UN proves once more that it is Unwanted Nobodies. It is helping Hamas once more.

[Donut]

Originally posted by Morgan_Corbesant: The UN makes too many rules that have to be followed. .

Yup! - it's becoming clear why you don't like them!

[Donut]

Mmmmmm! Interesting!

[Timber Loftis]

Well, that article was much too brief to be interesting.

Hey, how come we don't see a full inspection going on for the oil-for-bribes thingy? It really is a darn shame, because if a rebel farts in the jungle the UN is all atwitter, but it really has been able to conveniently ignore its own fraud and abuse.

You know, the exposure of oil-for-bribes is really one good thing that could come out of the War in Iraq -- and if the US hadn't made such a goof of the whole endeavor maybe there would be more review of issues around the war. As it is, though, it's just to hard to avert one's eyes from the great big train wreck that is the occupation of Iraq.

[Donut]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Well, that article was much too brief to be interesting.

No proof offered - don't you find that interesting?

[Timber Loftis]

I don't know enough one way or the other for it to be interesting yet. I'm not saying I believe either one.

Um, I do notice, upon second glance, that one side has *some* proof, including video footage, and all the other side has is a demand for an apology. So far.

[ 10-04-2004, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by JrKASperov: quote: Originally posted by Oblivion437: In defense of his nation, home and people? I should hope he would not.

Ah but that is exactly what the Palestinians are doing, isn't it? (after all, Gaza is theirs) [/QUOTE]Actually no, Palestinians don't exist, they're all migrants from the surrounding countries, who got displaced when Israel was created, nobody cared about them (even their own muslim "brothers") until they were seen as a potential way to attack Israel. Israel has a much better, and longstanding claim to the land, and it actually works within a standard set of rules of engagement that doesn't involve blowing up women, children, and any innocent bystander caught in the blast radius.

Check out http://www.palestinefacts.org/ or any number of websites that actually state history, and not just Hamas/PLO/misc terrorist propaganda and get back to me with some real facts, and not just regurgitated "facts" from an organization dedicated to wiping an entire people off the face of the earth.

[Timber Loftis]

You know Morgeruat, they shoulda known they had a recipe for disaster when they came up with THIS PLAN.

[Lucern]

Morgeruat, Even if everything you wrote was indisputable fact, history is not a valid justification for one people's right to be somewhere, and another people's denial of that right. It can explain the why or how of the situation, and it's important to do so. I can assure you, however, that any reasoning designed to attribute historical, national, or overall moral superiority over another group will be arbitrarily rooted in our own cultural values. As such, no justification or statement of 'fact' can actually justify the murder of Israeli citizens by suicide bombers, nor can it justify the situation that so-called Palestinians endure. It's equally arbitrary for any side to do so.

Palestinianfacts.org has done you a disservice in that they are not open with their agenda, instead trying to convince you that they are providing historical fact, and that the historical fact speaks for itself. They're giving history so far as it serves a Zionist cause (by their definition). Technically it's propaganda, but that's a loaded word. For example, you can find a wealth of graphs showing upsurges of suicide attacks after Oslo, but what about the graphs that show a correlation between 'pre-emptive' strikes by the IDF and suicide bombings? How about psycho-analyzing Gandhi and his opinion of the conflict? How is that fact? Try to find even a negative statement about Israeli actions. I couldn't find one, but it's a huge site. If this is the case, can you even imagine a fair assessment of ANY national policy that doesn't include the bad with the good?

I see in your post associations that fit squarely into the paradigm proffered by the site. With the migrants formerly known as Palestinians, you tell a story of castaways turned into a terrorist platform bent on genocide. With the Israelis you establish both righteous presence and military behaviour against aggressors. The opposite paradigm is equally incapable of fairly describing the situation. I know it's naive to say so, but maybe there won't be a conflict when both sides realize that not only does arbitrary moral authority not matter, but that neither have, or ever had it. Given the discourse, that's not going to happen.

[ 10-05-2004, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: Lucern ]

[JayS]

Update: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...535593,00.html

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Stratos: There's no point of having the Geneva Convention if you can just ignore it when you don't feel like following it. Same goes for any law. If you can ignore it when it doesn't fit your taste, then you might just scrap it altogether, I mean, who's gonna follow it then? Sure, the terrorists doesn't give a damn about the Geneva Convention and we have to, but that's a price we have to pay for being 'the good guys'.

DING DING DING we have a winner! Stratos you just broke the code!!!