jbg Posted July 31, 2013 Report Posted July 31, 2013 In my view, the most obvious example is the material and diplomatic defense and support for the state terror that Indonesia visited first upon its own people, culminating in the bloodbath of 1965; and then the invasion and brutalization of the East Timorese people. The latter is an especially telling example because so many Western nations played a part (including Canada, at least diplomatically), and because its primary supporter, the United States, supported it for 25 years, under five administrations, making it a perfectly bipartisan affair.You are great at referencing situations out of context. The 1965 "bloodbath" followed Suharto's predecessor, Sukarno virtually wrecking Indonesia's economy and sewing strife of his own. Now Sukarno escapes your criticism because he used leftist rhetoric in support of despotism as brutal and corrupt as Suharto. Overall, Dutch rule was probably kinder and gentler. On both the Suharto and East Timor situations, what economic viability was there to an alternative? Are we supposed to support every basket case situation that develops as a result of internal bickering? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
PIK Posted July 31, 2013 Report Posted July 31, 2013 As we speak children from syria are being look after by israelis hospitals, and I wonder why. Why is the savage jew looking after others children hudson??? Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
bleeding heart Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 The principle difference between Western powers and terrorist groups like Hamas is that Hamas's capabilities are limited and that is why the death toll and terrorism is limited. Yes, I think this is obvious. My impression (which could be wrong) is that you are overly critical of the West ??? Relative to what? and forgetting that, chances are, the alternatives to Western powers would include far more violations of human rights. But who is talking about alternatives to Western power? I'm doing nothing more radical than suggesting some of the behaviours, which you fully agree are "deplorable," are not the way we should be behaving. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
bleeding heart Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 As for Timor, some of you get your facts straight. Indonesia committed a war of illegal occupation of East Timor. Unlike Palestine, East Timor was a sovereign nation. Unlike Israel the Indonesian army committed war crimes the IDF has never been accused of let alone proven to have done. I wasn't talking about the IDF--as you'd know if you read without the red blinders of rage distorting your vision. I didn't mention Israel at all. Aside from this, you make much the same point I did. The difference, of which you seem to be unaware, is that this was not a typical case of horrible behavior from brutal allies that the West, rightly or wrongly, simply tolerated. The West helped. Fully, intentionally, knowingly, and materially. This was not like Syria. This was not like Rwanda, or the Congo. Say what you like about involvement (or lack thereof) in such situations...it was very different. In Indonesia's 25-year massacres, the West was culpable, and knowing it was culpable, continued anyway. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
bleeding heart Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 You are great at referencing situations out of context. The 1965 "bloodbath" followed Suharto's predecessor, Sukarno virtually wrecking Indonesia's economy and sewing strife of his own. Now Sukarno escapes your criticism because he used leftist rhetoric in support of despotism as brutal and corrupt as Suharto. Overall, Dutch rule was probably kinder and gentler. On both the Suharto and East Timor situations, what economic viability was there to an alternative? Are we supposed to support every basket case situation that develops as a result of internal bickering? Sukaro "escapes [my] criticism," because I didn't write a 20 000 word essay on the colonial and post-colonial history of the region. My bad. As for "support[ing] every basket case situation"--by which you mean the invasion of East Timor, the murders, rapes, and intentional starvation--we did support. We were very supportive. Of the murderous pseudo-fascists, and their policies which I mention above. You are engaging in, bar none, the most flat-out defense for mass murder on this entire thread. You had some competition...but you win! Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
jbg Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 As we speak children from syria are being look after by israelis hospitals, and I wonder why. Why is the savage jew looking after others children hudson???Don't expect an answer from Hudson, Bleeding Heart etc. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Rue Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 As we speak children from syria are being look after by israelis hospitals, and I wonder why. Why is the savage jew looking after others children hudson??? The H Jones web site does not have a script for that or the on-going peace talks or any news or stories of Israelis, Jews of any kind, Palestinians and/or Muslims working together or doing anything compassionate or positive. Lol. Quote
Rue Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 I wasn't talking about the IDF--as you'd know if you read without the red blinders of rage distorting your vision. I didn't mention Israel at all. Aside from this, you make much the same point I did. The difference, of which you seem to be unaware, is that this was not a typical case of horrible behavior from brutal allies that the West, rightly or wrongly, simply tolerated. The West helped. Fully, intentionally, knowingly, and materially. This was not like Syria. This was not like Rwanda, or the Congo. Say what you like about involvement (or lack thereof) in such situations...it was very different. In Indonesia's 25-year massacres, the West was culpable, and knowing it was culpable, continued anyway. You might want to look at a list of countries that traded with Indonesia while it was in Timor committing its autrocities. Aside from Canada and the US and European nations China and Russia and Arab League nations had no problems dealing with it. I have no problem with you or anyone criticizing any country for propping questionable governments for self gain but the point is and you did it again, you selectively choose the West as you do Israel for such criticism but not Arab League nations or China or Russia, why is that? Why is it that such criticism is leveled at only Israel or the US the two whipping boys of the left? How does Canada slip under the radar for selling weapons or trading with the same nations the US does? How do China, Russia, Europe and the rest of the friggin UN slip under the radar? How is it we have leaders of totalitarian regimes committing humanitarian crimes against their citizens passing condemnation of Israel at the UN? That is the point as well as the ridiculously selective criticism of H Jones that suddenly goes silent when peace talks start or Israelis act compassionately taking in Syrian patients or Palestinian patients for that matter. How is it this site can accuse Israel of being racist when it is fully aware Israeli hospitals taken in Palestinian children and provide them full medical care? What is it that will get you and this site and others who criticize Israel to use the same standard for all nations? That is the point. Some of us are sick of the selective bias that is so blatant it has rendered these threads a running joke of bash Israel whenever possible with any headline that appears negative. Where was H Jones are you pointing out what Tzipi Levni said yesterday and the day before? Do you even know what she said and do you even know why Netanyahu has stood to the side and let her say what she has? You have any idea what it means for Netanyahu to step to the side and let someone he is totally in disagreement with take a lead role in negotiations for peace? You think Abbas could do the same? I am openly a blatantly bias Tzipi Levni supporter but for Netanyahu to step quietly to the side and allow her a prominent role shows me behind the false stereotypes of him being simply a closed minded sob he has balls. He has the balls to put his opposition right up there with him during peace talks if it means uniting Israelis to try get a peace. Is Abbas capable of doing such a thing with his fellow Palestinian leaders? Why the double standard? How is it Abbas who is a fringe leader who can not even control his own Palestinian Authority and refuses to acknowledge a Jewish nation is deemed moderate by the Western press but Netanyahu is depicted as a right wing intransigent sob because he told off Sarkozy, Obama and Merkel when they patronized him and the country he stands for by having the audacity to tell him he must accept a border that places Israelis directly in the path of terrorists? We are now at the anniversary of a time 50 years ago where the IRA stood down from violence before peace talks could prevail. It required Protestant and Catholic clergy and General DeChastelaine of the Canadian army to act as neutral observers to guarantee both IRA and pro Unionist terrorists put down their weapons but it happened. Why is it you and so many others expect Israel to sit at a table with terrorists who refuse to disarm and denounce violence and the destruction of Israel but when Britain demanded that as a precondition to peace talks and obtained that first before it then talked, that was deemed as the only normal thing to do? How is it the West except of course Ireland and Libya and the Arab League of Nations, China and Russia, supported Britain's position that the IRA must disband first. Even the most famous of Irish Catholic American politicians Tip O'Neil and Ed Kennedy supported that notion. Now? Why do you or any European nation or any nation have the right let alone audacity to tell Israel it must return to borders if terrorists would still be armed and be seconds away from its citizens? How is it you and those who criticize Israel are silent to the terror cells that still exist on the West Bank that Abbas has no control over? How is it you think Israel lives in a vacuum where it unilaterally must do what ever Abbas demands but he on the other hand does not even have to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state in a peace settlement? That is the position of the EEC right now. In fact only Canada and the US have stated they do not expect Israel to agree to anything that endangers its citizens. They are the only two nations to unequivocally support Israel's right to safe borders. The EEC continues to remain silent on that notion. They expect Israel to simply give back the Golan Heights and West Bank with no concession to how that is not practical as long as terrorists exist? How is it Israel is solely portrayed as the obstacle to peace but not a peep is mentioned of Abbas' refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and not a peep is mentioned of terrorists who are the first and most obvious obstacle to peace. To read the comments of the West, only crazy extremist Jews on the West Bank prevent peace. Nothing else. That is what many of us are calling out. This tangent about Indonesia is just an example of how people are selective in who they criticize. Quote
Rue Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 I repeat again the premises that both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have engaged in conduct that has been unnecessarily adversarial and has set up obstacles to peace. A conflict does not simply arise because of one side being white and innocent and the other black and evil. The black and white premises continually put forth by H Jones is what propaganda sites do whose agenda is to incite violence and hatred against only one side, in this case Israel. An intelligent and rational mind flexes. It sees more than one colour, more than one perspective and argument. The mentally deficient mind limited by lack of intelligence or hatred or emotions or a combination of all three can't flex. It can not see any position, perspective or imagine any feeling other than its own. The world is either what it finds acceptable (white) or threatening and evil (black). I reject and will continue to reject categorically the stunted and mentally deficient concept that the conflict in the Middle East is simply created by whatever a Jew does who wants a Jewish state as is proposed by H. Jones. I reject categorically the statements of Bleeding Heat in this and past posts that show a subjective selectivity when analyzing all sides to the conflict. I repeat again issues between Israelis and Palestinians are only one of a multiple layered and inter- connected web of relationship conflicts between numerous interest groups manifesting in the problems of the Middle East. Israel and Palestine is but one sub conflict in a larger series of conflicts within the Middle East. The attempt to isolate it as he cause of all Middle East problems and blame all the ills of the Middle East on the US and Israel is what I now call out. I call out the people who blame Israel and the US for the internal difficulties, civil wars, corrupt and brutal regimes across the Middle East. Quote
bleeding heart Posted August 1, 2013 Report Posted August 1, 2013 You might want to look at a list of countries that traded with Indonesia while it was in Timor committing its autrocities. Aside from Canada and the US and European nations China and Russia and Arab League nations had no problems dealing with it. I have no problem with you or anyone criticizing any country for propping questionable governments for self gain but the point is and you did it again, you selectively choose the West as you do Israel for such criticism but not Arab League nations or China or Russia, why is that? Why is it that such criticism is leveled at only Israel or the US the two whipping boys of the left? How does Canada slip under the radar for selling weapons or trading with the same nations the US does? How do China, Russia, Europe and the rest of the friggin UN slip under the radar? I didn't mention China, the Arab League, et al because I was specifically answering pointed remarks about how the West "doesn't behave this way"...a bizarre opinion on which some of the posters have since backtracked. Most of us agree that the Arab nations, China, Russia are routinely culpable in such horrors. So the only argument was whether the West is. You see? I am not arguing for the nobility and innocence of Arab nations, China, and so on. Rather, I am answering statements about the nobility and innocence of specific Western nations. Now, that you think I left Canada and Europe out of the equation means, by definition, that you didn't read my posts. I point exactly this out, explicitly, several times...I even corrected a poster who kept bringing up the US, and told him that several other countries (the UK in the lead) were also directly involved. So you got this opinion from...well, who knows? Not from what I've posted. And--to make the point to you for the umpteenth time--nowhere do I single out Israel for particular disapprobation, on this matter or any other. And never have. Why you think I'm the same poster as people who post things that I do not post, and hold opinions that I've never expressed....I guess only you can answer this mystery. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Rue Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 If you argue I have misstated your positions Bleeding Heart then the last statement by you is good enough for me and we will leave it at this-I retract anything that suggests other than your opinions stated in your last post. Fair is fair. You are entitled to that in a debate. I disagree with much of what you say but I do not and have never thought you are a liar. It is your opinions I debate. If I have misconstrued some you are entitled to your defence and my retraction. Simple as that. Fair is fair. Quote
bleeding heart Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 If you argue I have misstated your positions Bleeding Heart then the last statement by you is good enough for me and we will leave it at this-I retract anything that suggests other than your opinions stated in your last post. Fair is fair. You are entitled to that in a debate. I disagree with much of what you say but I do not and have never thought you are a liar. It is your opinions I debate. If I have misconstrued some you are entitled to your defence and my retraction. Simple as that. Fair is fair. Thank you, Rue. You're a true gentleman. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
dre Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 There's a difference. Hamas is a listed terrorist group. It fires rockets blindly into civilian areas while hiding behind same. The United States is not a terrorist group. No amount of personal guilt on your part will make me see it otherwise. Sorry. You can smugly think yourself correct if you wish...it still won't change my POV. America helping dubious allies with support might be some other 'ism'...but it's just not terrorism. That's the realm of the fellow on the ground hacking your head off. There's a difference. Hamas is a listed terrorist group. This is a classic right here. The reason that western support for various mercenary, revolutionary, and paramilitary groups is because those groups are not on a list... made by the west! Arming terrorist guerillas in Nicaragua? No problem! They arent on the list! The US partners up with Israel to ship arms to Iran? No problem! They werent on the list! (Oh wait! They WERE on the list of state sponsors of terror when Israel shipped arms to them with the promise the US would resupply its inventory) Theres literally dozens of similar cases. Its all a matter of perspective. The violent paramilitary, guerilla, and revolutionary groups we LIKE are freedom fighters. The ones we DONT LIKE are terrorists. The west is as guilty as anyone else. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
bleeding heart Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 This is a classic right here. The reason that western support for various mercenary, revolutionary, and paramilitary groups is because those groups are not on a list... made by the west! Arming terrorist guerillas in Nicaragua? No problem! They arent on the list! The US partners up with Israel to ship arms to Iran? No problem! They werent on the list! (Oh wait! They WERE on the list of state sponsors of terror when Israel shipped arms to them with the promise the US would resupply its inventory) And then there's MEK in Iran. Listed as a terrorist group, they nevertheless were warmly embraced by many Democrats and Republicans alike...some even getting paid by the MEK to speak on their behalf. (That this is flatly illegal under US law need not be stressed, I presume.) I believe that European and Canadian officials also admire these terrorists, but I'm not sure. So what's the answer to this conundrum? Why...delist them as a terrorist group, of course! So that's what was done. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
DogOnPorch Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 And then there's MEK in Iran. Listed as a terrorist group, they nevertheless were warmly embraced by many Democrats and Republicans alike...some even getting paid by the MEK to speak on their behalf. (That this is flatly illegal under US law need not be stressed, I presume.) I believe that European and Canadian officials also admire these terrorists, but I'm not sure. So what's the answer to this conundrum? Why...delist them as a terrorist group, of course! So that's what was done. You and dre are free to support Hamas and their unique abilities to make folks see things their way. I recall a pack of motorcycles dragging a 'Zionist' through the streets last time they went all peaceful and non-terrorist-like. Shall we 'delist' them as merely misunderstood cycle enthusiasts? PS...I'd show you this event in action, but any media depicting of terrorist organizations doing what they do is apparently frowned upon here at MLW. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 The west is as guilty as anyone else. Well, you are. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bleeding heart Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 You and dre are free to support Hamas and their unique abilities to make folks see things their way. I recall a pack of motorcycles dragging a 'Zionist' through the streets last time they went all peaceful and non-terrorist-like. Shall we 'delist' them as merely misunderstood cycle enthusiasts? PS...I'd show you this event in action, but any media depicting of terrorist organizations doing what they do is apparently frowned upon here at MLW. Where in the name of Sweet Godzilla on His Throne did you get the idea that I "support Hamas"? Since it wasn't from any of my posts, I'm curious as to the arcane and mysterious genesis of the belief. I presume it's ultimately rather...religious in nature. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
DogOnPorch Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 Where in the name of Sweet Godzilla on His Throne did you get the idea that I "support Hamas"? Since it wasn't from any of my posts, I'm curious as to the arcane and mysterious genesis of the belief. I presume it's ultimately rather...religious in nature. You can 'delist' whomever you like. I'm not your keeper. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dre Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 Where in the name of Sweet Godzilla on His Throne did you get the idea that I "support Hamas"? In the absense of any kind of argument, he might as well just make some random noise I guess. This whole thing is obviously a double standard. Theres all kinds of guerilla groups that use terrorist tactics. Whether we officially consider them terrorists or not entirely depends on how we feel about the folks they are attacking. The nicaraguan contras were "freedom fighters" because they were fighting the leftest Ortega government. Alqeada founders fighting the soviet occupation of afghanistan were freedom fighters... But Hezbollah, Hamas, and the PLO fighting the Israeli occupation of the west bank and gaza are "terrorists". Its really just a matter of whos side these groups are on, and how they line up with our own interests. The contempory meaning of "terrorist" is actually "anti-western". Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
DogOnPorch Posted August 2, 2013 Report Posted August 2, 2013 (edited) In the absense of any kind of argument, he might as well just make some random noise I guess. This whole thing is obviously a double standard. Theres all kinds of guerilla groups that use terrorist tactics. Whether we officially consider them terrorists or not entirely depends on how we feel about the folks they are attacking. The nicaraguan contras were "freedom fighters" because they were fighting the leftest Ortega government. Alqeada founders fighting the soviet occupation of afghanistan were freedom fighters... But Hezbollah, Hamas, and the PLO fighting the Israeli occupation of the west bank and gaza are "terrorists". Its really just a matter of whos side these groups are on, and how they line up with our own interests. The contempory meaning of "terrorist" is actually "anti-western". Instead of all this dancing around why not just say it if you believe it: "Hamas isn't a terrorist group." If they're so NOT a terrorist group...instead of putting words in my mouth, step-up to the plate and defend your "freedom fighter" charges in Gaza. I'll take any further dancing around as a sign that you DO believe Hamas is a terrorist group. Edited August 2, 2013 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dre Posted August 3, 2013 Report Posted August 3, 2013 Instead of all this dancing around why not just say it if you believe it: "Hamas isn't a terrorist group." If they're so NOT a terrorist group...instead of putting words in my mouth, step-up to the plate and defend your "freedom fighter" charges in Gaza. I'll take any further dancing around as a sign that you DO believe Hamas is a terrorist group. I have no idea what you are even talking about. I never even hinted that I didnt believe Hamas is a terrorist group. You seem to have a hard time following a pretty simple and straight forward conversation. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
DogOnPorch Posted August 3, 2013 Report Posted August 3, 2013 I have no idea what you are even talking about. I never even hinted that I didnt believe Hamas is a terrorist group. You seem to have a hard time following a pretty simple and straight forward conversation. You apparently never know what your talking about. Hamas is a terrorist group. Not "freedom fighters". You: The nicaraguan contras (sic) were "freedom fighters" because they were fighting the leftest Ortega government. Speaking of never hinting . When have we EVER discussed 1980s Central American revolutions? Uhhh...never....plus, you can't spell "Contra" w/o "Sandinista". Bang-bang-shoot-shoot...happiness is a... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dre Posted August 3, 2013 Report Posted August 3, 2013 You apparently never know what your talking about. Hamas is a terrorist group. Not "freedom fighters". Thats a wonderful argument you are having with the voices inside your head Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
DogOnPorch Posted August 3, 2013 Report Posted August 3, 2013 (edited) Thats a wonderful argument you are having with the voices inside your head Just responding to a post made by another member named "dre", apparently. Your Doppelganger: This whole thing is obviously a double standard. Theres all kinds of guerilla groups that use terrorist tactics. Whether we officially consider them terrorists or not entirely depends on how we feel about the folks they are attacking. The nicaraguan contras were "freedom fighters" because they were fighting the leftest Ortega government. Alqeada founders fighting the soviet occupation of afghanistan were freedom fighters... But Hezbollah, Hamas, and the PLO fighting the Israeli occupation of the west bank and gaza are "terrorists". You should inform your doppelganger that he/she spelled "al-Qaeda" incorrectly. Edited August 3, 2013 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dre Posted August 3, 2013 Report Posted August 3, 2013 (edited) Just responding to a post made by another member named "dre", apparently. You should inform your doppelganger that he/she spelled "al-Qaeda" incorrectly. So you cant read? Where did I say Hamas were freedom fighters? Oh yeah! Nowhere. Youre arguing... with... yourself. Edited August 3, 2013 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.