hijab@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU (Raif Hijab) (10/05/86)
In article <8673@duke.duke.UUCP> rjn@duke.UUCP (R. James Nusbaum) writes: >> >>A terrorist attempts to foment TERROR -- he attacks the civilian >>population because it is a good way to do this. If you were to >>tell him (authoritatively) that a bomb in given place wouldn't >>harm a soul, he'd choose another target. He's after terror, not >>demolished buildings. > >The connotation of calling someone a terrorist is in my mind to say that >they are wrong or bad. After all the President says we are going to 'wipe >out terrorism' not wipe out Arab terrorism. I believe the commonly accepted >meaning of the word is that of unjustified violence against innocents. >In my opinion to place this label on the ANC is to say that they are wrong >in their fight for freedom. I am a strong supporter of the right of the ANC to fight against their white oppressors. However, I am disturbed by the lack of sensitivity in the U.S. for the opression of the Palestinians by the Israelis. Their suffering is somehow less important, less weighty on the conscience. Yes, there has been a lot of Palestinian terrorism, much of it senseless, useless acts of desperation. But the Palestinians did not start it, nor are they the only terrorists around. In particular, the Israelis are guilty of terrorism, BY THE SAME DEFINITION GIVEN ABOVE -namely, fomenting TERROR by attacking civilians. The difference is that they hit refugee camps and call them terrorist bases, and destroy villagers' homes "to teach them a lesson." YES, a government with a standing army can be as much a terrorist as an extralegal gang of desperate young men (or women). The Palestinians have their terrorists, as does the ANC. But so do the Israelis and the Afikaaners. Does the terrorism negate the truth about right and wrong? about just and unjust? Why is it that the same person who will defend the right of blacks in South Africa to fight racism, is squeamish about defending the same right for the Palestinians?
rjn@duke.UUCP (R. James Nusbaum) (10/08/86)
In article <1069@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU> hijab@cad.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Raif Hijab) writes: >In article <8673@duke.duke.UUCP> rjn@duke.UUCP (R. James Nusbaum) writes: >>> >>>A terrorist attempts to foment TERROR -- he attacks the civilian >>>population because it is a good way to do this. If you were to >>>tell him (authoritatively) that a bomb in given place wouldn't >>>harm a soul, he'd choose another target. He's after terror, not >>>demolished buildings. >> >>The connotation of calling someone a terrorist is in my mind to say that >>they are wrong or bad. After all the President says we are going to 'wipe >>out terrorism' not wipe out Arab terrorism. I believe the commonly accepted >>meaning of the word is that of unjustified violence against innocents. >>In my opinion to place this label on the ANC is to say that they are wrong >>in their fight for freedom. > >I am a strong supporter of the right of the ANC to fight against their >white oppressors. However, I am disturbed by the lack of sensitivity in >the U.S. for the opression of the Palestinians by the Israelis. Their >suffering is somehow less important, less weighty on the conscience. > >Yes, there has been a lot of Palestinian terrorism, much of it senseless, >useless acts of desperation. But the Palestinians did not start it, nor >are they the only terrorists around. In particular, the Israelis are >guilty of terrorism, BY THE SAME DEFINITION GIVEN ABOVE -namely, >fomenting TERROR by attacking civilians. The difference is that they >hit refugee camps and call them terrorist bases, and destroy villagers' >homes "to teach them a lesson." YES, a government with a standing army >can be as much a terrorist as an extralegal gang of desperate young men >(or women). > >The Palestinians have their terrorists, as does the ANC. But so do the >Israelis and the Afikaaners. Does the terrorism negate the truth about >right and wrong? about just and unjust? Why is it that the same person >who will defend the right of blacks in South Africa to fight racism, >is squeamish about defending the same right for the Palestinians? I was wondering when someone would bring this up. As I mentioned earlier, I believe that there is a basic difference between the goal of Palestinian groups and South African black groups. As far as I know the Palestinians have never made any attempt at peaceful settlement. They resorted to violence immediately. I believe that it is the goal of the Palestinians to completely get rid of the Jews. They make no attempt to negotiate, in fact they won't even recognize Israel as a country. Their goal is not to coexist, but to remove. Now many might say that this is also the objective of the blacks in South Africa, but I don't think that is true. The ANC clearly states that it wants a government for everyone without racial discrimination of any kind. I don't really think that Arabs in Israel are repressed to a degree anywhere near the level of blacks in South Africa. As far as I know (and please correct me if I am wrong) there are no laws that require discrimination against Arabs. I think Arabs are represented in the Israeli government. I am not a supporter of Israeli policy. I think their actions in Lebanon are without merit whatsoever. They are as guilty of terrorism as those they are fighting against. This does not excuse Palestinian terrorists of the brutal killings of totally innocent people. The Jews in Turkey, France, Rome and other places had absolutely nothing to do with Israel. The killings were perpetrated against people merely because of their religious beliefs. This would be like the ANC killing whites in Europe and America simply because they are white. If the ANC starts doing that then they will certainly lose my support. Personally I see very few similarities between the Palestinian plight and that of South African blacks. I sympathize with the injustice done to the Palestinians when they were not given the chance to rule their homeland, but I believe they are motivated strongly by religious intolerance and hate. Jim Nusbaum -- R. James Nusbaum, Duke University Computer Science Department, Durham NC 27706-2591. Phone (919)684-5110. CSNET: rjn@duke UUCP: {ihnp4!decvax}!duke!rjn ARPA: rjn%duke@csnet-relay
martillo@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU (Yakim Martillo) (10/09/86)
>I am a strong supporter of the right of the ANC to fight against their >white oppressors. However, I am disturbed by the lack of sensitivity in >the U.S. for the opression of the Palestinians by the Israelis. Their >suffering is somehow less important, less weighty on the conscience. I suspect that as a Muslim, you merely support the right of the majority to beat on and oppress a minority which is inherent in the Islamic doctrine of dhimma. I would be interested in your opinion of the various attempts of Sudanese Muslims to implose Islamic law on the non-Muslim black population of the Sudan. In any case, the discomfort that former oppressors (specifically Muslim residents of the land or Israel) feel when they see the people they formerly oppressed free and independent should not be weighty on anybody's conscience at all. >Yes, there has been a lot of Palestinian terrorism, much of it senseless, >useless acts of desperation. But the Palestinians did not start it, nor >are they the only terrorists around. In particular, the Israelis are >guilty of terrorism, BY THE SAME DEFINITION GIVEN ABOVE -namely, >fomenting TERROR by attacking civilians. The difference is that they >hit refugee camps and call them terrorist bases, and destroy villagers' >homes "to teach them a lesson." YES, a government with a standing army >can be as much a terrorist as an extralegal gang of desperate young men >(or women). Hijab is of course correct. Palestinian Muslims did not start the terrorism. Muslim attrocities against defenseless non-Muslims long pre-date Zionism and in fact occur in Muslim regions far removed from the land of Israel (e.g. Malaysia). Since Muslim terrorism against non-Muslims has an historical continuity of over a millennium and a global continuity totally independent of the ethnic identity of the victim, the logical conclusion is that Muslim terrorism has in fact little to do with Israel but rather is just the natural expression of Muslim contempt for non-Muslims as repeated expressed in the Qur'an, the ahadit, the commentaries and the law codes. >The Palestinians have their terrorists, as does the ANC. But so do the >Israelis and the Afikaaners. Does the terrorism negate the truth about >right and wrong? about just and unjust? Why is it that the same person >who will defend the right of blacks in South Africa to fight racism, >is squeamish about defending the same right for the Palestinians? The basic truth is Islam is wrong and unjust. When Muslims fix Islam perhaps peace might be negotiable.
mlwh@sun.UUCP (10/09/86)
> In article <1069@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU> hijab@cad.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Raif Hijab) writes: > >In article <8673@duke.duke.UUCP> rjn@duke.UUCP (R. James Nusbaum) writes: > >Yes, there has been a lot of Palestinian terrorism, much of it senseless, > >useless acts of desperation. But the Palestinians did not start it, nor > >are they the only terrorists around. In particular, the Israelis are > >guilty of terrorism, BY THE SAME DEFINITION GIVEN ABOVE -namely, > >fomenting TERROR by attacking civilians. The difference is that they > >hit refugee camps and call them terrorist bases, and destroy villagers' > >homes "to teach them a lesson." YES, a government with a standing army > >can be as much a terrorist as an extralegal gang of desperate young men > >(or women). > > > >The Palestinians have their terrorists, as does the ANC. But so do the > >Israelis and the Afikaaners. Does the terrorism negate the truth about > >right and wrong? about just and unjust? Why is it that the same person > >who will defend the right of blacks in South Africa to fight racism, > >is squeamish about defending the same right for the Palestinians? > > I was wondering when someone would bring this up. As I mentioned earlier, > I believe that there is a basic difference between the goal of Palestinian > groups and South African black groups. As far as I know the Palestinians > have never made any attempt at peaceful settlement. They resorted to > violence immediately. I believe that it is the goal of the Palestinians > to completely get rid of the Jews. They make no attempt to negotiate, in > fact they won't even recognize Israel as a country. Their goal is not to > coexist, but to remove. Now many might say that this is also the objective > of the blacks in South Africa, but I don't think that is true. The ANC > clearly states that it wants a government for everyone without racial > discrimination of any kind. > > I don't really think that Arabs in Israel are repressed to a degree > anywhere near the level of blacks in South Africa. As far as I know > (and please correct me if I am wrong) there are no laws that require > discrimination against Arabs. I think Arabs are represented in the > Israeli government. > > I am not a supporter of Israeli policy. I think their actions in Lebanon > are without merit whatsoever. They are as guilty of terrorism as those > they are fighting against. This does not excuse Palestinian terrorists of > the brutal killings of totally innocent people. The Jews in Turkey, France, > Rome and other places had absolutely nothing to do with Israel. The killings > were perpetrated against people merely because of their religious beliefs. > This would be like the ANC killing whites in Europe and America simply > because they are white. If the ANC starts doing that then they will > certainly lose my support. > > Personally I see very few similarities between the Palestinian plight > and that of South African blacks. I sympathize with the injustice done > to the Palestinians when they were not given the chance to rule their > homeland, but I believe they are motivated strongly by religious > intolerance and hate. > > Jim Nusbaum The Palestinain's are by no means a 'terrorist organization'. They are a political body that has wings (or factions) that currently use many terrorist tactics. The Arab world while not oppressed to the extent of those in South Africa, they have been 'bully-ed' by Israel. Israel attacks (or enters an area in 'self-defence') and then runs back and hides behind the $5 Billion dollars of annual military aid that the U.S. gives them. Unfortunately, the U.S. gives the aid somewhat blindly. The Palestinians and other factions have several times tried more peaceful means and have been rebuked...While I am not really sure what side I am on I definitely think that many people are brain-washed into believing that the PLO is a terrorist organization. ----Martin Lewis Walter Hall---- SUN Microsystems Mail Stop 1-40 2550 Garcia Avenue, Mountain View, Ca. 94043 (415) 691-7995 reply to: hplabs \ allegra > !sun!mlwh ios / or mlwh@sun.COM
ashcroft@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Dazed and Confused) (10/10/86)
In article <1244@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> martillo@trillian.UUCP (Yakim Martillo) writes: >The basic truth is Islam is wrong and unjust. When Muslims fix Islam >perhaps peace might be negotiable. ***********PHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW*********************** Christ in a cockpit.... what an ignorant slut - Islam is wrong and unjust eh ? I don't know what religion you may be Mr Martillo but if you are Jewish or Christian (or pretty much anything else) you are a nasty encrusted pot calling a kettle black. If you are an Atheist then you know that all religions are in a number of ways wrong and unjust and you are picking on one of them to advance your own agenda. Terrorism is no more a characteristic of Islam than it is of Christianity and Judaism. Witness if you will the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland and remember a particularly nasty bunch of terrorists led by one Menachem Begin. All religions almost by definition ("we are the true believers") breed the contempt for nonbelievers that can result in believing that violence against the nonbelievers is OK. Get a grip on reality.
martillo@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU (Yakim Martillo) (10/10/86)
In article <16071@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> ashcroft@ernie.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Dazed and Confused) writes: >In article <1244@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> martillo@trillian.UUCP (Yakim Martillo) writes: >>The basic truth is Islam is wrong and unjust. When Muslims fix Islam >>perhaps peace might be negotiable. > >***********PHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW*********************** >Christ in a cockpit.... what an ignorant slut - Islam is wrong and unjust eh ? >I don't know what religion you may be Mr Martillo but if you are Jewish or >Christian (or pretty much anything else) you are a nasty encrusted pot calling >a kettle black. If you are an Atheist then you know that all religions are >in a number of ways wrong and unjust and you are picking on one of them to >advance your own agenda. Terrorism is no more a characteristic of Islam >than it is of Christianity and Judaism. Witness if you will the sectarian >violence in Northern Ireland and remember a particularly nasty bunch of >terrorists led by one Menachem Begin. All religions almost by definition >("we are the true believers") breed the contempt for nonbelievers that >can result in believing that violence against the nonbelievers is OK. >Get a grip on reality. I would suggest that you learn something about Islam. Only a selected class of non-Muslims may live in a Muslim country and they are permitted to live in a permanently degraded and humiliated condition only if they accept dhimma that is only if they pay protection money. I know only one organization which engages in similar practices -- the mafia. A religion organized along mafiosi principles is simply unacceptable. No important modern Christian religious leader calls for the humiliation and degradation of non-Christians living in Christian countries. There are only a couple of fringe groups (I think in Brazil and in France which call for such things). However, I would have to work hard to find even an insignificant Muslim leader who does not demand that non-Muslims living among Muslims should be humiliated and degraded. I have heard the Imam of Washington ambiguously call for such humiliation and degradation in English while explicitly demanding such behavior in Arabic. Wallace Muhammad (who is not even an insignificant Muslim thinker as far as I can tell) has waffled on the issue. No wonder the rallying cry of Christians in Lebanon is, "We will not become dhimmis," and Christian leaders in Egypt are in fear of being returned to unreconstructed dhimma. In treatment of women Islam is totally unacceptable and probably should be considered criminal. The `ulema is basically divided into two camps of the excision of the clitoris. One camp considers the act commendable. The other considers it obligatory. Saying all religions are wrong bad and therefore I shouldn't pick on Islam is either symptomatic of Western leftist intellectual myopic inability to make ethical distinctions or pure intellectual dishonesty. All religions may be untrue but some religions may be worse than others. A religion which requires cannibalism would be unacceptable today. The Thugees were unacceptable to the British. Today's Thugees are the Islamic `Ulama. As for Menahem Begin, he was not a terrorist. He ran the `Irgun like the French underground and all officials of the British occupation were legitimate target because British behavior during WWII generally aided and abetted the extermination of the Jewish community even while the British fought the Germans. The vast majority of `Irgun action was directed at the British military. The Labor Zionists liked to call the Revisionists terrorists but that was only a piece of political propaganda because the Revisionists opposed Labor socialist ideology. The main terrorist act the Irgun was supposed to have committed is blowing up the King David Hotel but the British had established the King David hotel as the military headquarters and had thereby rendered the Hotel a legitimate military target. The British should be blamed for establishing a major military target in a civilian area. As for me, I am of southern Libyan Jewish background. My family was forced to grovel as dhimmis for over a thousand years. All the members of my family either were born in Muslim countries, grew up in Muslim countries or have spent long periods in Muslim countries. All the major Muslim languages are spoken in my family including `Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Turkish, Berber, Malaysian, and Chinese (though I must admit not the Hui dialect). As for Ashcroft he has already proven his antiSemitism in previous articles. This article shows his basic ignorant Western chauvinism. Very few religions have incorporated contempt for non-believers into fundamental principles. Christianity and Islam may be unique. Neither Judaism, nor Hinduism, nor Buddhism, nor Daoism, nor Greek paganism nor Roman paganism has doctrines requiring the humiliation of non-Believers. Since Ashcroft as an ignoramus only knows a little about Christianity, he assumes that all other belief systems are similar.
tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) (10/12/86)
> [Martin Lewis Walter Hall] > The Palestinians and other factions have several times tried more > peaceful means and have been rebuked...While I am not really sure what > side I am on I definitely think that many people are brain-washed into > believing that the PLO is a terrorist organization. ----------------- And all the time I thought it was because of the terrorist acts committed by the PLO. Silly me. ------------------ Begin Disclaimers to discourage flames: 1) The fact that the PLO is a terrorist organization in no way implies any merit or lack of merit in the Palestinians' underlying cause. THEY ARE SEPARATE ISSUES. 2) The fact that the PLO is a terrorist organization in no way implies that the Israeli government is a paragon of virtue. 3) The fact that the PLO is a terrorist organization in no way implies that all (or even most) of the current wave of terrorism is being committed by the PLO or its supporters. --------- The PLO is a terrorist organization because it engages in terrorism. Pure and simple. Should it publicly renounce terrorism (not necessarily armed struggle, which is not the same thing), AND LIVE UP TO ITS ANNOUNCEMENT, then it would no longer be a terrorist organization. However, the underlying merit in the Palestinian and Israeli causes would not be changed one whit. -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan
ashcroft@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Dazed and Confused) (10/12/86)
In article <1255@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> martillo@trillian.UUCP (Yakim Martillo) writes: > >As for Ashcroft he has already proven his antiSemitism in previous >articles. This article shows his basic ignorant Western chauvinism. >Very few religions have incorporated contempt for non-believers into >fundamental principles. Christianity and Islam may be unique. >Neither Judaism, nor Hinduism, nor Buddhism, nor Daoism, nor Greek >paganism nor Roman paganism has doctrines requiring the humiliation of >non-Believers. Since Ashcroft as an ignoramus only knows a little >about Christianity, he assumes that all other belief systems are >similar. mmmm... lesseee now... Hindus (traditional) consider non hindus unclean, the Romans had Xtians eaten, the Greeks considered non-Greeks to be Barbarians (origin of the word) the Biblical jews seem to have had a fun time wiping out the philistines. The Sinhalese Buddhists are gleefully wiping out the Hindu Tamils (of course this might JUST be plain racism...). Actually the one case of fairly peaceful coexistence of religions that I can think of (I mean in history) is in India where the Mughals ruled over the Hindus. Of course this disintegrated later at the end of the British Raj. And now the Hindus are killing the Bangladeshi refugees (Muslim) in Assam - the Hindus also are fighting the Sikhs. Face it Martillo - Most religious groups will vigorously persecute any minority groups in their midst.... Actually Martillo I know not even a little Christianity... The west is only different in that we have over time been able to throw off the shackles of the religious organizations that previously ran our lives. Before we brought the Christian churches to heel they didn't just extort or humiliate nonbelievers they killed them. And if you ever listen to an evangelist you know that given half a chance they would gladly do so in the future. I am not antisemitic. Tarring with that brush is a nasty and effective way of slandering someone but I won't let it stick.