genocide based upon these sorts of prejudiced assumptions is another thing entirely.
Don't be just another citizen, sitting at home, relying on censored news bulletins for your worldly info. Be a human, see the world and it's people for yourself. Citizenship is a social poison, a network of psychological chains, binding you to prejudiced loyalty and hatred toward people you have never met. Don't be a citizen, be a human.

I wouldn't mind doing that, if it weren't for the fact that i'd probably be lynched the minute i pop my western face around the corner.

Or so you assume from watching the daily news. Life is dangerous mate, that's what makes it interesting ;)

-edit- a good way to start would be to get in touch with your local muslim communities (there are plenty throughout Holland). Right now in my hometown it is 'Islam awareness week' (a cheesy name I know [img]smile.gif[/img] ), and numerous seminars by Muslim clerics are running at the local university, along with open days in local mosques and prayer centres, public exhibitions in the city, and fliers being handed out left right and centre. It's been great really.

Anyway, you might want to start your trip in Turkey, a slightly more 'Westernised' Muslim country. My sister has just returned to London after a one-month vacation there. She thought it was lovely, some of the men in the cities were a bit sleasy, but the people in the countryside were wonderful, hospitable, courteous and friendly. From there you might also want to move on to the less 'volatile' middle-eastern nations such as Jordan. One of my former workmates was from Jordan, he's a great guy, and a New Zealand permanent resident. His family went home to Jordan in March to quickly visit their relatives before the Americans invaded Iraq. Although, much like you, he was hesistant to go home to visit due to the recurrent hostilities in the region.

Now, after going through these countries you may pick up enough 'cultural lore' to get by in Palestine itself. Of course, Palestine isn't Jordan, and has it's own regional identities, culture and customs blah blah blah. But hopefully you'll know precious little enough by the time you get there to not stand out like a sore thumb [img]smile.gif[/img]
This is a trip I plan to take after I graduate university. And if I am not killed during my travels I'll be sure to come back and tell you all about it [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 08-25-2003, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

There's a HUGE difference between 'advocate' and 'what if'. ;)

Indeed there is. That's why I said advocate/suggest/muse over. 3 diminishing degrees of consideration you see ;)

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">

Well we WERE talkign about peace/war and Israel and Palestine...but I confess I may have missed a derailment somewhere along the line.
</font>

Well, I'm surprised that it took 95 posts for a WW2 analogy to be thrown out into the open, good restraint there Antryg ;)
People, do as you feel you have to. But if you are going to advocate/suggest/muse over the eradication of an entire people (ie: 'Let Israel wipe the Palestinians off the face of the Earth with American-subsidised weapons and equipment'), at least do them the courtesy of going to their land and experiencing their ways firsthand. Get to know them a little, learn some of their language, partake in a few of their customs. If you still want them wiped out after that, then so be it, either 'they' or you must be incredibly evil for you to desire such a thing afterward. Having ill opinions of people based on what you've heard through the grapevine is one thing, to support genocide based upon these sorts of prejudiced assumptions is another thing entirely.
Don't be just another citizen, sitting at home, relying on censored news bulletins for your worldly info. Be a human, see the world and it's people for yourself. Citizenship is a social poison, a network of psychological chains, binding you to prejudiced loyalty and hatred toward people you have never met. Don't be a citizen, be a human. </font>[/QUOTE]<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
I have on occasion to have been there...my thoughts....I prefer the use of toilet paper to the local tradition. I prefer deoderant to none. I prefer fixed prices to haggeling, I prefer less deadly religious oppression, and I prefer that thieves not have their hands cut off, I also prefer that women not be treated as property, I prefer to drink alcohol if I wish, I prefer not to have relations with my camel and I prefer western civilization to that of the middle east.

Now if you note..I did say that these were just preferences...many people no doubt have different preferances.

to emphasize one of my all time favorite examples of something I don't like from the arab nations. (this is a quote and not my personal observation) "While on a support mission I noticed that the women would remain a few paces behind their men. The man boldly leading the way through the streets. On a followup mission I noticed that now the women lead the way and not the men. I asked one of our local interpreters what the deal was. His answer was one word."

Landmines!. </font>

[ 08-25-2003, 10:59 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Ugh! man this seriously sounds like failed hippy speak from a 1960's socialist rally. I mean, if this is your actual belief and all...good luck. but just the sound of saying those words gives me the willies [img]smile.gif[/img] Do you really believe that all us citizens are being programed to hate? wow....I wish my government was that efficient...mine can't even keep the trains on time.
</font>

When you show this much respect to local tradition, it should come as no surprise to you when your thoughts are reciprocated..

Personally, I prefer folk who wash frequently to those who are determined to go without washing for days in the mistaken belief that, with deodorant, no-one will notice.

Fair enough - but haggling goes on where-ever you are. I would be surprised to find one western home-owner who didn't haggle the price - or someone who didn't haggle with a car dealer...

There is almost no religious oppression in the middle-east - there may be cultural oppression - but religious oppression is no more common there than it is in the west.

But crime (especially violent and sexual) is *much* lower than in most western countries - which has prompted at least one nation to instigate equally harsh measures, like the "3 strikes and your out":

"If an individual is charged with growing a single marijuana plant, and he has on his record two qualifying prior convictions, he's dog meat," said Jerome P. Mullins, a San Jose, Calif., criminal defense lawyer who has had several clients prosecuted under the state three-strikes law.

"He's looking at 25-to-life for growing a plant."
http://www.amend3strikes.org/_news/040102.htm


So does the middle east - that's why pornography, strip joints etc. etc. are outlawed there and why women in islamic countries have *never* been considered as property - unlike in the west.

Of course - but it is a drug that leads to violent disorder and thousands of deaths every year (not least as a result of drink drive accidents).

??????

Fair enough and although you are reading this page in greek letters, I bet that you are still using arabic numbers...

This emphasises something that I don't like about western nations - ignorance.

In poor societies, the only way to make money is through heavy manual labour. If the man dies, the family will literally starve to death - if the woman dies, the family will continue to survive. Harsh realities exist in harsh societies.

As for women walking behind men, this was a cultural tradition (not religious) - the idea behind it was for the man to keep ahead and provide protection to the women from those who would harass, to act as a shield in busy crowds so that the woman would not be 'accidently' touched by male members of the crowd, etc.

Finally, there have been more female heads of state in muslims countries than there have been in western ones - some western countries have never even had a female president/prime minister! Talk about inequality, eh?

You never seem to stop amazing me. Now if you'll excuse me, i'll go laugh my ass off for a while.

Ooooh, good thinking, the knight in his shining armour clears the way for his lovely lady so she may pass unharmed. But answer me this: why is the knight 20 feet in front of her ? would that be protection enough ? Did it cross his mind that black knights like me, might sneak up on his lady from behind to stare at her bottom ?

Nice story Skunk, unfortunately it doesn't hold any water. It's not about being protective, it's about being the head of the family. Why is a muslim female never sitting next to her husband in the car ? He can protect her better when she is in the back ?

BWAHAHAHAHA

[ 08-25-2003, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: johnny ]

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Umm Skunk....Johnny basicly summed up what I had to say....just a couple of things....

The Toilet paper issue is a valid concern, not just from a sanitary and health perspective, my preference has nothing to do with how I would and did treat individuals I interacted with. I seriously doubt the fact that I had my own toilet paper in my duffle bag offended anyone...unless they had X-ray vision.

Deoderant: I do not care how often you wash, if it is hot and humid out, then you will stink. Deoderant is a modern civilization social enhancer. Also, the use of deoderant does not prevent frequent washing. Personally I get a lot of flack for two showers a day and many hand and face washings in between.

Crime: Your ocmments are unsupported by the facts and by statistics. Although I would mention that some things that normal westerners would define as a crime (stoning your daughter because she engaged in pre-marital relations comes to mind) or beating your wife with a cane....are perfectly ok in many Arabic societies.

Religious Oppression: To emphasize what Johnny said,, BWAAAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHA.....perhaps you might want to rethink that comment.

So anyhooo just my follow up comments on MY preferences and your response.

</font>

Does anyone else see a bunch of cultural, racial, and religous stereotyping cropping up in this thread? I do. Booo!!!!!!!!

Chewie, while a generalization is not applicable to any single individual, they can be useful when discussing the behaviors of groups as a whole. So, pereception/stereotype, generalizations, and statistical proof or disproof of each can and should be taken into account when discussing social phenonmena.

"As good sociologists, we make generalizations about groups, not individuals." -- Berger.

So, while they may very well sound like stereotypes, social facts such as "Japan has the highest suicide rate" or "African Americans drink more Kool-Aid per capita than other ethnic groups" are quite relevant in a social study context. I try to limit my uses to those that are fair social patterns, and I would of course suggest everyone else do the same.

But some stereotypes also happen to be true. ;) Of the group of course -- not a particular individual. ;)

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Since most of what I wrote was from personal observation I have no problem with printing my perception. Call it stereotyping if you want...however, just because it is a stereotype does not mean that it is not true for the majority.....on second thought...yeah what Timber said.
</font>

My apologies, I thought you were making a reference to the culture in general rather than being specific about toilet practices.

That said, as you are probably aware, middle-easterners only ever use their left hand for 'dirty tasks' - so you can be sure when the food is passed to you (they only ever use the right hand for that) or when they shake hands that you are not coming into contact with anything unpleasant.

Unfortunately, in the west, no such practice exists in the west and when you shake hands with someone or are handed food, chances are that they are giving you a nice biological surprise (according to studies most of the germs are not killed by the hand-washing practice that most people call 'washing' after using the toilet facilities).
*That* is not very hygenic either...Shake hands anyone? Yuck!

No, my comments are more than fully supported by the facts and by the statistics.

Let's compare Syria to the United States, shall we?

In the United States, you are 5.8 times more likely to be murdered; women are so well respected that they are 110 times more likely to be raped there; you are 53999 times more likely to be the victim of theft; your car is 153 times more likely to be stolen; you are 46 times more likely to be burgled... Shall I go on or would you like to peruse the Interpol data yourself?

http://www.interpol.int/Public/Stati...00/usa2000.pdf
http://www.interpol.int/Public/Stati.../Syria1999.pdf

Oh PLEASE! That's no more legal in the middle east as hanging the nearest blackman on a tree while dancing around a burning cross - it happens but the state *will* punish anyone engaging in such illegal activity.

Then you'll be happy to know that 'deodorant' and perfume were arabic creations and its not such a western practice afterall. You are right in saying that the use of deodorant does not prevent frequent washing - but it often provides an excuse to avoid frequent washing! Very few people actually need deodorant - most folk in even the most extreme climates could get away with washing twice a day. Afterall the unpleasant smell is caused by the action of bacteria causing the sweat to start rotting - and it takes time for the sweat to become stale in this manner.

OK johnny, an experiment for you. Go out into the street and find yourself a muslim neighbourhood (I don't know what city you live in, but if you're within the Ranstad it should prove no problem).
1. Count the number of women walking behind their husbands
2. Go to the mosque as people are coming/going - count the number of women sitting in the back seat while hubby sits in the front - actually why not count the number of women driving while hubby is a passenger.

When you have completed this experiment, you might come to the shocking conclusion that I was right - those practices were not religious in nature but cultural. Afterall, if Islam bans women from walking beside her husband, you'll never witness it within the muslim community on the streets of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Den Haag, Utrecht...


[i]Anyway, apart from the fact that this is off-topic, I won't engage in this thread anymore because it is now turning into a 'my culture is better than your culture' debate when in reality, each culture has something to learn from the other. The question that folk have to ask themselves is:

<font color="#C4C7D7">"Are you big enough to look, listen and learn - or only small enough to believe in a fallacious ideal of cultural supremacy?"</font>

heh heh. I guess we're just diametrically opposed then Magik. However, since I was raised with 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all', I'll just hold my peace in relation to your beliefs and attitudes... ;)

Erm...Skunk, i don't have time for such experiments, i have a job to do as well. [img]tongue.gif[/img] :D

I live in Utrecht, and there are indeed a lot of muslims here, of all kinds of origin. Some of them have indeed "modernised" themselves, and don't walk like i said before, some women don't even have their hair covered anymore, but the majority of them still act as i described in public. I don't have to experiment for that, i can see it all around me when i go outside.

Skunk, you still not have told us of your travels in the MidEast. What countries have you visited and for what length of time? How often do you interact with the muslim community where you live? What training/classes in the faith have you taken?
I make no claims to being an expert, yet I know enough not to compare rape statistics between the US and Syria. In Syria, a woman admitting to rape is confessing to adultery (if married) or immoral behavior (if still living under her father's roof). In either case the woman is subject to penalties up to death for participating in unsanctioned sex. Rape cases are only reported if the husband or father wants legal remedy against the known rapist. If you really insist, I could dig out my old cultural anthropology texts dealing with MidEastern cultural norms. Then again you could also talk with my wife's family who reaffirmed this information. I will admit that my information comes from a small data base in this instance. They only lived there for the first 34 years of their life and have been living in the US for the past 30 years. I have much more exposure and study concerning the situation than this but sincerely do want to know your personal experience of the MidEast and the muslim faith.

Good show, Skunk, on reasoning and argument. But, I think your statistics are of no use.

You cited Interpol data using total numbers of each crime. Now, unless you did some division to account for population differences, your "XX times as likely..." is incorrect, being founded on totals data and not per capita data.

[quote]Originally posted by The Hierophant:

Quote:

Originally posted by MagiK: [qb] heh heh. I guess we're just diametrically opposed then Magik. However, since I was raised with 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all', I'll just hold my peace in relation to your beliefs and attitudes... ;)

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
I suppose you are quite right on all counts here. However...if we didn't openly and honestly discuss our differences/thoughts/beliefs...then there would truely never be any hope for any meeting of minds or coming to learn another view.....
</font>

[ 08-26-2003, 09:58 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

<font color=orange>I'd like to way in on the culture thing. It's been my experience have visited Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War in 1991 and interacting with the local population, that much, if not all of what Magik said is true. However I could get around much of the cultural differences except for one thing. Treatment of women. When I went to Riyhad on R and R, I was down in the Huge Market place they have there and I noticed one several block section that had a sea of women and children in it. I happen to ask a local merchant that spoke english what was happening? Was it a womens' conference or something? He laughted and said "No the are... How you call it... cast off... Divorced." He went on to explain that they had been cast out of their homes along with their children and that they lived on the street begging for food and money. I have a friend here at work, that graduated with a degree in Middleastern Studies from the University of Tennessee. I might add he has traveled there many times on Vacations. He told me that in order for a man to divorce his wife, all he has to do is step into the street and declare "I divorce you" three times and it's done.

Another time, we had two Suadi's approach one of our officers in my Section, and his driver (who happened to be a blonde female). They wished to buy her and offered the equavilant of $15,000 US. This shook Missy (her name) up after the Captian told her what they wanted. Later on they joked about it. She's was a rather fit girl and she figured the Captain should have taken their money and then she would kick their asses for them and then the Captain and her split the money. This happened at King Khalid Military City.

Needless to say, I don't have a very high opinion of the treatment of women by men in the Middleast.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Skunk: I haven't actually made it a scientific study here..but I see arabic women following their men everywhere here...as well as sitting in the back seat of the car...of course these people are probably mostly diplomats from the middle east (this is Washington DC) so maybe they haven't had a chance to "americanize" yet and can't really be counted as the norm for "Islamic/Arabic" peoples in thsi country...since those who immigrate here want to take part in our culture and society and aren't quite so primed to remain too rooted in the old one.
</font>

Sorry johnny, but mostly skunk was correct in his post. The muslim religious scripts do not mention that women should walk behind their husbands, and it is not always so in Arabic countries. ;) And whereas you would stare yourself blind on the woman's behind ( [img]tongue.gif[/img] ) that was not the case several centuries ago. The perfect body and what was looked upon have changed so many times and still do. Note also that Skunk meantions to shield in crowds. ;) There's another cultural difference. Men in western countries wouldn't mind bumping into a woman just to make her notice your there, and some go even farther than that. In that the Middle east hasn't caught up on you yet. ;)

However I do disagree that there are no religious traditions when it come to women being inferior to men. That is mentioned a lot in Arab, as well as Christian, scripts.

OK, it seems we're getting slightly off topic. I think I once more will point out that no one will be able to convinve another that one side in this dreadful drama is innocent. So let's leave all the petty squablle and get back to the discussion!