scott@hou2g.UUCP (Danger Mouse) (06/21/85)
I'll tell you what to do if you REALLY want to stop this kind of thing from happening again. (I make no claims of justification on legal or moral grounds--just a solution.) Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to have released. That'll shut 'em up... SJBerry
sef@drutx.UUCP (FarleighSE) (06/22/85)
SJ Berry does not go far enough. We tell the terrorists this: "You people have screwed up. If you release the hostages immediately we will only obliterate your military camps. If you do not immediately release the hostages we will not only obliterate your military camps, but also your civilian population." Ofcourse this country would have to have the guts to back that kind of statement up. Note: It would take only one instance like this to keep terrorists from ever pulling a stunt like this again. I know the lily-livered ones will scream bloodly murder that we are barbarian, but look at what we are dealing with, they sure aren't human. Scott Farleigh 303 538-4904
edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (06/23/85)
In article <518@hou2g.UUCP>, scott@hou2g.UUCP (Danger Mouse) writes: > > I'll tell you what to do if you REALLY want to > stop this kind of thing from happening again. > (I make no claims of justification on legal or > moral grounds--just a solution.) > > Each and every time those Shiite > terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > have released. That'll shut 'em up... > SJBerry While it might shut them up, we can't take that stand. As much as Reagan would (probably) like to bomb Beiruit into non-existance, he can't. We are dealing in politics here. Suppose Reagan issused the ultimatum that Mr. Berry suggests. And further suppose that you were, in some way, emotionally tied to one of the hostages. Would you like your President voluntarily letting your loved ones get killed? Probably not. Think what the Democrats would say. "Look, Republicans kill Americans!" Reagan political opponents would have a field day. The news media would crucify him. Reagan's a politician, he can't allow that (even if he is ineligible for re-election). I'm as disgusted as the next American at the wimpy world posture that the United States is projecting. We're simultaneously the greatest country in the world and one of the most spineless. Of course the MAD syndrome is an effective determent to hostile action againt the Soviets (Remember KAL007?). But the Shiites are non-communist, the only thing keeping Lebanon IN EXISTANCE (physically, that is) is 40 American lives. U.S.A.! U.S.A.! -- edward {decvax,ihnp4,mhuxt,seismo}! -+-> cbosgd! --> ukma!edward () {clyde,osu-eddie,ulysses}! ---| | |-- "Well, what's on the television then?" /|--- "Looks like a penguin." | \ _ \___/ \= Support barrier free design
reza@ihuxb.UUCP (Reza Taheri) (06/25/85)
> > I'll tell you what to do if you REALLY want to > stop this kind of thing from happening again. > (I make no claims of justification on legal or > moral grounds--just a solution.) > > Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell > it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > have released. That'll shut 'em up... > > > SJBerry Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him (and believe me he did enough experimentation to find out), but maybe we can improve on his mistakes. H. Reza Taheri ...!ihnp4!ihuxb!reza (312)-979-7473
mroddy@enmasse.UUCP (Mark Roddy) (06/25/85)
> SJ Berry does not go far enough. > > We tell the terrorists this: "You people have screwed up. > If you release the hostages immediately we will only obliterate > your military camps. If you do not immediately release the > hostages we will not only obliterate your military camps, but > also your civilian population." > There are no easy solutions. The Nazis used a similar policy against people that they felt were terrorists, exterminating entire villages for the acts of a few. If we descend to the level of terrorists, we are terrorists. It is so easy to expound righteous patriotic fervor, but nothing will be accomplished by sending Rambo to Beirut. Besides, there are really quite a few shiits in this world, distributed across quite a few national boundaries, exactly how do you'll propose do do them all in? After Munich, the Israeli's quietly and patiently identified and executed every member of the gang involved in that operation. -- Mark Roddy Net working, Just reading the news. (harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mroddy)
EPHRAIM@TECHUNIX.BITNET (06/25/85)
From: ephraim@techunix.bitnet (Ephraim Silverberg) > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Article 1 (SJ Berry) > > Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell > it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > have released. That'll shut 'em up... > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Article 2 (Scott Farleigh) > > We tell the terrorists this: "You people have screwed up. > If you release the hostages immediately we will only obliterate > your military camps. If you do not immediately release the > hostages we will not only obliterate your military camps, but > also your civilian population." > ----------------------------------------------------------------- When the State of Israel tries to neutralise the military camps of the Shi'ites in Lebanon, we are condemned as facists and murderers, although these people have waged an active war of terror on the Northern residents of Israel for over ten years. However, when the lives of Americans are af- fected then a "different" standard seems to apply -- anything goes: random killing, attack civilian populations, etc. I do *not*, Heaven forbid, take the lives of the endangered Americans lightly and I sincerely hope and pray that they all return safely to their homes and families. I am only sickened by the *constant* double standard the world applies to the State of Israel. We value the blood of our peo- ple and children as much as you do. I do *not* think any of the solutions mentioned above are reasonable; the terrorists regard their cause as holy and to kill their captives and then commit suicide would be considered by them as a ticket to heaven. On the other hand, I do not want their co-terrorists which they want released walking the streets of this country. I'd be more than willing to deport these criminals to countries sympathetic to their cause far from the bord- ers of Israel. Yes, there they will become instant "heroes", but there is no other way of both securing the release of the captives and ensuring the safety of the people of Israel. No, this will not deter further hijack- ings, but when dealing with people who consider themselves to be driven by the Word of G-d, nothing will. The only way to prevent such occurences in the future is to institute the same severe security measures on all air- lines as are presently used by El-Al Airlines. Granted this will make airline travel somewhat more cumbersome and unpleasant, but it is far more preferable than the alternative. May the captives soon be returned to their homes and loved ones safe and in good health. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ephraim Silverberg, Computer Science Department, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel. BITNET : ephraim@techunix ARPANET : ephraim%techunix.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa UUCP : {almost anywhere}!ucbvax!UCBJADE!TECHUNIX:EPHRAIM CSNET : ephraim%techunix.BITNET@csnet-relay --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9234dwz@houxf.UUCP (The Rev. Peak) (06/25/85)
->> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell
->> it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die,
->> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to
->> have released. That'll shut 'em up...
->>
->>
->> SJBerry
->
-> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill
->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him
->(and believe me he did enough experimentation to find out), but maybe
->we can improve on his mistakes.
->
->H. Reza Taheri
->
Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier
and that's how we got the word "decimate".
Dave Peak
@ !hotel!dxp
"My buddy..................Buddy Bear !" - Jimmy Buffetdave@circadia.UUCP (David Messer) (06/25/85)
> "... we will not only obliterate your military camps, but > also your civilian population." > > I know the lily-livered ones will scream bloodly murder > that we are barbarian, but look at what we are dealing with, they > sure aren't human. > > Scott Farleigh > 303 538-4904 I wonder what your definition of "human" is? Do you qualify? -- Dave Messer ...ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!circadia!dave
jhs@druri.UUCP (ShoreJ) (06/25/85)
>> I'll tell you what to do if you REALLY want to >> stop this kind of thing from happening again. >> (I make no claims of justification on legal or >> moral grounds--just a solution.) >> >> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell >> it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, >> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to >> have released. That'll shut 'em up... >> >> SJBerry > Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill >ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him >(and believe me he did enough experimentation to find out), but maybe >we can improve on his mistakes. > >H. Reza Taheri Hey, Reza, let's not give `SJBerry' any more help than [he/she/it] needs. Based on the 1st paragraph disclaimer, the next iteration could very well be "The Final Solution". -- Jeff Shore, ..!ihnp4!druri!jhs "Now, Virginia, did you REALLY think `The Marching Morons' was only a story?"
jhs@druri.UUCP (ShoreJ) (06/25/85)
[I feel a flame coming on ...] >>> .... >>> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to >>> have released. That'll shut 'em up... >>> >>> SJBerry >> >> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states .... >> >>H. Reza Taheri > >Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier >and that's how we got the word "decimate". > > Dave Peak @ !hotel!dxp Swell, Peak. I'm definitely going to sleep better knowing Hitler didn't formulate the policy, only implement it. Wonderful. So Berry learned from Hitler who learned from the Romans who learned from ... c'mon, now! Let's not be picky! How about giving credit where credit is due. Share it with EVERYONE who continues to propagate lunacy and horror. Well, Hitler may not have originated the policy, but he sure as hell implemented it on a scale that is incomprehensible to rational beings. And the ultimate obscenity is that nothing seems to change! Some [you name it, you feed it] is always resurrecting those policies/methods/solutions. Shouldn't we be more concerned that someone always wants to do it?!! Ah, what's the point? Some crazy is always going to suggest it, with or without justification. Right, SJB? Sometimes I wonder which is the more difficult--defending against the terrorists or the people with *solutions*. -- Jeff Shore ..!ihnp4!drutx!druri!jhs "...and the smoke blotted out the noon day sun!"
jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) (06/26/85)
In article <600003@ur-univax.UUCP> stro@ur-univax.UUCP writes: > What do other people out there think about the latest act of terrorism - > the hijacking (and kidnapping of the passengers) of TWA 847? What should > be done? What can be done? >... > the wworlds attention to their plight. Commiting ANY crime for these > reasons ( or any reason) should not be tolerated - especially when people's > lives have been threatened. Terrorists have come to know that if they > threaten people's lives they can bargain with governments to get what they > want. This only leads to more and more terrorism. I believe Turkey is one I agree in general with your attitude, however I'm not so sure about how I would *really* feel if friends or relatives were on the plane. I suggest that rather than going in to try to kill the terrorists and quite probably kill many hostages, we should take a few of the Shi'ite prisoners whose release has been asked for, and threaten to KILL THEM unless the hostages were released. Preferably this could have been done out on the airport tarmac for all to see. After all, there are ~700 Shi'ite. This strategy seems more likely to be successful than a more direct approach. > The best solution would be, of course, to stop it at its root. Insted of > ... > they want us out of there. And why do we stay? what's so special about > Lebanon? Why can't America just leave some countries alone? It's in our I agree that our activities in some countries is highly unethical. However, another approach to stopping the problem near the root would be (assuming that we had a highly effective intelligence organization) to destroy the terrorist organizations covertly. I'm not sure I agree with this strategy, but it might well be effective. -- Joe Arceneaux Lafayette, LA {akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla
gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly) (06/26/85)
-- > SJ Berry does not go far enough. > > We tell the terrorists this: "You people have screwed up. > If you release the hostages immediately we will only obliterate > your military camps. If you do not immediately release the > hostages we will not only obliterate your military camps, but > also your civilian population." > > Scott Farleigh What a wimpish, bleeding-heart solution! We'd better go farther than that to show 'em we mean business. We should tell 'em they're *ALL* dead meat, but if they release the hostages--and I mean *RIGHT NOW*--we'll kill 'em quickly. Otherwise it'll be slow torture, and we'll force them to watch it, too. Ahh, the Fuehrer would be proud... Actually, the most ingenious solution (as opposed to the final one) I've heard is for the US Gov't. to insist that Israel release all its Shi'ite prisoners--to the US Marines. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 25 Jun 85 [7 Messidor An CXCIII] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7753 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***
joel@peora.UUCP (Joel Upchurch) (06/26/85)
> -> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill > ->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him > > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > and that's how we got the word "decimate". Actually decimate means kill one out of ten. Decimation was used by Roman commanders on military units of the Roman Legions as a punishment. I seem to vaguely recall that it was used against some units on the German Frontier that revolted against Tiberius. Against conquered people it was ever so much more profitable to sell them into slavery.
mroddy@enmasse.UUCP (Mark Roddy) (06/26/85)
[] in reference to suggestions that the US murder shiite prisoners... > > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > and that's how we got the word "decimate". > I thought that decimating was used to discipline the legions, not as a policy for controling populations. -- Mark Roddy Net working, Just reading the news. (harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mroddy)
todd@SCIRTP.UUCP (Todd Jones) (06/26/85)
> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell > it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > have released. That'll shut 'em up... > > > SJBerry WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!? Don't forget that the Shiites consider martyrdom one of the greatest honors possible. The preceding opinions are, in all likelihood, those of Todd Jones. However, these opinions will, in all certainty, bear scant resemblance to the opinions of SCI Systems, Inc., Mr. Jones' employer. ||||| || || [ O-O ] Todd Jones \ ^ / {decvax,akgua}!mcnc!rti-sel!scirtp!todd | _ | |___| FLAME ME IF YOU DARE!
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (06/27/85)
>-> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill >->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him >->(and believe me he did enough experimentation to find out), but maybe >->we can improve on his mistakes. >-> >->H. Reza Taheri >-> > >Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier >and that's how we got the word "decimate". > > > Dave Peak From the OED: Decimate (3) *Military* To select by lot and put to death one in every ten of (a body of soldiers guitly of mutiny): a practice in ancient Roman times, sometimes followed in later times. Not *quite* the same thing. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt
tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) (06/27/85)
Nahh, you folks have it all wrong. Study the Koran. Tell them that if they don't toe the line, we will spray the entire country with pig's excrement, blood, and parts. In this way, none of the fanatics who believe they will be able to join Allah if they are killed in a Jihad will be able to. You can't make it to heaven tainted with pig's anything. This method has been used before to nullify the fanatisism of some of the Moslem groups. The British used it in India and in North Africa (WWII). As long as the Moslem fanatic believes he will not be allowed into paradise because he is tainted with swine, his fervor vanishes. This method precludes the killing of innocent people plus, the problem for the truly religious can be cleaned. Publish pictures of marines dipping their machine-gun rounds in vats of pig's blood and see how quick the howl goes up from the fanatics. This all may sound tounge-in-cheek, but it has worked in the past. You have to understand the all-consuming fervor of the religious Moslem in the Middle East. To be killed in the line of duty during a Jihad (the I-A-Toe-La Cock-a-Maimie declared one for the Shi'ites several years ago) is a free ticket to paradise, AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT TAINTED BY ONE OF THE NO-NOs. Pig's anything on your person is a definate NO-NO. Perhaps we could line the inside of our airliners with pigskin. This would at least put a damper on the enthusiasm of Moslem terrorists, no? This all may sound silly, but, its better than shooting up the countryside just to drop a few terrorists. I suggest trying something on these lines, it couldn't hurt. Use Moslem philosophy to counter Moslem terrorists. (Disclaimer-- I in no way wish to hurt or harm innocent folk be they Moslem, Jewish, Budist, or whatever. If someone's sensibilities are piqued, then I'm sorry. I just get tired of all of the killing and perhaps we need a new direction.) T. C. Wheeler
jmt@ecsvax.UUCP (Jerry M. Trott) (06/27/85)
>-> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill >->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". It didn't work for him >->(and believe me he did enough experimentation to find out), but maybe >->we can improve on his mistakes. >-> >->H. Reza Taheri >-> > >Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier >and that's how we got the word "decimate". Actually the word decimate means 'one in ten', not 'ten for one'. If a Roman military unit broke or ran, they would later be lined up and every tenth man killed. While I imagine the Romans had their own unique ways of dealing with problems with the local population, decimation was reserved for the military. Jerry Trott jmt@ecsvax
cdp@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA (06/27/85)
I absolutely agree with Prentiss.
acheng@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA (06/27/85)
>... >From: ephraim@techunix.bitnet (Ephraim Silverberg) > > When the State of Israel tries to neutralise the military camps of the > Shi'ites in Lebanon, we are condemned as facists and murderers, although > these people have waged an active war of terror on the Northern residents > of Israel for over ten years. However, when the lives of Americans are af- > fected then a "different" standard seems to apply -- anything goes: random > killing, attack civilian populations, etc. > > I do *not*, Heaven forbid, take the lives of the endangered Americans > lightly and I sincerely hope and pray that they all return safely to their > homes and families. I am only sickened by the *constant* double standard > the world applies to the State of Israel. We value the blood of our peo- > ple and children as much as you do. > >... What about the lives of the Leboron people? Their homes? Their country? What about those shi'ite kidnapped under the name of war? In name of securing the peace for Galilee, Leboron was bombed flat? How about one standard to all countries, be it America, Israel, Leboron, and even Palistine?
chas@ihuxe.UUCP (Charles Lambert) (06/28/85)
> What do other people out there think about the latest act of terrorism - > the hijacking (and kidnapping of the passengers) of TWA 847? What should I'm posting a response to this discussion in net.misc. Charlie Lambert @ the Death Star, IL.
rafferty@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Colin Rafferty) (06/28/85)
>->> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell >->> it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, >->> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to >->> have released. That'll shut 'em up... >->> >->> >->> SJBerry >-> >-> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill >-> ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". >-> >-> H. Reza Taheri >-> > > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > and that's how we got the word "decimate". > > Dave Peak > Actually, the word decimate came up because the Romans would kill one tenth of their own soldiers if they lost. That made the Roman soldiers very unlikely to surrender or retreat. (Leave with your shield or on it.) ---- Colin Rafferty { Math Department, Carnegie-Mellon University }
jlowry@bbnccv.UUCP (John Lowry) (06/28/85)
In article <416@enmasse.UUCP> mroddy@enmasse.UUCP (Mark Roddy) writes: >[] >in reference to suggestions that the US murder shiite prisoners... >> >> Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier >> and that's how we got the word "decimate". >> >I thought that decimating was used to discipline the legions, not as a >policy for controling populations. >-- > Mark Roddy > Net working, > Just reading the news. > > (harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mroddy) Actually, decimate does not refer to the killing of 10 for each one, but to the process of killing every 10th person in a group. You are right that it was used in the Legions, usually for the crime of mutiny or having supported the wrong general etc... Havin' fun .. John Lowry ============================== "Great Maestros, like great Capitalists have a keen sense of humor .." Berke Breathed
dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) (07/01/85)
In article <9700096@uiucdcs> acheng@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA writes: > >>From: ephraim@techunix.bitnet (Ephraim Silverberg) >> >> When the State of Israel tries to neutralise the military camps of the >> Shi'ites in Lebanon, we are condemned as facists and murderers, although >> these people have waged an active war of terror on the Northern residents >> of Israel for over ten years. However, when the lives of Americans are af- >> fected then a "different" standard seems to apply -- anything goes: random >> killing, attack civilian populations, etc. >> > >What about the lives of the Leboron people? Their homes? Their country? >What about those shi'ite kidnapped under the name of war? In name of securing >the peace for Galilee, Leboron was bombed flat? How about one standard >to all countries, be it America, Israel, Leboron, and even Palistine? Where on earth do you get such ideas? Lebanon "bombed flat"? By Israel? Take a look at the civil war which has been going on there since 1975. Israel attacked military and terrorist (PLO) targets primarily. Yes, civilians have suffered. But the Lebanese have suffered much more at the hands of the PLO, Syria and themselves than from Israel. And Israel was quite justified in invading in the first place. What would the U.S. do if Cuba started sending bombs and missiles daily into Florida? "Palistine"? Or did you mean Palestine? At any rate, there is no such country. Unless you mean Jordan, which is 77% of Palestine. Dave Sherman Toronto -- { ihnp4!utzoo pesnta utcs hcr decvax!utcsri } !lsuc!dave
raju@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Raju Bhatt) (07/02/85)
>From: ephraim@techunix.bitnet (Ephraim Silverberg) > > When the State of Israel tries to neutralise the military camps of the > Shi'ites in Lebanon, we are condemned as facists and murderers, although > these people have waged an active war of terror on the Northern residents > of Israel for over ten years. However, when the lives of Americans are af- > fected then a "different" standard seems to apply -- anything goes: random > killing, attack civilian populations, etc. > > I do *not*, Heaven forbid, take the lives of the endangered Americans > lightly and I sincerely hope and pray that they all return safely to their > homes and families. I am only sickened by the *constant* double standard > the world applies to the State of Israel. We value the blood of our peo- > ple and children as much as you do. > Interesting, so the Shiites were attacking Israel for the last 10 years...Then what were the Palestinians doing, sightseeing in the refugee camps? I hope by now you realised that you goofed, but then to you "They all look the same." I don't believe the whole world applies the double standard. The Jewish Lobby along with the many Jewish-owned publications (Ex: New York Times), have helped Israel retain a "special" standard with the U.S. About not taking "the lives of the ... Americans lightly" and hoping (and praying) "that all return safely to their homes and families", I guess that to you "Who cares about those Shiites whom Israel is holding, after all they must not have families". After pounding West Beirut and having Arafat withdraw his forces on the condition that Israel would not enter West Beirut, the Israeli "sightseeing" force entered West Beirut and pretended not to see the Maronites killing Palestinian refugees. Did the American public forget that or were they helped to forget? <Note: Shouldn't this discussion be exclusively in net.politics?>
sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) (07/02/85)
From: tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) Message-ID: <146@pyuxii.UUCP> > ... Study the Koran. Tell them > that if they don't toe the line, we will spray the entire country > with pig's excrement, blood, and parts. ... > ... You can't make it to heaven > tainted with pig's anything. This method has been used before to > nullify the fanatisism of some of the Moslem groups. The British > used it in India and in North Africa (WWII). As long as the Moslem > fanatic believes he will not be allowed into paradise because he > is tainted with swine, his fervor vanishes. This method precludes > the killing of innocent people plus, the problem for the truly > religious can be cleaned. ... > This all may sound tounge-in-cheek, but it has worked in the past. Has anyone heard of this being used on the Muslim populations in India or North Africa? Was anything similar ever used on the Hindus to control them whenever (if ever) they became 'rowdy'? Sunil Trivedi sunil@ut-ngp.ARPA ...!ut-sally!ut-ngp!sunil
clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (07/03/85)
In article <1949@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) writes: >From: tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) Message-ID: <146@pyuxii.UUCP> >> ... Study the Koran. Tell them >> that if they don't toe the line, we will spray the entire country >> with pig's excrement, blood, and parts. ... >> ... You can't make it to heaven >> tainted with pig's anything. This method has been used before to >> nullify the fanatisism of some of the Moslem groups. The British >> used it in India and in North Africa (WWII). As long as the Moslem >> fanatic believes he will not be allowed into paradise because he >> is tainted with swine, his fervor vanishes. This method precludes >> the killing of innocent people plus, the problem for the truly >> religious can be cleaned. ... >> This all may sound tounge-in-cheek, but it has worked in the past. > >Has anyone heard of this being used on the Muslim populations in >India or North Africa? Was anything similar ever used on the >Hindus to control them whenever (if ever) they became 'rowdy'? > > Sunil Trivedi > sunil@ut-ngp.ARPA > ...!ut-sally!ut-ngp!sunil Yeah, the British used it India (or, at least the Sepoy regiments thought so). See where it got them? The 1847 (may have the wrong date) Sepoy Rebellion. This is how I remember it: The British were introducing a new rifle cartridge to their troops (both the Indian regiments and the British soldiers themselves) - they were lubricated with some sort of grease. You were supposed to bite off the end before using it. A rumor started claiming that the grease was from pigs (I seem to remember that it was not animal-derived at all). But, for some reason the senior British officers (who the Sepoys respected and would have believed) refused to deny this - they just reiterated the order that the Sepoys HAD to use the cartridge, regardless of their religious beliefs. Next thing you knew, the Sepoy regiments mutinied and the British had a real fight on their hands (both from the civilian population AND the British trained native regiments). Hundreds (if not thousands) of both Indian and British soldiers and civilians (many of the soldier's families) died over the next year or so. Senior British Officers can be phenomenally stupid opon occasion. (Especially, as was frequently the case in "quiet" zones, when they were in their 80's. I heard the comment once: The British lose all of the battles, but always win the war ). -- Chris Lewis, UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321
jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre) (07/04/85)
I hope most of the suggestions given are in jest.
The problem with any kind of retaliation against anyone but the
hijackers is that you are taking their word for who they are!
Assume some policy of retaliation like killing the prisoners they
requested freed was addopted. The next group of terrists will demand
the release of whoever they would most like to see killed.
I believe that direct action against the hijackers is a solution. If
the hijackers were given one chance to surrender before the plane was
boarded by force then there would be no encentive for hijacking. The
most they could hope to accomplish would be the destruction of the
plane and passengers. They could do that, using a bomb, without
getting themselves killed. The news value would be reduced because the
situation would be over quickly. Yesterdays news is never the lead
story.
Jerry Aguirre @ Olivetti ATC
{hplabs|fortune|idi|ihnp4|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerryroot@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) (07/04/85)
>From: raju@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Raju Bhatt) >Subject: Re: Terrorism and TWA 847 >Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 05:08:32 EDT > >...The Jewish Lobby >along with the many Jewish-owned publications (Ex: New York Times), have helped ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Israel retain a "special" standard with the U.S. Uh oh, here they come, right of their dark little holes...the classic "jew haters". Ok, if you're going to be a boor in public then me too: Do you really think *all* Jews unquestionably support Israel on everything? Even in Israel, let alone America? Do you really believe the owners of the NY Times just work their wills on all editorial comments in the paper? Even the syndicated stuff? Can you name at least one newspaper not owned by Jews that you disagree with? How do you so easily explain that (oh yeah, they must owe money to the Jewish Banking Conspiracy)? This is a tired argument used by some of the biggest nut groups in this country and is not generally (I hope) believed or even considered by rational people, so save your fingers, most of us just laughed at you. -Barry Shein, Boston University
dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) (07/05/85)
In article <1947@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> raju@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Raju Bhatt) writes: > I >don't believe the whole world applies the double standard... > After pounding >West Beirut and having Arafat withdraw his forces on the condition that Israel >would not enter West Beirut, the Israeli "sightseeing" force entered West Beirut >and pretended not to see the Maronites killing Palestinian refugees. Did the >American public forget that or were they helped to forget? The Wall Street Journal put it very well in this article of May 30: "Something seems to be missing as violence in Lebanon rises to a new crescendo. For weeks now, Christian forces have been in retreat from advancing Shiites; the number of Christian refugees is approaching 100,000, though precise estimates are hard to find. And since May 19, Shiite forces have been moving in on Palestinian camps, including Sabra and Shatilla, around the Lebanese capital... the latest despatches say hundreds of people have been massacred. "Where are all the moralists now? They descended on the Lebanese story in droves when, in September 1982, Phalangist forces, moving past Israeli troops, drove into Sabra and Shatilla in search of Palestinian guerrillas and in over 36 terrible hours killed hundreds of people, including many women and children. Some accused the Israelis, in effect, of aiding and abetting the massacre... "But you don't hear the moralists now. They aren't blaming the Syrian defense minister. They aren't asking for a commission of inquiry in Damascus. They aren't heaping on the head of President Assad the kind of hateful language they leveled at Prime Minister Begin. And they appear to take no notice whatsoever of the fact that Syria's brutal consolidation of its hegemony in Lebanon is taking place under cover provided by Moscow. After a while it makes one wonder whether it was the deaths of innocent Palestinians that was worrying the moralists to begin with, or the possibility of a Western victory." (Wall Street Journal, May 30/85, "Deafening Silence". Ref. CJN 27/6/85 p.2) Yes, there's a double standard. It's quite visible in Mr. Bhatt's misleading accusations. Dave Sherman -- { ihnp4!utzoo pesnta utcs hcr decvax!utcsri } !lsuc!dave
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (07/08/85)
> ->> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell > ->> it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > ->> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > ->> have released. That'll shut 'em up... > ->> SJBerry > -> > -> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill > ->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". > ->H. Reza Taheri > -> > > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > and that's how we got the word "decimate". > Dave Peak My understanding of "decimation" was that it was a process whereby people were lined up and counted and every 10th person was killed. Does anybody know for sure which meaning is the correct one? -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
mohan@sbcs.UUCP (Chilukuri K. Mohan) (07/10/85)
> In article <1949@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) writes: > >From: tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) Message-ID: <146@pyuxii.UUCP> > >> ... Study the Koran. Tell them > >> that if they don't toe the line, we will spray the entire country > >> with pig's excrement, blood, and parts. ... > >> ... You can't make it to heaven > >> tainted with pig's anything. This method has been used before to > >> nullify the fanatisism of some of the Moslem groups. The British > >> used it in India and in North Africa (WWII). As long as the Moslem > >> fanatic believes he will not be allowed into paradise because he > >> is tainted with swine, his fervor vanishes. This method precludes > >> the killing of innocent people plus, the problem for the truly > >> religious can be cleaned. ... > >> This all may sound tounge-in-cheek, but it has worked in the past. > > > >Has anyone heard of this being used on the Muslim populations in > >India or North Africa? Was anything similar ever used on the > >Hindus to control them whenever (if ever) they became 'rowdy'? > > > > Sunil Trivedi > > sunil@ut-ngp.ARPA > > ...!ut-sally!ut-ngp!sunil > > Yeah, the British used it India (or, at least the Sepoy regiments > thought so). See where it got them? The 1847 (may have the wrong > date) Sepoy Rebellion. > > This is how I remember it: > > The British were introducing a new rifle cartridge to their troops > (both the Indian regiments and the British soldiers themselves) - they > were lubricated with some sort of grease. You were supposed to bite > off the end before using it. A rumor started claiming that the grease > was from pigs (I seem to remember that it was not animal-derived at > all). But, for some reason the senior British officers (who the Sepoys > respected and would have believed) refused to deny this - they just > reiterated the order that the Sepoys HAD to use the cartridge, > regardless of their religious beliefs. Next thing you knew, the Sepoy > regiments mutinied and the British had a real fight on their hands > (both from the civilian population AND the British trained native > regiments). Hundreds (if not thousands) of both Indian and British > soldiers and civilians (many of the soldier's families) died over the > next year or so. > > Senior British Officers can be phenomenally stupid opon occasion. > (Especially, as was frequently the case in "quiet" zones, when they were > in their 80's. I heard the comment once: > The British lose all of the battles, but always win the war > ). > -- > Chris Lewis, > UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis > BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321 In the year 1857, there were tremendous uprisings in several parts of India. British historians called the whole thing a `Sepoy Mutiny', and tragically, the idea that it was a mere act of indiscipline seems to be widely believed. I, would like to protest: in calling the FIRST WAR OF INDIAN INDEPENDENCE a mere mutiny, history is being written to suit the ideas of colonisers. The reasons for uprisings, `mutinies', revolutions are not to be simply found in the stupidity of a few officers, just as they are not to be seen as the machinations of outsiders. The very existence of oppression is cause enough for the oppressed to rebel. The very existence of colonial domination is sufficient fuel for conflagrations of national liberation struggles. Yes, sparks are needed: sometimes external and internal conditions reach a point at which the oppressed find the existing situation intolerable. And then: death and destruction to the masters, with the inevitable sacrifice of some of the rebels as well. The `sepoy mutiny' as well as several other struggles must be seen in this light. The rumors circulated about pigfat and cowfat being used by the army are but one small item in a whole list of other reasons for the uprising. The mutiny itself must be seen in conjunction with all the other struggles that were occurring in the country at the time. I am sure there are a lot of history books which can help contribute to the genuine understanding of what happened in 1857, as well as in the years preceding and following. PLEASE don't believe that the dead cobra is nothing but a piece of rope: at one time, it moved, it hissed, and flung its venom at the WhiteMan's Burden. Chilukuri K. Mohan (alias 'CK') mohan@suny-sbcs.csnet [Stony Brook] *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
mag@whuxlm.UUCP (Gray Michael A) (07/10/85)
> > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > > and that's how we got the word "decimate". > > Dave Peak > > My understanding of "decimation" was that it was a process whereby people > were lined up and counted and every 10th person was killed. Does anybody > know for sure which meaning is the correct one? > -- > Sophie Quigley Sophie wins. Mike Gray, whuxlm!mag
ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac) (07/11/85)
> > ->> Each and every time those Shi'ite (or however you spell > > ->> it) terrorists kill a hostage, or let a hostage die, > > ->> let's execute 5 or so of the people they're trying to > > ->> have released. That'll shut 'em up... > > ->> SJBerry > > -> > > -> Actually, the Adolph Hitler principle states that you should kill > > ->ten of "their" people for each one of "ours". > > ->H. Reza Taheri > > -> > > > > Don't credit Hitler with this policy, the Romans instituted it much earlier > > and that's how we got the word "decimate". > > Dave Peak > > My understanding of "decimation" was that it was a process whereby people > were lined up and counted and every 10th person was killed. Does anybody > know for sure which meaning is the correct one? > -- > Sophie Quigley Sophie is right. Decimation was a punishment used for group crimes, like mutiny in the army. I believe Suetonius gives some examples. -- "Don't argue with a fool. Ethan Vishniac Borrow his money." {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan Department of Astronomy University of Texas
acheng@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA (07/11/85)
>/* Written 12:21 am Jul 1, 1985 by dave@lsuc.UUCP in uiucdcs:net.general */ > >Where on earth do you get such ideas? Lebanon "bombed flat"? >By Israel? Take a look at the civil war which has been going on >there since 1975. Israel attacked military and terrorist (PLO) >targets primarily. Yes, civilians have suffered. But the Lebanese >have suffered much more at the hands of the PLO, Syria and themselves >than from Israel. And Israel was quite justified in invading in the >first place. What would the U.S. do if Cuba started sending bombs >and missiles daily into Florida? Just because other people are committing murders, doesnot give Israel a permit to commit murders too. I never say the Syrians, PLO or even Lebanonians, be it christian or muslim, have any rights to kill innocent people. If Cuba, as a country, commits acts of war against U.S., yes, U.S. has a right to defend herself, even by counter attack. But Leboron did not declare war or attack Israel. No one has rights to kill bystanders when he is chasing after his enemies. Remember the incidents of the MOVE in Philedelphenia? The police claimed it was an accident that 5 blocks of houses burned to level. If the police chief claimed he burned down the whole place to flush out those MOVE members, I bet no one would tolerate that. >"Palistine"? Or did you mean Palestine? At any rate, there is no such country. >Unless you mean Jordan, which is 77% of Palestine. Forgive my spelling. Don't tell me there is no such a country and pass the buck to Jordon. What was there between Syria, Leboron, Jordon and Eygpt before 1948? Why are there Palestinian Refugee camps in Leboron, Jordon now? Where did those people come from? I am not against Israel or advocating them be "pushed" into the sea. No, i am saying "all men are created equal" and that applies to all mankinds, be it Jews, Arabs, or even Orientals (i am one). Let us make solutions to let everyone live equally in peace.
clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (07/12/85)
In article <351@sbcs.UUCP> mohan@sbcs.UUCP (Chilukuri K. Mohan) writes: >In the year 1857, there were tremendous uprisings in several parts of India. >British historians called the whole thing a `Sepoy Mutiny', and tragically, >the idea that it was a mere act of indiscipline seems to be widely believed. >I, would like to protest: in calling the > FIRST WAR OF INDIAN INDEPENDENCE >a mere mutiny, history is being written to suit the ideas of colonisers. I apologize to those people who may have been mislead by my posting to believe that the ONLY reason for the Sepoy Mutiny (C. Mohan's "First War of Indian Independence") was a "mere act of indiscipline" (regarding pig fat etc.). I was not rewriting history to suit the ideas of the colonizers. I know somewhat more about the war than that (other than getting the year wrong - sorry). There were many other FAR MORE IMPORTANT factors behind the war. The Pig Fat incident was merely one of the focal points (and had major influence solely on the Sepoy regiments - not the rest of the participants. Without this incident MAYBE the Sepoys would have stayed with the British, but this, in itself wouldn't have affected much - the war would still have happened, just delayed a little longer.) To people more familiar with European history, the "Pig Fat" incident was similar in effect to the assassination of Arch-Duke Ferdinand in 1914. The latter was certainly NOT the reason for WWI, but it was one of the major triggers. My main point in posting the original posting was to point out that the original suggestion of dumping animal parts and byproducts on Lebanon was likely to have the opposite effect to what the original suggester suggested. Partially to show how little understanding there is of the peoples involved on the part of some of the posters (sorta) supporting such an action. My personal views on Indian Independence and the wars were not the issue, and still aren't. I'm not British either - so I won't go into issues of possible bias or "history rewriting" on EITHER side. -- Chris Lewis, UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321
dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) (07/19/85)
In article <9700099@uiucdcs> acheng@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA writes: > > Just because other people are committing murders, doesnot give > Israel a permit to commit murders too. Israel has tried hard to survive without using excessive force. However, protecting her citizens comes first. Since it appears retaliatory bombings are the only deterrent against terrorist attacks, that is what Israel does. Many Israelis don't like it either, but no-one has a better solution. > I never say the Syrians, > PLO or even Lebanonians, be it christian or muslim, have any > rights to kill innocent people. If Cuba, as a country, commits > acts of war against U.S., yes, U.S. has a right to defend herself, > even by counter attack. But Leboron did not declare war or attack > Israel. Hold it right there. Lebanon DID attack Israel, in 1948, and has never ceased its formal state of war on Israel. Furthermore, attacks on Israel were made regularly until 1982, in theform of Katyusha rocket attacks and terrorist border attacks on Israeli villages and kibbutzim. These attacks were made from Lebanon. The Lebanese government was unable or unwilling to stop them. That gave Israel the right under international law to move into Lebanon itself. > No one has rights to kill bystanders when he is chasing > after his enemies. Remember the incidents of the MOVE in Philedelphenia? > The police claimed it was an accident that 5 blocks of houses burned > to level. If the police chief claimed he burned down the whole > place to flush out those MOVE members, I bet no one would tolerate > that. Maybe you should learn a little about how the PLO intentionally used schools, hospitals and residential areas to hide behind, so that Israelis would be unable to attack them without hurting innocent people. (I can post extensive documented evidence to the net, as I did a couple of years ago; this is hardly anything new.) The Israeli army makes every effort not to harm innocent people; however, it can only go so far, and protecting itself and its people comes first. > >"Palistine"? Or did you mean Palestine? At any rate, there is no such country. > >Unless you mean Jordan, which is 77% of Palestine. > > Forgive my spelling. Don't tell me there is no such a country and pass > the buck to Jordon. What was there between Syria, Leboron, Jordon and > Eygpt before 1948? Before 1922 there was a large British colony, seized from the Turks, called Palestine. Britain carved over 3/4 of this off and handed it to the Hashemite clan, and King Hussein is still there. (What? No complaints about the legitimate rights of the residents? Horrors!) Before 1948, in Western Palestine, there was a Jewish community and an Arab community, of roughly equal populations. The Jews had purchased (note: purchased) land which was largely unused, and turned swamp and desert into flourishing communities. The UN voted in 1947 to partition the land into two states, one for the Jews, one for the Arabs. The Arabs rejected this entirely. Arab leaders told their people to leave their homes so that they could destroy the Jews. They lost. Still, from 1949 to 1967 the Arabs could have formed a state on the West Bank. But no, they insisted on total destruction of Israel. Again they lost (in 1967). How many times is a vicious aggressor, whose one goal is to kill you, entitled to come back and say "we lost, but give us back our land and let us set up a state next to you so we can attack you again and destroy you"? > Why are there Palestinian Refugee camps in Leboron, > Jordon now? Where did those people come from? Why are they there? Simple. Because NO ARAB COUNTRY GIVES A DAMN. They were told to leave their homes, and that they'd be back soon, in a few days or weeks, after the Jews had been wiped out. Instead they became refugees. OK, they're refugees. Do you know how many Jewish refugees from Arab countries Israel absorbed in a few short years? Something like 600,000. Israel offered to take in 100,000 of the Arab refugees too. But no other Arab country wanted any of them. These people are culturally, ethnically, linguistically and religiously affiliated with 20 Arab countries. Why are they Israel's problem? If the Arabs had used a tiny fraction of their oil revenues, they could have resettled all the refugees years ago. They left them to rot because they care more about their hatred of Israel than about their own brethren. > I am not against Israel or advocating them be "pushed" into the > sea. No, i am saying "all men are created equal" and that applies > to all mankinds, be it Jews, Arabs, or even Orientals (i am one). > Let us make solutions to let everyone live equally in peace. That's easy to say when you don't know anything about the history of the area. Unfortunately, until the Arab countries and the Palestinian Arabs agree not to push Israel into the sea, Israel has no choice but to use force to maintain its existence. Dave Sherman Toronto P.S. if you want to understand the problems Israel has faced, read a book like "O Jerusalem", an unbiased history of the 1948 war. Or read Leon Uris' recent novel, "The Haj". -- { ihnp4!utzoo pesnta utcs hcr decvax!utcsri } !lsuc!dave
davew@shark.UUCP (Dave Williams) (07/22/85)
I thought I would add my two cents worth (or is that shekels worth?)
about the situation in the Middle East. A little history may be in
order.
Turkey had control of the area comprising what is now Israel, Lebanon,
Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia for more than 300 years. After
WWI the French and English were given mandates for several of these
countries. England was given a mandate for Palestine and Trans-Jordan
and the French were given Syria. A portion of Syria was partitioned
off and became Lebanon. Lebanon was to be a haven for Christian
Arabs. The population was about 2/3 Christian at the time of
partition in 1922. The fact that Lebanon was part of Syria explains why
Syria wishes to keep control of the area. Over the years the Christian
majority has been eroded by inward immigration of Muslim Arabs, such as
Palestinians, a higher birth rate among the Muslims and an outward
migration of Christians to other countries, such as the U.S. The French
mandate collapsed in 1941 as a result of WWII.
In order for the British to inlist the aid of the Jewish population in
Palestine during WWI, the British Goverment established the Balfour
Declaration stating a Jewish Homeland should be established in Palestine.
Modern Israel became a country in 1948 when Palestine was partitioned
between Israel and Jordan. Many Arabs fled the area at the urging of their
leaders who promised to drive the Jews out. This diidn't happen and as
a result thousands of Palestinian Arabs were left homeless, living in
refugee camps under deplorable conditions. These people became pawns
used by the Arab leaders who used the Palestinian cause as a
means to keep their own power.
While Lebanon was officially at war with Israel since 1948, its leaders
had little interest in pursuing outright hostilities. When the 1967
war broke out and Syria lost the Golan Heights, the PLO and other
terrorist organizations started using Southern Lebanon as a base of
activities. The PLO also helped subvert the government of Lebanon
so they could use that country as a base of operation.
What is needed is a homeland for the Arab Palestinians. The West Bank
area might provide the best place for this. The problem is that Syria
would probably never agree to let this happen as they want political
instability to continue until their goals are accomplished. Those
goals are the return of the Golan Heights and total domination of
Lebanon as well as the complete distruction of Israel. These goals
are shared by The Soviet Union. If you are a student of Bible
Prophecy you know this will not happen.
--
Dave Williams
Tektronix, Inc.
Graphic Workstations Division
"The 6000 Family"
"The workstations that made
Wilsonville famous."