[POLITICAL] - LEBANON

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:14 pm

Stinky - i'm not going to get into an argument or discussion on this - I've fully realised how futile that most often is & I have much more fruitful activities I can partake in - such as continuing to follow the current crisis.
My 'sources' which you refer to are many - but stem from the dissertation research I did at the University of Bradford's Peace Studies department.
Check out the credentials of The tutors & professors working there if you wish - & their connections & conflict resolution work in the middle east & elsewhere.
I never finished my dissertation by the way - but I continue to gather information, monitor the situation & stay in contact with informed parties.
A few answers.
The taking of palestinian hostages has been reported in western media - although very minimally.
Just because the U.S. locks up prisoners in Guantanamo that makes it ok for the Israelis to practice administrative detention (including children) - then again they ahve far more experience & have been doing it far longer & treh supreme court has now ruled against the detainees in the states.
I also have no misconceptions regarding British Moral superiority & never made reference to that, so that's a fallacious & incorrect assumption/accusation - many of teh techniques used in Guantanomo & elsewhere wher first practiced on IRA prisoners & suspects by the British military.
Regarding U.S. intelligence regarding alleged Iraqi WMD - if you did any research you would discover how much intelligence was from Israeli sources - as tehy are considered 'experts' in the area, notwithstanding their immense political & strategically motivated bias.

May I ask your sources of information.

stinky
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:06 am

Post by stinky » Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:33 pm

diverdee wrote:The taking of palestinian hostages has been reported in western media - although very minimally.
I'm already aware of this, and have already mentioned it in previous posts.
diverdee wrote:Just because the U.S. locks up prisoners in Guantanamo that makes it ok for the Israelis to practice administrative detention (including children) - then again they ahve far more experience & have been doing it far longer & treh supreme court has now ruled against the detainees in the states.
Of course not, and i've bashed heads tirelessly on this forum for those same exact sentiments!
diverdee wrote:Regarding U.S. intelligence regarding alleged Iraqi WMD - if you did any research you would discover how much intelligence was from Israeli sources - as tehy are considered 'eperts' in the area, notwithstanding their immense political & strategically motivated bias.
Yes, i'm aware of that, but that just shows that "intelligence" isn't really that, is it!
diverdee wrote:May I ask your sources of information.
First, i like to remain anonymous for my own personal preferences that don't have anything to do with this thread, and i've stated this in previous threads. It's my right, and i use it. Second, let's say that i have firsthand knowledge of events, as well as friends & family in both the military, various left leaning groups and refusenik associations. I too monitor the situation very closely, and read Chomsky emphatically, as well as Monbiot. Anyone here on this forum who knows me, knows that i emphatically defend the left. Having said that, if you'll notice i haven't disagreed with many of your accusations, and i repeatedly state in previous posts that i do not wholeheartedly condone the acts of the Israeli government. But, i don't believe that israel bashing is right. I don't respect anyone who foolishly states we should "send 'em to Mexico, or Death Valley,<place other idiotic locale here>"

A certain amount of objectivity needs to be had, and i don't think many people posting about this subject do, and mostly only regurgitate their own polical bias without pandering even remotely to an opposition, or "fact" that disregards their "facts".

Just because you work at a University for yadda yadda, doesn't make it right to go israel bashing. Let me ask you this.. how many palestinians do you know first hand debate the morality of suicide bombings. Everyone i know justifies it. I 'can' justify it to some extent, but that's still not morally just, is it? Now, on the israeli side, there is a peace camp, and a full blown left that does protest emphatically against the government there. I ask you this... is that view being reciprocated unabashedly on the palestinian side? Can you honestly tell me that it is? Name the organizations that mirror groups like Peace Now but on the palestinian side, and are willing to protest openly (as they do in jerusalem and tel aviv almost weekly)? You should be able to do this, since you worked on "dissertation research ___ at the University of Bradford's Peace Studies department"

adi
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 9:58 am
Location: tlv

Post by adi » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:32 pm

i live this shit, and i just want a way to peace. i'd be willing to give up a lot if it meant real peace.

djadonis206
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:23 pm
Location: Seattle, WA.

Post by djadonis206 » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:41 pm

Damn, you guys sound like your hella fun to kick it with
Ableton | Elektron

Music

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:14 pm

I wasn't 'Israel Bashing'.
I am myself of Jewish extraction (among others - being something of a 'mutt') & also, through family connections etc. & aquaintances from Uni. have connections with peoples on both sides of this struggle.
Regarding nonviolent organisations on the Palestinian side - historically the most active were various womens groups who made alliances with peacenow, the woemn in black & others during the first Intifada.
They came to nought though with the increasing militancy exhibited, mostly through the participation of more radical islamist organisations towards the end of the first intifada, For someone with a good eal of knowledge on the subject it does not need to be pointed out who helped the rise of the islamists as a counter to more moderate elemdnts within that resistance movement.
Presently the main role (largely unreported - althoug haaretz, Johnathon Cook & others have reported to an extent) of non-violent resistance is along the path of the wall.
This is mostly a joint effort between palestinian villagers, Israeli peace activists & number of international organisations, including a fair number of palestinians who have foreign residency.
There are a number of peace camps - one of which received an Israeli supreme court ruling (limited as it was) that the wall's route in that particular area should be changed for humanitarian reasons (I forget the name of the village).
This movement is coming under increasing threat as the IDF policy now is teargas & rubber bullets, espacially it seems vs. any Israelis who dare to cross.
This will also become more difficult as Israeli law has recently been changed so as to disallow palestinians with foreign residency (who also have requests for palestinian residency routinely denied) access to Gaza - basically when their trimonthly permit runs out next time that will be it, they will be denied access under fear of imprisonment.
That's a shame (but a logical extension of the current policy) as many of the most moderate elements are these same palestinians, a large number of journalist & people involved with the U.N., journalists & members of various N.G.O's are also included in this number.
It's also a shame that many of the more moderate elements are among the thousands locked up in Israeli jails & detention camps, some among the 'administrative' detainees.
Many of these more moderate elements were principal architects of the 'prisoners declaration'.
Anyways - not Israel bashing, just an observer of a policy which (somewhat like U.S. policy in the region) I find hard to understand, coming from a background of international relations & conflict resolution theory, as it seems so short sighted & likely to result in yet further cycles of violence from participants on both sides.
Lock up & attack the moderates & one leaves a political vacuum in which only the extremist can flourish.
Ignore the moves extemem elements take in the direction of moderation & one can pretty much guarantee that they will take a step back to extremism.
Give a people nothing to lose, backed into a corner & they will likely fight harder.
It is also yet more recruting fodder for Jihadis the world over.
Regarding Lebanon & the effect it is already having for instance - Moqtada el Sadr has already stated the he is considering releasing his Badr brigades to fight the U.S. occupation of Iraq as a gesture of solidarity with the Lebanese.
Some recent statemnts from Newt Gingrich & others reagarding a 'third world war' are also scary in the extreme.
Meanwhile more regimes stand up & take notice theat unilateral action can be taken & that the rule of force & ignoring of the Geneva conventions is becoming standard operating procedure.
dark days.

sweetjesus
Posts: 8803
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: www.fridge.net.au
Contact:

Post by sweetjesus » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:23 pm

diverdee wrote:I wasn't 'Israel Bashing'.
I am myself of Jewish extraction (among others - being something of a 'mutt') & also, through family connections etc. & aquaintances from Uni. have connections with peoples on both sides of this struggle.
Regarding nonviolent organisations on the Palestinian side - historically the most active were various womens groups who made alliances with peacenow, the woemn in black & others during the first Intifada.
They came to nought though with the increasing militancy exhibited, mostly through the participation of more radical islamist organisations towards the end of the first intifada, For someone with a good eal of knowledge on the subject it does not need to be pointed out who helped the rise of the islamists as a counter to more moderate elemdnts within that resistance movement.
Presently the main role (largely unreported - althoug haaretz, Johnathon Cook & others have reported to an extent) of non-violent resistance is along the path of the wall.
This is mostly a joint effort between palestinian villagers, Israeli peace activists & number of international organisations, including a fair number of palestinians who have foreign residency.
There are a number of peace camps - one of which received an Israeli supreme court ruling (limited as it was) that the wall's route in that particular area should be changed for humanitarian reasons (I forget the name of the village).
This movement is coming under increasing threat as the IDF policy now is teargas & rubber bullets, espacially it seems vs. any Israelis who dare to cross.
This will also become more difficult as Israeli law has recently been changed so as to disallow palestinians with foreign residency (who also have requests for palestinian residency routinely denied) access to Gaza - basically when their trimonthly permit runs out next time that will be it, they will be denied access under fear of imprisonment.
That's a shame (but a logical extension of the current policy) as many of the most moderate elements are these same palestinians, a large number of journalist & people involved with the U.N., journalists & members of various N.G.O's are also included in this number.
It's also a shame that many of the more moderate elements are among the thousands locked up in Israeli jails & detention camps, some among the 'administrative' detainees.
Many of these more moderate elements were principal architects of the 'prisoners declaration'.
Anyways - not Israel bashing, just an observer of a policy which (somewhat like U.S. policy in the region) I find hard to understand, coming from a background of international relations & conflict resolution theory, as it seems so short sighted & likely to result in yet further cycles of violence from participants on both sides.
Lock up & attack the moderates & one leaves a political vacuum in which only the extremist can flourish.
Ignore the moves extemem elements take in the direction of moderation & one can pretty much guarantee that they will take a step back to extremism.
Give a people nothing to lose, backed into a corner & they will likely fight harder.
It is also yet more recruting fodder for Jihadis the world over.
Regarding Lebanon & the effect it is already having for instance - Moqtada el Sadr has already stated the he is considering releasing his Badr brigades to fight the U.S. occupation of Iraq as a gesture of solidarity with the Lebanese.
Some recent statemnts from Newt Gingrich & others reagarding a 'third world war' are also scary in the extreme.
Meanwhile more regimes stand up & take notice theat unilateral action can be taken & that the rule of force & ignoring of the Geneva conventions is becoming standard operating procedure.
dark days.
where is the profit in peace?

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:30 pm

sweetjesus wrote:
where is the profit in peace?
Exactly - Nail & Head.
Top man, that's exactly where i'm coming from theoretically.
Follow the accumulation of power & profit.
Of course it's short term gain for a specific group with specific agenda - a narrowly shared huge profit for a minority, as opposed to a more long term view which allows the sharing of bounty.
But that's the NWO in action, as it has been planned since the end of WW2 & before.
I'll shut up now.

Edit: there's a wonderful documentary caled 'Why we Fight' - you would likely find it enjoyabel & informative.

stinky
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:06 am

Post by stinky » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:38 pm

I agree with everything you said, but you made my point for me perfectly:
diverdee wrote:Regarding nonviolent organisations on the Palestinian side - historically the most active were various womens groups who made alliances with peacenow, the woemn in black & others during the first Intifada.
They came to nought though with the increasing militancy exhibited, mostly through the participation of more radical islamist organisations towards the end of the first intifada,
These organizations can't exist to protest their own governments policies, because they would be threatened immediately. This is not just apparent in palestinian society but every single arab society, except perhaps few protest in Jordan and Lebanon (considered the most free of all arab nations).

Now, these organizations are outstandingly vocal throughout Israel, and are felt politically and socially. In fact, mass protests on such a large scale happen so often in israel that it's almost unheard of in any other country. My point is, it's a virtually impossible task to change your nanny states policy, and every country in the world has this problem, be it western, middle eastern, south american, asian, etc.

Look at the United States.. a majority of the population have always been against the war. Same with Britain. Look what happened today, Bush vetoed the Stem Cell bill supported by a majority of the population & the Senate. That flies in the face of rational thinking. How can any western country purport to be democratic when such an environment is allowed to exist unabashed? This is not just a problem in Israel, or the US, or Europe. It's just apathy, fear, media control, etc.. a combination of all of the above. Conspiracy theories abound. That doesn't make the US, or Israel, or Iran inherrently evil. Why do i say that? Because of social tolerances (or lack of) being the accepted norm of the respective society. This is an issue that is not just israels and to whole heartedly blame israel society for the injustices of it's leaders in in itself unjust.

Same with Iranians.

Same with Palestinians.

It's apathy and fear and media control, and these are the things that need to change on a socially conscious level (and not just in israel). And, until that happens, you can say 'peace' to peace in the middle east.

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:50 pm

Ahhh.. if I came across as 'bashing' or being negative towards the Israeli people themselves I apologise & didn't mean that.
Usually in these discussions I am more careful with terms & definitions, so as to avoid misunderstanding.
It is indeed the Israeli adminstration (which is increasingly being led by the military, especially the air force) I mean to criticise, or at least the policy of sections of the administration.
The problem with representative democracy is that it can skirt so close to fascism - as seen in the U.S. presently.
Having said that there are particular extremist segments of Israeli society, radical settler groups (such as the one Golstein belonged to) which are allied with small but powerful right wing religious parties active in the Knesset & the semi-autonomous (more autonomous than semi in reality) religious units in the IDF that I have serious issues with.
The funny thing is (not funny at all actually - more very sad) that once Israelis & Palestinians come into contact with each other in nonviolent resistance they find they have so much in common.
Of course extreme elements on both sides, & those who are just looking to take advantage & make a profit really can't be allowing that level of real human interaction & understanding.
For instance Fatah officials were mostly absent during peaceful demonstrations against teh wall & refused to legitimise them - strange that?
Not considering the nepotism, profiterring & racketeering that went on within the ranks of the 'tunisian' fatah old guard returnees - but that's a subject of discussion worthy of a book on it's own - profit before lasting peace there pretty much every time.

stinky
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:06 am

Post by stinky » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:55 pm

Ahhh.. if I came across as 'bashing' or being negative towards the Israeli people themselves I apologise & didn't mean that.
Yes thank you.. my references were to people like b0unce and computo who have no firsthand experience yet remarkably denigrate only Israel (without pause for seperation from fringe elements as whole) and without equally bashing the fringe elements on the opposing side, thereby legitimizing morally corrupt attitudes. Those are the people the further distort and confuse others who pay attention only passingly but nevertheless perpertuate fallacies that have a major effect on individuals worldwide, and not just in the portion of the globe that's currently embroiled in conflict.

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:49 pm

To bring this back to a smaller question, and the topic of this thread (Lebanon), it seems that the Arab League is rather tired of Hizbollah's antics as well.

Nasrallah was rebuffed by a multitude of Arabic and muslim power-brokers recently.

Saudi Arabian foreign minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal, said bluntly and publicly that Hezbollah's decision to cross the Lebanese border, attack Israel, and kidnap its soldiers has left the Shiite group on its own to face Israel. The unspoken message here was, "We hope they blow you away."

The Arab League declared on saturday that "behavior undertaken by some groups [read: Hezbollah and Hamas] in apparent safeguarding of Arab interests does in fact harm those interests, allowing Israel and other parties from outside the Arab world [read: Iran] to wreck havoc with the security and safety of all Arab countries."

Abdul Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of Al-Arabiya, wrote on the 19th: "We have lost most of our causes and the largest portions of our lands following fiery speeches and empty promises of struggle coupled with hallucinating, drug-induced political fantasies."

Tariq Alhomayed, editor in chief of the Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat: "Mr. Nasrallah bombastically announced he consulted no one when he decided to attack Israel, nor did he measure Lebanon's need for security, prosperity, and the safety of its people. He said he needs no one's help but God's to fight the fight."

My source on this is Journalist Youssef Ibrahim, who wrote a scathing editorial in the NY Sun... And he's not known as an Israeli appologist I can tell you.
http://www.nysun.com/article/36110

It seems that even a number of Arab sources are placing the blame for the CURRENT breakout of violence squarely on Hamas and Hizbollah in particular.

stinky
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:06 am

Post by stinky » Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:54 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:Abdul Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of Al-Arabiya, wrote on the 19th: "We have lost most of our causes and the largest portions of our lands following fiery speeches and empty promises of struggle coupled with hallucinating, drug-induced political fantasies."

Tariq Alhomayed, editor in chief of the Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat: "Mr. Nasrallah bombastically announced he consulted no one when he decided to attack Israel, nor did he measure Lebanon's need for security, prosperity, and the safety of its people. He said he needs no one's help but God's to fight the fight."

Journalist Youssef Ibrahim wrote a scathing editorial in the NY Sun... And he's not known as an Israeli appologist I can tell you.

It seems that even a number of Arab sources are placing the blame for the CURRENT breakout of violence squarely on Hamas and Hizbollah in particular.
Yay, rational thought. Wonderful. I'd like to point out that with the current Israeli government, at no time in recent history, has peace been more possible. Olmert is not Sharon. He was never a military behemoth. Labor is active in the current goverment. There's a unity government. Hamas and Hezbollah fucked that up royally.

kennerb
Posts: 1464
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Post by kennerb » Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:15 pm

stinky wrote:
noisetonepause wrote:It's not an Islamic practice. It's done in certain circles in Sudan and that area by Christians, Animists, and Muslims alike. Outside these areas it is looked down upon and regarded as disgusting by all Muslims.
Sorry, you're wrong there too. Here's an article from 2004 talking about the merits of 'debating' female circumcision in Egypt!!!

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Sate ... 9503543886

In general, yes most muslim 'countries' do not 'condone' this practice (which has only been recently, since western countries have complained about human/woman's right issues), but that doesn't mean it still doesn't happen, discretely. Kind of like honor killings, people don't talk about it openly, but are still expected to carry it out to maintain respect and keep their honor within their communities. By the way, in Egypt in 1997, a ban on the practice was overturned. Additionally, you mentioned sudan like it was not muslim, but a majority of the country is. Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya and Chad... regardless of whether or not the majority is muslim, muslims there do practice this.

Here's some more info:

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Sharia/fe ... ision.html

http://www.mwlusa.org/publications/posi ... s/fgm.html

if you look here,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_circumcision

you'll note that

"Although it is practiced by African Muslims, it is also known to exist throughout the Middle East, though it is veiled in secrecy, unlike in parts of Africa, where it is practiced relatively openly. The practice occurs particularly in northern Saudi Arabia, southern Jordan, and Iraq, and there is also circumstantial evidence to suggest it is present in Syria, western Iran, and among the Bedouin population of Israel."

But yet the cutting of the forskin off a guy is just Okey Dokey in Western society.
3ghz Pentium 4 (Prescott), XP Sp2, 1gig Ram, Dual Monitor with Matrox Millenium, MOTU Traveler, Event EZ8 Adat card. Also IBM THinkpad t40 1.6 1 gig ram

stinky
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:06 am

Post by stinky » Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:16 pm

kennerb wrote:But yet the cutting of the forskin off a guy is just Okey Dokey in Western society.
Yeah, actually. That's because you (a male) don't lose orgasmic sensation, as well as it being more hygenic.

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:20 pm

stinky wrote:
kennerb wrote:But yet the cutting of the forskin off a guy is just Okey Dokey in Western society.
Yeah, actually. That's because you (a male) don't lose orgasmic sensation, as well as it being more hygenic.
...You do lose it. I've spoken with men who were circuimscised as an adult and they claimed they lost a significant ammount of sensitivity. They could still bust a nut, but it was more like "pppfffffft" rather that "BWWWAAAANG!!!"

I was snipped as an infant, and I'm fucking pissed that I was never given the option.

Post Reply