james,

There was an interesting article in the New York Times web site.  The
reporter interviewed some kids on the Palestinian side.  All of them had one
objective in mind ... to strap on a bomb or whatever and kill Israelis.
They did not see it wrong to kill women or even other Arabs in the same
blast.  They only stopped short on the possibility of killing perhaps some
other school kids.

The bottom line is that this is the sort of world that is being constructed.
The present leadership is not presenting the viability of other options.
There is a certain mentality that is being fostered.  You can see it in the
parades on TV.  A society that is focused upon killing.  For the moment it
serves the agenda of those who have no interest in peace, but indicates real
problems on the long term for that region.

We are arguing here about small things ... as if to discuss whether we
should polish the brass handrails whilst the Titanic is sinking.

eduard



  -----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 12:00 AM
Subject: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application?


   From: "swmaerske" <SWMirsky@...>
   Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
   To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application?
   Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 02:56:30 -0000

   Sorry, have been away and so missed some of the discussion here but
   perhaps it's not too late to chime in a bit. No question in my mind
   that Mandela and Arafat are not equivalent individuals. Mandela
   demonstrated that he was a man of very high moral fiber and character
   whereas every action of Arafat seems to demonstrate the reverse. The
   evidence seems pretty clear that he has been dissembling about his
   aims with regard to Israel and his support for terrorism for years.
   It is also fairly clear, at least to me, that he was directly
   culpable in the unleashing of the latest spate of violence in the
   Mideast as I've already noted. That the Palestinians, either directly
   supported by him (as recently retrieved documents seem to show) or as
   merely incited by him, have given the Israelis sufficient and extreme
   provocation to react as they have done is also clear, as I see it. It
   is a messy thing the Israelis are doing (and something we all wish
   they had not done) but one must recognize that they resisted doing it
   right up until the past couple of months although the terroism
   unleashed by the Palestinians started some 18 months ago.

   That said, I also think it is perfectly clear that the Israelis
   cannot continue to occupy or contend with the Palestinians for the
   West Bank territory indefinitely. Whatever else has occured, it is
   certainly the case that the Israelis must give way to a Palestinian
   state in the territories they have occupied and this is long overdue.
   It has demeaned the Israelis' own moral position and culture and
   turned them into occupiers.

   What is unclear is whether the Palestinians will accept a final
   settlement based on this arrangement or will only consider this a
   jumping off point to the next stage of their effort to drive the
   Israelis permanently from the region. That, of course, is what the
   Israelis fear, but I think if that were to happen, while it would
   surely be problematic from a military perspective for them, the
   matter would be morally clearer as it would be a matter of one state
   against another. It should be clear from this that I think the
   Israelis should withdraw completely from the West Bank area and Gaza,
   including shutting down all but a few border area settlements which
   would remain as part of a permanent and officially recognized border
   adjustment (bearing in mind that permanent and accepted borders have
   never been fixed and that the old pre-'67 borders were armistice
   lines only, where the armies halted in place when the cease-fire was
   effected in '48).

   I suspect that this will not be acceptable to many, if not all, the
   Arab countries but unless they are saying that Israel ultimately must
   be driven out, then some sort of adjustment along these lines must be
   made.

   I also support placing the sacred sites in East Jerusalem (Muslim,
   Christian and Jewish) under international supervision and ceding a
   portion of that area to the new state of Palestine for its capital as
   the Palestinians demand. Of course, this is an invitation to future
   problems because of the contiguity of the combatants, but I don't see
   any other rational choice.

   I also believe that the Palestinians must agree that this is the end
   of their claims (a so-called right of return is a non-starter since
   Israel cannot agree to it without signing its own death warrant) and
   that the Palestinians must finally accept the partition of the old
   British mandate of western Palestine (the eastern portion was long
   ago absorbed into the kingdom of Jordan) which gives them their state.

   If they are of good will, I believe over time the wounds can be
   healed and the region can grow into an economically prosperous one
   serving all its people. If not, then the next war will be fought
   between the state of Palestine and the state of Israel and that will
   be a bloody one indeed. But hopefully, it will never come to that.

   I would just note in passing that almost all of this could have been
   had 18 months ago at the negotiations between Barak and Arafat.
   (Barak was not offering as comprehensive a dismantling of all the
   settlements as I think is necessary but Arafat certainly had room to
   bargain for more when he decided, instead, to walk away from the
   table and unleash the intifada.)

   Now how do we get to all this via a moral analysis and application of
   the principles behind this analysis?

   I think that the values here are: 1) recognizing that both claimants
   have rights to the disputed territory (neither of which trumps the
   other); and 2) they have the right to be free from dominance by the
   other. I also think that there is a value to peaceful compromise as a
   means of addressing the rights claims and that the use of violence is
   not only not effective here but only creates longer term grievances
   for both sides. I also think the empirical evidence indicates that
   the Palestinians have so far been the less honest and sincere in
   their contacts with the Israelis though the Israelis are not to be
   absolved here since I think they have secretly (or not-so-secretly)
   nurtured a dream that some day events would work out in their favor
   if they just continued to hold onto the occupied territories and
   continued to plant their settlements.

   But those policies have manifestly been counterproductive as they
   have just proved to the Palestinians that the prolongation of the
   occupation can only result in their continued loss of control over
   their lands. Had Israel followed the original Labor party policy of
   only establishing limited settlements to enhance security there was a
   chance that, over the years, an ethnic and cultural rapprochement
   could have been developed between the two peoples. Not everyone on
   both sides would have embraced this, of course, but I think a core of
   people who saw a benefit in peaceful and perhaps even friendly
   coexistence would have developed. Instead we got an increasingly
   angry and radicalized Palestinian population which only grew their
   hatred and anger into the bloody terrorism we have witnessed in the
   past 18 months. While I do not think the Palestinians can be absolved
   from responsibility for their very bloody actions by excusing this as
   a result of foolish and wrong-headed Israeli policies, I do think
   Israeli policy bares some of the blame for what has occurred.

   Could Israel have gone down a different path? I think there was
   always a large contingent of Israelis who preferred rapprochement
   with the Arab population with whom they shared the land (just witness
   the election of Rabin and, later, Barak). Unfortunately, populations
   do not act like people (concepts of corporate moral obligations
   aside) and, given that Israel was a democracy, the majority feeling
   in Israel shifted in the late seventies/early eighties to a
   preference for land (for religious and expansionist reasons) instead
   of peace. It was the wrong direction and I think reasonable
   individuals would not have pursued this path, but the "corporate"
   that is Israel acted like corporates always do and pursued a path not
   based on reason, per se, but on emotion (in this case religious
   fervor and greed).

   Now events have their own momentum and only exhaustion of the two
   sides seems able to bring them back to a more rational meeting place.
   But I think that will now happen, pretty much as I've sketched out
   above. What comes from this in the future will depend, largely, on
   how sincere the Palestinians will be in meeting the Israelis in this
   new place. But I think, to do that, they will have to jettison Arafat
   and his ilk since these men have a clear agenda to wipe Israel off
   the face of the earth. That the Israelis will never accept and is
   thus a ticket to continued bloodshed and, ultimately, all-out war.

   My moral analysis here is based on the values I stated above which I
   think are fair and can be embraced by all of us here, as well as the
   facts as they have developed on the ground. Now, if one has a
   different perspective, that Allah has ordained the land for Muslims
   only or that God has ordained the West Bank for Jews only, for
   isntance, then this doesn't work, obviously. The value of enforcing a
   god's will in a society that makes THAT paramount would trump
   questions of competing rights on both sides.

   Similarly, a perspective that only one side is at fault (either
   Israelis or Palestinians, depending on your viewpoint) would also
   lead to a different outcome. If Palestinians persist in claiming that
   Israelis are nazis (and that zionism equals nazism), for instance,
   and if this were factually true, than that would also alter this
   equation. But I think that a dispassionate assessment will show that
   however aggressive the Israelis are now, or wrongheaded in terms of
   past policies, they have not acted like nazis, that is they have not
   followed a policy of expulsion or genocidal extermination of the
   Palestinians. (Discrimination based on security concerns and land
   expropriation, while wrong, at least this is clear in the second
   case, do not rise to the level of nazi atrocities no matter how much
   one makes the claim to the contrary!)

   Are they imperialists and/or colonists, then? Insofar as one could
   say they have come from another part of the world, I guess you could
   make that claim. But all people at one time came from somewhere else.
   Americans came initially from Europe to overrun native aboriginal
   peoples. The English came from Germanic Europe to overrun, terrorize
   and, ultimately absorb, the native Celts who had previously been
   overrun and conquered by the Romans out of what is today Italy (and
   who had previously come out of Europe to overrun the more aboriginal
   tribes who preceded THEM in the British Isles).

   The Arabs, of course, came from Arabia to overrun the old
   Roman/Byzantine province of Palestine (which became that when the
   ancient Romans overran and conquered the Judean state of John
   Hyrcanus, the Maccabean ruler of the revived Jewish successor state
   to ancient Israel, and, finally, drove out the Jews from that region).

   Of course, the ancient Israelites, according to the Bible, themselves
   overran and drove out and/or exterminated and/or absorbed the native
   Canaanite peoples who were allegedly there before them (though modern
   archaeology now suggests there was less a conquest by invading
   Israelites than a development of certain local groups into the group
   that became the Israelites).

   My point, of course, is that this is how nations, all nations, got
   formed so it is a bit unfair to liken the Israeli presence in the old
   Turkish province of Palestine to the recent history of European
   imperialism which was a manifestly different phenomenon or even to
   the Crusades of the Middle Ages which were also different. The
   Israelis are a transplanted people who are contesting territory with
   an indigenous people and are, by now, firmly rooted in that region.
   Kicking them out would not only be unacceptable to them, but morally
   untenable, given the provenance of other national claims.

   Therefore, again, the right solution is for the two groups to
   recognize one another's rights and claims and arrive at a rational
   accommodation.

   And that's my two cents for what they're worth (or perhaps, given how
   long this statement has been, somewhat more than that).

   SWM



   --- In WisdomForum@y..., Tommy Beavitt <tommy@s...> wrote:
   > >At 2:23 pm -0800 6/4/02, Christopher Bobo wrote:
   > >The ANC was negotiating with the white majority government
   > >peacefully. The ANC was not fire-bombing restaurants or killing
   > >civilians, as far as I recall.
   >
   > That is right. What we call the ANC today was not, prior to the
   fall
   > of the apartheid system run by white supremacists, fire-bombing
   > restaurants or killing 'civilians'. But others were.
   >
   > The Palestinian Authority is not doing these things either. There
   is
   > some question of whether it is using its influence over the other
   > groups sufficiently proactively. But that is completely a moot
   point
   > since its ability and will to use this influence diminishes daily
   due
   > to the emasculation it has been receiving from Sharon's Israel.
   >
   > If the western world were to grant the PA the moral authority it
   > granted the ANC it may very well be that we would say of it in
   > retrospect (once the vision of a Palestinian state has been
   > achieved), "it negotiated with the Jewish majority government
   > peacefully".
   >
   > The only legitimate question, it seems to me, is whether Mandela is
   a
   > man of integrity similar in inherent moral stature to a Gandhi or a
   > Luther King while Arafat is fatally flawed.
   >
   > There my objection breaks down and so does yours I suppose since we
   > cannot, as Sartreans, ever say of somebody that they are inherently
   > this or that. It is the choices they make from moment to moment
   > within the contingency of their situation and how these choices are
   > viewed from without.
   >
   > It seems to me also that your argument tends in the direction of
   > regarding there to be some kind of inherent racial element here,
   eg.
   > Arabs are inherently unstable whereas blacks are inherently
   > peace-loving. I don't think that is the case. While I am no
   > determinist, I do believe that behaviour such as suicide bombing or
   > necklacing (the treatment given by blacks to other blacks who
   > collaborated with the apartheid oppressors) is elicited by the
   > situation within which choices such as "shall I get married or go
   > straight to heaven?" are made.
   >
   > Your point about the Palestinians having TVs and Disney toys rather
   > than wearing rags and starving is, I am afraid, not worthy of you.
   > There is a fundamental point about occupation in terms of how
   humans
   > see themselves and behave which is not a simple sliding scale of
   > personal involvement in consumerist technological advances.
   >
   > Anyway, I have written far too much here. A few words would have
   > sufficed. I am off to bed.
   >
   > Good night!
   >
   > Tommy









   _________________________________________________________________
   Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



   Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
   (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

   TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
   existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

James,

Well written, I can't find one iota of contention about your thoughts on
your perception of the relation of the Palestinians and the Israeli's.

This is the 70% that makes up American thought, which though has
preconceived ideas about what an Israeli is and same for a Palestinian, yet
basis their perception on the actual situation that is in play.  Suicide
bombers are terrorists to the receiving party, even they may be political or
religious heroes to the sending party, this is all that matters.

I can't help feel that the moderate Palestinians are going along with what
is happening in the hopes of getting a windfall gain at no expense of their
own, hopefully not though, and I hope they are just the silent majority that
only wants fair play.

John
----- Original Message -----
From: "james tan" <tyjfk@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role


> From: "Christopher Bobo" <cbobo@...>
> Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
> To: "Wisdom Forum" <WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role
> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 14:23:39 -0800
>
> Tommy wrote:
>  >>The point is though that they do not. What I am calling your
> attention to is not the question of whether it is right or wrong to
> kill other people but the scale of the action that is being employed
> by the Palestinions. Perhaps if they had nuclear weapons they would
> nuke Israel in a grand, final gesture of hopelessness. But the point
> is, they do not. They don't even have any tanks!<<
>
> In don't think that the scale of the Israeli actions are disproportionate
to
> the threat.  The Israeli's have not wantonly been killing women, children
or
> the unarmed.  They have engaged in battle with men firing at them with
> AK-47s.  The Palestinians should not start a fight with a superior force
and
> then claim the fight is unfair.  Just look at the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
> They found themselves in a similar situation.  I'm curious to know if that
> is an especial feature of Arab or Islamic culture. I'm really growing
> increasingly curious about the value system such acts express.  And I
think
> it's a good thing that the Palestinians don't have nuclear weapons, since
> they seem to be prone two what I might regard as irrational acts.  I'm not
> as concerned about the Israeli's, however, employing the nuclear weapons
> that they do have against the Palestinians, because as far as I can see,
the
> Israelis appear to be behaving rationally.
>
> The U.S. certainly does not refrain from using B-52, B-1s, Tommahawk
Cruise
> Missles, AC-130 gunships, daisy cutter bombs, bunker buster bombs and
> thermobaric bombs against those who do not have them.  What rationale
would
> the Israelis have to leave their tanks and armored personnel carriers at
> home when they go off to fight.  And Tommy, that you could even complain
> about this point makes me wonder about your views, when the entire object
of
> warfare since the practically the dawn of time has been to have better and
> more sophisticated weapons than your opponent and to use them to you
> advantage to defeat your enemy.  Surely you remember the passage from the
> stone age to the metal age, and the passage from bronze weapons to iron,
> from calvary to armored tanks.  Why should the Israelis commit suicide to
> satisfy your idea of fairness in a fight.
>
> And I think all this talk about Palestinian "hopelessness" is pure
> propaganda and non-sense.  You should examine it more carefully.  Take,
for
> instance, the 18 year old girl who decided one day to become a suicide
> bomber.  She was engaged to be married and was planning to go to college.
> In what way was she hopeless?  I don't think hopeless people have video
> cameras and TV sets for the purpose of making and showing suicide bomber
> last wills and testaments.  American TV interviewed one of the families of
> one of the early suicide bombers and he seemed to come from a nice home,
he
> was educated, he had nice clothes, his family was well fed, oddly enough
he
> had a think for Disney knick knacks and had a lot of Mickey Mouse statues,
> posters and memorabilia in his room.  In what sense was he hopeless.  In
my
> book, truly hopeless people are starving,  homeless, lack basic comforts,
> wear tattered clothes, etc.  None of these indicia of hopelessness apply
to
> the Palestinians that I have seem.  Rather, I suspect there is something
> going on behind this unsupported rhetoric of hopelessness.  People are
just
> making choices about how to achieve their aims.  That 18 year old girl was
> offered a choice--get married and got to college or go straight to heaven
as
> a suicide bomber.  She choose to go straight to heaven.  The choice was
> hers.  To lay the blame on others for that choice is simply bad faith.
>
> Tommy said:
>  >>A country can only take responsibility for its actions if it has a
> border and an army capable of defending it. Palestine has neither of
> these things but its people are discriminated against on account of
> their race and culture and confined into refugee camps which have
> become their permanent homes.<<
>
> But the Paletinians do not yet constitute a country, and I think you are
> wrong about this.  The Palestinians Authority, I believe, has a security
> force of some 30,000.  What have they done with it.  Absolutely nothing to
> secure peaceful co-existence with its neighbor, Israel.
>
> I have been reading Kant's Perpetual Peace lately and come across these
> worlds "We ordinarily assume that no one may act inimically toward another
> except when he has been actively injured by the other.  This is quite
> correct if both are under civil law, for, by entering into such a state ,
> they afford each other the requisite security through the sovereign which
hs
> power over both.  Man (or the people) in the state of nature deprives me
of
> this security and injures me, if he is near me, by this mere status of
his,
> even though he does not injure me actively; he does so by the lawlessness
of
> his condition which constantly threatens me.  Therefore, I can compel him
> either to enter with me in a state of civil law or to remove himself from
my
> neighborhood....All mem who can reciprocally influence each other must
stand
> under some civil constitution."    And here the Israelis are with respect
to
> the radical Palestinians--either they we place themselves under a civil
law
> with the Israelis, or the Israelis will be compelled to attempt to remove
> them from the neighborhood.
>
> Tommy wrote:
>  >>The situation is directly analogous to that of South Africa ten years
> ago. There is almost universal agreement after the successful
> election of the ANC to power that what Mandela and his black
> compatriots did was just and right. But look at the right wing press
> prior to the fall of apartheid and you will find all sorts of
> justifications for its continuation, mainly based around the general
> premise (however well disguised) of "you can't trust the blacks". The
> violence that was taking place in the townships, both black-on-white
> and black-on-black, was cited as one of the reasons that the blacks
> weren't to be trusted. This is exactly the argument Israel is using
> to justify its continued racist oppression of a subjugated people.<<
>
> But Tommy, the situation is nothing like that in South Africa.  The ANC
was
> negotiating with the white majority government peacefully. The ANC was not
> fire-bombing restaurants or killing civilians, as far as I recall.  Even
the
> blacks in the white townships were fighting the South African security
> forces, I don't recall them bursting into wedding and banquets and killing
> every white person they could find, although there were no doubt instances
> of lawless murder motivated by racial hatred.  The two situations are
> incomparable.  No one is saying you can't trust the Palestinians.  Even
the
> right wing is saying there are Palestinians who want peace and who they
can
> negotiate with, but it may be highly likely that Yasser Arafat is not that
> person.  Arafat is no Mandela.  I think he's amply proved that.  Mandela
> rejected even his own lifelong mate and wife when it became apparent that
> she was involved in a political murder, whereas Arafat is the sponsor of
> murderers.
>
> If he were a leader the stature of Mandela, I believe this conflict would
> never have reached the level of violence and wanton destruction that it
has,
> and what's more, it would have resulted in a final peace by now.  Arafat
has
> done absolutely nothing effectieve to indicate a willing to make peace
with
> the Israelis or to stop suicide bombing.  At best, he plays lip service to
> peace when he speaks English for the Western press, but when he speaks
> Arabic to his supporters he's ordering them to Jihad, Jihad, and more
Jihad
> and acquiring weapons and bombs from Iran.
>
> Tommy wrote:
>  >>Back to communicationalism: we must trust the Other (currently being
> defined, generally, as "Arab", "terrorist", "Al-Quaeda" etc.) not to
> nuke us or otherwise make our citizens dead and our countries
> uninhabitable. This trust will not be achieved by preventing the
> Other from developing "weapons of mass destruction", such as those
> possessed in the large part by the US and Israel, but by ensuring
> that the Other has as much of a stake in the overall health and
> wealth of the world as we do. This quite patently not presently the
> case. We will only begin to understand all the reasons why the Other
> doesn't feel as if s/he has as much of a stake in the overall health
> of the world as we do once we start taking on board the factors that
> go into the decision of someone to strap explosives to his or her
> body to attack an oppressive enemy.<<
>
> The great statesman Henry Clay once said "Cultivate calmness of mind but
> prepare for the worst."  Ronald Reagan prudently observed that we should
> "Trust but verifiy."  The stakes are too high to be naively optimistic, or
> to allow ourselves to be misguided by idealism.  I agree that the other
> should have as much at stake in the world as do we.  What's more, I think
> that they do have as much at stake in the world as we do but that they
> motivations and reasons for action are very different from what you
suppose,
> Tommy.  You know, Osama bin Laden did not seek to wage war against the
U.S.
> because he was poor, or that Arabs were poor or suffering, but because
U.S.
> troops are in what he regards as the sacred land.  Bin Laden and his Sheik
> friends are multimillionaires.  They have more money than you and your
> neighbors can even dream of.  They are not poor and desperate.  And
neither
> are the terrorists.  Many of them were educated, had jobs, family and
money.
>   They are engineers and computer programmers.  They are motivated by
> hopelessness or desperation and you should stop deluding yourself that
they
> are.  You've been listening to their rhetoric far too long and not
observing
> the facts.  They have thousands of dollars to spend on bombs, millions on
> weapons, and plenty of cash to feed and equip armies of terrorists.
>
>
> Tommy asked:
>  >>Dropping communicationalism for the moment and thinking instead about
> pragmatic solutions to the problem of the Middle East, why don't you
> create a homeland for the Jewish People in America and let the
> Palestinians have Palestine? It would be cheaper in the long run and
> there is really quite a lot of land in the US, a lot of it better
> than what you will find in Palestine. And you folks do seem to get
> along remarkably well with one another. Just think of the economic
> benefits of having all those clever people under the one roof so to
> speak. Sharon could be given a ranch in Idaho. We in Europe will
> agree on our part to change our immigration laws to permit more Arabs
> to settle here (there already are quite a few, especially in France).<<
>
> Palestinian Muslims as well as Muslims from all of the world are free to
> immigrate to America and have been welcomed here, as have been Jews from
all
> over Europe.  They have all been guarantee the equal protection of the
laws
> and life free from discrimination and persecution because of their race,
> creed or national origin.  There are about 3 million Arab Americans here
and
> 8 million Jewish Americans.  And that is more Arabs than are in the West
> Bank and more Jews than are in the entire state of Israel.  They all
already
> have a homeland here.  The only thing asked of them--in addition to paying
> taxes, of course--is that that respect the creed that this is one nation
> under God with liberty and justice for all, or in other words they pledge
> allegiance to the constitution of the United States, which requires a
> separation of church and state.  Because this is one nation, there cannot
be
> other nations within it--except for Native American Tribes, which are
> themselves sovereign nations which pre-existed the U.S. We know from our
> history, in particular the Civil War, that we cannot have separate nations
> in the U.S. and that once a state enters the Union, it cannot leave. I'm
> sure we'd take in the rest suffeing in Israel today, as this country is
> already home to over 24 million people who were not born here, but were,
of
> course, welcomed.   To be sure, they'd have to agree to live in peace and
> obey the laws of the land, but that's not a very burdensome requirement
> after all.
>
> And I'm serious, as usual.
>
> Chris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tommy Beavitt
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 3:37 PM
> To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role
>
> At 9:47 am -0800 4/4/02, Christopher Bobo wrote:
>  >Tommy observed:
>  >  >>I don't think we can reasonably complain that people who have lived
>  >for more than a generation in a refugee camp take exception to their
>  >plight, strap explosives to their bodies and obliterate a handful of
>  >those who must directly be considered their oppressors.<<
>  >
>  >I do and I think we must so complain.  The world is populated with
>  >people who believe they have gotten a raw deal from one party or
>  >another.  If all the aggrieved peoples of the world were to start
>  >strapping explosives to their bodies and obliterating those who they
>  >considered their oppressors, there would be mountains of dead people
>  >all over the world and no end to the carnage.  Which is why such
>  >conduct is clearly beyond the pale of any notion of civilization and
>  >is so unprecedented.  Perhaps all Europeans in Africa would be piled
>  >together and slaughtered.  Perhaps all Chinese in Tibet or Singapore
>  >would be next.  All Koreans in Japan might feel inclined to start
>  >killing Japanese.  Native Americans would start killing everyone is
>  >sight who wasn't a native American.  Under your philosophy, we might
>  >as well just nuke the planet and be done with it now.
>
> The point is though that they do not. What I am calling your
> attention to is not the question of whether it is right or wrong to
> kill other people but the scale of the action that is being employed
> by the Palestinions. Perhaps if they had nuclear weapons they would
> nuke Israel in a grand, final gesture of hopelessness. But the point
> is, they do not. They don't even have any tanks!
>
> A country can only take responsibility for its actions if it has a
> border and an army capable of defending it. Palestine has neither of
> these things but its people are discriminated against on account of
> their race and culture and confined into refugee camps which have
> become their permanent homes.
>
> It is only Israel that can be considered capable of acting
> responsibly to change this situation because only it has both borders
> and an army.
>
> The situation is directly analogous to that of South Africa ten years
> ago. There is almost universal agreement after the successful
> election of the ANC to power that what Mandela and his black
> compatriots did was just and right. But look at the right wing press
> prior to the fall of apartheid and you will find all sorts of
> justifications for its continuation, mainly based around the general
> premise (however well disguised) of "you can't trust the blacks". The
> violence that was taking place in the townships, both black-on-white
> and black-on-black, was cited as one of the reasons that the blacks
> weren't to be trusted. This is exactly the argument Israel is using
> to justify its continued racist oppression of a subjugated people.
>
> Dropping communicationalism for the moment and thinking instead about
> pragmatic solutions to the problem of the Middle East, why don't you
> create a homeland for the Jewish People in America and let the
> Palestinians have Palestine? It would be cheaper in the long run and
> there is really quite a lot of land in the US, a lot of it better
> than what you will find in Palestine. And you folks do seem to get
> along remarkably well with one another. Just think of the economic
> benefits of having all those clever people under the one roof so to
> speak. Sharon could be given a ranch in Idaho. We in Europe will
> agree on our part to change our immigration laws to permit more Arabs
> to settle here (there already are quite a few, especially in France).
>
> Only joking. Kind of.
>
> Tommy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
> Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
> (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
> existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

eduard,

yes, and what u mentioned is disturbing, i mean the mentality of these young
palestinians kids.

james.


From: "Eduard Alf" <yeoman@...>
Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application?
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 00:54:34 -0500

james,

There was an interesting article in the New York Times web site.  The
reporter interviewed some kids on the Palestinian side.  All of them had one
objective in mind ... to strap on a bomb or whatever and kill Israelis.
They did not see it wrong to kill women or even other Arabs in the same
blast.  They only stopped short on the possibility of killing perhaps some
other school kids.

The bottom line is that this is the sort of world that is being constructed.
The present leadership is not presenting the viability of other options.
There is a certain mentality that is being fostered.  You can see it in the
parades on TV.  A society that is focused upon killing.  For the moment it
serves the agenda of those who have no interest in peace, but indicates real
problems on the long term for that region.

We are arguing here about small things ... as if to discuss whether we
should polish the brass handrails whilst the Titanic is sinking.

eduard



   -----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 12:00 AM
Subject: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application?


    From: "swmaerske" <SWMirsky@...>
    Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
    To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application?
    Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 02:56:30 -0000

    Sorry, have been away and so missed some of the discussion here but
    perhaps it's not too late to chime in a bit. No question in my mind
    that Mandela and Arafat are not equivalent individuals. Mandela
    demonstrated that he was a man of very high moral fiber and character
    whereas every action of Arafat seems to demonstrate the reverse. The
    evidence seems pretty clear that he has been dissembling about his
    aims with regard to Israel and his support for terrorism for years.
    It is also fairly clear, at least to me, that he was directly
    culpable in the unleashing of the latest spate of violence in the
    Mideast as I've already noted. That the Palestinians, either directly
    supported by him (as recently retrieved documents seem to show) or as
    merely incited by him, have given the Israelis sufficient and extreme
    provocation to react as they have done is also clear, as I see it. It
    is a messy thing the Israelis are doing (and something we all wish
    they had not done) but one must recognize that they resisted doing it
    right up until the past couple of months although the terroism
    unleashed by the Palestinians started some 18 months ago.

    That said, I also think it is perfectly clear that the Israelis
    cannot continue to occupy or contend with the Palestinians for the
    West Bank territory indefinitely. Whatever else has occured, it is
    certainly the case that the Israelis must give way to a Palestinian
    state in the territories they have occupied and this is long overdue.
    It has demeaned the Israelis' own moral position and culture and
    turned them into occupiers.

    What is unclear is whether the Palestinians will accept a final
    settlement based on this arrangement or will only consider this a
    jumping off point to the next stage of their effort to drive the
    Israelis permanently from the region. That, of course, is what the
    Israelis fear, but I think if that were to happen, while it would
    surely be problematic from a military perspective for them, the
    matter would be morally clearer as it would be a matter of one state
    against another. It should be clear from this that I think the
    Israelis should withdraw completely from the West Bank area and Gaza,
    including shutting down all but a few border area settlements which
    would remain as part of a permanent and officially recognized border
    adjustment (bearing in mind that permanent and accepted borders have
    never been fixed and that the old pre-'67 borders were armistice
    lines only, where the armies halted in place when the cease-fire was
    effected in '48).

    I suspect that this will not be acceptable to many, if not all, the
    Arab countries but unless they are saying that Israel ultimately must
    be driven out, then some sort of adjustment along these lines must be
    made.

    I also support placing the sacred sites in East Jerusalem (Muslim,
    Christian and Jewish) under international supervision and ceding a
    portion of that area to the new state of Palestine for its capital as
    the Palestinians demand. Of course, this is an invitation to future
    problems because of the contiguity of the combatants, but I don't see
    any other rational choice.

    I also believe that the Palestinians must agree that this is the end
    of their claims (a so-called right of return is a non-starter since
    Israel cannot agree to it without signing its own death warrant) and
    that the Palestinians must finally accept the partition of the old
    British mandate of western Palestine (the eastern portion was long
    ago absorbed into the kingdom of Jordan) which gives them their state.

    If they are of good will, I believe over time the wounds can be
    healed and the region can grow into an economically prosperous one
    serving all its people. If not, then the next war will be fought
    between the state of Palestine and the state of Israel and that will
    be a bloody one indeed. But hopefully, it will never come to that.

    I would just note in passing that almost all of this could have been
    had 18 months ago at the negotiations between Barak and Arafat.
    (Barak was not offering as comprehensive a dismantling of all the
    settlements as I think is necessary but Arafat certainly had room to
    bargain for more when he decided, instead, to walk away from the
    table and unleash the intifada.)

    Now how do we get to all this via a moral analysis and application of
    the principles behind this analysis?

    I think that the values here are: 1) recognizing that both claimants
    have rights to the disputed territory (neither of which trumps the
    other); and 2) they have the right to be free from dominance by the
    other. I also think that there is a value to peaceful compromise as a
    means of addressing the rights claims and that the use of violence is
    not only not effective here but only creates longer term grievances
    for both sides. I also think the empirical evidence indicates that
    the Palestinians have so far been the less honest and sincere in
    their contacts with the Israelis though the Israelis are not to be
    absolved here since I think they have secretly (or not-so-secretly)
    nurtured a dream that some day events would work out in their favor
    if they just continued to hold onto the occupied territories and
    continued to plant their settlements.

    But those policies have manifestly been counterproductive as they
    have just proved to the Palestinians that the prolongation of the
    occupation can only result in their continued loss of control over
    their lands. Had Israel followed the original Labor party policy of
    only establishing limited settlements to enhance security there was a
    chance that, over the years, an ethnic and cultural rapprochement
    could have been developed between the two peoples. Not everyone on
    both sides would have embraced this, of course, but I think a core of
    people who saw a benefit in peaceful and perhaps even friendly
    coexistence would have developed. Instead we got an increasingly
    angry and radicalized Palestinian population which only grew their
    hatred and anger into the bloody terrorism we have witnessed in the
    past 18 months. While I do not think the Palestinians can be absolved
    from responsibility for their very bloody actions by excusing this as
    a result of foolish and wrong-headed Israeli policies, I do think
    Israeli policy bares some of the blame for what has occurred.

    Could Israel have gone down a different path? I think there was
    always a large contingent of Israelis who preferred rapprochement
    with the Arab population with whom they shared the land (just witness
    the election of Rabin and, later, Barak). Unfortunately, populations
    do not act like people (concepts of corporate moral obligations
    aside) and, given that Israel was a democracy, the majority feeling
    in Israel shifted in the late seventies/early eighties to a
    preference for land (for religious and expansionist reasons) instead
    of peace. It was the wrong direction and I think reasonable
    individuals would not have pursued this path, but the "corporate"
    that is Israel acted like corporates always do and pursued a path not
    based on reason, per se, but on emotion (in this case religious
    fervor and greed).

    Now events have their own momentum and only exhaustion of the two
    sides seems able to bring them back to a more rational meeting place.
    But I think that will now happen, pretty much as I've sketched out
    above. What comes from this in the future will depend, largely, on
    how sincere the Palestinians will be in meeting the Israelis in this
    new place. But I think, to do that, they will have to jettison Arafat
    and his ilk since these men have a clear agenda to wipe Israel off
    the face of the earth. That the Israelis will never accept and is
    thus a ticket to continued bloodshed and, ultimately, all-out war.

    My moral analysis here is based on the values I stated above which I
    think are fair and can be embraced by all of us here, as well as the
    facts as they have developed on the ground. Now, if one has a
    different perspective, that Allah has ordained the land for Muslims
    only or that God has ordained the West Bank for Jews only, for
    isntance, then this doesn't work, obviously. The value of enforcing a
    god's will in a society that makes THAT paramount would trump
    questions of competing rights on both sides.

    Similarly, a perspective that only one side is at fault (either
    Israelis or Palestinians, depending on your viewpoint) would also
    lead to a different outcome. If Palestinians persist in claiming that
    Israelis are nazis (and that zionism equals nazism), for instance,
    and if this were factually true, than that would also alter this
    equation. But I think that a dispassionate assessment will show that
    however aggressive the Israelis are now, or wrongheaded in terms of
    past policies, they have not acted like nazis, that is they have not
    followed a policy of expulsion or genocidal extermination of the
    Palestinians. (Discrimination based on security concerns and land
    expropriation, while wrong, at least this is clear in the second
    case, do not rise to the level of nazi atrocities no matter how much
    one makes the claim to the contrary!)

    Are they imperialists and/or colonists, then? Insofar as one could
    say they have come from another part of the world, I guess you could
    make that claim. But all people at one time came from somewhere else.
    Americans came initially from Europe to overrun native aboriginal
    peoples. The English came from Germanic Europe to overrun, terrorize
    and, ultimately absorb, the native Celts who had previously been
    overrun and conquered by the Romans out of what is today Italy (and
    who had previously come out of Europe to overrun the more aboriginal
    tribes who preceded THEM in the British Isles).

    The Arabs, of course, came from Arabia to overrun the old
    Roman/Byzantine province of Palestine (which became that when the
    ancient Romans overran and conquered the Judean state of John
    Hyrcanus, the Maccabean ruler of the revived Jewish successor state
    to ancient Israel, and, finally, drove out the Jews from that region).

    Of course, the ancient Israelites, according to the Bible, themselves
    overran and drove out and/or exterminated and/or absorbed the native
    Canaanite peoples who were allegedly there before them (though modern
    archaeology now suggests there was less a conquest by invading
    Israelites than a development of certain local groups into the group
    that became the Israelites).

    My point, of course, is that this is how nations, all nations, got
    formed so it is a bit unfair to liken the Israeli presence in the old
    Turkish province of Palestine to the recent history of European
    imperialism which was a manifestly different phenomenon or even to
    the Crusades of the Middle Ages which were also different. The
    Israelis are a transplanted people who are contesting territory with
    an indigenous people and are, by now, firmly rooted in that region.
    Kicking them out would not only be unacceptable to them, but morally
    untenable, given the provenance of other national claims.

    Therefore, again, the right solution is for the two groups to
    recognize one another's rights and claims and arrive at a rational
    accommodation.

    And that's my two cents for what they're worth (or perhaps, given how
    long this statement has been, somewhat more than that).

    SWM



    --- In WisdomForum@y..., Tommy Beavitt <tommy@s...> wrote:
    > >At 2:23 pm -0800 6/4/02, Christopher Bobo wrote:
    > >The ANC was negotiating with the white majority government
    > >peacefully. The ANC was not fire-bombing restaurants or killing
    > >civilians, as far as I recall.
    >
    > That is right. What we call the ANC today was not, prior to the
    fall
    > of the apartheid system run by white supremacists, fire-bombing
    > restaurants or killing 'civilians'. But others were.
    >
    > The Palestinian Authority is not doing these things either. There
    is
    > some question of whether it is using its influence over the other
    > groups sufficiently proactively. But that is completely a moot
    point
    > since its ability and will to use this influence diminishes daily
    due
    > to the emasculation it has been receiving from Sharon's Israel.
    >
    > If the western world were to grant the PA the moral authority it
    > granted the ANC it may very well be that we would say of it in
    > retrospect (once the vision of a Palestinian state has been
    > achieved), "it negotiated with the Jewish majority government
    > peacefully".
    >
    > The only legitimate question, it seems to me, is whether Mandela is
    a
    > man of integrity similar in inherent moral stature to a Gandhi or a
    > Luther King while Arafat is fatally flawed.
    >
    > There my objection breaks down and so does yours I suppose since we
    > cannot, as Sartreans, ever say of somebody that they are inherently
    > this or that. It is the choices they make from moment to moment
    > within the contingency of their situation and how these choices are
    > viewed from without.
    >
    > It seems to me also that your argument tends in the direction of
    > regarding there to be some kind of inherent racial element here,
    eg.
    > Arabs are inherently unstable whereas blacks are inherently
    > peace-loving. I don't think that is the case. While I am no
    > determinist, I do believe that behaviour such as suicide bombing or
    > necklacing (the treatment given by blacks to other blacks who
    > collaborated with the apartheid oppressors) is elicited by the
    > situation within which choices such as "shall I get married or go
    > straight to heaven?" are made.
    >
    > Your point about the Palestinians having TVs and Disney toys rather
    > than wearing rags and starving is, I am afraid, not worthy of you.
    > There is a fundamental point about occupation in terms of how
    humans
    > see themselves and behave which is not a simple sliding scale of
    > personal involvement in consumerist technological advances.
    >
    > Anyway, I have written far too much here. A few words would have
    > sufficed. I am off to bed.
    >
    > Good night!
    >
    > Tommy









    _________________________________________________________________
    Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



    Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
    (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

    TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
    existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

From: "Christopher Bobo" <cbobo@...>
Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
To: "Wisdom Forum" <WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 21:49:34 -0800

Tommy wrote:
  >>It seems to me also that your argument tends in the direction of
regarding there to be some kind of inherent racial element here, eg.
Arabs are inherently unstable whereas blacks are inherently
peace-loving. I don't think that is the case. While I am no
determinist, I do believe that behaviour such as suicide bombing or
necklacing (the treatment given by blacks to other blacks who
collaborated with the apartheid oppressors) is elicited by the
situation within which choices such as "shall I get married or go
straight to heaven?" are made.<<

Taking this, your most grievous accusation against me, I will attribute it
to your fatigue before bedtime.  I do not now, nor have I ever believed that
people are inherently one thing or the other because of their race or
ethnicity.  What I am trying to understand is what I suspect may be learned
cultural differences that manifest themselves in different ways in different
people.  There is no doubt that there are good people and bad people of
every color, race and creed.  What I think we are discussing are the
attributes, inclinations, characters, decisions and actions of political
leaders chosen to guide particular societies.  Necklacing and suicide
bombing are very different things.  Necklacing was directed at people
believed to be guilty of specific wrongful acts, whereas suicide bombing is
directed against people innocent of any wrongdoing under any rational
account.  And that is a huge difference.  Still, I think necklacing
suspected collaborators is morally wrong, although not as reprehensible as
suicide bombing weddings, banquets and restaurants.

Tommy said:
  >>There my objection breaks down and so does yours I suppose since we
cannot, as Sartreans, ever say of somebody that they are inherently
this or that. It is the choices they make from moment to moment
within the contingency of their situation and how these choices are
viewed from without.<<

I think we must make a distinction here.  It is true that we may not know
what lies deep inside the character of Arafat as a man.  But as a political
leader, we must judge him on the ground of practice by what he does, even
more so than by what he says.  What he has done in leading his people has
taken them into the horrific realm of murderous terrorism and plunge them
into the abyss of a mindless war.  And even you must admit, the Israeli
aggression is a response to suicide bombing and not the cause of it.  The
bombing preceded in time the military incursions of the Israelis.  And
that's a simply fact.

Tommy wrote:
  >>The Palestinian Authority is not doing these things either. There is
some question of whether it is using its influence over the other
groups sufficiently proactively. But that is completely a moot point
since its ability and will to use this influence diminishes daily due
to the emasculation it has been receiving from Sharon's Israel.<<

Again I think you are buying a load of political propaganda and hogwash.
Arafat called for Jihad and started supporting suicide bombers and
glorifying them long before there was any emasculation of his position by
Sharon's Israel.

Tommy said:
  >>Your point about the Palestinians having TVs and Disney toys rather
than wearing rags and starving is, I am afraid, not worthy of you.
There is a fundamental point about occupation in terms of how humans
see themselves and behave which is not a simple sliding scale of
personal involvement in consumerist technological advances.<<

I think this is a relevant point.  At what point does political oppression,
which comes in degrees, warrant murderous violence?  Just because you find
the occupation rude, disrespectful or hurtful to your feelings does not
justify one in killing innocent men, women and children.  If the oppression
rises to the level of starvation, mass murder, or genocide, then one ways
more warrant for extreme and violent actions. My point is that the
Palestinians are utterly lacking in the degree of justification, if any
there could be, for the heinousness of their actions.  In the course of
human history, many people have endured much worse without stooping to the
levels of murder and mayhem that the Palestinian suicide bombers have
inflicted.  Many peoples throughout time have achieved their political aims
without blowing up innocent civilians.  The sooner they realize that these
actions are utterly unacceptable and unjustifiable from any civilized
perspective the better we will all be. I doubt seriously if European Jewry
on the way to the their near extermination ever thought the solution lay is
killing innocent German children in pizza parlors.  I don't even think the
blacks of apartheid South Africa engaged in such tactics.

We have a saying for the person who occupies the top political position in
the U.S. That saying is that the buck stops on his desk.  He can't pass
around the blame.  He takes his office with all the burdens of
responsibility that it brings with it.  The buck stops on
Chairman/President/General Arafat's too.  He's responsible for what goes on
under his authority, the buck stops on his desk.  He doesn't get to make
excuses, he only gets to accept responsibility and to act responsibly, in
accordance with the rights, privileges and powers of his office as leader of
his people. Sadly, he doesn't seem to realize that.


----- Original Message -----
From: Tommy Beavitt
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 4:08 PM
To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role

  >At 2:23 pm -0800 6/4/02, Christopher Bobo wrote:
  >The ANC was negotiating with the white majority government
  >peacefully. The ANC was not fire-bombing restaurants or killing
  >civilians, as far as I recall.

That is right. What we call the ANC today was not, prior to the fall
of the apartheid system run by white supremacists, fire-bombing
restaurants or killing 'civilians'. But others were.

The Palestinian Authority is not doing these things either. There is
some question of whether it is using its influence over the other
groups sufficiently proactively. But that is completely a moot point
since its ability and will to use this influence diminishes daily due
to the emasculation it has been receiving from Sharon's Israel.

If the western world were to grant the PA the moral authority it
granted the ANC it may very well be that we would say of it in
retrospect (once the vision of a Palestinian state has been
achieved), "it negotiated with the Jewish majority government
peacefully".

The only legitimate question, it seems to me, is whether Mandela is a
man of integrity similar in inherent moral stature to a Gandhi or a
Luther King while Arafat is fatally flawed.

There my objection breaks down and so does yours I suppose since we
cannot, as Sartreans, ever say of somebody that they are inherently
this or that. It is the choices they make from moment to moment
within the contingency of their situation and how these choices are
viewed from without.

It seems to me also that your argument tends in the direction of
regarding there to be some kind of inherent racial element here, eg.
Arabs are inherently unstable whereas blacks are inherently
peace-loving. I don't think that is the case. While I am no
determinist, I do believe that behaviour such as suicide bombing or
necklacing (the treatment given by blacks to other blacks who
collaborated with the apartheid oppressors) is elicited by the
situation within which choices such as "shall I get married or go
straight to heaven?" are made.

Your point about the Palestinians having TVs and Disney toys rather
than wearing rags and starving is, I am afraid, not worthy of you.
There is a fundamental point about occupation in terms of how humans
see themselves and behave which is not a simple sliding scale of
personal involvement in consumerist technological advances.

Anyway, I have written far too much here. A few words would have
sufficed. I am off to bed.

Good night!

Tommy








_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

james,

I am watching Meet the Press which has Colin Powell as a guest.  He is
speaking of "both" sides needing to pull back, but primarily Arafat needs to
act in some fashion to stop the terrorism on his side.  I find it
interesting that there is mention of some $80 million of US funding to the
Palestinian Authority, so it is not true that money is only going to Israel.

I spoke before about the concept of "memes" which are mind viruses which
once started can be self propagating.  Look at what is now happening in the
Islamic world.  Iraq has offered an award of $25,000 to any family which
loses a son or daughter to some suicide bombing.  All this is being done to
reemphasize and ensure continuation of the meme.  A whole generation of
youth are being indoctrinated.  I recall a picture of what seemed like
kindergarten kids holding machine guns and standing on Israeli and US flags.
This is the work of adults, but the impact is upon the youth.  The only real
solution is to provide an anti-meme which is the creation of a Palestinian
State.  But that requires more than just a vague statement of resulting
"normalization" of relations with Israel.  Just as the Palestinians want to
enjoy security with their own boundaries, so to does Israel.  Somehow the
Arab League has to make a clear statement of intent and that is the problem.
Everyone is hedging their bets.  They don't want to make the statement
because they may have to live up to it.

People are losing perspective.  The focus is entirely upon Israel and
Palestine without looking at the larger picture.  The combined
Israel/Palestine region is about 300 miles long, 85 miles in width at the
largest point and only 40 miles at the narrowest.  The whole area could
easily fit between Toronto and Ottawa.

eduard


   -----Original Message-----
   From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
   Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 6:31 AM
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application?



   eduard,

   yes, and what u mentioned is disturbing, i mean the mentality of these
young
   palestinians kids.

   james.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

james,

I can see your point, but I tend to agree with Tommy on the aspect of
Palestinians with TVs and such.  In a society, those who are in the middle
class are usually those who have the time, connections and inclination to
act.  Those at the lower ranks are too busy trying to survive to do
likewise.  Those who participated in the 9-11 terrorism were well educated
and could hardly be said to be suffering.  Yet they were more open to the
"meme" that suicide has its own reward.

My other fear is that, if Israel military withdraws from their latest
advancement into the occupied territories, it will be seen that terrorism
does indeed have a result in causing change.  If there is no positive
indication of security for the Israeli state by the Arab League, this will
go on forever.  You can see the some of the thinking now in the references
to the American revolution.  "Give me Liberty or Give me Death".  The point
is being made that if the Americans took such action [in essence terrorism]
against Britain, then why not the Palestinians.  Of course the situations
are not the same, but you can see how this is going.

As to Arafat, I think that in his old age he is unable to take positive
action.  I think that he was a prisoner within his own community, even
before the Israelis laid a siege on his headquarters.  It may well be that
he is not capable of acting responsibly even if he wanted to.  Unfortunately
he is the only figure head that is available.  Perhaps the actions of the
Israelis in regard to preventing him from travelling, and the visits by
American spokesmen, may actually do him some good.

eduard


   -----Original Message-----
   From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
   Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 7:02 AM
   Subject: [existlist] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role


   From: "Christopher Bobo" <cbobo@...>
   Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
   To: "Wisdom Forum" <WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com>
   Subject: Re: [WisdomForum] Re: A Real Life Application? The Media's Role
   Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 21:49:34 -0800

   Tommy wrote:
   >>It seems to me also that your argument tends in the direction of
   regarding there to be some kind of inherent racial element here, eg.
   Arabs are inherently unstable whereas blacks are inherently
   peace-loving. I don't think that is the case. While I am no
   determinist, I do believe that behaviour such as suicide bombing or
   necklacing (the treatment given by blacks to other blacks who
   collaborated with the apartheid oppressors) is elicited by the
   situation within which choices such as "shall I get married or go
   straight to heaven?" are made.<<

   Taking this, your most grievous accusation against me, I will attribute it
   to your fatigue before bedtime.  I do not now, nor have I ever believed
that
   people are inherently one thing or the other because of their race or
   ethnicity.  What I am trying to understand is what I suspect may be
learned
   cultural differences that manifest themselves in different ways in
different
   people.  There is no doubt that there are good people and bad people of
   every color, race and creed.  What I think we are discussing are the
   attributes, inclinations, characters, decisions and actions of political
   leaders chosen to guide particular societies.  Necklacing and suicide
   bombing are very different things.  Necklacing was directed at people
   believed to be guilty of specific wrongful acts, whereas suicide bombing
is
   directed against people innocent of any wrongdoing under any rational
   account.  And that is a huge difference.  Still, I think necklacing
   suspected collaborators is morally wrong, although not as reprehensible as
   suicide bombing weddings, banquets and restaurants.

   Tommy said:
   >>There my objection breaks down and so does yours I suppose since we
   cannot, as Sartreans, ever say of somebody that they are inherently
   this or that. It is the choices they make from moment to moment
   within the contingency of their situation and how these choices are
   viewed from without.<<

   I think we must make a distinction here.  It is true that we may not know
   what lies deep inside the character of Arafat as a man.  But as a
political
   leader, we must judge him on the ground of practice by what he does, even
   more so than by what he says.  What he has done in leading his people has
   taken them into the horrific realm of murderous terrorism and plunge them
   into the abyss of a mindless war.  And even you must admit, the Israeli
   aggression is a response to suicide bombing and not the cause of it.  The
   bombing preceded in time the military incursions of the Israelis.  And
   that's a simply fact.

   Tommy wrote:
   >>The Palestinian Authority is not doing these things either. There is
   some question of whether it is using its influence over the other
   groups sufficiently proactively. But that is completely a moot point
   since its ability and will to use this influence diminishes daily due
   to the emasculation it has been receiving from Sharon's Israel.<<

   Again I think you are buying a load of political propaganda and hogwash.
   Arafat called for Jihad and started supporting suicide bombers and
   glorifying them long before there was any emasculation of his position by
   Sharon's Israel.

   Tommy said:
   >>Your point about the Palestinians having TVs and Disney toys rather
   than wearing rags and starving is, I am afraid, not worthy of you.
   There is a fundamental point about occupation in terms of how humans
   see themselves and behave which is not a simple sliding scale of
   personal involvement in consumerist technological advances.<<

   I think this is a relevant point.  At what point does political
oppression,
   which comes in degrees, warrant murderous violence?  Just because you find
   the occupation rude, disrespectful or hurtful to your feelings does not
   justify one in killing innocent men, women and children.  If the
oppression
   rises to the level of starvation, mass murder, or genocide, then one ways
   more warrant for extreme and violent actions. My point is that the
   Palestinians are utterly lacking in the degree of justification, if any
   there could be, for the heinousness of their actions.  In the course of
   human history, many people have endured much worse without stooping to the
   levels of murder and mayhem that the Palestinian suicide bombers have
   inflicted.  Many peoples throughout time have achieved their political
aims
   without blowing up innocent civilians.  The sooner they realize that these
   actions are utterly unacceptable and unjustifiable from any civilized
   perspective the better we will all be. I doubt seriously if European Jewry
   on the way to the their near extermination ever thought the solution lay
is
   killing innocent German children in pizza parlors.  I don't even think the
   blacks of apartheid South Africa engaged in such tactics.

   We have a saying for the person who occupies the top political position in
   the U.S. That saying is that the buck stops on his desk.  He can't pass
   around the blame.  He takes his office with all the burdens of
   responsibility that it brings with it.  The buck stops on
   Chairman/President/General Arafat's too.  He's responsible for what goes
on
   under his authority, the buck stops on his desk.  He doesn't get to make
   excuses, he only gets to accept responsibility and to act responsibly, in
   accordance with the rights, privileges and powers of his office as leader
of
   his people. Sadly, he doesn't seem to realize that.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The U.S. really screwed up the Angolan war. I'm pasting below an article that
I recieved via email about recent investigations into the US involvement.
It's very interesting.
Claire ;D


Published on Sunday, March 31, 2002 in the New York Times

From Old Files, a New Story of U.S. Role in Angolan War

by Howard W. French

In the summer of 1975, with the cold war raging and the
memory of Saigon's fall terribly fresh, the United States
sponsored a covert operation to prevent another Communist
takeover, this time across the world, in Angola.

The effort failed to keep a Marxist government from taking
power but ushered in a long and chaotic civil war, involving
American, Chinese and Russian interests, and Cuban and South
African soldiers.

Now, coinciding with the death last month of Washington's
longtime rebel ally in Angola, Jonas Savimbi, a trove of
recently declassified American documents seem to overturn
conventional explanations of the war's origins.

Historians and former diplomats who have studied the
documents say they show conclusively that the United States
intervened in Angola weeks before the arrival of any Cubans,
not afterward as Washington claimed. Moreover, though a
connection between Washington and South Africa, which was
then ruled by a white government under the apartheid policy,
was strongly denied at the time, the documents appear to
demonstrate their broad collaboration.

"When the United States decided to launch the covert
intervention, in June and July, not only were there no
Cubans in Angola, but the U.S. government and the C.I.A.
were not even thinking about any Cuban presence in Angola,"
said Piero Gleijeses, a history professor at Johns Hopkins
University, who used the Freedom of Information Act to
uncover the documents. Similarly, cables of the time have
now been published by the National Security Archive, a
private research group.

"If you look at the C.I.A. reports which were done at the
time, the Cubans were totally out of the picture," Dr.
Gleijeses said. But in reports presented to the Senate in
December 1975, "what you find is really nothing less than
the rewriting of history."

Cuba eventually poured 50,000 troops into Angola in support
of a Marxist independence group, the Popular Movement for
the Liberation of Angola. The group held the capital in the
months just before independence from Portugal, declared in
August 1975.

But Dr. Gleijeses's research shows that the Cuban
intervention came in response to a C.I.A.-financed covert
invasion via neighboring Zaire, now known as Congo, and
South Africa's simultaneous drive on the capital, using
troops who posed as Western mercenaries.

The United States gradually switched its support to Mr.
Savimbi's movement, Unita, and continued to support it
intermittently during nearly two decades of warfare.

Dr. Gleijeses's research documents significant coordination
between the United States and South Africa, from joint
training missions to airlifts, and bluntly contradicts the
Congressional testimony of the era and the memoirs of Henry
A. Kissinger, the former secretary of state.

The work draws heavily on White House, State Department and
National Security Council memorandums, as well as extensive
interviews and archival research in Cuba, Angola, Germany
and elsewhere. It was carried out in preparation of Dr.
Gleijeses's recently published history of the conflict,
"Conflicting Missions, Havana, Washington and Africa,
1959-1976" (Chapel Hill).

The book strongly challenges common perceptions of Cuban
behavior in Africa. In the 1960s and 1970s, when Havana and
Washington clashed repeatedly in central and southern
Africa, Cuban troops in the continent were typically seen as
foot soldiers for Soviet imperialism.

In fact, Dr. Gleijeses writes, Cuba intervened in Angola
without seeking Soviet permission. Eager not to derail an
easing of tension with Washington, the Soviets limited
themselves to providing 10 charter flights to transport
Cubans to Angola in January 1976. The next year, Havana and
Moscow supported opposite sides in an attempted coup in
Angola, in which the Marxist government, Cuba's ally,
prevailed.

After reviewing Dr. Gleijeses's work, several former senior
United States diplomats who were involved in making policy
toward Angola broadly endorsed its conclusions.

"Considering that things came to a head over covert action
in the U.S. government in mid-July, there is no reason to
believe we were responding to Cuban involvement in Angola,"
said Nathaniel Davis, who resigned as Mr. Kissinger's
assistant secretary of state for African affairs in July
1975 over the Angola intervention.

Mr. Davis said he could find no fault with Mr. Gleijeses's
scholarship. Asked why the story of America responding to
Cuban intervention in Angola had persisted for so long, Mr.
Davis said: "Life is funny. What catches on in terms of
public debate is hard to predict."

The United States denied collaboration with South Africa
during the Angolan war, but it was quickly discovered by
China, an erstwhile American ally against the Marxists in
Angola, and was suspected and deeply resented by
Washington's main African partners.

--
Dan Clore




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From: "AIDI Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>
To: "james tan" <tyjfk@...>, "Yusri" <lesaint@...>,
"Wilis" <wilino@...>, "Sher" <sbalati@...>,   "S Haroon"
<syedharoon@...>, "Pitung Wari" <apitung@...>,   "Nazri Bin
Ibrahim" <NAZRI@...>,   "Najeeb  Jahrom  Al-Haj"
<rhnajeeb@...>,   "Iskandar" <i_nugraha@...>,   "Dali
Meskam" <dmeskam@...>,   "azrin rahim" <azrin@...>,
"Azlan" <azlan@...>,   "Akbar Hakim" <AKBAR@...>, "AIDI
Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>,   "Abdul Hadhi"
<Abdul.Hadhi@...>,   "Abd Amin Hj Hashim"
<abdamin@...>,   "Meskam Faisal" <faisal@...>
Subject: Robert Fisk:
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:08:30 +0800

Robert Fisk: A speech laced with obsessions and little else
05 April 2002
Internal links

Bush tells Israel: enough is enough

George Bush: 'Leadership not terror is needed for peace'

Troops accused of trying to storm Nativity church

Hizbollah attack on UN observers

Six major West Bank towns in Israeli hands

EU persists with call for mediation

Kurdish leader survives Saddam assassination bid

Blair and Bush will hold a united front

Leading article: What the Prime Minister should tell the President down at
the ranch

Adrian Hamilton: Europe does have influence over Israel and should use it
now

Ariel Sharon could not have done better. The heaping of blame upon an
occupied people, the obsessive use of the word terror � by my rough count
there were 50 references in just 10 minutes � and the brief, frightened
remarks about "occupation" and (one mention only) to Jewish settlements and
the need for Israeli "compassion" at the end were proof enough that
President Bush had totally failed to understand the tragedy he is supposedly
trying to solve.

The mugger became the victim and the victim became the mugger. What, I
wonder, is the exact distance between the Rose Garden and Bethlehem? So the
US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, is travelling to "the region'' next
week. Next week? Why not now?

But of course, the White House, which according to the Israeli press has
repeatedly been asking Mr Sharon how long he intends to reoccupy the
Palestinian cities of the West Bank, is to give the Israeli Prime Minister
more time to finish his invasion, destroy the Palestinian infrastructure and
dismantle the Palestinian Authority.

The speech was laced with all the "war on terror'' obsessions: Iraq as a
sponsor of terror for donating money to a family of Palestinian "martyrs'',
and Syria for not making up its mind if it is "for or against terror''.

The European Union, fearful of rising oil prices and their effect on the
eurozone economy, had earlier dispatched a mission to Israel; with typical
contempt, Mr Sharon told its members they could not visit Yasser Arafat in
Ramallah. The delegation, which had earlier announced that the Americans had
failed in their mission as peacemaker in the Middle East, simply packed up
and left Tel Aviv within hours.

But will Mr Powell do any better? The dollar has fallen against world
currencies because of the Middle East crisis � as good a reason as any for
Mr Bush to act � and the possible restrictions on Middle East oil
production, though more damaging to Europe, must have helped to prompt the
President's decision to dispatch Mr Powell.

The Palestinian suicide bombings, however, were the core of Mr Bush's
address. He talked of the 18-year-old Palestinian girl who blew herself up
and killed a 17-year-old Israeli girl, the Jewish state's "dream'' of peace
with its neighbours. "Terror must be stopped ... no nation can negotiate
with terrorists ... leaderships not terror ... you're either with the
civilised world or you're with the terrorists ... all in the Middle East ...
must move in word and deed against terrorists ... I call on the Palestinian
Authority to do everything in their power to stop terrorist activities.''
Arafat had agreed to control "terrorism'' � "he failed'.' The reoccupation
of the West Bank was a "temporary measure'', Mr Bush announced, trusting the
word of the Israeli occupiers. "Suicide bombing missions could well blow up
the only hope of a Palestinian state.''

On it went, 11 September-speak applied to the Middle East. Israel's enemies
must be eliminated � Al Aqsa, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbollah, which
yesterday beat up a UN observer on the Lebanese border in the most dangerous
incident of its kind since the Israeli withdrawal in 2000. The whole Bush
speech revolved around Israel's wellbeing, with scarcely three minutes
devoted to the Palestinians and their 35 years under occupation. Israel
should, Mr Bush decided, show a "respect'' for and "concern'' for the
Palestinian people.

There was some ritual mention of UN Security Council resolutions 242 and
338, which calls for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the
1967 war but which Mr Sharon has already said he cannot accept, and an
appeal to halt settlement building. But Jewish settlements are still being
built, at an ever-faster rate, on Palestinian land.

Only a heart of stone could not respond to the suffering of those Israeli
families whose loved ones have been so wickedly cut down by the Palestinian
suicide bombers. But where was Mr Bush's compassion for the vastly greater
number of Palestinians who have been killed by the Israelis over the past 19
months, or his condemnation of Israel's death squads, house demolition and
land theft? They simply didn't exist in the Bush speech.

The money for "martyrs" does not, of course, only go to the kin of suicide
bombers � it goes to families of all those killed by Israelis, most of whom
have been struck down by American-made weapons. Certainly, America has never
offered to make reparations for the innocents killed by the air-to-ground
missiles and shells it has sold to Israel.

Far more instructive than the Bush speech was the measured, fair way in
which Terje Larson, the UN's special Middle East envoy, and Nigel Roberts,
the local director of the World Bank, tried to describe the tragedy. In a
short press conference they appealed to both sides to end violence and
respect international law and cited Israel as well as the Palestinians for
breaking it. The so-called Israeli "closed military areas" were, Mr Larson
said, "illegitimate and in direct violation of the [Oslo] Agreements". Mr
Roberts talked of the surge in violence as a threat that could "consign to
history the unique opportunity for reconciliation''.

But "closed military areas" achieved another Israeli victory over the
Western television satellite stations. Yesterday, the BBC, Sky and CNN, with
their own crews largely prevented from filming in the reoccupied Palestinian
cities, all ran footage of the Bethlehem battle taken by Israeli soldiers.
Rather than refuse to use the tape unless their own crews were permitted
access to the carnage, the three channels all dutifully used the film taken
by the army of occupation. Another milestone in the collapse of journalism
in the Middle East. But not so serious as the collapse of America's
peace-making.












_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

Here as pretty good Newsweek article on those responsible for the suicide
bombings.

Inside Suicide, Inc.
Death wishes: Suicide missions have become part of a culture from which no
child is spared. The mechanics of martyrdom

By Christopher Dickey
NEWSWEEK




      April 15 issue —  Little boys love to play soldier. They want so
badly to look like men, standing at attention in their crinkly little
camouflage fatigues, trying to harden their soft eyes and their baby-toothed
grins and show they’re not really as powerless as they almost always feel.





      IN OTHER GENERATIONS, in other places, they have been cowboys
conquering the Wild West or Jedi knights up against the Empire. In the
Israeli-occupied territories today, they’re would-be suicide bombers
killing Israelis. And unlike most little boys and girls, for whom the games
of war are passing fantasies, the children of Palestine are taught by
everything and everyone around them that they’ll have their chance. When
they grow up they’ll trade their cardboard bombs for real ones, and kill
the real Israelis who man the omnipresent checkpoints, who intimidate and
humiliate their parents, or fight their brothers in the streets.
         “They want to be martyrs even if they don’t know the meaning of
the word,” says Muhammad Abu Rukbah, principal of an elementary school in
Gaza’s Jabaliya refugee camp. “They see the images on TV, the posters in
the streets, the honor of the martyrs’ families, and they want that kind
of honor for themselves, for their families.” Out on the dusty street of
the camp, 10-year-old Aya, a pretty, bright-eyed girl in a school smock, is
asked how she feels about kids just like her who are blown up by
murderer-martyrs in Israel. “I don’t feel sorry for them,” she says.
“Their families and their mothers are pushing them to fight us and kill
us.” She adds that she’d like to be a doctor someday, “or maybe a
martyr myself.”







          What kind of madness is this? Since September 11, the answer to
that question has become vital to Americans as well as Israelis. When the
World Trade Center was destroyed, Flight 93 hijacked and the Pentagon
blasted by 19 terrorists (all of them Arabs, none of them Palestinians), the
security of the most massively armed country on earth seemed in peril at the
hands of men with box cutters and a passionate will to die. The suicidal
killers came on the scene as the ultimate weapon of asymmetric warfare, one
that could penetrate to the democratic core of American society. “A human
bomb is like a very sophisticated guided missile,” says Ely Karmon of
Israel’s International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism. But no
multibillion-dollar antimissile system can stop it.


THOUSANDS OF WOULD-BE MARTYRS?
         Now that Israel has come under an unprecedented wave of suicide
attacks, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has responded with a relentless, if
temporary, reoccupation of Palestinian cities. Protests spread last week
throughout the Muslim world and Europe. But for at least four days, no
suicide bomb thundered through the daily life of Israeli civilians. Were the
bombers broken? Or were they just biding their time, and possibly looking
for new targets? If we are to believe a recent Israeli propaganda film,
“irrevocable seeds of hatred have been planted into an entire
generation,” and Palestinian children—by the hundreds of
thousands—will grow, irrevocably, to be killers. And if death-cult
terrorists can do what they’ve done to mighty little Israel, making life a
daily dance with carnage, what can they do to the U.S.A.? As one Palestinian
academic suggests, without meaning it as a threat, “if the present
situation continues, you are going to see the kind of terrorism all over the
world that we had in the 1970s, but this time with suicide attacks.” Are
there really thousands of would-be martyrs “out there,” whole
populations—whole cultures ready to clash with Western civilization? And
if so, what possible defense can there be?

          In fact, there are defenses, and some of them are diplomatic. The
anger of the Palestinians is not immune to negotiation, and there’s no
reason to think it’s irrevocable. Nor is the anger of other Arabs and
Muslims throughout the world, for whom the suffering of the Palestinians has
become a satellite-broadcast passion play, inspiring their own most violent
currents. But diplomacy works slowly, and suicide bombers don’t.
          How do you address the immediate threat? There, too, answers exist.
The despair that afflicts—and motivates—so much of Palestinian society
is not enough to launch a concerted campaign of suicide bombings. For that,
cynical technicians are required who build an infrastructure to encourage,
discipline and arm the would-be shahid, or martyr. Those same technicians
have worked to create a mystique around the dead, which attracts still more
recruits. And all this takes money, so contributions have had to be
collected from sympathizers around the world.
             In Gaza and the West Bank, Islamic fundamentalists from Hamas
and other groups have nurtured a cult of death for years, having learned
from the example of Lebanon’s Hizbullah. At least since 1992, when several
Hamas leaders were exiled to Lebanon by the Israeli government, the two
organizations have had extensive contacts. Teachers in Hamas day camps and
preachers in mosques have kept up a constant chorus of praise for
“martyrs” defending Palestinian lands. Like Hizbullah, they called for
an end to the Jewish state. “It’s a religious war,” says Hani, a
bearded 23-year-old Hamas disciple in Gaza who neighbors say is destined for
martyrdom. “This is not about land.”

SEEKING THE UNMARRIED AND UNEMPLOYED
         In the past, Hamas and Islamic Jihad fundamentalists operated highly
secretive cells that recruited young men deemed to be suitable candidates
for suicide missions. For the most part, these men, like Hani, were
unmarried and unemployed. Most were educated (at least to the high-school
level), but faced bleak futures. Many were enticed, in part, by the promise
of a wondrous “marriage” in heaven, where they would be greeted by 72
dark-eyed virgins.
          Over the past year, secular militants connected to Palestinian
Authority Chairman Yasir Arafat have stolen the banner of martyrdom that was
growing so popular in the territories. Not to be outdone by Islamic
fundamentalist rivals, terrorists from Arafat’s Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades
have taken up suicide attacks. “When the Al Aqsa Brigades saw that Hamas
was taking a lead in the intifada and threatening their status in the
street, they adopted this suicide strategy,” says Ely Karmon of the
counterterrorism institute. Neither Freud nor Allah is the primary motivator
here; the dream of “Palestine” is. And the demographics and culture of
the Palestinians are such that there is potentially an endless supply of
cannon fodder to this cause: in 1995 and 1996, when Hamas mounted its first
major suicide-bombing campaigns, only 20 percent of Palestinians approved;
in the most recent poll, it’s 80 percent.
           A document that Israeli military intelligence says it captured in
Yasir Arafat’s headquarters last week gives a weirdly banal picture of the
infrastructure of terror that took shape. The paper, denounced as a
fabrication by the Palestinians, appears to be an invoice from the
“Al-Aqsa Martyrs Troops.” By Israel’s count, the Aqsa Brigades have
mounted at least 22 attacks since last August, killing 26 Israelis and
wounding 613. Among the itemized expenses from its early operations are
“various electrical components and chemical supplies (for the production
of charges and bombs).” The author of the memo goes on to point out that
“this has been our largest expense”—the cost of a prepared bomb being
at least 700 shekels, or roughly $150. “We need about five to nine bombs a
weeks for our cells in various areas.” There are also expense items for
printing posters of some “martyrs,” mounting the portraits of others on
wooden boards and the cost of memorial ceremonies for the dead. Other
captured documents purport to show a request from Marwan Barghouti, the most
popular of Arafat’s militia leaders in the West Bank, requesting funds for
a dozen men, of whom several were on Israel’s wanted list of fugitives.
Barghouti asked $1,000 for each. Arafat signed off on $350.
          Compared with the impact of the operations, the amounts are truly
insignificant. But the money trail is not. Cash is needed not only to fund
the operations but to maintain morale and propagate the hero worship that is
at the heart of the suicide movement. Some funds from Palestinian factions
go to creating special martyrs’ videos that serve as recruitment tapes.
“There’s a special unit in the military wing that’s in charge of
it,” Hamas official Ismail Abu Shanab told NEWSWEEK. “It’s done on the
last day of training, before the operation. Making the video is a way of
getting media exposure. It gets the message out that these people are
martyrs of their own free will. And it encourages others to become
martyrs.”

INCENTIVES FOR BOMBERS
         At wakes for Hamas bombers, it has become routine for an activist to
approach the father with an envelope containing $10,000. Abu Shanab says the
money is a form of reparation to help the family rebound from their loss,
but Israelis say it provides the bomber some incentive. “If a guy knows
that the money will serve as a dowry for his sister, for instance, that it
will allow her to marry a good husband, this is a factor,” says one
Israeli security official.
          Sorrow is often masked—or overwhelmed—by the cheers and praise
of the community, but it is not erased. Shuhail Masri was never proud of
what his son did. Last August, 22-year-old Izzedine Masri walked into the
Sbarro pizza restaurant in downtown Jerusalem and blew himself up for Hamas,
killing 15 people. But the hundreds of well-wishers who went to the Masri
home in the West Bank town of Aqqaba after the attack helped comfort Shuhail
and his wife, Fatima. In nearby Jenin, Palestinians handed out candy on the
streets to celebrate the bombing. “It took our minds off the loss of our
son,” Masri says. Now the crowds are gone and the misery remains: “I
lost my health. I wish I still had my son around. If I knew, I would have
stopped him.”
          Iyad Sarraj, a Palestinian psychologist who studies the phenomenon
of suicide attacks, says families of the bombers are initially comforted by
the status accorded to their sons. “But if you go back to these families
six months later, you see nothing but grief.”
          The money to support organizations like Hamas, as well as
Arafat’s Fatah, largely comes from outside the Palestinian territories.
Iraq said last week it would now up its contribution to $25,000 (from
$10,000) for the family of each suicide bomber. But U.S. intelligence and
law-enforcement officials say Iraq probably plays a minor role in financing
suicide networks. The bulk of the money comes from the same sources that
provide funds to a wide assortment of radical Islamic groups and causes,
including Al Qaeda: wealthy Arab businessmen, particularly from Saudi Arabia
and other oil states, and well-off Islamic families in the Western world.
Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, told NEWSWEEK last week
that private Saudi donations to Hamas had been cut since the group was put
on a special terrorist list by the U.S. Treasury Department in November. Now
“support goes only to the Palestinian Authority” of Yasir Arafat, said
al-Faisal.
           Money has also come from the United States. Treasury Department
officials say they are convinced that some U.S.-based groups whose assets
have been frozen by the president since September 11 were raising money for
Palestinian bombing missions. A 49-page report sent by the FBI to the
Treasury Department last November explicitly accuses one of the largest U.S.
Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, of
providing “crucial” financial support to the families of Hamas suicide
bombers. Established in 1989, the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation has
openly raised money to help Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. But the
FBI report says “evidence strongly suggests” that by providing
“annuities” to the families of Hamas members, the Holy Land Foundation
had helped Hamas over the years by “providing a constant flow of suicide
volunteers.”

‘NO PEACE EVER!’
         According to the FBI document, Holy Land Foundation officials have
talked at meetings inside the United States about how their organization was
supporting the families of Palestinian “martyrs.” An FBI informant
reported that, at a 1994 Muslim youth association conference in Los Angeles
attended by the foundation’s chief, a spokesman for the Hamas military
wing said, “I hope no one is recording me or taking any pictures ...
because I’m going to speak the truth to you. It’s simple. Finish off the
Israelis. Kill them all! Exterminate them! No peace ever! Do not bother to
talk politics.” According to the FBI report, $207,000 was raised after
this speech for “the cause.” The Holy Land Foundation has denied
government allegations that it supports terrorism and has sued the Justice
and Treasury Departments, seeking to have the courts order the government to
unfreeze its assets. In a written statement, the foundation said that it is
“dedicated to alleviating the suffering of people ... around the world ...
particularly in Palestine.” The organization said it “rejects terrorism
by anyone,” and denied that it has ever acted on behalf of Hamas.
          Another U.S.-based group that apparently has ties to Hamas is the
Islamic Association for Palestine. An INS report obtained by NEWSWEEK
alleges that a top Hamas official, Mousa Abu Marzook, had contributed
$490,000 to the IAP’s budget. The report notes that the IAP distributed
Hamas recruitment videos and published two pro-Hamas newspapers. But the
precise links between groups like IAP and operations against civilians in
Israel are hard, if not impossible, to find. IAP president Rafeeq Jabar told
NEWSWEEK that he was unaware who had made the $490,000 contribution, and
that his organization’s funds are used to produce position papers, videos
and other materials dedicated to “educating our fellow Americans about
what’s going on in Palestine. We don’t send money to martyrs.” Asked
about his appearance at a conference two years ago, when he read the will of
a Palestinian “martyr” who had driven his car into Israeli soldiers and
died in a hail of gunfire, Jabar said: “I read his will so that people
will feel the despair that Palestinians feel. These people feel they have
nothing to live for.”
          So, is the world—or more to the point, are Americans—due for a
new wave of attacks by suicidal mass murderers? The possibility is there,
but on balance, the likelihood is not. There is nothing natural about
killing yourself in any culture. In those who have waged suicide-war, the
strongest motivation is protection of home and hearth. Japan’s kamikaze
pilots saw themselves as the last line of defense for their families in
World War II. Sri Lanka’s Tamil Tigers, who have carried out more than 170
suicide attacks in the last 25 years, are fighting at the behest of a
charismatic leader to secure their homeland. Lebanon’s Hizbullah has a
radical Islamic ideology, but it was created and grew as a response to
Israel’s 1982 invasion of their country. Although martyrdom is revered in
Islam, the Qur’an recognizes the martyrdom only of those who fight to
defend their faith and their land. Suicide, as a means of escape from this
life, is regarded as a sin.
          All of which may explain why Osama bin Laden, after processing tens
of thousands of foreign recruits through his Afghan camps, appears to have
produced only a relatively small number of suicide attackers. His ideas
might have inspired most recruits to fight ferociously, but not to embrace
certain death. With the destruction of bin Laden’s infrastructure for
indoctrinating, training and equipping his international terrorist brigades
of America-haters, the threat that he can organize future large-scale
attacks really is reduced.
          Palestinian suicide bombers pose a more difficult problem.
Precisely because the terrorism is a reaction to occupation, the use of more
intense and brutal occupation to try to wipe them out is not likely to have
the desired effect. And the issue of Palestine’s liberation is of such
passionate interest to Muslims throughout the world that it could provide
the impetus for new waves of terror that have nothing whatsoever to do with
Al Qaeda, or could be exploited by the group’s remnants.
          And meanwhile, the youngest generation of Palestinians wakes up
every morning with more reason to die. After Israeli troops stormed into the
Jabaliya refugee camp last month, schoolteacher Samira Abu Shamak was
shocked to hear her 6-year-old daughter begging for a gun or a bomb. “She
said, ‘I want to be a martyr’,” remembers Abu Shamak. “What could I
say? I didn’t know. I told her, ‘Wait until you’re grown up, dear.
Maybe—maybe things will change. At least wait until then’.”












_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

james,

The Newsweek article is practically the same as
that in the New York Times.  Which was probably
the same as any number of other articles.  It is
quite apparent that a generation is being produced
that sees only the option of more killing
[including themselves].  Israel is correct in
responding by moving into the cities of the
occupied territories.  At least it is
understandable as a form of response.  But
ultimately there has to be a political settlement
and this must involve a clear statement from the
Arab League as to recognition and continued
security of the Israeli state.

I have yet to see a demonstration against an Iraqi
embassy or any other Arab embassy for that matter
to protest actions on the other side.  It would
certainly be of order to have such a demonstration
to show that terrorism is good marketing.

eduard

-----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 8:42 PM
Subject: [existlist] Inside Suicide, Inc.


Here as pretty good Newsweek article on those
responsible for the suicide
bombings.

Inside Suicide, Inc.
Death wishes: Suicide missions have become part of
a culture from which no
child is spared. The mechanics of martyrdom

By Christopher Dickey
NEWSWEEK




      April 15 issue —  Little boys love to play
soldier. They want so
badly to look like men, standing at attention in
their crinkly little
camouflage fatigues, trying to harden their soft
eyes and their baby-toothed
grins and show they’re not really as powerless
as they almost always feel.





      IN OTHER GENERATIONS, in other places, they
have been cowboys
conquering the Wild West or Jedi knights up
against the Empire. In the
Israeli-occupied territories today, they’re
would-be suicide bombers
killing Israelis. And unlike most little boys and
girls, for whom the games
of war are passing fantasies, the children of
Palestine are taught by
everything and everyone around them that they’ll
have their chance. When
they grow up they’ll trade their cardboard bombs
for real ones, and kill
the real Israelis who man the omnipresent
checkpoints, who intimidate and
humiliate their parents, or fight their brothers
in the streets.
         “They want to be martyrs even if they
don’t know the meaning of
the word,” says Muhammad Abu Rukbah, principal
of an elementary school in
Gaza’s Jabaliya refugee camp. “They see the
images on TV, the posters in
the streets, the honor of the martyrs’ families,
and they want that kind
of honor for themselves, for their families.”
Out on the dusty street of
the camp, 10-year-old Aya, a pretty, bright-eyed
girl in a school smock, is
asked how she feels about kids just like her who
are blown up by
murderer-martyrs in Israel. “I don’t feel
sorry for them,” she says.
“Their families and their mothers are pushing
them to fight us and kill
us.” She adds that she’d like to be a doctor
someday, “or maybe a
martyr myself.”







          What kind of madness is this? Since
September 11, the answer to
that question has become vital to Americans as
well as Israelis. When the
World Trade Center was destroyed, Flight 93
hijacked and the Pentagon
blasted by 19 terrorists (all of them Arabs, none
of them Palestinians), the
security of the most massively armed country on
earth seemed in peril at the
hands of men with box cutters and a passionate
will to die. The suicidal
killers came on the scene as the ultimate weapon
of asymmetric warfare, one
that could penetrate to the democratic core of
American society. “A human
bomb is like a very sophisticated guided
missile,” says Ely Karmon of
Israel’s International Policy Institute for
Counter-Terrorism. But no
multibillion-dollar antimissile system can stop
it.


THOUSANDS OF WOULD-BE MARTYRS?
         Now that Israel has come under an
unprecedented wave of suicide
attacks, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has responded
with a relentless, if
temporary, reoccupation of Palestinian cities.
Protests spread last week
throughout the Muslim world and Europe. But for at
least four days, no
suicide bomb thundered through the daily life of
Israeli civilians. Were the
bombers broken? Or were they just biding their
time, and possibly looking
for new targets? If we are to believe a recent
Israeli propaganda film,
“irrevocable seeds of hatred have been planted
into an entire
generation,” and Palestinian children—by the
hundreds of
thousands—will grow, irrevocably, to be killers.
And if death-cult
terrorists can do what they’ve done to mighty
little Israel, making life a
daily dance with carnage, what can they do to the
U.S.A.? As one Palestinian
academic suggests, without meaning it as a threat,
“if the present
situation continues, you are going to see the kind
of terrorism all over the
world that we had in the 1970s, but this time with
suicide attacks.” Are
there really thousands of would-be martyrs “out
there,” whole
populations—whole cultures ready to clash with
Western civilization? And
if so, what possible defense can there be?

          In fact, there are defenses, and some of
them are diplomatic. The
anger of the Palestinians is not immune to
negotiation, and there’s no
reason to think it’s irrevocable. Nor is the
anger of other Arabs and
Muslims throughout the world, for whom the
suffering of the Palestinians has
become a satellite-broadcast passion play,
inspiring their own most violent
currents. But diplomacy works slowly, and suicide
bombers don’t.
          How do you address the immediate threat?
There, too, answers exist.
The despair that afflicts—and motivates—so
much of Palestinian society
is not enough to launch a concerted campaign of
suicide bombings. For that,
cynical technicians are required who build an
infrastructure to encourage,
discipline and arm the would-be shahid, or martyr.
Those same technicians
have worked to create a mystique around the dead,
which attracts still more
recruits. And all this takes money, so
contributions have had to be
collected from sympathizers around the world.
             In Gaza and the West Bank, Islamic
fundamentalists from Hamas
and other groups have nurtured a cult of death for
years, having learned
from the example of Lebanon’s Hizbullah. At
least since 1992, when several
Hamas leaders were exiled to Lebanon by the
Israeli government, the two
organizations have had extensive contacts.
Teachers in Hamas day camps and
preachers in mosques have kept up a constant
chorus of praise for
“martyrs” defending Palestinian lands. Like
Hizbullah, they called for
an end to the Jewish state. “It’s a religious
war,” says Hani, a
bearded 23-year-old Hamas disciple in Gaza who
neighbors say is destined for
martyrdom. “This is not about land.”

SEEKING THE UNMARRIED AND UNEMPLOYED
         In the past, Hamas and Islamic Jihad
fundamentalists operated highly
secretive cells that recruited young men deemed to
be suitable candidates
for suicide missions. For the most part, these
men, like Hani, were
unmarried and unemployed. Most were educated (at
least to the high-school
level), but faced bleak futures. Many were
enticed, in part, by the promise
of a wondrous “marriage” in heaven, where they
would be greeted by 72
dark-eyed virgins.
          Over the past year, secular militants
connected to Palestinian
Authority Chairman Yasir Arafat have stolen the
banner of martyrdom that was
growing so popular in the territories. Not to be
outdone by Islamic
fundamentalist rivals, terrorists from Arafat’s
Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades
have taken up suicide attacks. “When the Al Aqsa
Brigades saw that Hamas
was taking a lead in the intifada and threatening
their status in the
street, they adopted this suicide strategy,”
says Ely Karmon of the
counterterrorism institute. Neither Freud nor
Allah is the primary motivator
here; the dream of “Palestine” is. And the
demographics and culture of
the Palestinians are such that there is
potentially an endless supply of
cannon fodder to this cause: in 1995 and 1996,
when Hamas mounted its first
major suicide-bombing campaigns, only 20 percent
of Palestinians approved;
in the most recent poll, it’s 80 percent.
           A document that Israeli military
intelligence says it captured in
Yasir Arafat’s headquarters last week gives a
weirdly banal picture of the
infrastructure of terror that took shape. The
paper, denounced as a
fabrication by the Palestinians, appears to be an
invoice from the
“Al-Aqsa Martyrs Troops.” By Israel’s count,
the Aqsa Brigades have
mounted at least 22 attacks since last August,
killing 26 Israelis and
wounding 613. Among the itemized expenses from its
early operations are
“various electrical components and chemical
supplies (for the production
of charges and bombs).” The author of the memo
goes on to point out that
“this has been our largest expense”—the cost
of a prepared bomb being
at least 700 shekels, or roughly $150. “We need
about five to nine bombs a
weeks for our cells in various areas.” There are
also expense items for
printing posters of some “martyrs,” mounting
the portraits of others on
wooden boards and the cost of memorial ceremonies
for the dead. Other
captured documents purport to show a request from
Marwan Barghouti, the most
popular of Arafat’s militia leaders in the West
Bank, requesting funds for
a dozen men, of whom several were on Israel’s
wanted list of fugitives.
Barghouti asked $1,000 for each. Arafat signed off
on $350.
          Compared with the impact of the
operations, the amounts are truly
insignificant. But the money trail is not. Cash is
needed not only to fund
the operations but to maintain morale and
propagate the hero worship that is
at the heart of the suicide movement. Some funds
from Palestinian factions
go to creating special martyrs’ videos that
serve as recruitment tapes.
“There’s a special unit in the military wing
that’s in charge of
it,” Hamas official Ismail Abu Shanab told
NEWSWEEK. “It’s done on the
last day of training, before the operation. Making
the video is a way of
getting media exposure. It gets the message out
that these people are
martyrs of their own free will. And it encourages
others to become
martyrs.”

INCENTIVES FOR BOMBERS
         At wakes for Hamas bombers, it has become
routine for an activist to
approach the father with an envelope containing
$10,000. Abu Shanab says the
money is a form of reparation to help the family
rebound from their loss,
but Israelis say it provides the bomber some
incentive. “If a guy knows
that the money will serve as a dowry for his
sister, for instance, that it
will allow her to marry a good husband, this is a
factor,” says one
Israeli security official.
          Sorrow is often masked—or
  overwhelmed—by the cheers and praise
of the community, but it is not erased. Shuhail
Masri was never proud of
what his son did. Last August, 22-year-old
Izzedine Masri walked into the
Sbarro pizza restaurant in downtown Jerusalem and
blew himself up for Hamas,
killing 15 people. But the hundreds of
well-wishers who went to the Masri
home in the West Bank town of Aqqaba after the
attack helped comfort Shuhail
and his wife, Fatima. In nearby Jenin,
Palestinians handed out candy on the
streets to celebrate the bombing. “It took our
minds off the loss of our
son,” Masri says. Now the crowds are gone and
the misery remains: “I
lost my health. I wish I still had my son around.
If I knew, I would have
stopped him.”
          Iyad Sarraj, a Palestinian psychologist
who studies the phenomenon
of suicide attacks, says families of the bombers
are initially comforted by
the status accorded to their sons. “But if you
go back to these families
six months later, you see nothing but grief.”
          The money to support organizations like
Hamas, as well as
Arafat’s Fatah, largely comes from outside the
Palestinian territories.
Iraq said last week it would now up its
contribution to $25,000 (from
$10,000) for the family of each suicide bomber.
But U.S. intelligence and
law-enforcement officials say Iraq probably plays
a minor role in financing
suicide networks. The bulk of the money comes from
the same sources that
provide funds to a wide assortment of radical
Islamic groups and causes,
including Al Qaeda: wealthy Arab businessmen,
particularly from Saudi Arabia
and other oil states, and well-off Islamic
families in the Western world.
Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal,
told NEWSWEEK last week
that private Saudi donations to Hamas had been cut
since the group was put
on a special terrorist list by the U.S. Treasury
Department in November. Now
“support goes only to the Palestinian
Authority” of Yasir Arafat, said
al-Faisal.
           Money has also come from the United
States. Treasury Department
officials say they are convinced that some
U.S.-based groups whose assets
have been frozen by the president since September
11 were raising money for
Palestinian bombing missions. A 49-page report
sent by the FBI to the
Treasury Department last November explicitly
accuses one of the largest U.S.
Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation for
Relief and Development, of
providing “crucial” financial support to the
families of Hamas suicide
bombers. Established in 1989, the Texas-based Holy
Land Foundation has
openly raised money to help Palestinians in the
West Bank and Gaza. But the
FBI report says “evidence strongly suggests”
that by providing
“annuities” to the families of Hamas members,
the Holy Land Foundation
had helped Hamas over the years by “providing a
constant flow of suicide
volunteers.”

‘NO PEACE EVER!’
         According to the FBI document, Holy Land
Foundation officials have
talked at meetings inside the United States about
how their organization was
supporting the families of Palestinian
“martyrs.” An FBI informant
reported that, at a 1994 Muslim youth association
conference in Los Angeles
attended by the foundation’s chief, a spokesman
for the Hamas military
wing said, “I hope no one is recording me or
taking any pictures ...
because I’m going to speak the truth to you.
It’s simple. Finish off the
Israelis. Kill them all! Exterminate them! No
peace ever! Do not bother to
talk politics.” According to the FBI report,
$207,000 was raised after
this speech for “the cause.” The Holy Land
Foundation has denied
government allegations that it supports terrorism
and has sued the Justice
and Treasury Departments, seeking to have the
courts order the government to
unfreeze its assets. In a written statement, the
foundation said that it is
“dedicated to alleviating the suffering of
people ... around the world ...
particularly in Palestine.” The organization
said it “rejects terrorism
by anyone,” and denied that it has ever acted on
behalf of Hamas.
          Another U.S.-based group that apparently
has ties to Hamas is the
Islamic Association for Palestine. An INS report
obtained by NEWSWEEK
alleges that a top Hamas official, Mousa Abu
Marzook, had contributed
$490,000 to the IAP’s budget. The report notes
that the IAP distributed
Hamas recruitment videos and published two
pro-Hamas newspapers. But the
precise links between groups like IAP and
operations against civilians in
Israel are hard, if not impossible, to find. IAP
president Rafeeq Jabar told
NEWSWEEK that he was unaware who had made the
$490,000 contribution, and
that his organization’s funds are used to
produce position papers, videos
and other materials dedicated to “educating our
fellow Americans about
what’s going on in Palestine. We don’t send
money to martyrs.” Asked
about his appearance at a conference two years
ago, when he read the will of
a Palestinian “martyr” who had driven his car
into Israeli soldiers and
died in a hail of gunfire, Jabar said: “I read
his will so that people
will feel the despair that Palestinians feel.
These people feel they have
nothing to live for.”
          So, is the world—or more to the point,
are Americans—due for a
new wave of attacks by suicidal mass murderers?
The possibility is there,
but on balance, the likelihood is not. There is
nothing natural about
killing yourself in any culture. In those who have
waged suicide-war, the
strongest motivation is protection of home and
hearth. Japan’s kamikaze
pilots saw themselves as the last line of defense
for their families in
World War II. Sri Lanka’s Tamil Tigers, who have
carried out more than 170
suicide attacks in the last 25 years, are fighting
at the behest of a
charismatic leader to secure their homeland.
Lebanon’s Hizbullah has a
radical Islamic ideology, but it was created and
grew as a response to
Israel’s 1982 invasion of their country.
Although martyrdom is revered in
Islam, the Qur’an recognizes the martyrdom only
of those who fight to
defend their faith and their land. Suicide, as a
means of escape from this
life, is regarded as a sin.
          All of which may explain why Osama bin
Laden, after processing tens
of thousands of foreign recruits through his
Afghan camps, appears to have
produced only a relatively small number of suicide
attackers. His ideas
might have inspired most recruits to fight
ferociously, but not to embrace
certain death. With the destruction of bin
Laden’s infrastructure for
indoctrinating, training and equipping his
international terrorist brigades
of America-haters, the threat that he can organize
future large-scale
attacks really is reduced.
          Palestinian suicide bombers pose a more
difficult problem.
Precisely because the terrorism is a reaction to
occupation, the use of more
intense and brutal occupation to try to wipe them
out is not likely to have
the desired effect. And the issue of Palestine’s
liberation is of such
passionate interest to Muslims throughout the
world that it could provide
the impetus for new waves of terror that have
nothing whatsoever to do with
Al Qaeda, or could be exploited by the group’s
remnants.
          And meanwhile, the youngest generation of
Palestinians wakes up
every morning with more reason to die. After
Israeli troops stormed into the
Jabaliya refugee camp last month, schoolteacher
Samira Abu Shamak was
shocked to hear her 6-year-old daughter begging
for a gun or a bomb. “She
said, ‘I want to be a martyr’,” remembers
Abu Shamak. “What could I
say? I didn’t know. I told her, ‘Wait until
you’re grown up, dear.
Maybe—maybe things will change. At least wait
until then’.”












__________________________________________________
_______________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print
your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups

Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
(Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

From: "AIDI Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>
To: "james tan" <tyjfk@...>, "Yusri" <lesaint@...>,
"Wilis" <wilino@...>, "Sher" <sbalati@...>,   "S Haroon"
<syedharoon@...>, "Pitung Wari" <apitung@...>,   "Nazri Bin
Ibrahim" <NAZRI@...>,   "Najeeb  Jahrom  Al-Haj"
<rhnajeeb@...>,   "Iskandar" <i_nugraha@...>,   "Dali
Meskam" <dmeskam@...>,   "azrin rahim" <azrin@...>,
"Azlan" <azlan@...>,   "Akbar Hakim" <AKBAR@...>, "AIDI
Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>,   "Abdul Hadhi"
<Abdul.Hadhi@...>,   "Abd Amin Hj Hashim"
<abdamin@...>,   "Meskam Faisal" <faisal@...>
Subject: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk mail!!!!!
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:39:20 +0800

Interesting....

Subject: FW: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk mail!!!!!



































                                  Press Releases
                                   Breaking News
                                   Daily Commentaries











                                  How Israeli terrorism and American treason
caused the September 11 Attacks
                                  By David Duke, National President
                                  European-American Unity and Rights
Organization (EURO)
                                  November 21, 2001
                                  If Osama bin Laden is the man behind the
attack that caused the death of thousands of Americans on September 11, I,
like most Americans want to him to suffer the ultimate punishment for his
crime. No person or nation that commits terrorism against America should
escape punishment.

                                  But now I am going to make a statement that
may well shock you. If you agree that those who commit terrorist acts
against America should be punished, then America should put Israel at the
top of our hit list; for in this article, I will prove that Israel has
committed deliberate acts of murderous terrorism and treachery against
America.

                                  Israel's acts of terrorism and treachery
against America have not only gone unpunished, but have been rewarded by
politicians who have treasonously betrayed the United States.

                                  Read David Duke's previous articles:
                                  The Big Lie - The true reason behind the
attack

                                  Will Anyone Dare to Ask Why?


                                  I will show that Israel has committed more
continuing terrorism in the last half century than any other nation on
earth. Then, I will expose Israel's terrorism and treachery against the
United States of America. Finally, I will show the shocking facts proving
that Israel deliberately sought the death of thousands of Americans on
September 11.

                                  Why was America attacked?

                                  No one would argue that whatever his
motivations, if bin Laden was behind the horror of the WTC attacks, he
deserves punishment for killing so many innocent people. At the same time,
it is vital that we know why bin Laden and millions of others around the
world have come to hate America. Why are so many willing to risk or even
sacrifice their lives to get at us? I certainly hope no one reading this is
so na�ve as to believe that the growing millions who hate America do so
because we are "free." That canard has to be the most ridiculous notion ever
sold to the American people since the pet rock.

                                  To end the threat of terrorism against the
American people, we must know the true reason why we are so hated. Modern
technology makes mass murder and terrorism so ridiculously easy that just
about anyone can do it. It cannot be stopped by military might. In fact,
even the brute force we are using in Afghanistan supposedly to wipe out
terror -- already shows signs of whipping up enough world-wide hatred
against America to give rise to a thousand new terrorists for eevery one
terrorist we might kill.

                                  I also wonder what the kill ratio is in
Afghanistan. Perhaps 1 member of the al-Qaida network is killed for every 10
run-of-the-mill Afghan soldiers and civilians who are basically just trying
to get through their own lives like the rest of us. Or maybe it's 1
terrorist for a 100 Afghanis. I suspect the real figure is more like a 1000
non-terrorists dead for the life of 1 genuine terrorist who might ever
bother America.

                                  Perhaps we should have enough courage to
consider the possible reasons why so many might hate us. Only when we have
all the facts, rather than cute little clich�s like "They were attacking
freedom," can we decide the best way we can protect our people in the
future.

                                  By the way, how do we define an "attack on
American freedom?" I would say that a real "attack on freedom" is trashing
the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States. The Ten
Amendments are the very core of what American freedom actually is. George
Bush and the U.S. Congress, armed with the newspeak U.S.A. Patriot Act, did
infinitely more to take away our Constitutional freedoms than bin Laden ever
could.

                                  The real reason we have suffered terrorism

                                  The real reason we have suffered the
terrorism of the WTC attack is shockingly simple.

                                  Too many American politicians have
treasonously betrayed the American people by blindly supporting the leading
terrorist nation on earth: Israel.

                                  The American mass media and the government
cannot have it both ways. If they are motivated to attack Afghanistan for
giving aid and comfort to terrorists, then some Palestinians naturally find
motivation to attack America for giving aid and even military support to
Israel, a nation that has committed unrelenting terrorism against them.






                                  Traitors to the United States have allowed
a terrorist foreign nation to control the United States Government. Some
readers might think it preposterous for me to assert that that a foreign
nation controls America. But, consider the fact that the former head of the
United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee, William Fulbright, said
precisely that. He asserted on ABC's Face the Nation television program that
"Israel Controls the United States Senate."(1) And, Senator Fulbright was no
dummy; it is in his name that the brightest students scramble after the
so-named "Fulbright" scholarships. Not only did Senator Fulbright make this
powerful indictment, but the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
George Brown, as well as many others, have said essentially the same thing.

                                  We can say we can't possibly get the
Congress to support a (Israeli) program like this. And they say don't worry
about the Congress. We will take care of the Congress. This is somebody from
another country, but they can do it. They own, you know, the banks in this
country, the newspapers. Just look at where the Jewish money is. -
(2)(General George S. Brown, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)

                                  Of course, General Brown actually
understated the Jewish control of the American media. It is true that they
control the most influential newspapers in America, including the top three:
The New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal. They
also own the top three newsmagazines Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World
Report. But, even more importantly, they thoroughly dominate the television
and broadcast media, the two largest media conglomerates being Time-Warner
and Disney, and their domination includes the network news executives of the
main three networks: ABC, CBS and NBC. Control of the media by pro-Israeli
partisans is another subject for another time; but if you would like
complete documentation, please go to my website www.davidduke.com and pull
up a chapter from My Awakening called "Who Runs the Media." The extreme
pro-Israeli partisanship of the media is why most Americans are woefully
ignorant of Israel's terrorist record. All this article needs to do is apply
just a tiny pinprick into the balloon of Israeli propaganda, for it will
take only a few good jabs to burst the balloon of lies surrounding Israel.

                                  I will show you documentary evidence that
during the last 50 years Israel has engaged in more murderous terrorism than
any other nation in the world; and that by supporting its criminal behavior,
America is now reaping the fanatical hatred of hundreds of millions of
people around the globe. Support for Israel's terrorism has directly led to
the terrorism now going on against the United States. Most Americans don't
even realize the magnitude and scope of Israeli terrorism because of the
Jewish media control mentioned by General Brown. A pertinent example of
their incredible media power is their ability to propagate the Big Lie that
the WTC attack had nothing at all to do with Israel; that the kamikaze
attackers hated and attacked Americans because we are "free."

                                  The Big Lie

                                  The Jewish-dominated American mass media
and the Israeli-controlled politicians do not want the American people to
fully realize the incredibly high price America pays for blindly supporting
Israel. In the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001, even
President Bush repeated the absurd lie, alleging the attack happened because
they hate the fact that we are free. If, as the media says, bin Laden is
behind the terrorism, then they know that the attack occurred not because he
hates freedom. Just three years ago, ABC television and PBS Frontline
interviewed bin Laden during the time of the Clinton administration. Bin
Laden clearly stated why he opposed America:

                                  They (Americans) have put themselves at the
mercy of a disloyal government,... it is Israel inside America. Take the
sensitive ministries such as the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper hand in
them. They make use of America to further their plans for the world..."

                                  For over half a century, Muslims in
Palestine have been (by the Jews) slaughtered and assaulted and robbed of
their honor and of their property. Their houses have been blasted, their
crops destroyed...This is my message to the American people: to look for a
serious government that looks out for their interests and does not attack
other people's lands, or other people's honor..."(3)

                                  Notwithstanding any of his alleged crimes,
bin Laden has never in his entire life uttered a word against Democracy! The
media invented the lie about attacking Democracy to hide the real truth;
that America is being attacked in retaliation for the American government's
support of Israel's terrorist policies in the Mideast. The unanimity of the
media in propagating this huge lie without contradiction should make every
thoughtful person suspect that Americans are not getting the whole truth
from the media.

                                  First, let's take a look at Israel's
terrorism against the Palestinians.

                                  Israel: a mass murderer as Head of State

                                  Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, is
one of the world's most bloodstained terrorists. He is responsible for the
cold-blooded slaughter of at least 1,500 men, women and children in the
Beirut refugee camps of Chatila and Sabra. Even a formal Israeli commission
found Sharon personally responsible for the Lebanese massacres.(4)






                                  In 1982, as Israel's defense minister,
Sharon directed Israel's invasion of Lebanon and the carpet bombing and
devastation of the city of Beirut (In Lebanon five times more women and
children died than in the September New York attack). This terror bombing
was carried out by Jews using jet fighters and bombs supplied by the United
States.

                                  After the Israeli military devastation and
occupation, Sharon forcibly removed Palestinian resistance fighters from
Lebanon. Many Palestinian women, children and old people were left behind in
refugee camps near Beirut. The United States publicly guaranteed their
safety and promised that they would quickly be reunited with their loved
ones. When Sharon plotted their murder, he not only planned a bloody act of
terrorism against the refugees; he knew it was an act of treachery against
the United States that would raise intense hatred against America.

                                  On the night of September 16, 1982, Sharon
sent Phalangist murder squads into two Palestinian refugee camps, Sabra and
Chatila. With Israeli tanks and troops closely surrounding the camps to
prevent any of the Palestinians from escaping, the murder squads
machine-gunned, bayoneted, and bludgeoned Palestinian civilians all that
night, the next day and the following night; all while the Israelis
surrounding the camps listened gleefully to the machine gun fire and screams
coming from inside. Sharon then sent in bulldozers to hide as much of the
atrocity as he could. At least 1500 Palestinian men, women and children were
butchered, and perhaps as many as 2500. (An official Lebanese investigation
set the figure at 2500) Even after the efforts of Sharon's bulldozers, many
Palestinians remained unburied, and Red Cross workers found whole families;
including hundreds of elderly and little children, with their throats cut or
disemboweled. Uncounted numbers of women and girls were also raped before
they were slaughtered.

                                  Ariel Sharon is sought for trial by the
Hague Tribunal, the same body that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic for charges of crimes against humanity in
Kosovo. Sharon will not travel to Belgium for fear of arrest by the
International Court for the massacre.(5)

                                  Although he is sought for his Chatila and
Sabra murders, Sharon could be tried for any of a dozen other massacres
committed during his sterling career, crimes against humanity that go back
at least as far as 1953. The Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, recalls Sharon's
leading of a massacre in the village of Kibya in 1953, "The soldiers of
Major Ariel Sharon killed 70 Palestinians in the reprisal raid, most of them
women and children "(6)






                                  America, which clamored for the Hague
Tribunal to arrest and try Milosevic, pretends to be unaware of Sharon's
mass murder. Instead of handing Sharon an arrest warrant for mass murder and
putting him in the shackles that he deserves, President Bush greets Ariel
Sharon with handshakes and hugs! How the world must snicker in disbelief
when Bush confers with Sharon on "fighting terrorism."

                                  If President Bush is truly serious about
punishing nations that support or harbor terrorists, he will have to begin
with Israel, a nation that elected one of the world's worst terrorists and
mass murderers as its the Head of State. Does America's Israel-controlled
Senate punish Israel for harboring terrorists? No, instead we supply their
terrorists with billions of American taxpayer's dollars and the very weapons
with which they kill!

                                  Israel's murder of the Palestinian refugees
after the United States had publicly guaranteed their safety was not only a
crime against humanity, but also one of treachery against America. Sharon
and the others involved were completely aware of America's well-publicized
promise of the refugees' safety.

                                  The Beirut Sabra and Chatila Massacre was
the chief motivation of the Lebanese suicide bombing attack that killed 241
American Marines in Beirut less than a year later, and it clearly
demonstrates how American support of Israeli terrorism leads to terrible
consequences for the United States. The Los Angeles Times, in discussing a
revealing book by a former agent of the Israeli Mossad (secret service),
showed that the Mossad had foreknowledge of the terrorist attack on the
Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983, but treacherously did not warn
America.(7)

                                  Among Ostrovsky's more shocking allegations
are that Mossad failed to share with the U.S. detailed intelligence that
might have averted the 1983 suicide bombing of the Beirut Marine barracks
that killed 241 U.S. servicemen;...

                                  Israel: founded by terror against the
British and Palestinians

                                  In their effort to wrest control of
Palestine from British control, the Zionists waged a campaign of relentless
terror, including the bombing of the King David Hotel, which killed 93
people. They ruthlessly murdered British officials and soldiers. The
Zionists assassinated anyone in their way, including the world-respected
U.N. mediator, Count Folke Bernadotte, who dared to tell the world of the
Zionist terror and murder campaign. A favorite tactic of the Irgun and Stern
terrorist gangs was to kidnap British soldiers and slowly torture them to
death. Israel was also the first nation to employ the modern terrorist
technique of the letter bomb; and over the years sent out hundreds of them,
killing dozens of their enemies and many bystanders all over the world. The
current terrorism of mailing anthrax infected letters is simply a logical
stepchild of the letter bomb.

                                  The terror of Deir Yassin

                                  The Palestinians, of course, have been the
greatest victims of this half a century of Israeli terror. In fact, Israel
carved its state out of Palestine through a deliberate policy of mass terror
against the Palestinians. It was the method by which they drove 800,000 of
them from their homes, businesses and farms(9). In his book The Revolt(10),
former Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, boasts about his role in the massacre
of the 254 Palestinians at Deir Yassin. (Most of the victims were elderly
men, women and children who remained in the Israeli-occupied village) In his
book, Begin points out that Deir Yassin and other massacres caused panic
among the residents, causing them to flee in terror from their homes. This
intentional mass terror enabled the Zionists to take control of Palestine.
And, it should be noted that the refugees are still not permitted to return
home after more than half a century!




                                  What did the Zionist terrorists actually do
at Deir Yassin and at other villages that caused the Palestinian people to
flee in fear? A Red Cross doctor, Jacques de Reynier, chief representative
of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Jerusalem gave a shocking
account of the massacre in his official report.(11)

                                  De Reynier arrived at the village on the
second day and saw "the mopping up," as one of the Israeli terrorists put it
to him. It had been done with machine guns, then grenades, and was finished
off with knives. The Jews decapitated some of the victims and fatally maimed
52 children in sight of their mothers. They cut open 25 pregnant women's
wombs and butchered the babies in front of them.

                                  Israelis present at Deir Yassin have
confirmed these atrocities. After his retirement in 1972, Israeli Haganah
officer, Colonel Meir Pa'el, stated the following about Deir Yassin in
Yediot Ahronot, a major Jewish publication:

                                  The Irgun and LEHI men came out of hiding
and began to `clean' the houses. They shot whoever they saw, women and
children included, the commanders did not try to stop the massacre...they
were taken to the quarry between Deir Yassin and Giv'at Shaul, and murdered
in cold blood... (12)

                                  The commander of the Haganah unit that
controlled Deir Yassin after the massacre, Zvi Ankori, made this statement
in the Israeli newspaper Davar:

                                  I went into six to seven houses. I saw cut
off genitalia and women's crushed stomachs. According to the shooting signs
on the bodies, it was direct murder.(13)

                                  Have you seen any TV documentaries or any
Hollywood movies about the Israeli terror of Deir Yassin or of many
thousands of other Israeli acts of terror against the Palestinian people?
You have heard plenty of violin music for Jewish victims of Hitler, but have
you heard any violins for the women at Deir Yassin who had their babies cut
from their wombs by Jewish Supremacists? Have you heard any violins for any
of the other thousands of Palestinian victims of Begin, Shamir, Barak, and
Sharon? Befitting Israel's long record of terrorism against the Palestinian
people, Israel has the nasty habit of electing its most notorious terrorists
and mass murderers as its Head of State.

                                  The United States has a whole division of
the Justice Department dedicated to hunting down Nazis who have committed
crimes against humanity. While America doggedly pursues elderly suspected
German war criminals, American Presidents have state dinners honoring Jewish
ones!

                                  Mr. Bush is fond of talking about wiping
out evil terrorists, yet was not a massacre such as Deir Yassin clearly an
act of consummate evil?

                                  As Begin points out in The Revolt, terror
against Palestinians was a crucial factor in establishing Israel. It
established the Jewish state and it truly set the tone for a half century of
ongoing terror against the Palestinian people.

                                  52 years of Ongoing Terror against
Palestinians

                                  Since 1948, Palestinians have faced ongoing
terrorism from Israel. Hundreds of villages have been obliterated and
literally wiped from the map. Tens of thousands of homes have been bombed,
bull-dozed or dynamited during peacetime! Tens of thousands of men, women
and children have been killed. Even greater numbers have been blinded,
crippled, disfigured and maimed. Hundreds of thousands have been imprisoned
and/or tortured.

                                  In going after Palestinian resistance to
Israeli occupation, Israel has never been shy about bombing refugee camps
full of women and children. Israeli tanks, helicopters and even jet fighters
are used to drop bombs or fire missiles into the heart of Palestinian
neighborhoods and refugee camps packed with women and children. These
weapons cannot discriminate between a supposed terrorist or an
eight-year-old little girl. Such a weapon can kill a child as surely as it
can kill enemies of the state.

                                  Palestinians suspected of actively opposing
Israel's occupation of the West Bank or Gaza, have had their homes and
families attacked by Israeli tank cannons, missiles or bombs. And after
their suspect is killed or imprisoned, the Israeli army bulldozes or
dynamites their family's home. Thousands of homes have been destroyed in
this fashion.

                                  Israel has also killed hundreds of
Palestinian leaders by assassination and terroristic attacks. These attacks
often kill innocent bystanders. Many of those assassinated have never been
associated with any terror or violence of any kind; they simply were poets,
writers, or clerics who by their words have inspired in their countrymen the
desire for freedom. The Israeli Prime Minister previous to Ariel Sharon was
Ehud Barak. In 1972, during peacetime between Israel and Lebanon, he led an
Israeli commando death squad into Beirut, Lebanon where he personally
murdered Palestinian writer Kamal Edwan. In the middle of the night, using
silenced submachine guns, he and his team slaughtered Edwan while he slept
in their bed. When the newly elected Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak,
came to New York and Washington, the Jewish-controlled press treated this
murderer, as though he was a conquering hero.

                                  The double standards never seem to end.
When an Israeli cabinet official, Rechavam Zeevi, was assassinated by
Palestinians in October of 2001, Sharon and some U.S. officials denounced it
as "terrorism." If the shooting down of Zeevi is indeed terrorism, what
should we call many years of Israeli assassinations of hundreds of
Palestinian political figures, philosophers, clerics and poets? Why doesn't
the press point out that Zeevi was himself a Jewish Supremacist who
described Palestinians living and working illegally in Israel as "lice" and
a "cancer in our midst.(14)" Zeevi himself was a terrorist who advocated the
forcible expulsion of all Palestinians from the occupied territories and the
assassination of all those who resist Israel occupation. He even publicly
called for the assassination of Yassir Arafat. Yet, the same press that
calls his assassination "terrorism" never calls the pro-assassination Zeevi
a terrorist or even a Jewish Supremacist. The Zeevi assassination itself was
in direct response to the Israeli assassination of a Palestinian leader a
few weeks before.

                                  In 1991, at an Israeli cabinet meeting,
Zeevi said that President George Bush, by pressing Israel to peace talks,
was "an enemy of Israel" and that "America was plotting a second
Holocaust.(15)" With a supposed "ally" like this, does America need any
enemies?

                                  The power of the Jews in the world media
keeps many from fully grasping the terror of hundreds of Israeli
assassinations. In fact, even before the WTC terror attack in September, the
BBC instructed their reporters to call Israel's assassination of their
enemies as "targeted killings" rather than exactly what they are:
assassinations.(16) However, the BBC (which has a heavily Jewish executive
staff) referred to the Zeevi killing as an assassination, and not a
"targeted killing." The public has been subjected to this kind of sanitized
and distorted media treatment of Israel for years. It is no wonder that few
Britons and even fewer Americans are little aware of Israel's record of
terrorism. It is for this reason that I cannot blame most Americans for
their ignorance of Israeli terrorism.

                                  The terror of Israeli torture: at least
150,000 victims

                                  The brutal torture of thousands of one's
enemies must be classified as a particularly vicious form of terrorism. Tens
of thousands of Palestinians have been tortured in Israeli jails. A Jewish
human rights group in Israel confirmed in a 60-page report that 85% of
Palestinian detainees undergo torture while in custody.(17) And make no
mistake about it; many of the tortures endured by these Palestinian victims
are the stuff of one's worst nightmares. Israeli torture includes everything
from choking victims with urine and feces soaked bags tied over their heads,
to using electric cattle prods for anal rape and mutilation. Israel often
doesn't even admit to who they are holding, so if they decide to kill or
torture a Palestinian to death while he is in custody, his body will simply
disappear, or they will later claim that they died in a battle with Israeli
police before capture. Many thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese have died
while in Israeli custody.

                                  A feature article by Joel Greenburg in the
very pro-Israel New York Times stated matter-of-factly that Israel tortures
500 to 600 Palestinians every month.(18) That figure, which is probably too
low as it comes from the pro-Israel New York Times, means that each year at
least 6,000 Palestinians are tortured in Israel. Torture of Palestinians has
been going on in Israel since 1948 (53 years to date). Even if one uses just
one-half of the number of Palestinians that Mr. Greenburg says suffer
torture each year -- at least 150,000 human beings have been tortured in
Israeli jails since the founding of the Jewish state.

                                  Bowing to Israel's public relations
problems because of its legalized torture, in 1999 the Israeli Supreme Court
made an intentionally vague ruling that torture is sometimes illegal, but
Israeli and Palestinian rights groups offer much evidence that the ruling
was just a public-relations veneer. They offer evidence that torture
continues just as did before the ruling.(19)

                                  Following Israel's lead, Jewish journalists
are now beginning to advocate the use of torture in America! A recent issue
of Newsweek headlined an article entitled 'Time to think about torture; it's
a new world, and survival may well require old techniques that seemed out of
the question."(20) Even a supposed Jewish champion of civil liberties, Alan
Dershowitz, now advocates it.(21)

                                  Victor Ostrovsky, a former Israeli Mossad
agent, wrote two books about Israel's terror against their enemies. In one
of them, he discusses the fate of Palestinians who illegally cross the
border in search of work in Israel. Many thousands of these young men simply
are never heard from again after being captured by Israel's forces. Some of
them are taken to the ABC research facilities where they endure the
indescribable terror of chemical, nuclear or biological warfare.

                                  ...ABC standing for atomic,
bacteriological, and chemical. It was where our top epidemiological
scientists were developing various doomsday machines...should there be an
all-out war in which this type of weapon would be needed; there was no room
for error. The Palestinian infiltrators came in handy in this regard. As
human guinea pigs, they could make sure the weapons the scientist were
developing worked properly and could verify how fast they worked and make
them more efficient.(22)

                                  Terror against the Lebanese People

                                  During the Israeli invasion and occupation
of Lebanon from 1978 to 2000, at least 15,000 civilians died. An example of
Israeli terror was its intentional bombing of the UN center in Qana, Lebanon
that occurred just five years ago. The following article was not written by
a Palestinian, Arab or even a Muslim, but by Englishman Robert Fisk, one of
the most respected British journalists working in the Mideast. He writes for
the London newspaper, The Independent. If an American wants to understand
the hatred that Israel is generating toward America, dare to read this
gruesome account and dare to take a close look at the pictures showing the
realities of Israeli terror.

                                  Most Americans have read countless gory
accounts Jewish Holocaust atrocities or even stories about the Israeli
victims of Palestinian suicide bombers. They have seen dozens of the most
gruesome movies or documentaries about Jewish victims, but most Americans
have never read even one account like the one quoted here. You won't read
such accounts in American newspapers or news magazines.



                                  The gory reality of Israel's terrorism.
Workers remove the victims (mostly women, children and elderly) killed in by
Israeli forces in Lebanon, including the decapitated child shown above.



                                  Qana, southern Lebanon - It was a massacre.
Not since Sabra and Chatila had I seen the innocent slaughtered like this.
The Lebanese refugee women and children and men lay in heaps, their hands or
arms or legs missing, beheaded or disemboweled. There were well over a
hundred of them. A baby lay without a head. The Israeli shells had scythed
through them as they lay in the United Nations shelter, believing that they
were safe under the world's protection. Like the Muslims of Srebrenica, the
Muslims of Qana were wrong.

                                  In front of a burning building of the UN's
Fijian battalion headquarters, a girl held a corpse in her arms, the body of
a gray- haired man whose eyes were staring at her, and she rocked the corpse
back and forth in her arms, keening and weeping and crying the same words
over and over: "My father, my father." A Fijian UN soldier stood amid a sea
of bodies and, without saying a word, held aloft the body of a headless
child.

                                  ...When I walked towards them, I slipped on
a human hand...

                                  Israel's slaughter of civilians in this
terrible 10-day offensive - 206 by last night - has been so cavalier, so
ferocious, that not a Lebanese will forgive this massacre. There had been
the ambulance attacked on Saturday, the sisters killed in Yohmor the day
before, the 2-year-old girl decapitated by an Israeli missile four days ago.
And earlier yesterday, the Israelis had slaughtered a family of 12 - the
youngest was a four- day-old baby - when Israeli helicopter pilots fired
missiles into their home.

                                  Shortly afterwards, three Israeli jets
dropped bombs only 250 meters from a UN convoy on which I was traveling,
blasting a house 30 feet into the air in front of my eyes. Traveling back to
Beirut to file my report on the Qana massacre to the Independent last night,
I found two Israeli gunboats firing at the civilian cars on the river bridge
north of Sidon...

                                  A French UN trooper muttered oaths to
himself as he opened a bag in which he was dropping feet, fingers, pieces of
people's arms...

                                  We had suddenly become not UN troops and
journalists but Westerners, Israel's allies, an object of hatred and venom.
One bearded man with fierce eyes stared at us, his face dark with fury. "You
are Americans", he screamed at us. "Americans are dogs. You did this.
Americans are dogs."

                                  President Bill Clinton has allied himself
with Israel in its war against "terrorism" and the Lebanese, in their grief,
had not forgotten this. Israel's official expression of sorrow was rubbing
salt in their wounds. "I would like to be made into a bomb and blow myself
up amid the Israelis", one old man said...(23)

                                  If every American read the above article by
Robert Fisk, it would help them to understand why America is so hated and
why we now face terrorist kamikazes. If you would like to know the real
motivations of terrorists like Osama bin Laden, The Nation magazine, did an
interview with him on September 21, 1998. It describes his reaction to the
Israeli Qana massacre.

                                  When I last saw bin Laden, he was still
obsessed with the Israeli massacre of 107 Lebanese refugees sheltering at
the UN camp at Qana in April 1996. Israel claimed it was a 'mistake,' the UN
conceded otherwise and President Clinton called it only a 'tragedy'--as if
it was a natural disaster. It was, said bin Laden, an act of 'international
terrorism.' There must be justice, he saidd, and trials for the Israeli
perpetrators. Clinton used almost exactly the same words about bin Laden and
his supporters in August. But the deaf, as usual, were talking to the
deaf."(24)

                                  Most Americans will never see any such
accounts like the one by Robert Fisk about Qana. The Israelis tight grip on
the American press and the American government has successfully suppressed
much of the ongoing story of Israeli terrorism against Palestinians. I will
now show that they have also been able to cover up murderous Israeli acts of
war and terrorism against the United States of America.

                                  Israeli terrorism against America

                                  In 1954, the Israeli government launched a
secret operation of terror against the United States called Operation
Suzannah. It plotted to murder Americans and blow up American installations
in Egypt. Their plan was to leave false evidence that the Egyptians did it,
so as to make America go to war against Egypt on the side of Israel. Jewish
agents succeeded in blowing up some post offices and American libraries in
Cairo and Alexandria. On the way to blow up an American movie house, the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Theater, an Israeli's agent's bomb went off prematurely.
Thankfully, for both Egypt and for America, the plot was then exposed and
stopped in its early stages.

                                  Because of the capture of the Israeli
agents, the world learned of this Israeli treachery and the Israeli Foreign
Minister, Pinhas Lavon, was later forced to resign. The whole episode became
known as the Lavon Affair. Today, the Jewish-dominated American media and
publishing establishment deftly cover up this Israeli treachery against us.
Most Americans know nothing about it. For instance, only a slight mention of
the Lavon Affair is found in the popular Encarta Encyclopedia. It is in an
article about Ben Gurion authored by the pro-Zionist, Bernard Reich. By the
way, the article's author illustrates a typical media pattern. When
Americans suppose they are reading unbiased Encyclopedia or news magazine
accounts, they more often than not are reading distorted accounts written by
ardent Jewish Zionists.

                                  Ben-Gurion returned to politics in 1955 to
replace Minister of Defense Pinhas Lavon-who resigned after a failed attempt
to sabotage Egypt's relations with the West.(25)

                                  Note how the article meekly says, "a failed
attempt to sabotage Egypt's relations with the West." What does this mean?
"Sabotaging relations" sounds as though Israel might have just said a few
nasty things about Egypt and America behind each other's back. The
intentional deception used in this article by its Jewish author is typical
of the distortions that go on countless times in the mass media.

                                  The line in Encarta should read:

                                  "--who was forced to resign after Israel
was caught committing terrorist bombings against the United States to
treacherously inncite America to war against Israel's enemy."

                                  I am sure that ninety percent of those who
read this have never heard of it. Some may think I am making this all up.
Well, if you still might doubt that Israel has committed these terrorist
acts against America in Egypt, here is a quote from a recent article
appearing in the Jewish magazine Moment, written by Samuel Katz and meant
for its small Jewish audience. It is more forward, yet still omits the
provocative word terrorism, a word Israel uses when Palestinians blow up
libraries and cinemas.

                                  And the failures were as common as the
spectacular successes. In the mid '50s, A'man (the Jewish Defense Agency)
suffered a serious setback during the infamous "Operation Suzannah," when
Israeli agents provoked Jews in Egypt to attack American and British targets
and incite anti-Western sentiment. Many Jews were arrested, and some were
executed. The bungled operation was a severe embarrassment for the
government of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and his defense minister,
Pinhas Lavon(26)

                                  So, in the Lavon Affair we learned how our
so-called "best friend in the Mideast," Israel, rewards the United States
for its unconditional monetary and military support: by committing terrorism
against us! Think about the fact that most Americans have never even heard
about this Israeli terrorist attack against us.

                                  If the Egyptian government had been behind
this terror against America, we would have rightly considered it an act of
war and we would have attacked Egypt right back, just as we have done
against Afghanistan. And the press; they would have clamored for such
attacks just as they demanded attacks against Afghanistan. In fact, we
attacked Afghanistan on far less grounds than we have for attacking Israel.
No evidence exists that Afghanistan approved of or even knew anything about
the attack on the World Trade Center; but in the Lavon Affair, the Israeli
government committed a direct act of war against the United States. We, of
course, did not bomb Tel Aviv in retaliation. We did not sever our
diplomatic relations. In fact, we did not even cut off our billions of
dollars in monetary and military aid!

                                  Any American government official who would
have given aid to the Japanese after the attack on Pearl Harbor would have
been prosecuted as a traitor to the United States.

                                  Let me be perfectly blunt. Those Americans
in government who continued our support of Israel after it had committed
terrorist acts against the people of the United States -- clearly committed
treason against our country.

                                  If America's leaders, after Israel's
terrorist attack against us in the Lavon Affair, would simply have stopped
their treasonous aid to Israel, there would have been no subsequent acts of
terror against us such as the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.

                                  Israel's terrorist attack on the USS
Liberty

                                  In 1967, during the Six Day War, Israel
again committed a grievous terrorist act against the United States of
America. On June 8, Israel used unmarked fighters and torpedo boats to
launch an hour and one-half attack on the American Navy ship the USS
Liberty, costing 34 American lives and 171 wounded.(27) The Israelis first
attacked the Liberty's radio towers in an attempt to stop the Sixth Fleet
from learning that the Israelis were the attackers. After unmarked Israeli
fighters horrendously bombed and strafed the Liberty, Israel sent in torpedo
boats to finish the job. They even machine gunned the deployed life rafts in
an effort to ensure that there would be no survivors (witnesses) who could
expose them.






                                  Only by the heroism and ingenuity of the
captain and crew of the USS Liberty kept the Israeli plan from succeeding.
They were able to keep the ship afloat as well as contact the fleet and let
it know that Israel, rather than Egypt, that had attacked the ship. Knowing
that its plan had been exposed, Israel withdrew and meekly claimed that
their attack was a case of mistaken identity. They said that they mistook
the USS Liberty for an Egyptian ship.

                                  The United States Secretary of State at the
time, Dean Rusk, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral
Thomas Moorer, both say the attack was no accident, that Israel deliberately
attacked the USS Liberty. For instance, it was clear day with a stiff breeze
and the Liberty sported both a huge American flag and large international
identification numbers on her hull. Israeli jets buzzed the USS Liberty long
before the attack, flying so close that the members of the Liberty crew
could even see their hand waves as they passed. Just as in the Lavon Affair,
Israel hoped to blame this act of war on their enemy, the Egyptians. This
time, only the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew prevented a
further compounding of the travesty.

                                  The Jewish-dominated American media
expressed no outrage for the attack and supinely accepted the specious
Israeli excuse for it. Even though our own Secretary of State and our own
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the Israeli attack was
deliberate, the Jewish Lobby was even able to prevent a formal Congressional
inquiry into the attack. In contrast, the USS Liberty's sister ship, the USS
Pueblo, was captured by North Korea the following year (1968) with the loss
of only one life, yet within a year the U.S. Congress launched a formal
inquiry into that attack. There still has been no formal inquiry into the
attack on the USS Liberty. The Liberty's commanding officer, Captain William
McGonagle, was awarded America's highest honor, the Congressional Medal of
Honor, for his splendid courage during the Israeli attack. But, he was given
the award in a quiet ceremony in the US Navy Yard, rather than the White
House (as is customary), so as not to hurt the image of the very enemy who
killed 34 of his comrades and wounded him and 174 more Americans on the
Liberty!

                                  How did the political leaders of the United
States respond to this Israeli act of war against it? Did America bomb Tel
Aviv as it did Kabul, Afghanistan? No, the Israeli-controlled American
government along with the Jewish-controlled media committed a clear case of
treason against America by covering up this vicious terrorist attack, and
continues to send billions of American tax dollars to Israel in military and
monetary aid.

                                  Again, I invoke the example of Pearl
Harbor. Any American government official who would have given aid or comfort
to Japan after the attack in 1941 would have been prosecuted as a traitor to
the United States. I charge that those American government officials who
collaborate with the Jewish Lobby and media in continuing to support Israel
after its attack on the USS Liberty - are traitors against the United States
of America!

                                  If, after Israel's treacherous attack on
the USS Liberty, we would have simply stopped treasonously supporting the
Israeli terrorist state; we would surely not have suffered the terrorism of
September 11, 2001.

                                  Israel: A nation that spies on America and
sells our secrets to our worst enemies

                                  In the 1980s, Israel recruited an American
Jew, Jonathan Pollard, to spy against the United States. After his
apprehension, Israeli officials at first claimed he was a "rogue agent," but
later they admitted that Pollard was working for them from the beginning.
Other than the Jewish spies, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who gave our atom
bomb secrets to the Soviets, probably no spies have ever done more damage to
our country than that which was done by this single Israeli spy: Jonathan
Pollard.






                                  Israel's use of Pollard's information not
only destroyed our intelligence operations in the Mideast; it practically
destroyed our intelligence apparatus in the Soviet Union and the Eastern
Bloc.(28) Many of America's most loyal and best agents in the Communist
world were executed because Israel sold or bartered Pollard's stolen
information to the Soviets.(29) As the article below by Eric Margolis shows,
our "wonderful friend and ally" Israel would not even allow the United
States to debrief the Mossad agents who handled the Pollard spying so as to
help determine the full extent of the damage done to the United States and
the dangers posed to American agents overseas.

                                  Some of the enormously sensitive secrets
stolen by Pollard may have been either sold, or bartered, by Israel to the
Soviet Union.

                                  A number of key CIA agents in the East Bloc
were allegedly executed as a result of Pollard's spying. The KGB likely
gained access to top-secret U.S. codes - either directly from Israel, or
through spies in Israel's government. In short, Pollard's treachery caused
one of the worst security disasters in modern U.S. history...

                                  So, Israel, which receives billions of
American aid, has treacherously spied on and harmed the very security of the
United States. To further demonstrate their contempt for us, they even
bartered the top secret information they had stolen from us - to America's
worst enemies. Even after Israel's public relations apologies for the
Pollard spying, it has continued to spy on us. The Los Angeles Times in 1997
reported that an American Jew named David A. Tenenbaum "admitted to
divulging secrets to Israel."(30) To quote the Los Angeles Times, "A
civilian engineer working at an Army command facility near Detroit has
admitted divulging classified military information to Israeli officials over
the last 10 years."

                                  Even after Israel proved its willingness to
spy on us and critically damage America's intelligence operations, President
Clinton appointed a dedicated, Zionist Jew to Chairman of the National
Security Council, the highest intelligence position in the White House. Even
the Israeli daily Maariv referred to Berger as a "warm Jew," meaning that he
is devoted to Israel first.(31) Appointing Berger as National Security
Council chief after the Pollard Spy Case is pure insanity.

                                  The fact that Israel could commit these
outrages against the United States without suffering scathing media attacks
or even the end of aid to Israel, shows their extreme power over us and the
treason that reaches into the highest echelons of the American
establishment. It is no wonder that Ariel Sharon could make the following
statement to Simon Peres when he suggested that Israel might lose American
aid if it did not pull back recent Israeli incursions. Sharon responded:

                                  "Every time we do something you tell me
America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something
very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish
people, control America, and the Americans know it." ---Ariel Sharon,
October 3, 2001 (32)

                                  It is not only Jonathan Pollard who has
committed treason against America. All those in the American government who
would continue to monetarily and militarily support a foreign nation that
spies on us and severely damages our intelligence operations (along with
causing the deaths of American agents) have committed treason against the
United States of America. In response to these ongoing acts of treachery
against the United States, a truly patriotic American Government would have
(at the very least) ended our support for Israel. Supporting a foreign
nation after it willfully commits such acts of treachery against America is
nothing less than treason.

                                  The World Trade Center Attack

                                  So, the record is clear. Israel is the
worst terrorist rogue state on earth. Israel and its terrorist leaders such
as Begin, Shamir and Sharon have committed a half-century of relentless
ethnic cleansing, bombings, shootings, torture and murder against the
Palestinian people.

                                  Israel has also committed numerous acts of
treachery and terrorism against the United States of America as I have
clearly shown in documenting the Lavon Affair, the Pollard Spy Scandal and
the Attack on the USS Liberty.

                                  Because of overwhelming Israeli power in
media and government, traitors to the United States continue to support,
with little fear of punishment, this rogue terrorist nation.

                                  In fact, these traitors to the United
States supplied to Israel the very weapons it used to commit the terrorist
attack on the Liberty!

                                  Through the efforts of Jewish and other
traitors to the United States, the American government has embarked on a
foreign policy that has repeatedly betrayed America's true interests.
Massive American military and monetary support has enabled Israel to
continue its relentless terrorism against the Palestinians. American
treasonous support of Israel's terror has thus caused tremendous hatred
against the United States, greatly hurt American economic and strategic
interests, and ultimately spawned the terrorism now rising against us.

                                  The traitors who sold out America to Israel
are as guilty of causing the loss of 5,000 American lives on September 11 as
those who actually hijacked and crashed the planes into the World Trade
Center and Pentagon.

                                  Israel wants Arabic terrorism against
Western nations

                                  Over the last two years, Israel has
suffered the worst public relations disaster in its history. The election of
mass murder Ariel Sharon as Prime Minister was the last straw for millions
of decent minded people the world over. The UN Conference on Racism, which
labeled Israel an "Apartheid state", also signaled growing disapproval of
Israel.

                                  Then, suddenly, the attack on the World
Trade Center changed the world's mood back to Israel's favor. Was this just
a fortunate coincidence for Israel?

                                  As I have shown in this article, Israeli
leaders have launched terrorist attacks on America disguised as Arab
attacks, because they knew that any Arab terrorist attack on America
advances their own aims. They are fully aware that the bigger the attack
against America; the more carnage, the better it is for Israel. Ariel Sharon
learned an important lesson in Beirut. Rather than to directly commit
atrocities against America as it did in the Lavon Affair and the attack on
the Liberty, it is much easier and safer for Israel to continue to commit
atrocities, such as Sabra and Chatila against Arabic people, so as to drive
their Islamic enemies to terrorism against the West. That's precisely what
occurred in the retaliatory bombing of the American Marine and French
Paratrooper contingent in Beirut, and it is continued Israeli terror that
has motivated the Trade Center Attacks.

                                  What was Israel's role in the WTC attack?

                                  The Washington Times ran a story on
September 10, 2001 about a 68-page study issued by the U.S. Army School for
Advanced Military Studies (SAMS). The study, issued by the elite Army
officer's school, detailed the dangers of a possible U.S. Army occupational
force in the Mideast. Here is article's comment about the study's view of
the Israeli Mossad:

                                  Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence
service, the SAMS officers say: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has
capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab
act."

                                  Ironically, within 24 hours of the story's
publication, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was attacked. Could the
"ruthless and cunning Mossad," as the U.S. Army officers describe it,
covertly have been behind the attack?

                                  The Mossad is the most ruthless terrorist
organization in the entire world. It is also one of the largest and most
sophisticated intelligence organizations. No other nation comes even close
to its scope and power in the Mideast region. It prides itself on
infiltrating every sizable militant Palestinian and Arabic organization on
earth. Knowing these facts, there can be little doubt the Mossad has deeply
penetrated one of the oldest, largest and what is considered the most
dangerous Arabic terrorist organization on earth; bin Laden's al-Qaida.

                                  Furthermore, the FBI and the CIA have
clearly stated that the attack on the WTC and Pentagon was a huge covert
operation using an international network of at least a hundred terrorists,
spanning three continents. Could Mossad agents in al-Qaida as well as the
rest of Mossad's vast network of thousands of infiltrators and informants,
not have known about the most extensive and ambitious Arabic terrorist
operation in history?

                                  It is, of course, extremely difficult to
prove the precise role of a secretive, foreign intelligence organization,
such as the Mossad, in a terrorist act; they don't brag about their exploits
on the Internet. But, powerful evidence is mounting that Israelis had
foreknowledge of the September 11th attack on America. And, if indeed they
had foreknowledge of these murderous acts of terrorism - and then had the
cold-blooded mentality not to warn the United States because they saw a
horrendous massacre of thousands of Americans as good for Israel - it
follows that they would have felt no restraint from actually instigating and
covertly aiding this terrorist plan through their own agent provocateurs.
Let's look at the hard evidence indicating the Mossad had foreknowledge of
the September 11 attack.

                                  Evidence of Mossad Treachery in the WTC
Attack

                                  The day after the attack on the World Trade
Center, the Jerusalem Post, the most respected and famous Israeli newspaper
in the world, reported that 4000 Israelis were missing in the attack on the
WTC. The Foreign Ministry compiled the number from Israeli relatives, who in
the first few hours after the attack, contacted the Israeli Foreign Ministry
and gave the names of Israeli friends and relatives who worked in the WTC or
who had business scheduled in it or its adjacent structures. Even without
seeing the article in the Jerusalem Post, logic alone would tell you that
there would be many hundreds, if not thousands of Israelis in the World
Trade Center at the time of the attacks. The international Jewish
involvement in banking and finance is legendary. For instance, two of the
richest firms in New York are Goldman-Sachs and the Solomon Brothers; and
both firms have offices in the Twin Towers. Many executives in these firms
regularly commute back and forth to Israel. New York is the center of
world-wide Jewish financial power, and the World Trade Center is at its
epicenter. One would naturally expect the Israeli death toll to be
catastrophic. The Jerusalem Post certainly thought so on September 12, 2001.
Here is the beginning of its article:

                                  Thousands of Israelis missing near WTC,
Pentagon

                                  The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so
far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas
of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attack. (The
headline and first sentence of the Jerusalem Post article) (33)

                                  When George Bush made his speech before
Congress, it turns out that he made a significant error other than saying
that the WTC attackers did it because they "hated freedom." Bush made a
point to say that in addition to thousands of Americans, 130 Israelis died
in the WTC. The implication was to say that Israel shared in our suffering,
and that we and Israel are in this thing together. Upon hearing the number
of 130 Israeli dead, it seemed suspiciously low to me. If 4000 Israelis were
at the WTC and the WTC death toll was about 4500 (about 10 percent of the
45,000 people normally in the buildings at that time), the Israeli toll
should have statistically been around 400 and not 130.






                                  As a place for doing business and for
employment, the world Trade Center was not a minimum wage or a MacDonald's
kind of place; it had highly paid, high tech and high level jobs and
executive positions primarily in international finance, banking and stock
trading. I asked myself how there could be only 130 Israelis dead, while
there were an estimated 199 dead from Columbia and 428 from the Philippines?

                                  In previous articles I wrote on the
September 11 terror, I did not allude to these suspicions, because I have
always taken pride in not writing anything I could not firmly substantiate.
But, while researching this article on Israeli terrorism against Palestine
and America, I discovered the most shocking fact I have ever run across in
all my years of research and writing. I discovered a simple fact that has
enormous ramifications in regard to the September terror attack.

                                  Searching through hundreds of articles
trying to track down the true Israeli death toll, I found a New York Times
piece that clarified the precise number of Israelis who died in the World
Trade Center attack. It turned out that of the 130 Israelis President Bush
claimed had died in the World Trade Center, 129 of them were still alive.
Only one Israeli had actually died. I was incredulous. "Good God," I said to
myself, "only one Israeli!" Here is the pertinent excerpt from the NY Times:

                                  But interviews with many consulate
officials Friday suggested that the lists of people they were collecting
varied widely in their usefulness. For example, the city had somehow
received reports of many Israelis feared missing at the site, and President
Bush in his address to the country on Thursday night mentioned that about
130 Israelis had died in the attacks.

                                  But Friday, Alon Pinkas, Israel's consul
general here, said that lists of the missing included reports from people
who had called in because, for instance, relatives in New York had not
returned their phone calls from Israel. There were, in fact, only three
Israelis who had been confirmed as dead: two on the planes and another who
had been visiting the towers on business and who was identified and buried.
(New York Times, Sept. 22) (34)

                                  The very low death toll of 130 suggested
that a number of Israelis at the Trade Center had been warned before the
attack. When I found out the truth that only one Israeli had died, there
could be no doubt that there had been a prior warning for many Israelis.
Having only one Israeli casualty among the 4500 dead at the WTC is simply a
statistical impossibility. Even if the Israeli Foreign Ministry and the
Jerusalem Post had grossly overestimated the number of Israelis in the World
Trade Center by say 3,000 (400 percent), there still should have still been
1,000 Israelis there at the time of the attacks. Again, even if only a few
hundred Israelis were present at the time of the attack, only one Israeli
death occurring there is statistically absurd. Either September 11 had to be
a big Jewish holiday, or a number of Israeli citizens had some advance
warning of the impending attack.

                                  Prior Warning to Israelis

                                  The next thing I researched was to see if
there were any confirmed warnings to Israelis prior to the attack. I quickly
found an article in Newsbytes, a news service of the Washington Post, titled
"Instant Messages To Israel Warned of WTC attack."(35) The Israeli daily,
Ha'aretz, also confirmed the prior warnings to Israel and confirmed that the
FBI is investigating the warnings.(36) The articles detailed that an Israeli
messaging firm, Odigo, with offices in both the World Trade Center and in
Israel, received a number of warnings just two hours before the attack.

                                  Instant Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC
Attack

                                  Officials at instant-messaging firm Odigo
confirmed today that two employees received text messages warning of an
attack on the World Trade Center two hours before terrorists crashed planes
into the New York landmarks.

                                  But Alex Diamandis, vice president of sales
and marketing, confirmed that workers in Odigo's research and development
and international sales office in Israel received a warning from another
Odigo user approximately two hours prior to the first attack. (From the
Washington Post's Newsbytes)

                                  So now we have powerful and convincing
evidence from impeccable sources that Israel had foreknowledge of the
attack. First, without a prior warning, there could not have been only a
single Israeli victim at the World Trade Center. Secondly, there is clear
confirmation that a company with offices in both Israel and the WTC received
warnings immediately prior to the attack.

                                  Who would have warned Israelis of the
impending attack, if not Israel's Mossad? The fact that Israel's government
had prior knowledge of the pending attack and had warned potential Israeli
victims, but then deliberately let thousands of Americans die - makes the
Israelis just as responsible for the carnage as the Arab attackers of the
WTC.

                                  What's good for Israel is bad for America

                                  You can be sure that joy rose in the hearts
of all Israeli terrorists as they witnessed the smoke plume from the twin
towers. The FBI even arrested five Israelis on a rooftop nearby the twin
towers, videotaping and cheering the entire event.(37) They knew that
American and world resistance to Israel's Supremacism and terrorism
plummeted right along with the collapse of the towers of the World Trade
Center. Perhaps the most telling statement was when a NY Times reporter
questioned the former Israeli, Benjamin Netanyahu, a man every bit as
radical as Ariel Sharon. Here are the words of the excited former Israeli
Prime Minister:

                                  Asked tonight what the attack meant for
relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the
former prime minister, replied, "It's very good." Then he edited himself:
"Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy. (38)

                                  The World Trade Center Attack was obviously
very good for Israel; in fact, Israel is the only nation who benefited from
it. Israel's fifty-year record of unrelenting terrorism became completely
overshadowed by the horror and the visual magnitude of this one spectacular
terrorist attack. When the Jewish-dominated American media repeatedly showed
a few, long-suffering Palestinians celebrating the attacks, Palestinians
became unfairly painted as behind the Trade Center terror, even though every
Palestinian organization condemned it, and not a single Palestinian was
proven to be involved.

                                  Of course, it was America that suffered
most of all, with almost 5000 dead, a wrecked economy, and the worst
restrictions against Constitutional liberties in American history. The Lavon
Affair, the Attack on the Liberty, and the spying of Jonathon Pollard, and
the murder of 5000 Americans on September 11th -- were all good for Israel,
but terribly bad for the United States.

                                  When will America come to finally
understand that what is good for the terrorist state of Israel is
destructive and even deadly for the United States of America.?

                                  When will we get the backbone to put a stop
to the Israeli agents and American traitors who have orchestrated fifty
years of support for Israeli terrorism and fifty years of treason against
our own country?

                                  My life is dedicated to a free, secure and
sovereign America, an America dedicated to our own people and our own
interests; not the criminal purposes of a foreign, terrorist nation.

                                  Whatever the cost to me personally, I will
continue to pursue that path.

                                  I urge you to join with me. I beseech you
not to purchase your security at the cost of your freedom and your honor.

                                  Courageously share the information of this
article with other Americans and the rest of the world. Let us tell the
truth about the worst terrorist nation on earth: Israel. In doing so, you
will help save not only the Palestinian people, but the lives and freedom of
the American people as well.

                                  David Duke

                                  Former Member of the House of
Representatives
                                  State of Louisiana, United States of
America
                                  www.davidduke.com




------------------------------------------------


                                  FOOTNOTES

                                  1.. Fulbright, Sen. William. (1973). Face
the Nation. CBS: New York. April 15.
                                  2.. Getler, Michael. (1974). Pentagon Chief
Suggests Israel Lobby Has Too Much Influence. Los Angeles Times.
                                  3.. ABC News and PBS Frontline web sites
have the interview (1998)
                                  4.. Israel Kahan Commission.
                                  5.. United Press International. (2001)
Sharon fears to visit Belgium. Sept. 7.
                                  6.. Ha'aretz. (2001). As long as he doesn't
hurt us again. Feb. 16, 2001
                                  7.. Los Angeles Times. (1998). Mossad's
Checkered Past. Home Edition. pp A-16. Feb. 27.
                                  8.. Begin, M. (1964). The Revolt: The Story
Of The Irgun. Tel-Aviv: Hadar Pub.
                                  9.. Encarta Encyclopedia. (1996). Funk and
Wagnalls.
                                  10.. Begin, M. (1964). The Revolt: The
Story Of The Irgun. Tel-Aviv: Hadar Pub. p.162.
                                  11.. De Reynier, J. (1950). Chief
Representative Of The International Committee Of The Red Cross In Jerusalem.
(A Jerusalem Un Drapeau Flottait Sur La Ligne De Feu', Geneva.
                                  12.. Yediot Ahronot. (1972). April 4.
                                  13.. Ankori, Zvi (1982). Davar. April 9.
                                  14.. Phil Reeves. (2001) War On Terrorism:
Israel - Assassins kill general. Independent. Oct. 18.
                                  15.. Phil Reeves. (2001) War On Terrorism:
Israel - Assassins kill general. Independent. Oct. 18.
                                  16.. The Independent. (2001) BBC staff are
told not to call Israeli killings' assassination'. August 4.
                                  17.. Sami Sockol, Moshe Reinfeld (1998) May
20. the Israeli daily, Ha'aretz
                                  18.. Joel Greenberg (1993). Israel Rethinks
Interrogation of Arabs. New York Times Aug. 14
                                  19.. Weizman, Steve. (2001). Rights Groups
Cite Israel Torture. AP Online. Nov. 11
                                  20.. Jonathan Alter. (2001). Time To Think
About Torture; It's a new world, and survival may well require old
techniques that seemed out of the question. Newsweek, Nov. 5.
                                  21.. St. Louis Post-Dispatch (2001). U.S.
Now might have to consider what once was unthinkable, Dershowitz says. Nov.
5.
                                  22.. Ostrovsky, V. The Other Side Of
Deception(confessions of a former Jewish MOSSAD agent for Israel) p.188
                                  23.. Fisk, R. (1996). Massacre In
Sanctuary: Eyewitness. The Independent. April 19. p.1.
                                  24.. The Nation. (1998). Talks with Osama
Bin Laden. Sept. 21.
                                  25.. Bernard Reich. (2001). Encarta
Encyclopedia. Ben Gurion.
                                  26.. Katz, Samuel M. (1998). Israel's
covert crisis Moment. Oct.1.
                                  27.. ENNES, James M. (1979). Assault on the
Liberty; The True Story of the Israeli Attack on an American Intelligence
Ship. N. Y. : Random House.
                                  28.. Weiner, Tim. (1999) U.S. Now Tells of
Much Deeper Damage by Pollard. New York Times, 11 Jan.
                                  29.. Hersh, Seymour. (1999) The Traitor:
The Case Against Jonathan Pollard. The New Yorker Magazine. January 18.
                                  30.. Los Angeles Times. (1997). Engineer
Admits Divulging Secrets to Israel. Feb. 20.
                                  31.. Bar-Yosef, Avinoam. (1994). The Jews
Who Run Clinton's Court. Maariv.
                                  32.. PIA (2001). From a monitored news
broadcast of Yid Israel radio. Oct. 3. and also reported in Pravda.
                                  33.. Jerusalem Post. (2001). Thousands of
Israelis missing near WTC, Pentagon. Sept. 12.
                                  34.. Lipton, Eric. (2001). Estimates of
toll may be too high. New York Times. Sept. 22
                                  35.. McWilliams, Brian. (2001) Instant
Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack. Newsbytes. Sept. 27.
                                  36.. Dror, Yuval. (2001). Odigo says
workers were warned of attack. Ha'aretz. Sept 29.
                                  37.. Melman, Yossi. (2001). 5 Israelis
detained for `puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy. Ha'aretz. Oct. 14
                                  38.. Bennet, James. (2001). Spilled Blood
Is Seen as Bond That Draws 2 Nations Closer. NY Times. International
section. Sept. 12.



------------------------------------------------


                                  Additional Articles of Interest:
                                  Read a sample Chapter from David Duke's
autobiography:

                                  �  Jewish Supremacism

                                  �  Who runs the media?

                                  We cannot continue our work without your
support. Please make a donation to our efforts today.

                                  Click Here to Make a Donation.
                                  Click Here to Join the European-American
Unity and Rights Organization.













Copyright � 2002, David Duke, All Rights Reserved.
              No part of this page may be reproduced in any part
              without the written consent of David Duke






There's more, have a look at  website:  http://www.davidduke.com









_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Transcript
8/04/2002
Does the US have what it takes to broker a Middle East ceasefire?

KERRY O'BRIEN: Welcome to the program.

First to the deepening crisis in the Middle East.

So far, the Israeli army estimates 200 Palestinians have been killed and
1,500 wounded since Israeli armoured columns began rolling into West Bank
towns 10 days ago.

Thirteen Israeli troops have been killed and more than 100 wounded.

Today, despite growing US pressure for Israeli forces to withdraw, pitched
gun battles continued in the towns of Nablus and Bethlehem.

But can America broker a cease-fire when the cycle of violence has seemingly
left neither side willing to give peace a chance?

ABC Middle East correspondent Chris Clark reports.

CHRIS CLARK: Not many people made it to church in and around Bethlehem this
weekend.

In neighbouring Beit Jala where security is not as tight there was a
reasonable turnout for mass.

There were prayers for peace, but few signs of hope.

Just stepping out your front door here can be lethal.

DR PETER CUMRI, BEIT JALA HOSPITAL: His little child, the son, opened the
door of the house and he was afraid that he might go out to the street.

He went to pick him and to get him inside.

They shot him.

CHRIS CLARK: Into this atmosphere the United States is about to inject a
fresh dose of its Middle East diplomacy.

DR PETER CUMRI: If the United States wants to stop killing, wants to put an
end, so there will be an end.

I'm not optimistic at all.

I'm pessimistic, not optimistic at all.

I think this area will be boiled till everything will be cleared.

CHRIS CLARK: The Israeli army controls the streets of Bethlehem.

There has been a curfew here for a week.

Residents have been told if they go outside they risk being shot.

People have died, civilians among them.

Posters for the martyrs are plastered over shop doors.

Eventually we found the El-Ali household, everyone cooped up, and they told
us the story of their martyr, husband to Elaine and father of three.

Eiser El-Ali we was shot dead by Israeli troops last October.

He was 57, a carpenter.

JUMANA EL-ALI: He was driving his car.

A tank shot at the back of the car.

CHRIS CLARK: Before her father's death, Jumana El-Ali wasn't interested in
politics.

JUMANA EL-ALI: I was saying peace and peace come, even though we are
suffering.

Now I say we have to take our land back.

This is our land.

Israel has no rights in this land.

CHRIS CLARK: While Jumana says she doesn't support suicide bombings, this
social worker with a university degree says Palestinians have no choice.

JUMANA EL-ALI: I don't agree but this is our only chance.

It is the only way we can fight or our land.

We don't have weapons, just ourselves, just our flesh, as we say.

We have just our bodies to give.

CHRIS CLARK: The suicide bombings provoked this latest Israeli military
assault.

Now Palestinians are prisoners.

Just as Israelis are held captive by the fear of being blown to pieces.

ARIEL GOLDEN: I was at a friend of mine when my mother called me.

I heard in her voice she was, like, crying.

CHRIS CLARK: It's almost a year since Mario Golden was standing at the
bus-stop on his way to work when a suicide bomber blew himself up.

ARIEL GOLDEN: I'm very angry, because I thinks it's a waste that a good man
like my father was murdered just like that and -- and it's very difficult to
continue living like this, with every day hearing another suicide, a
Palestinian that blows up people just like that.

It's not a war.

It's murder.

CHRIS CLARK: Ariel Golden says he's changed in the year since his father was
killed.

ARIEL GOLDEN: Yes, it's changed my thoughts about everything here.

I thought there was a possibility to make peace with the Palestinians, but
now I don't think so.

I don't believe it.

I don't believe them.

CHRIS CLARK: Palestinians say the problem is the occupation.

Remove that, they argue, and the suicide bombings will stop.

JUMANA EL-ALI: I'm angry about Israelis also, because they say when ever
there is a terrorist man who goes and bombs himself in one of the
restaurants, people get killed, but we are getting killed also.

CHRIS CLARK: Far from buckling under the threat of suicide attacks, though,
Israelis want to hit back.

ARIEL GOLDEN: I'm angry at the government.

I don't think they're doing enough.

I don't know the way out.

That's why I feel so lost.

And I don't have any answer for this.

But what I feel is that there is no security here in Israel.

So it's very hard every day.

CHRIS CLARK: Yet with all its military might, Israel can't simply make the
Palestinians go away.

They're around every corner.

They remain two communities side by side and as far apart as ever.

KERRY O'BRIEN: Multiply those two stories by thousands and you have a better
idea why both sides are so entrenched.


Transcripts on this website are created by an independent transcription
service. The ABC does not warrant the accuracy of the transcripts.







_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

James,
  Again I want to stipulate that a number of things
occur because "we the people" allow it!
  A number of small crimes is beneath our concern, it
is only when it directlt cross' our path do we decide
to do something. We need to watch over each other and
help our fellow man/woman.
  Just a question; is this the same David Duke that was
associated with the ku klux klan a few years ago?
Greg
--- james tan <tyjfk@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: "AIDI Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>
> To: "james tan" <tyjfk@...>, "Yusri"
> <lesaint@...>,
> "Wilis" <wilino@...>, "Sher"
> <sbalati@...>,   "S Haroon"
> <syedharoon@...>, "Pitung Wari"
> <apitung@...>,   "Nazri Bin
> Ibrahim" <NAZRI@...>,   "Najeeb  Jahrom
> Al-Haj"
> <rhnajeeb@...>,   "Iskandar"
> <i_nugraha@...>,   "Dali
> Meskam" <dmeskam@...>,   "azrin rahim"
> <azrin@...>,
> "Azlan" <azlan@...>,   "Akbar Hakim"
> <AKBAR@...>, "AIDI
> Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>,   "Abdul Hadhi"
> <Abdul.Hadhi@...>,   "Abd Amin Hj Hashim"
> <abdamin@...>,   "Meskam Faisal"
> <faisal@...>
> Subject: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not
> Junk mail!!!!!
> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:39:20 +0800
>
> Interesting....
>
> Subject: FW: The truth about Israel - This is not
> Junk mail!!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                                  Press Releases
>                                   Breaking News
>                                   Daily Commentaries
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                                  How Israeli
> terrorism and American treason
> caused the September 11 Attacks
>                                  By David Duke,
> National President
>                                  European-American
> Unity and Rights
> Organization (EURO)
>                                  November 21, 2001
>                                  If Osama bin Laden
> is the man behind the
> attack that caused the death of thousands of
> Americans on September 11, I,
> like most Americans want to him to suffer the
> ultimate punishment for his
> crime. No person or nation that commits terrorism
> against America should
> escape punishment.
>
>                                  But now I am going
> to make a statement that
> may well shock you. If you agree that those who
> commit terrorist acts
> against America should be punished, then America
> should put Israel at the
> top of our hit list; for in this article, I will
> prove that Israel has
> committed deliberate acts of murderous terrorism and
> treachery against
> America.
>
>                                  Israel's acts of
> terrorism and treachery
> against America have not only gone unpunished, but
> have been rewarded by
> politicians who have treasonously betrayed the
> United States.
>
>                                  Read David Duke's
> previous articles:
>                                  The Big Lie - The
> true reason behind the
> attack
>
>                                  Will Anyone Dare to
> Ask Why?
>
>
>                                  I will show that
> Israel has committed more
> continuing terrorism in the last half century than
> any other nation on
> earth. Then, I will expose Israel's terrorism and
> treachery against the
> United States of America. Finally, I will show the
> shocking facts proving
> that Israel deliberately sought the death of
> thousands of Americans on
> September 11.
>
>                                  Why was America
> attacked?
>
>                                  No one would argue
> that whatever his
> motivations, if bin Laden was behind the horror of
> the WTC attacks, he
> deserves punishment for killing so many innocent
> people. At the same time,
> it is vital that we know why bin Laden and millions
> of others around the
> world have come to hate America. Why are so many
> willing to risk or even
> sacrifice their lives to get at us? I certainly hope
> no one reading this is
> so na�ve as to believe that the growing millions who
> hate America do so
> because we are "free." That canard has to be the
> most ridiculous notion ever
> sold to the American people since the pet rock.
>
>                                  To end the threat
> of terrorism against the
> American people, we must know the true reason why we
> are so hated. Modern
> technology makes mass murder and terrorism so
> ridiculously easy that just
> about anyone can do it. It cannot be stopped by
> military might. In fact,
> even the brute force we are using in Afghanistan
> supposedly to wipe out
> terror -- already shows signs of whipping up enough
> world-wide hatred
> against America to give rise to a thousand new
> terrorists for eevery one
> terrorist we might kill.
>
>                                  I also wonder what
> the kill ratio is in
> Afghanistan. Perhaps 1 member of the al-Qaida
> network is killed for every 10
> run-of-the-mill Afghan soldiers and civilians who
> are basically just trying
> to get through their own lives like the rest of us.
> Or maybe it's 1
> terrorist for a 100 Afghanis. I suspect the real
> figure is more like a 1000
> non-terrorists dead for the life of 1 genuine
> terrorist who might ever
> bother America.
>
>                                  Perhaps we should
> have enough courage to
> consider the possible reasons why so many might hate
> us. Only when we have
> all the facts, rather than cute little clich�s like
> "They were attacking
> freedom," can we decide the best way we can protect
> our people in the
> future.
>
>                                  By the way, how do
> we
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

greg,

indeed it is the same person. as such, i think u don't have to take
seriously what he wrote... ie, it was basically junk mail... i did not know
about david duke until someone from other forum told me he is a white
supremacist...involved in the kkk clan. ie, he does not have moral authority
or even basic integrity to talk about persecution; it is somewhat ironical.

james.


From: greg goodwin <ggoodwin56@...>
Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk
mail!!!!!
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 06:58:40 -0700 (PDT)

James,
   Again I want to stipulate that a number of things
occur because "we the people" allow it!
   A number of small crimes is beneath our concern, it
is only when it directlt cross' our path do we decide
to do something. We need to watch over each other and
help our fellow man/woman.
   Just a question; is this the same David Duke that was
associated with the ku klux klan a few years ago?
Greg
--- james tan <tyjfk@...> wrote:
  >
  >
  >
  > From: "AIDI Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>
  > To: "james tan" <tyjfk@...>, "Yusri"
  > <lesaint@...>,
  > "Wilis" <wilino@...>, "Sher"
  > <sbalati@...>,   "S Haroon"
  > <syedharoon@...>, "Pitung Wari"
  > <apitung@...>,   "Nazri Bin
  > Ibrahim" <NAZRI@...>,   "Najeeb  Jahrom
  > Al-Haj"
  > <rhnajeeb@...>,   "Iskandar"
  > <i_nugraha@...>,   "Dali
  > Meskam" <dmeskam@...>,   "azrin rahim"
  > <azrin@...>,
  > "Azlan" <azlan@...>,   "Akbar Hakim"
  > <AKBAR@...>, "AIDI
  > Rahim" <nfo.araidi@...>,   "Abdul Hadhi"
  > <Abdul.Hadhi@...>,   "Abd Amin Hj Hashim"
  > <abdamin@...>,   "Meskam Faisal"
  > <faisal@...>
  > Subject: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not
  > Junk mail!!!!!
  > Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:39:20 +0800
  >
  > Interesting....
  >
  > Subject: FW: The truth about Israel - This is not
  > Junk mail!!!!!
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  Press Releases
  >                                   Breaking News
  >                                   Daily Commentaries
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  How Israeli
  > terrorism and American treason
  > caused the September 11 Attacks
  >                                  By David Duke,
  > National President
  >                                  European-American
  > Unity and Rights
  > Organization (EURO)
  >                                  November 21, 2001
  >                                  If Osama bin Laden
  > is the man behind the
  > attack that caused the death of thousands of
  > Americans on September 11, I,
  > like most Americans want to him to suffer the
  > ultimate punishment for his
  > crime. No person or nation that commits terrorism
  > against America should
  > escape punishment.
  >
  >                                  But now I am going
  > to make a statement that
  > may well shock you. If you agree that those who
  > commit terrorist acts
  > against America should be punished, then America
  > should put Israel at the
  > top of our hit list; for in this article, I will
  > prove that Israel has
  > committed deliberate acts of murderous terrorism and
  > treachery against
  > America.
  >
  >                                  Israel's acts of
  > terrorism and treachery
  > against America have not only gone unpunished, but
  > have been rewarded by
  > politicians who have treasonously betrayed the
  > United States.
  >
  >                                  Read David Duke's
  > previous articles:
  >                                  The Big Lie - The
  > true reason behind the
  > attack
  >
  >                                  Will Anyone Dare to
  > Ask Why?
  >
  >
  >                                  I will show that
  > Israel has committed more
  > continuing terrorism in the last half century than
  > any other nation on
  > earth. Then, I will expose Israel's terrorism and
  > treachery against the
  > United States of America. Finally, I will show the
  > shocking facts proving
  > that Israel deliberately sought the death of
  > thousands of Americans on
  > September 11.
  >
  >                                  Why was America
  > attacked?
  >
  >                                  No one would argue
  > that whatever his
  > motivations, if bin Laden was behind the horror of
  > the WTC attacks, he
  > deserves punishment for killing so many innocent
  > people. At the same time,
  > it is vital that we know why bin Laden and millions
  > of others around the
  > world have come to hate America. Why are so many
  > willing to risk or even
  > sacrifice their lives to get at us? I certainly hope
  > no one reading this is
  > so na�ve as to believe that the growing millions who
  > hate America do so
  > because we are "free." That canard has to be the
  > most ridiculous notion ever
  > sold to the American people since the pet rock.
  >
  >                                  To end the threat
  > of terrorism against the
  > American people, we must know the true reason why we
  > are so hated. Modern
  > technology makes mass murder and terrorism so
  > ridiculously easy that just
  > about anyone can do it. It cannot be stopped by
  > military might. In fact,
  > even the brute force we are using in Afghanistan
  > supposedly to wipe out
  > terror -- already shows signs of whipping up enough
  > world-wide hatred
  > against America to give rise to a thousand new
  > terrorists for eevery one
  > terrorist we might kill.
  >
  >                                  I also wonder what
  > the kill ratio is in
  > Afghanistan. Perhaps 1 member of the al-Qaida
  > network is killed for every 10
  > run-of-the-mill Afghan soldiers and civilians who
  > are basically just trying
  > to get through their own lives like the rest of us.
  > Or maybe it's 1
  > terrorist for a 100 Afghanis. I suspect the real
  > figure is more like a 1000
  > non-terrorists dead for the life of 1 genuine
  > terrorist who might ever
  > bother America.
  >
  >                                  Perhaps we should
  > have enough courage to
  > consider the possible reasons why so many might hate
  > us. Only when we have
  > all the facts, rather than cute little clich�s like
  > "They were attacking
  > freedom," can we decide the best way we can protect
  > our people in the
  > future.
  >
  >                                  By the way, how do
  > we
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/


Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
(Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/










_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

indeed, i have no idea who is this david duke until chris pointed out he is
a kkk clan member. and thanks for the details. i have seen films on the kkk
many years back, how they would torture sadistically and kill blacks in
america for no reason other than they are blacks. it hits me as totally
ridiculous. what they believe in is indeed akin to the nazis' racist
standpoint, and as such i think this duke does not have moral authority. as
chris pointed out, it was a junk mail.

james.


From: "swmaerske" <SWMirsky@...>
Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WisdomForum] Re: Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 02:02:20 -0000

I imagine it's hard for folks who are not familiar with America to
understand this but Mr. Duke is a neo-Nazi and former leader of the
Ku Klux Klan. Of course, what the Nazis and the Klan stand for should
be well-known to those who are outside the United States, even if
they don't know the names of all the players themselves. But it is
instructive to see what is coming out of the woodwork and who it is
that's making common cause with the terrorists in the Middle East.

Be assured, racist elements like Duke have no love for other non-
"aryan" groups either and, after they're done trashing the Jews and
the blacks (the Nazis were notoriously racist on that score), they'll
go after other non-European racial groups as well. But I suppose
that, in a case like this, they are subscribing to the age-old Middle
Eastern dictum that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Suffice it to say that anything presented by Mr. Duke is not worth
responding to since he is so plainly beyond the pale of rational or
even moral argument. Like Mr. bin Laden, this is a man who wants to
shut down liberal society and introduce his own brand of hate and
poison. If anyone is falling victim to his words, then there is
nothing more I can say to them. Here the dialogue shuts down. (I hope
that James is merely unaware of the invalidity of the tripe spewed by
a fellow like this and does not believe it himself. I suppose it
sounds like just another voice with possibly useful information to
someone unfamiliar with the facts. But it is not that at all. This
man is no existentialist or thought-provoking thinker unless you
think that that was what Hitler was!)

SWM

>Subject: FW: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk mail!!!!!
  >
  >                                  Press Releases
  >                                   Breaking News
  >                                   Daily Commentaries
  >
  >                                  How Israeli terrorism and American
treason caused the September 11 Attacks By David Duke, National
President European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO)
  >                                  November 21, 2001
  >                                  If Osama bin Laden is the man
behind the
  > attack that caused the death of thousands of Americans on September
11, I,
  > like most Americans want to him to suffer the ultimate punishment
for his
  > crime. No person or nation that commits terrorism against America
should
  > escape punishment.
  >
  >                                  But now I am going to make a
statement that
  > may well shock you. If you agree that those who commit terrorist
acts
  > against America should be punished, then America should put Israel
at the
  > top of our hit list; for in this article, I will prove that Israel
has
  > committed deliberate acts of murderous terrorism and treachery
against
  > America.
  >
  >                                  Israel's acts of terrorism and
treachery
  > against America have not only gone unpunished, but have been
rewarded by
  > politicians who have treasonously betrayed the United States.
  >
  >                                  Read David Duke's previous
articles:
  >                                  The Big Lie - The true reason
behind the
  > attack
  >
  >                                  Will Anyone Dare to Ask Why?
  >
  >
  >                                  I will show that Israel has
committed more
  > continuing terrorism in the last half century than any other nation
on
  > earth. Then, I will expose Israel's terrorism and treachery against
the
  > United States of America. Finally, I will show the shocking facts
proving
  > that Israel deliberately sought the death of thousands of Americans
on
  > September 11.
  >
  >                                  Why was America attacked?
  >
  >                                  No one would argue that whatever
his
  > motivations, if bin Laden was behind the horror of the WTC attacks,
he
  > deserves punishment for killing so many innocent people. At the
same time,
  > it is vital that we know why bin Laden and millions of others
around the
  > world have come to hate America. Why are so many willing to risk or
even
  > sacrifice their lives to get at us? I certainly hope no one reading
this is
  > so na�ve as to believe that the growing millions who hate America
do so
  > because we are "free." That canard has to be the most ridiculous
notion ever
  > sold to the American people since the pet rock.
  >
  >                                  To end the threat of terrorism
against the
  > American people, we must know the true reason why we are so hated.
Modern
  > technology makes mass murder and terrorism so ridiculously easy
that just
  > about anyone can do it. It cannot be stopped by military might. In
fact,
  > even the brute force we are using in Afghanistan supposedly to wipe
out
  > terror -- already shows signs of whipping up enough world-wide
hatred
  > against America to give rise to a thousand new terrorists for
eevery one
  > terrorist we might kill.
  >
  >                                  I also wonder what the kill ratio
is in
  > Afghanistan. Perhaps 1 member of the al-Qaida network is killed for
every 10
  > run-of-the-mill Afghan soldiers and civilians who are basically
just trying
  > to get through their own lives like the rest of us. Or maybe it's 1
  > terrorist for a 100 Afghanis. I suspect the real figure is more
like a 1000
  > non-terrorists dead for the life of 1 genuine terrorist who might
ever
  > bother America.
  >
  >                                  Perhaps we should have enough
courage to
  > consider the possible reasons why so many might hate us. Only when
we have
  > all the facts, rather than cute little clich�s like "They were
attacking
  > freedom," can we decide the best way we can protect our people in
the
  > future.
  >
  >                                  By the way, how do we define
an "attack on
  > American freedom?" I would say that a real "attack on freedom" is
trashing
  > the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States. The
Ten
  > Amendments are the very core of what American freedom actually is.
George
  > Bush and the U.S. Congress, armed with the newspeak U.S.A. Patriot
Act, did
  > infinitely more to take away our Constitutional freedoms than bin
Laden ever
  > could.
  >
  >                                  The real reason we have suffered
terrorism
  >
  >                                  The real reason we have suffered
the
  > terrorism of the WTC attack is shockingly simple.
  >
  >                                  Too many American politicians have
  > treasonously betrayed the American people by blindly supporting the
leading
  > terrorist nation on earth: Israel.
  >
  >                                  The American mass media and the
government
  > cannot have it both ways. If they are motivated to attack
Afghanistan for
  > giving aid and comfort to terrorists, then some Palestinians
naturally find
  > motivation to attack America for giving aid and even military
support to
  > Israel, a nation that has committed unrelenting terrorism against
them.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  Traitors to the United States have
allowed
  > a terrorist foreign nation to control the United States Government.
Some
  > readers might think it preposterous for me to assert that that a
foreign
  > nation controls America. But, consider the fact that the former
head of the
  > United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee, William
Fulbright, said
  > precisely that. He asserted on ABC's Face the Nation television
program that
  > "Israel Controls the United States Senate."(1) And, Senator
Fulbright was no
  > dummy; it is in his name that the brightest students scramble after
the
  > so-named "Fulbright" scholarships. Not only did Senator Fulbright
make this
  > powerful indictment, but the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff,
  > George Brown, as well as many others, have said essentially the
same thing.
  >
  >                                  We can say we can't possibly get
the
  > Congress to support a (Israeli) program like this. And they say
don't worry
  > about the Congress. We will take care of the Congress. This is
somebody from
  > another country, but they can do it. They own, you know, the banks
in this
  > country, the newspapers. Just look at where the Jewish money is. -
  > (2)(General George S. Brown, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff)
  >
  >                                  Of course, General Brown actually
  > understated the Jewish control of the American media. It is true
that they
  > control the most influential newspapers in America, including the
top three:
  > The New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street
Journal. They
  > also own the top three newsmagazines Time, Newsweek and U.S. News
and World
  > Report. But, even more importantly, they thoroughly dominate the
television
  > and broadcast media, the two largest media conglomerates being Time-
Warner
  > and Disney, and their domination includes the network news
executives of the
  > main three networks: ABC, CBS and NBC. Control of the media by pro-
Israeli
  > partisans is another subject for another time; but if you would
like
  > complete documentation, please go to my website www.davidduke.com
and pull
  > up a chapter from My Awakening called "Who Runs the Media." The
extreme
  > pro-Israeli partisanship of the media is why most Americans are
woefully
  > ignorant of Israel's terrorist record. All this article needs to do
is apply
  > just a tiny pinprick into the balloon of Israeli propaganda, for it
will
  > take only a few good jabs to burst the balloon of lies surrounding
Israel.
  >
  >                                  I will show you documentary
evidence that
  > during the last 50 years Israel has engaged in more murderous
terrorism than
  > any other nation in the world; and that by supporting its criminal
behavior,
  > America is now reaping the fanatical hatred of hundreds of millions
of
  > people around the globe. Support for Israel's terrorism has
directly led to
  > the terrorism now going on against the United States. Most
Americans don't
  > even realize the magnitude and scope of Israeli terrorism because
of the
  > Jewish media control mentioned by General Brown. A pertinent
example of
  > their incredible media power is their ability to propagate the Big
Lie that
  > the WTC attack had nothing at all to do with Israel; that the
kamikaze
  > attackers hated and attacked Americans because we are "free."
  >
  >                                  The Big Lie
  >
  >                                  The Jewish-dominated American mass
media
  > and the Israeli-controlled politicians do not want the American
people to
  > fully realize the incredibly high price America pays for blindly
supporting
  > Israel. In the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001, even
  > President Bush repeated the absurd lie, alleging the attack
happened because
  > they hate the fact that we are free. If, as the media says, bin
Laden is
  > behind the terrorism, then they know that the attack occurred not
because he
  > hates freedom. Just three years ago, ABC television and PBS
Frontline
  > interviewed bin Laden during the time of the Clinton
administration. Bin
  > Laden clearly stated why he opposed America:
  >
  >                                  They (Americans) have put
themselves at the
  > mercy of a disloyal government,... it is Israel inside America.
Take the
  > sensitive ministries such as the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of
  > Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper
hand in
  > them. They make use of America to further their plans for the
world..."
  >
  >                                  For over half a century, Muslims
in
  > Palestine have been (by the Jews) slaughtered and assaulted and
robbed of
  > their honor and of their property. Their houses have been blasted,
their
  > crops destroyed...This is my message to the American people: to
look for a
  > serious government that looks out for their interests and does not
attack
  > other people's lands, or other people's honor..."(3)
  >
  >                                  Notwithstanding any of his alleged
crimes,
  > bin Laden has never in his entire life uttered a word against
Democracy! The
  > media invented the lie about attacking Democracy to hide the real
truth;
  > that America is being attacked in retaliation for the American
government's
  > support of Israel's terrorist policies in the Mideast. The
unanimity of the
  > media in propagating this huge lie without contradiction should
make every
  > thoughtful person suspect that Americans are not getting the whole
truth
  > from the media.
  >
  >                                  First, let's take a look at
Israel's
  > terrorism against the Palestinians.
  >
  >                                  Israel: a mass murderer as Head of
State
  >
  >                                  Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel
Sharon, is
  > one of the world's most bloodstained terrorists. He is responsible
for the
  > cold-blooded slaughter of at least 1,500 men, women and children in
the
  > Beirut refugee camps of Chatila and Sabra. Even a formal Israeli
commission
  > found Sharon personally responsible for the Lebanese massacres.(4)
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  In 1982, as Israel's defense
minister,
  > Sharon directed Israel's invasion of Lebanon and the carpet bombing
and
  > devastation of the city of Beirut (In Lebanon five times more women
and
  > children died than in the September New York attack). This terror
bombing
  > was carried out by Jews using jet fighters and bombs supplied by
the United
  > States.
  >
  >                                  After the Israeli military
devastation and
  > occupation, Sharon forcibly removed Palestinian resistance fighters
from
  > Lebanon. Many Palestinian women, children and old people were left
behind in
  > refugee camps near Beirut. The United States publicly guaranteed
their
  > safety and promised that they would quickly be reunited with their
loved
  > ones. When Sharon plotted their murder, he not only planned a
bloody act of
  > terrorism against the refugees; he knew it was an act of treachery
against
  > the United States that would raise intense hatred against America.
  >
  >                                  On the night of September 16,
1982, Sharon
  > sent Phalangist murder squads into two Palestinian refugee camps,
Sabra and
  > Chatila. With Israeli tanks and troops closely surrounding the
camps to
  > prevent any of the Palestinians from escaping, the murder squads
  > machine-gunned, bayoneted, and bludgeoned Palestinian civilians all
that
  > night, the next day and the following night; all while the Israelis
  > surrounding the camps listened gleefully to the machine gun fire
and screams
  > coming from inside. Sharon then sent in bulldozers to hide as much
of the
  > atrocity as he could. At least 1500 Palestinian men, women and
children were
  > butchered, and perhaps as many as 2500. (An official Lebanese
investigation
  > set the figure at 2500) Even after the efforts of Sharon's
bulldozers, many
  > Palestinians remained unburied, and Red Cross workers found whole
families;
  > including hundreds of elderly and little children, with their
throats cut or
  > disemboweled. Uncounted numbers of women and girls were also raped
before
  > they were slaughtered.
  >
  >                                  Ariel Sharon is sought for trial
by the
  > Hague Tribunal, the same body that succeeded in extraditing former
Yugoslav
  > President Slobodan Milosevic for charges of crimes against humanity
in
  > Kosovo. Sharon will not travel to Belgium for fear of arrest by the
  > International Court for the massacre.(5)
  >
  >                                  Although he is sought for his
Chatila and
  > Sabra murders, Sharon could be tried for any of a dozen other
massacres
  > committed during his sterling career, crimes against humanity that
go back
  > at least as far as 1953. The Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, recalls
Sharon's
  > leading of a massacre in the village of Kibya in 1953, "The
soldiers of
  > Major Ariel Sharon killed 70 Palestinians in the reprisal raid,
most of them
  > women and children "(6)
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  America, which clamored for the
Hague
  > Tribunal to arrest and try Milosevic, pretends to be unaware of
Sharon's
  > mass murder. Instead of handing Sharon an arrest warrant for mass
murder and
  > putting him in the shackles that he deserves, President Bush greets
Ariel
  > Sharon with handshakes and hugs! How the world must snicker in
disbelief
  > when Bush confers with Sharon on "fighting terrorism."
  >
  >                                  If President Bush is truly serious
about
  > punishing nations that support or harbor terrorists, he will have
to begin
  > with Israel, a nation that elected one of the world's worst
terrorists and
  > mass murderers as its the Head of State. Does America's Israel-
controlled
  > Senate punish Israel for harboring terrorists? No, instead we
supply their
  > terrorists with billions of American taxpayer's dollars and the
very weapons
  > with which they kill!
  >
  >                                  Israel's murder of the Palestinian
refugees
  > after the United States had publicly guaranteed their safety was
not only a
  > crime against humanity, but also one of treachery against America.
Sharon
  > and the others involved were completely aware of America's well-
publicized
  > promise of the refugees' safety.
  >
  >                                  The Beirut Sabra and Chatila
Massacre was
  > the chief motivation of the Lebanese suicide bombing attack that
killed 241
  > American Marines in Beirut less than a year later, and it clearly
  > demonstrates how American support of Israeli terrorism leads to
terrible
  > consequences for the United States. The Los Angeles Times, in
discussing a
  > revealing book by a former agent of the Israeli Mossad (secret
service),
  > showed that the Mossad had foreknowledge of the terrorist attack on
the
  > Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983, but treacherously did not warn
  > America.(7)
  >
  >                                  Among Ostrovsky's more shocking
allegations
  > are that Mossad failed to share with the U.S. detailed intelligence
that
  > might have averted the 1983 suicide bombing of the Beirut Marine
barracks
  > that killed 241 U.S. servicemen;...
  >
  >                                  Israel: founded by terror against
the
  > British and Palestinians
  >
  >                                  In their effort to wrest control
of
  > Palestine from British control, the Zionists waged a campaign of
relentless
  > terror, including the bombing of the King David Hotel, which killed
93
  > people. They ruthlessly murdered British officials and soldiers.
The
  > Zionists assassinated anyone in their way, including the world-
respected
  > U.N. mediator, Count Folke Bernadotte, who dared to tell the world
of the
  > Zionist terror and murder campaign. A favorite tactic of the Irgun
and Stern
  > terrorist gangs was to kidnap British soldiers and slowly torture
them to
  > death. Israel was also the first nation to employ the modern
terrorist
  > technique of the letter bomb; and over the years sent out hundreds
of them,
  > killing dozens of their enemies and many bystanders all over the
world. The
  > current terrorism of mailing anthrax infected letters is simply a
logical
  > stepchild of the letter bomb.
  >
  >                                  The terror of Deir Yassin
  >
  >                                  The Palestinians, of course, have
been the
  > greatest victims of this half a century of Israeli terror. In fact,
Israel
  > carved its state out of Palestine through a deliberate policy of
mass terror
  > against the Palestinians. It was the method by which they drove
800,000 of
  > them from their homes, businesses and farms(9). In his book The
Revolt(10),
  > former Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, boasts about his role in the
massacre
  > of the 254 Palestinians at Deir Yassin. (Most of the victims were
elderly
  > men, women and children who remained in the Israeli-occupied
village) In his
  > book, Begin points out that Deir Yassin and other massacres caused
panic
  > among the residents, causing them to flee in terror from their
homes. This
  > intentional mass terror enabled the Zionists to take control of
Palestine.
  > And, it should be noted that the refugees are still not permitted
to return
  > home after more than half a century!
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  What did the Zionist terrorists
actually do
  > at Deir Yassin and at other villages that caused the Palestinian
people to
  > flee in fear? A Red Cross doctor, Jacques de Reynier, chief
representative
  > of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Jerusalem gave a
shocking
  > account of the massacre in his official report.(11)
  >
  >                                  De Reynier arrived at the village
on the
  > second day and saw "the mopping up," as one of the Israeli
terrorists put it
  > to him. It had been done with machine guns, then grenades, and was
finished
  > off with knives. The Jews decapitated some of the victims and
fatally maimed
  > 52 children in sight of their mothers. They cut open 25 pregnant
women's
  > wombs and butchered the babies in front of them.
  >
  >                                  Israelis present at Deir Yassin
have
  > confirmed these atrocities. After his retirement in 1972, Israeli
Haganah
  > officer, Colonel Meir Pa'el, stated the following about Deir Yassin
in
  > Yediot Ahronot, a major Jewish publication:
  >
  >                                  The Irgun and LEHI men came out of
hiding
  > and began to `clean' the houses. They shot whoever they saw, women
and
  > children included, the commanders did not try to stop the
massacre...they
  > were taken to the quarry between Deir Yassin and Giv'at Shaul, and
murdered
  > in cold blood... (12)
  >
  >                                  The commander of the Haganah unit
that
  > controlled Deir Yassin after the massacre, Zvi Ankori, made this
statement
  > in the Israeli newspaper Davar:
  >
  >                                  I went into six to seven houses. I
saw cut
  > off genitalia and women's crushed stomachs. According to the
shooting signs
  > on the bodies, it was direct murder.(13)
  >
  >                                  Have you seen any TV documentaries
or any
  > Hollywood movies about the Israeli terror of Deir Yassin or of many
  > thousands of other Israeli acts of terror against the Palestinian
people?
  > You have heard plenty of violin music for Jewish victims of Hitler,
but have
  > you heard any violins for the women at Deir Yassin who had their
babies cut
  > from their wombs by Jewish Supremacists? Have you heard any violins
for any
  > of the other thousands of Palestinian victims of Begin, Shamir,
Barak, and
  > Sharon? Befitting Israel's long record of terrorism against the
Palestinian
  > people, Israel has the nasty habit of electing its most notorious
terrorists
  > and mass murderers as its Head of State.
  >
  >                                  The United States has a whole
division of
  > the Justice Department dedicated to hunting down Nazis who have
committed
  > crimes against humanity. While America doggedly pursues elderly
suspected
  > German war criminals, American Presidents have state dinners
honoring Jewish
  > ones!
  >
  >                                  Mr. Bush is fond of talking about
wiping
  > out evil terrorists, yet was not a massacre such as Deir Yassin
clearly an
  > act of consummate evil?
  >
  >                                  As Begin points out in The Revolt,
terror
  > against Palestinians was a crucial factor in establishing Israel.
It
  > established the Jewish state and it truly set the tone for a half
century of
  > ongoing terror against the Palestinian people.
  >
  >                                  52 years of Ongoing Terror against
  > Palestinians
  >
  >                                  Since 1948, Palestinians have
faced ongoing
  > terrorism from Israel. Hundreds of villages have been obliterated
and
  > literally wiped from the map. Tens of thousands of homes have been
bombed,
  > bull-dozed or dynamited during peacetime! Tens of thousands of men,
women
  > and children have been killed. Even greater numbers have been
blinded,
  > crippled, disfigured and maimed. Hundreds of thousands have been
imprisoned
  > and/or tortured.
  >
  >                                  In going after Palestinian
resistance to
  > Israeli occupation, Israel has never been shy about bombing refugee
camps
  > full of women and children. Israeli tanks, helicopters and even jet
fighters
  > are used to drop bombs or fire missiles into the heart of
Palestinian
  > neighborhoods and refugee camps packed with women and children.
These
  > weapons cannot discriminate between a supposed terrorist or an
  > eight-year-old little girl. Such a weapon can kill a child as
surely as it
  > can kill enemies of the state.
  >
  >                                  Palestinians suspected of actively
opposing
  > Israel's occupation of the West Bank or Gaza, have had their homes
and
  > families attacked by Israeli tank cannons, missiles or bombs. And
after
  > their suspect is killed or imprisoned, the Israeli army bulldozes
or
  > dynamites their family's home. Thousands of homes have been
destroyed in
  > this fashion.
  >
  >                                  Israel has also killed hundreds of
  > Palestinian leaders by assassination and terroristic attacks. These
attacks
  > often kill innocent bystanders. Many of those assassinated have
never been
  > associated with any terror or violence of any kind; they simply
were poets,
  > writers, or clerics who by their words have inspired in their
countrymen the
  > desire for freedom. The Israeli Prime Minister previous to Ariel
Sharon was
  > Ehud Barak. In 1972, during peacetime between Israel and Lebanon,
he led an
  > Israeli commando death squad into Beirut, Lebanon where he
personally
  > murdered Palestinian writer Kamal Edwan. In the middle of the
night, using
  > silenced submachine guns, he and his team slaughtered Edwan while
he slept
  > in their bed. When the newly elected Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud
Barak,
  > came to New York and Washington, the Jewish-controlled press
treated this
  > murderer, as though he was a conquering hero.
  >
  >                                  The double standards never seem to
end.
  > When an Israeli cabinet official, Rechavam Zeevi, was assassinated
by
  > Palestinians in October of 2001, Sharon and some U.S. officials
denounced it
  > as "terrorism." If the shooting down of Zeevi is indeed terrorism,
what
  > should we call many years of Israeli assassinations of hundreds of
  > Palestinian political figures, philosophers, clerics and poets? Why
doesn't
  > the press point out that Zeevi was himself a Jewish Supremacist who
  > described Palestinians living and working illegally in Israel
as "lice" and
  > a "cancer in our midst.(14)" Zeevi himself was a terrorist who
advocated the
  > forcible expulsion of all Palestinians from the occupied
territories and the
  > assassination of all those who resist Israel occupation. He even
publicly
  > called for the assassination of Yassir Arafat. Yet, the same press
that
  > calls his assassination "terrorism" never calls the pro-
assassination Zeevi
  > a terrorist or even a Jewish Supremacist. The Zeevi assassination
itself was
  > in direct response to the Israeli assassination of a Palestinian
leader a
  > few weeks before.
  >
  >                                  In 1991, at an Israeli cabinet
meeting,
  > Zeevi said that President George Bush, by pressing Israel to peace
talks,
  > was "an enemy of Israel" and that "America was plotting a second
  > Holocaust.(15)" With a supposed "ally" like this, does America need
any
  > enemies?
  >
  >                                  The power of the Jews in the world
media
  > keeps many from fully grasping the terror of hundreds of Israeli
  > assassinations. In fact, even before the WTC terror attack in
September, the
  > BBC instructed their reporters to call Israel's assassination of
their
  > enemies as "targeted killings" rather than exactly what they are:
  > assassinations.(16) However, the BBC (which has a heavily Jewish
executive
  > staff) referred to the Zeevi killing as an assassination, and not a
  > "targeted killing." The public has been subjected to this kind of
sanitized
  > and distorted media treatment of Israel for years. It is no wonder
that few
  > Britons and even fewer Americans are little aware of Israel's
record of
  > terrorism. It is for this reason that I cannot blame most Americans
for
  > their ignorance of Israeli terrorism.
  >
  >                                  The terror of Israeli torture: at
least
  > 150,000 victims
  >
  >                                  The brutal torture of thousands of
one's
  > enemies must be classified as a particularly vicious form of
terrorism. Tens
  > of thousands of Palestinians have been tortured in Israeli jails. A
Jewish
  > human rights group in Israel confirmed in a 60-page report that 85%
of
  > Palestinian detainees undergo torture while in custody.(17) And
make no
  > mistake about it; many of the tortures endured by these Palestinian
victims
  > are the stuff of one's worst nightmares. Israeli torture includes
everything
  > from choking victims with urine and feces soaked bags tied over
their heads,
  > to using electric cattle prods for anal rape and mutilation. Israel
often
  > doesn't even admit to who they are holding, so if they decide to
kill or
  > torture a Palestinian to death while he is in custody, his body
will simply
  > disappear, or they will later claim that they died in a battle with
Israeli
  > police before capture. Many thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese
have died
  > while in Israeli custody.
  >
  >                                  A feature article by Joel
Greenburg in the
  > very pro-Israel New York Times stated matter-of-factly that Israel
tortures
  > 500 to 600 Palestinians every month.(18) That figure, which is
probably too
  > low as it comes from the pro-Israel New York Times, means that each
year at
  > least 6,000 Palestinians are tortured in Israel. Torture of
Palestinians has
  > been going on in Israel since 1948 (53 years to date). Even if one
uses just
  > one-half of the number of Palestinians that Mr. Greenburg says
suffer
  > torture each year -- at least 150,000 human beings have been
tortured in
  > Israeli jails since the founding of the Jewish state.
  >
  >                                  Bowing to Israel's public
relations
  > problems because of its legalized torture, in 1999 the Israeli
Supreme Court
  > made an intentionally vague ruling that torture is sometimes
illegal, but
  > Israeli and Palestinian rights groups offer much evidence that the
ruling
  > was just a public-relations veneer. They offer evidence that
torture
  > continues just as did before the ruling.(19)
  >
  >                                  Following Israel's lead, Jewish
journalists
  > are now beginning to advocate the use of torture in America! A
recent issue
  > of Newsweek headlined an article entitled 'Time to think about
torture; it's
  > a new world, and survival may well require old techniques that
seemed out of
  > the question."(20) Even a supposed Jewish champion of civil
liberties, Alan
  > Dershowitz, now advocates it.(21)
  >
  >                                  Victor Ostrovsky, a former Israeli
Mossad
  > agent, wrote two books about Israel's terror against their enemies.
In one
  > of them, he discusses the fate of Palestinians who illegally cross
the
  > border in search of work in Israel. Many thousands of these young
men simply
  > are never heard from again after being captured by Israel's forces.
Some of
  > them are taken to the ABC research facilities where they endure the
  > indescribable terror of chemical, nuclear or biological warfare.
  >
  >                                  ...ABC standing for atomic,
  > bacteriological, and chemical. It was where our top epidemiological
  > scientists were developing various doomsday machines...should there
be an
  > all-out war in which this type of weapon would be needed; there was
no room
  > for error. The Palestinian infiltrators came in handy in this
regard. As
  > human guinea pigs, they could make sure the weapons the scientist
were
  > developing worked properly and could verify how fast they worked
and make
  > them more efficient.(22)
  >
  >                                  Terror against the Lebanese People
  >
  >                                  During the Israeli invasion and
occupation
  > of Lebanon from 1978 to 2000, at least 15,000 civilians died. An
example of
  > Israeli terror was its intentional bombing of the UN center in
Qana, Lebanon
  > that occurred just five years ago. The following article was not
written by
  > a Palestinian, Arab or even a Muslim, but by Englishman Robert
Fisk, one of
  > the most respected British journalists working in the Mideast. He
writes for
  > the London newspaper, The Independent. If an American wants to
understand
  > the hatred that Israel is generating toward America, dare to read
this
  > gruesome account and dare to take a close look at the pictures
showing the
  > realities of Israeli terror.
  >
  >                                  Most Americans have read countless
gory
  > accounts Jewish Holocaust atrocities or even stories about the
Israeli
  > victims of Palestinian suicide bombers. They have seen dozens of
the most
  > gruesome movies or documentaries about Jewish victims, but most
Americans
  > have never read even one account like the one quoted here. You
won't read
  > such accounts in American newspapers or news magazines.
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  The gory reality of Israel's
terrorism.
  > Workers remove the victims (mostly women, children and elderly)
killed in by
  > Israeli forces in Lebanon, including the decapitated child shown
above.
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  Qana, southern Lebanon - It was a
massacre.
  > Not since Sabra and Chatila had I seen the innocent slaughtered
like this.
  > The Lebanese refugee women and children and men lay in heaps, their
hands or
  > arms or legs missing, beheaded or disemboweled. There were well
over a
  > hundred of them. A baby lay without a head. The Israeli shells had
scythed
  > through them as they lay in the United Nations shelter, believing
that they
  > were safe under the world's protection. Like the Muslims of
Srebrenica, the
  > Muslims of Qana were wrong.
  >
  >                                  In front of a burning building of
the UN's
  > Fijian battalion headquarters, a girl held a corpse in her arms,
the body of
  > a gray- haired man whose eyes were staring at her, and she rocked
the corpse
  > back and forth in her arms, keening and weeping and crying the same
words
  > over and over: "My father, my father." A Fijian UN soldier stood
amid a sea
  > of bodies and, without saying a word, held aloft the body of a
headless
  > child.
  >
  >                                  ...When I walked towards them, I
slipped on
  > a human hand...
  >
  >                                  Israel's slaughter of civilians in
this
  > terrible 10-day offensive - 206 by last night - has been so
cavalier, so
  > ferocious, that not a Lebanese will forgive this massacre. There
had been
  > the ambulance attacked on Saturday, the sisters killed in Yohmor
the day
  > before, the 2-year-old girl decapitated by an Israeli missile four
days ago.
  > And earlier yesterday, the Israelis had slaughtered a family of 12 -
   the
  > youngest was a four- day-old baby - when Israeli helicopter pilots
fired
  > missiles into their home.
  >
  >                                  Shortly afterwards, three Israeli
jets
  > dropped bombs only 250 meters from a UN convoy on which I was
traveling,
  > blasting a house 30 feet into the air in front of my eyes.
Traveling back to
  > Beirut to file my report on the Qana massacre to the Independent
last night,
  > I found two Israeli gunboats firing at the civilian cars on the
river bridge
  > north of Sidon...
  >
  >                                  A French UN trooper muttered oaths
to
  > himself as he opened a bag in which he was dropping feet, fingers,
pieces of
  > people's arms...
  >
  >                                  We had suddenly become not UN
troops and
  > journalists but Westerners, Israel's allies, an object of hatred
and venom.
  > One bearded man with fierce eyes stared at us, his face dark with
fury. "You
  > are Americans", he screamed at us. "Americans are dogs. You did
this.
  > Americans are dogs."
  >
  >                                  President Bill Clinton has allied
himself
  > with Israel in its war against "terrorism" and the Lebanese, in
their grief,
  > had not forgotten this. Israel's official expression of sorrow was
rubbing
  > salt in their wounds. "I would like to be made into a bomb and blow
myself
  > up amid the Israelis", one old man said...(23)
  >
  >                                  If every American read the above
article by
  > Robert Fisk, it would help them to understand why America is so
hated and
  > why we now face terrorist kamikazes. If you would like to know the
real
  > motivations of terrorists like Osama bin Laden, The Nation
magazine, did an
  > interview with him on September 21, 1998. It describes his reaction
to the
  > Israeli Qana massacre.
  >
  >                                  When I last saw bin Laden, he was
still
  > obsessed with the Israeli massacre of 107 Lebanese refugees
sheltering at
  > the UN camp at Qana in April 1996. Israel claimed it was
a 'mistake,' the UN
  > conceded otherwise and President Clinton called it only a 'tragedy'-
-as if
  > it was a natural disaster. It was, said bin Laden, an act
of 'international
  > terrorism.' There must be justice, he saidd, and trials for the
Israeli
  > perpetrators. Clinton used almost exactly the same words about bin
Laden and
  > his supporters in August. But the deaf, as usual, were talking to
the
  > deaf."(24)
  >
  >                                  Most Americans will never see any
such
  > accounts like the one by Robert Fisk about Qana. The Israelis tight
grip on
  > the American press and the American government has successfully
suppressed
  > much of the ongoing story of Israeli terrorism against
Palestinians. I will
  > now show that they have also been able to cover up murderous
Israeli acts of
  > war and terrorism against the United States of America.
  >
  >                                  Israeli terrorism against America
  >
  >                                  In 1954, the Israeli government
launched a
  > secret operation of terror against the United States called
Operation
  > Suzannah. It plotted to murder Americans and blow up American
installations
  > in Egypt. Their plan was to leave false evidence that the Egyptians
did it,
  > so as to make America go to war against Egypt on the side of
Israel. Jewish
  > agents succeeded in blowing up some post offices and American
libraries in
  > Cairo and Alexandria. On the way to blow up an American movie
house, the
  > Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Theater, an Israeli's agent's bomb went off
prematurely.
  > Thankfully, for both Egypt and for America, the plot was then
exposed and
  > stopped in its early stages.
  >
  >                                  Because of the capture of the
Israeli
  > agents, the world learned of this Israeli treachery and the Israeli
Foreign
  > Minister, Pinhas Lavon, was later forced to resign. The whole
episode became
  > known as the Lavon Affair. Today, the Jewish-dominated American
media and
  > publishing establishment deftly cover up this Israeli treachery
against us.
  > Most Americans know nothing about it. For instance, only a slight
mention of
  > the Lavon Affair is found in the popular Encarta Encyclopedia. It
is in an
  > article about Ben Gurion authored by the pro-Zionist, Bernard
Reich. By the
  > way, the article's author illustrates a typical media pattern. When
  > Americans suppose they are reading unbiased Encyclopedia or news
magazine
  > accounts, they more often than not are reading distorted accounts
written by
  > ardent Jewish Zionists.
  >
  >                                  Ben-Gurion returned to politics in
1955 to
  > replace Minister of Defense Pinhas Lavon-who resigned after a
failed attempt
  > to sabotage Egypt's relations with the West.(25)
  >
  >                                  Note how the article meekly
says, "a failed
  > attempt to sabotage Egypt's relations with the West." What does
this mean?
  > "Sabotaging relations" sounds as though Israel might have just said
a few
  > nasty things about Egypt and America behind each other's back. The
  > intentional deception used in this article by its Jewish author is
typical
  > of the distortions that go on countless times in the mass media.
  >
  >                                  The line in Encarta should read:
  >
  >                                  "--who was forced to resign after
Israel
  > was caught committing terrorist bombings against the United States
to
  > treacherously inncite America to war against Israel's enemy."
  >
  >                                  I am sure that ninety percent of
those who
  > read this have never heard of it. Some may think I am making this
all up.
  > Well, if you still might doubt that Israel has committed these
terrorist
  > acts against America in Egypt, here is a quote from a recent
article
  > appearing in the Jewish magazine Moment, written by Samuel Katz and
meant
  > for its small Jewish audience. It is more forward, yet still omits
the
  > provocative word terrorism, a word Israel uses when Palestinians
blow up
  > libraries and cinemas.
  >
  >                                  And the failures were as common as
the
  > spectacular successes. In the mid '50s, A'man (the Jewish Defense
Agency)
  > suffered a serious setback during the infamous "Operation
Suzannah," when
  > Israeli agents provoked Jews in Egypt to attack American and
British targets
  > and incite anti-Western sentiment. Many Jews were arrested, and
some were
  > executed. The bungled operation was a severe embarrassment for the
  > government of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and his defense
minister,
  > Pinhas Lavon(26)
  >
  >                                  So, in the Lavon Affair we learned
how our
  > so-called "best friend in the Mideast," Israel, rewards the United
States
  > for its unconditional monetary and military support: by committing
terrorism
  > against us! Think about the fact that most Americans have never
even heard
  > about this Israeli terrorist attack against us.
  >
  >                                  If the Egyptian government had
been behind
  > this terror against America, we would have rightly considered it an
act of
  > war and we would have attacked Egypt right back, just as we have
done
  > against Afghanistan. And the press; they would have clamored for
such
  > attacks just as they demanded attacks against Afghanistan. In fact,
we
  > attacked Afghanistan on far less grounds than we have for attacking
Israel.
  > No evidence exists that Afghanistan approved of or even knew
anything about
  > the attack on the World Trade Center; but in the Lavon Affair, the
Israeli
  > government committed a direct act of war against the United States.
We, of
  > course, did not bomb Tel Aviv in retaliation. We did not sever our
  > diplomatic relations. In fact, we did not even cut off our billions
of
  > dollars in monetary and military aid!
  >
  >                                  Any American government official
who would
  > have given aid to the Japanese after the attack on Pearl Harbor
would have
  > been prosecuted as a traitor to the United States.
  >
  >                                  Let me be perfectly blunt. Those
Americans
  > in government who continued our support of Israel after it had
committed
  > terrorist acts against the people of the United States -- clearly
committed
  > treason against our country.
  >
  >                                  If America's leaders, after
Israel's
  > terrorist attack against us in the Lavon Affair, would simply have
stopped
  > their treasonous aid to Israel, there would have been no subsequent
acts of
  > terror against us such as the World Trade Center and Pentagon
attacks.
  >
  >                                  Israel's terrorist attack on the
USS
  > Liberty
  >
  >                                  In 1967, during the Six Day War,
Israel
  > again committed a grievous terrorist act against the United States
of
  > America. On June 8, Israel used unmarked fighters and torpedo boats
to
  > launch an hour and one-half attack on the American Navy ship the
USS
  > Liberty, costing 34 American lives and 171 wounded.(27) The
Israelis first
  > attacked the Liberty's radio towers in an attempt to stop the Sixth
Fleet
  > from learning that the Israelis were the attackers. After unmarked
Israeli
  > fighters horrendously bombed and strafed the Liberty, Israel sent
in torpedo
  > boats to finish the job. They even machine gunned the deployed life
rafts in
  > an effort to ensure that there would be no survivors (witnesses)
who could
  > expose them.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  Only by the heroism and ingenuity
of the
  > captain and crew of the USS Liberty kept the Israeli plan from
succeeding.
  > They were able to keep the ship afloat as well as contact the fleet
and let
  > it know that Israel, rather than Egypt, that had attacked the ship.
Knowing
  > that its plan had been exposed, Israel withdrew and meekly claimed
that
  > their attack was a case of mistaken identity. They said that they
mistook
  > the USS Liberty for an Egyptian ship.
  >
  >                                  The United States Secretary of
State at the
  > time, Dean Rusk, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Admiral
  > Thomas Moorer, both say the attack was no accident, that Israel
deliberately
  > attacked the USS Liberty. For instance, it was clear day with a
stiff breeze
  > and the Liberty sported both a huge American flag and large
international
  > identification numbers on her hull. Israeli jets buzzed the USS
Liberty long
  > before the attack, flying so close that the members of the Liberty
crew
  > could even see their hand waves as they passed. Just as in the
Lavon Affair,
  > Israel hoped to blame this act of war on their enemy, the
Egyptians. This
  > time, only the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew
prevented a
  > further compounding of the travesty.
  >
  >                                  The Jewish-dominated American
media
  > expressed no outrage for the attack and supinely accepted the
specious
  > Israeli excuse for it. Even though our own Secretary of State and
our own
  > Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the Israeli attack was
  > deliberate, the Jewish Lobby was even able to prevent a formal
Congressional
  > inquiry into the attack. In contrast, the USS Liberty's sister
ship, the USS
  > Pueblo, was captured by North Korea the following year (1968) with
the loss
  > of only one life, yet within a year the U.S. Congress launched a
formal
  > inquiry into that attack. There still has been no formal inquiry
into the
  > attack on the USS Liberty. The Liberty's commanding officer,
Captain William
  > McGonagle, was awarded America's highest honor, the Congressional
Medal of
  > Honor, for his splendid courage during the Israeli attack. But, he
was given
  > the award in a quiet ceremony in the US Navy Yard, rather than the
White
  > House (as is customary), so as not to hurt the image of the very
enemy who
  > killed 34 of his comrades and wounded him and 174 more Americans on
the
  > Liberty!
  >
  >                                  How did the political leaders of
the United
  > States respond to this Israeli act of war against it? Did America
bomb Tel
  > Aviv as it did Kabul, Afghanistan? No, the Israeli-controlled
American
  > government along with the Jewish-controlled media committed a clear
case of
  > treason against America by covering up this vicious terrorist
attack, and
  > continues to send billions of American tax dollars to Israel in
military and
  > monetary aid.
  >
  >                                  Again, I invoke the example of
Pearl
  > Harbor. Any American government official who would have given aid
or comfort
  > to Japan after the attack in 1941 would have been prosecuted as a
traitor to
  > the United States. I charge that those American government
officials who
  > collaborate with the Jewish Lobby and media in continuing to
support Israel
  > after its attack on the USS Liberty - are traitors against the
United States
  > of America!
  >
  >                                  If, after Israel's treacherous
attack on
  > the USS Liberty, we would have simply stopped treasonously
supporting the
  > Israeli terrorist state; we would surely not have suffered the
terrorism of
  > September 11, 2001.
  >
  >                                  Israel: A nation that spies on
America and
  > sells our secrets to our worst enemies
  >
  >                                  In the 1980s, Israel recruited an
American
  > Jew, Jonathan Pollard, to spy against the United States. After his
  > apprehension, Israeli officials at first claimed he was a "rogue
agent," but
  > later they admitted that Pollard was working for them from the
beginning.
  > Other than the Jewish spies, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who gave
our atom
  > bomb secrets to the Soviets, probably no spies have ever done more
damage to
  > our country than that which was done by this single Israeli spy:
Jonathan
  > Pollard.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  Israel's use of Pollard's
information not
  > only destroyed our intelligence operations in the Mideast; it
practically
  > destroyed our intelligence apparatus in the Soviet Union and the
Eastern
  > Bloc.(28) Many of America's most loyal and best agents in the
Communist
  > world were executed because Israel sold or bartered Pollard's
stolen
  > information to the Soviets.(29) As the article below by Eric
Margolis shows,
  > our "wonderful friend and ally" Israel would not even allow the
United
  > States to debrief the Mossad agents who handled the Pollard spying
so as to
  > help determine the full extent of the damage done to the United
States and
  > the dangers posed to American agents overseas.
  >
  >                                  Some of the enormously sensitive
secrets
  > stolen by Pollard may have been either sold, or bartered, by Israel
to the
  > Soviet Union.
  >
  >                                  A number of key CIA agents in the
East Bloc
  > were allegedly executed as a result of Pollard's spying. The KGB
likely
  > gained access to top-secret U.S. codes - either directly from
Israel, or
  > through spies in Israel's government. In short, Pollard's treachery
caused
  > one of the worst security disasters in modern U.S. history...
  >
  >                                  So, Israel, which receives
billions of
  > American aid, has treacherously spied on and harmed the very
security of the
  > United States. To further demonstrate their contempt for us, they
even
  > bartered the top secret information they had stolen from us - to
America's
  > worst enemies. Even after Israel's public relations apologies for
the
  > Pollard spying, it has continued to spy on us. The Los Angeles
Times in 1997
  > reported that an American Jew named David A. Tenenbaum "admitted to
  > divulging secrets to Israel."(30) To quote the Los Angeles
Times, "A
  > civilian engineer working at an Army command facility near Detroit
has
  > admitted divulging classified military information to Israeli
officials over
  > the last 10 years."
  >
  >                                  Even after Israel proved its
willingness to
  > spy on us and critically damage America's intelligence operations,
President
  > Clinton appointed a dedicated, Zionist Jew to Chairman of the
National
  > Security Council, the highest intelligence position in the White
House. Even
  > the Israeli daily Maariv referred to Berger as a "warm Jew,"
meaning that he
  > is devoted to Israel first.(31) Appointing Berger as National
Security
  > Council chief after the Pollard Spy Case is pure insanity.
  >
  >                                  The fact that Israel could commit
these
  > outrages against the United States without suffering scathing media
attacks
  > or even the end of aid to Israel, shows their extreme power over us
and the
  > treason that reaches into the highest echelons of the American
  > establishment. It is no wonder that Ariel Sharon could make the
following
  > statement to Simon Peres when he suggested that Israel might lose
American
  > aid if it did not pull back recent Israeli incursions. Sharon
responded:
  >
  >                                  "Every time we do something you
tell me
  > America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you
something
  > very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the
Jewish
  > people, control America, and the Americans know it." ---Ariel
Sharon,
  > October 3, 2001 (32)
  >
  >                                  It is not only Jonathan Pollard
who has
  > committed treason against America. All those in the American
government who
  > would continue to monetarily and militarily support a foreign
nation that
  > spies on us and severely damages our intelligence operations (along
with
  > causing the deaths of American agents) have committed treason
against the
  > United States of America. In response to these ongoing acts of
treachery
  > against the United States, a truly patriotic American Government
would have
  > (at the very least) ended our support for Israel. Supporting a
foreign
  > nation after it willfully commits such acts of treachery against
America is
  > nothing less than treason.
  >
  >                                  The World Trade Center Attack
  >
  >                                  So, the record is clear. Israel is
the
  > worst terrorist rogue state on earth. Israel and its terrorist
leaders such
  > as Begin, Shamir and Sharon have committed a half-century of
relentless
  > ethnic cleansing, bombings, shootings, torture and murder against
the
  > Palestinian people.
  >
  >                                  Israel has also committed numerous
acts of
  > treachery and terrorism against the United States of America as I
have
  > clearly shown in documenting the Lavon Affair, the Pollard Spy
Scandal and
  > the Attack on the USS Liberty.
  >
  >                                  Because of overwhelming Israeli
power in
  > media and government, traitors to the United States continue to
support,
  > with little fear of punishment, this rogue terrorist nation.
  >
  >                                  In fact, these traitors to the
United
  > States supplied to Israel the very weapons it used to commit the
terrorist
  > attack on the Liberty!
  >
  >                                  Through the efforts of Jewish and
other
  > traitors to the United States, the American government has embarked
on a
  > foreign policy that has repeatedly betrayed America's true
interests.
  > Massive American military and monetary support has enabled Israel
to
  > continue its relentless terrorism against the Palestinians.
American
  > treasonous support of Israel's terror has thus caused tremendous
hatred
  > against the United States, greatly hurt American economic and
strategic
  > interests, and ultimately spawned the terrorism now rising against
us.
  >
  >                                  The traitors who sold out America
to Israel
  > are as guilty of causing the loss of 5,000 American lives on
September 11 as
  > those who actually hijacked and crashed the planes into the World
Trade
  > Center and Pentagon.
  >
  >                                  Israel wants Arabic terrorism
against
  > Western nations
  >
  >                                  Over the last two years, Israel
has
  > suffered the worst public relations disaster in its history. The
election of
  > mass murder Ariel Sharon as Prime Minister was the last straw for
millions
  > of decent minded people the world over. The UN Conference on
Racism, which
  > labeled Israel an "Apartheid state", also signaled growing
disapproval of
  > Israel.
  >
  >                                  Then, suddenly, the attack on the
World
  > Trade Center changed the world's mood back to Israel's favor. Was
this just
  > a fortunate coincidence for Israel?
  >
  >                                  As I have shown in this article,
Israeli
  > leaders have launched terrorist attacks on America disguised as
Arab
  > attacks, because they knew that any Arab terrorist attack on
America
  > advances their own aims. They are fully aware that the bigger the
attack
  > against America; the more carnage, the better it is for Israel.
Ariel Sharon
  > learned an important lesson in Beirut. Rather than to directly
commit
  > atrocities against America as it did in the Lavon Affair and the
attack on
  > the Liberty, it is much easier and safer for Israel to continue to
commit
  > atrocities, such as Sabra and Chatila against Arabic people, so as
to drive
  > their Islamic enemies to terrorism against the West. That's
precisely what
  > occurred in the retaliatory bombing of the American Marine and
French
  > Paratrooper contingent in Beirut, and it is continued Israeli
terror that
  > has motivated the Trade Center Attacks.
  >
  >                                  What was Israel's role in the WTC
attack?
  >
  >                                  The Washington Times ran a story
on
  > September 10, 2001 about a 68-page study issued by the U.S. Army
School for
  > Advanced Military Studies (SAMS). The study, issued by the elite
Army
  > officer's school, detailed the dangers of a possible U.S. Army
occupational
  > force in the Mideast. Here is article's comment about the study's
view of
  > the Israeli Mossad:
  >
  >                                  Of the Mossad, the Israeli
intelligence
  > service, the SAMS officers say: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning.
Has
  > capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a
Palestinian/Arab
  > act."
  >
  >                                  Ironically, within 24 hours of the
story's
  > publication, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was attacked.
Could the
  > "ruthless and cunning Mossad," as the U.S. Army officers describe
it,
  > covertly have been behind the attack?
  >
  >                                  The Mossad is the most ruthless
terrorist
  > organization in the entire world. It is also one of the largest and
most
  > sophisticated intelligence organizations. No other nation comes
even close
  > to its scope and power in the Mideast region. It prides itself on
  > infiltrating every sizable militant Palestinian and Arabic
organization on
  > earth. Knowing these facts, there can be little doubt the Mossad
has deeply
  > penetrated one of the oldest, largest and what is considered the
most
  > dangerous Arabic terrorist organization on earth; bin Laden's al-
Qaida.
  >
  >                                  Furthermore, the FBI and the CIA
have
  > clearly stated that the attack on the WTC and Pentagon was a huge
covert
  > operation using an international network of at least a hundred
terrorists,
  > spanning three continents. Could Mossad agents in al-Qaida as well
as the
  > rest of Mossad's vast network of thousands of infiltrators and
informants,
  > not have known about the most extensive and ambitious Arabic
terrorist
  > operation in history?
  >
  >                                  It is, of course, extremely
difficult to
  > prove the precise role of a secretive, foreign intelligence
organization,
  > such as the Mossad, in a terrorist act; they don't brag about their
exploits
  > on the Internet. But, powerful evidence is mounting that Israelis
had
  > foreknowledge of the September 11th attack on America. And, if
indeed they
  > had foreknowledge of these murderous acts of terrorism - and then
had the
  > cold-blooded mentality not to warn the United States because they
saw a
  > horrendous massacre of thousands of Americans as good for Israel -
it
  > follows that they would have felt no restraint from actually
instigating and
  > covertly aiding this terrorist plan through their own agent
provocateurs.
  > Let's look at the hard evidence indicating the Mossad had
foreknowledge of
  > the September 11 attack.
  >
  >                                  Evidence of Mossad Treachery in
the WTC
  > Attack
  >
  >                                  The day after the attack on the
World Trade
  > Center, the Jerusalem Post, the most respected and famous Israeli
newspaper
  > in the world, reported that 4000 Israelis were missing in the
attack on the
  > WTC. The Foreign Ministry compiled the number from Israeli
relatives, who in
  > the first few hours after the attack, contacted the Israeli Foreign
Ministry
  > and gave the names of Israeli friends and relatives who worked in
the WTC or
  > who had business scheduled in it or its adjacent structures. Even
without
  > seeing the article in the Jerusalem Post, logic alone would tell
you that
  > there would be many hundreds, if not thousands of Israelis in the
World
  > Trade Center at the time of the attacks. The international Jewish
  > involvement in banking and finance is legendary. For instance, two
of the
  > richest firms in New York are Goldman-Sachs and the Solomon
Brothers; and
  > both firms have offices in the Twin Towers. Many executives in
these firms
  > regularly commute back and forth to Israel. New York is the center
of
  > world-wide Jewish financial power, and the World Trade Center is at
its
  > epicenter. One would naturally expect the Israeli death toll to be
  > catastrophic. The Jerusalem Post certainly thought so on September
12, 2001.
  > Here is the beginning of its article:
  >
  >                                  Thousands of Israelis missing near
WTC,
  > Pentagon
  >
  >                                  The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem
has so
  > far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in
the areas
  > of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the
attack. (The
  > headline and first sentence of the Jerusalem Post article) (33)
  >
  >                                  When George Bush made his speech
before
  > Congress, it turns out that he made a significant error other than
saying
  > that the WTC attackers did it because they "hated freedom." Bush
made a
  > point to say that in addition to thousands of Americans, 130
Israelis died
  > in the WTC. The implication was to say that Israel shared in our
suffering,
  > and that we and Israel are in this thing together. Upon hearing the
number
  > of 130 Israeli dead, it seemed suspiciously low to me. If 4000
Israelis were
  > at the WTC and the WTC death toll was about 4500 (about 10 percent
of the
  > 45,000 people normally in the buildings at that time), the Israeli
toll
  > should have statistically been around 400 and not 130.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >                                  As a place for doing business and
for
  > employment, the world Trade Center was not a minimum wage or a
MacDonald's
  > kind of place; it had highly paid, high tech and high level jobs
and
  > executive positions primarily in international finance, banking and
stock
  > trading. I asked myself how there could be only 130 Israelis dead,
while
  > there were an estimated 199 dead from Columbia and 428 from the
Philippines?
  >
  >                                  In previous articles I wrote on
the
  > September 11 terror, I did not allude to these suspicions, because
I have
  > always taken pride in not writing anything I could not firmly
substantiate.
  > But, while researching this article on Israeli terrorism against
Palestine
  > and America, I discovered the most shocking fact I have ever run
across in
  > all my years of research and writing. I discovered a simple fact
that has
  > enormous ramifications in regard to the September terror attack.
  >
  >                                  Searching through hundreds of
articles
  > trying to track down the true Israeli death toll, I found a New
York Times
  > piece that clarified the precise number of Israelis who died in the
World
  > Trade Center attack. It turned out that of the 130 Israelis
President Bush
  > claimed had died in the World Trade Center, 129 of them were still
alive.
  > Only one Israeli had actually died. I was incredulous. "Good God,"
I said to
  > myself, "only one Israeli!" Here is the pertinent excerpt from the
NY Times:
  >
  >                                  But interviews with many consulate
  > officials Friday suggested that the lists of people they were
collecting
  > varied widely in their usefulness. For example, the city had
somehow
  > received reports of many Israelis feared missing at the site, and
President
  > Bush in his address to the country on Thursday night mentioned that
about
  > 130 Israelis had died in the attacks.
  >
  >                                  But Friday, Alon Pinkas, Israel's
consul
  > general here, said that lists of the missing included reports from
people
  > who had called in because, for instance, relatives in New York had
not
  > returned their phone calls from Israel. There were, in fact, only
three
  > Israelis who had been confirmed as dead: two on the planes and
another who
  > had been visiting the towers on business and who was identified and
buried.
  > (New York Times, Sept. 22) (34)
  >
  >                                  The very low death toll of 130
suggested
  > that a number of Israelis at the Trade Center had been warned
before the
  > attack. When I found out the truth that only one Israeli had died,
there
  > could be no doubt that there had been a prior warning for many
Israelis.
  > Having only one Israeli casualty among the 4500 dead at the WTC is
simply a
  > statistical impossibility. Even if the Israeli Foreign Ministry and
the
  > Jerusalem Post had grossly overestimated the number of Israelis in
the World
  > Trade Center by say 3,000 (400 percent), there still should have
still been
  > 1,000 Israelis there at the time of the attacks. Again, even if
only a few
  > hundred Israelis were present at the time of the attack, only one
Israeli
  > death occurring there is statistically absurd. Either September 11
had to be
  > a big Jewish holiday, or a number of Israeli citizens had some
advance
  > warning of the impending attack.
  >
  >                                  Prior Warning to Israelis
  >
  >                                  The next thing I researched was to
see if
  > there were any confirmed warnings to Israelis prior to the attack.
I quickly
  > found an article in Newsbytes, a news service of the Washington
Post, titled
  > "Instant Messages To Israel Warned of WTC attack."(35) The Israeli
daily,
  > Ha'aretz, also confirmed the prior warnings to Israel and confirmed
that the
  > FBI is investigating the warnings.(36) The articles detailed that
an Israeli
  > messaging firm, Odigo, with offices in both the World Trade Center
and in
  > Israel, received a number of warnings just two hours before the
attack.
  >
  >                                  Instant Messages To Israel Warned
Of WTC
  > Attack
  >
  >                                  Officials at instant-messaging
firm Odigo
  > confirmed today that two employees received text messages warning
of an
  > attack on the World Trade Center two hours before terrorists
crashed planes
  > into the New York landmarks.
  >
  >                                  But Alex Diamandis, vice president
of sales
  > and marketing, confirmed that workers in Odigo's research and
development
  > and international sales office in Israel received a warning from
another
  > Odigo user approximately two hours prior to the first attack. (From
the
  > Washington Post's Newsbytes)
  >
  >                                  So now we have powerful and
convincing
  > evidence from impeccable sources that Israel had foreknowledge of
the
  > attack. First, without a prior warning, there could not have been
only a
  > single Israeli victim at the World Trade Center. Secondly, there is
clear
  > confirmation that a company with offices in both Israel and the WTC
received
  > warnings immediately prior to the attack.
  >
  >                                  Who would have warned Israelis of
the
  > impending attack, if not Israel's Mossad? The fact that Israel's
government
  > had prior knowledge of the pending attack and had warned potential
Israeli
  > victims, but then deliberately let thousands of Americans die -
makes the
  > Israelis just as responsible for the carnage as the Arab attackers
of the
  > WTC.
  >
  >                                  What's good for Israel is bad for
America
  >
  >                                  You can be sure that joy rose in
the hearts
  > of all Israeli terrorists as they witnessed the smoke plume from
the twin
  > towers. The FBI even arrested five Israelis on a rooftop nearby the
twin
  > towers, videotaping and cheering the entire event.(37) They knew
that
  > American and world resistance to Israel's Supremacism and terrorism
  > plummeted right along with the collapse of the towers of the World
Trade
  > Center. Perhaps the most telling statement was when a NY Times
reporter
  > questioned the former Israeli, Benjamin Netanyahu, a man every bit
as
  > radical as Ariel Sharon. Here are the words of the excited former
Israeli
  > Prime Minister:
  >
  >                                  Asked tonight what the attack
meant for
  > relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu,
the
  > former prime minister, replied, "It's very good." Then he edited
himself:
  > "Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy. (38)
  >
  >                                  The World Trade Center Attack was
obviously
  > very good for Israel; in fact, Israel is the only nation who
benefited from
  > it. Israel's fifty-year record of unrelenting terrorism became
completely
  > overshadowed by the horror and the visual magnitude of this one
spectacular
  > terrorist attack. When the Jewish-dominated American media
repeatedly showed
  > a few, long-suffering Palestinians celebrating the attacks,
Palestinians
  > became unfairly painted as behind the Trade Center terror, even
though every
  > Palestinian organization condemned it, and not a single Palestinian
was
  > proven to be involved.
  >
  >                                  Of course, it was America that
suffered
  > most of all, with almost 5000 dead, a wrecked economy, and the
worst
  > restrictions against Constitutional liberties in American history.
The Lavon
  > Affair, the Attack on the Liberty, and the spying of Jonathon
Pollard, and
  > the murder of 5000 Americans on September 11th -- were all good for
Israel,
  > but terribly bad for the United States.
  >
  >                                  When will America come to finally
  > understand that what is good for the terrorist state of Israel is
  > destructive and even deadly for the United States of America.?
  >
  >                                  When will we get the backbone to
put a stop
  > to the Israeli agents and American traitors who have orchestrated
fifty
  > years of support for Israeli terrorism and fifty years of treason
against
  > our own country?
  >
  >                                  My life is dedicated to a free,
secure and
  > sovereign America, an America dedicated to our own people and our
own
  > interests; not the criminal purposes of a foreign, terrorist nation.
  >
  >                                  Whatever the cost to me
personally, I will
  > continue to pursue that path.
  >
  >                                  I urge you to join with me. I
beseech you
  > not to purchase your security at the cost of your freedom and your
honor.
  >
  >                                  Courageously share the information
of this
  > article with other Americans and the rest of the world. Let us tell
the
  > truth about the worst terrorist nation on earth: Israel. In doing
so, you
  > will help save not only the Palestinian people, but the lives and
freedom of
  > the American people as well.
  >
  >                                  David Duke
  >
  >                                  Former Member of the House of
  > Representatives
  >                                  State of Louisiana, United States
of
  > America
  >                                  www.davidduke.com
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > ------------------------------------------------
  >
  >
  >                                  FOOTNOTES
  >
  >                                  1.. Fulbright, Sen. William.
(1973). Face
  > the Nation. CBS: New York. April 15.
  >                                  2.. Getler, Michael. (1974).
Pentagon Chief
  > Suggests Israel Lobby Has Too Much Influence. Los Angeles Times.
  >                                  3.. ABC News and PBS Frontline web
sites
  > have the interview (1998)
  >                                  4.. Israel Kahan Commission.
  >                                  5.. United Press International.
(2001)
  > Sharon fears to visit Belgium. Sept. 7.
  >                                  6.. Ha'aretz. (2001). As long as
he doesn't
  > hurt us again. Feb. 16, 2001
  >                                  7.. Los Angeles Times. (1998).
Mossad's
  > Checkered Past. Home Edition. pp A-16. Feb. 27.
  >                                  8.. Begin, M. (1964). The Revolt:
The Story
  > Of The Irgun. Tel-Aviv: Hadar Pub.
  >                                  9.. Encarta Encyclopedia. (1996).
Funk and
  > Wagnalls.
  >                                  10.. Begin, M. (1964). The Revolt:
The
  > Story Of The Irgun. Tel-Aviv: Hadar Pub. p.162.
  >                                  11.. De Reynier, J. (1950). Chief
  > Representative Of The International Committee Of The Red Cross In
Jerusalem.
  > (A Jerusalem Un Drapeau Flottait Sur La Ligne De Feu', Geneva.
  >                                  12.. Yediot Ahronot. (1972). April
4.
  >                                  13.. Ankori, Zvi (1982). Davar.
April 9.
  >                                  14.. Phil Reeves. (2001) War On
Terrorism:
  > Israel - Assassins kill general. Independent. Oct. 18.
  >                                  15.. Phil Reeves. (2001) War On
Terrorism:
  > Israel - Assassins kill general. Independent. Oct. 18.
  >                                  16.. The Independent. (2001) BBC
staff are
  > told not to call Israeli killings' assassination'. August 4.
  >                                  17.. Sami Sockol, Moshe Reinfeld
(1998) May
  > 20. the Israeli daily, Ha'aretz
  >                                  18.. Joel Greenberg (1993). Israel
Rethinks
  > Interrogation of Arabs. New York Times Aug. 14
  >                                  19.. Weizman, Steve. (2001).
Rights Groups
  > Cite Israel Torture. AP Online. Nov. 11
  >                                  20.. Jonathan Alter. (2001). Time
To Think
  > About Torture; It's a new world, and survival may well require old
  > techniques that seemed out of the question. Newsweek, Nov. 5.
  >                                  21.. St. Louis Post-Dispatch
(2001). U.S.
  > Now might have to consider what once was unthinkable, Dershowitz
says. Nov.
  > 5.
  >                                  22.. Ostrovsky, V. The Other Side
Of
  > Deception(confessions of a former Jewish MOSSAD agent for Israel)
p.188
  >                                  23.. Fisk, R. (1996). Massacre In
  > Sanctuary: Eyewitness. The Independent. April 19. p.1.
  >                                  24.. The Nation. (1998). Talks
with Osama
  > Bin Laden. Sept. 21.
  >                                  25.. Bernard Reich. (2001).
Encarta
  > Encyclopedia. Ben Gurion.
  >                                  26.. Katz, Samuel M. (1998).
Israel's
  > covert crisis Moment. Oct.1.
  >                                  27.. ENNES, James M. (1979).
Assault on the
  > Liberty; The True Story of the Israeli Attack on an American
Intelligence
  > Ship. N. Y. : Random House.
  >                                  28.. Weiner, Tim. (1999) U.S. Now
Tells of
  > Much Deeper Damage by Pollard. New York Times, 11 Jan.
  >                                  29.. Hersh, Seymour. (1999) The
Traitor:
  > The Case Against Jonathan Pollard. The New Yorker Magazine. January
18.
  >                                  30.. Los Angeles Times. (1997).
Engineer
  > Admits Divulging Secrets to Israel. Feb. 20.
  >                                  31.. Bar-Yosef, Avinoam. (1994).
The Jews
  > Who Run Clinton's Court. Maariv.
  >                                  32.. PIA (2001). From a monitored
news
  > broadcast of Yid Israel radio. Oct. 3. and also reported in Pravda.
  >                                  33.. Jerusalem Post. (2001).
Thousands of
  > Israelis missing near WTC, Pentagon. Sept. 12.
  >                                  34.. Lipton, Eric. (2001).
Estimates of
  > toll may be too high. New York Times. Sept. 22
  >                                  35.. McWilliams, Brian. (2001)
Instant
  > Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack. Newsbytes. Sept. 27.
  >                                  36.. Dror, Yuval. (2001). Odigo
says
  > workers were warned of attack. Ha'aretz. Sept 29.
  >                                  37.. Melman, Yossi. (2001). 5
Israelis
  > detained for `puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy. Ha'aretz. Oct.
14
  >                                  38.. Bennet, James. (2001).
Spilled Blood
  > Is Seen as Bond That Draws 2 Nations Closer. NY Times.
International
  > section. Sept. 12.
  >
  >
  >
  > ------------------------------------------------
  >
  >
  >                                  Additional Articles of Interest:
  >                                  Read a sample Chapter from David
Duke's
  > autobiography:
  >
  >                                  �  Jewish Supremacism
  >
  >                                  �  Who runs the media?
  >
  >                                  We cannot continue our work
without your
  > support. Please make a donation to our efforts today.
  >
  >                                  Click Here to Make a Donation.
  >                                  Click Here to Join the European-
American
  > Unity and Rights Organization.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > Copyright � 2002, David Duke, All Rights Reserved.
  >              No part of this page may be reproduced in any part
  >              without the written consent of David Duke
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > There's more, have a look at  website:  http://www.davidduke.com
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > _________________________________________________________________
  > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
  > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx









_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

james,

I was wondering about the author.  The statement
that there was a Jewish conspiracy in the media
sort of gave it away.

By the way, there was an excellent discussion on
the Charlie Rose program last night.  The
interview was with Thomas Friedman of the New York
Times.  I am wondering if it is possible to get a
free transcript on the internet.

eduard

-----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:56 AM
To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [existlist] Re: Fwd: Fw: The truth about
Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!



indeed, i have no idea who is this david duke
until chris pointed out he is
a kkk clan member. and thanks for the details. i
have seen films on the kkk
many years back, how they would torture
sadistically and kill blacks in
america for no reason other than they are blacks.
it hits me as totally
ridiculous. what they believe in is indeed akin to
the nazis' racist
standpoint, and as such i think this duke does not
have moral authority. as
chris pointed out, it was a junk mail.

james.

At 20:59 4/9/02, james tan wrote:

>indeed it is the same person. as such, i think u don't have to take
>seriously what he wrote... ie, it was basically junk mail... i did not know
>about david duke until someone from other forum told me he is a white
>supremacist...involved in the kkk clan. ie, he does not have moral authority
>or even basic integrity to talk about persecution; it is somewhat ironical.
>
>james.

He is from here in Louisiana.  I remember him going back to his college
days when he would appear in Free Speech Alley in his Nazi outfits.

He used to be a state legislator from a district in the New Orleans
suburbs.  I don't think he spends much time in the state now.

Tommy in Baton Rouge

Hi There!

I have been receiving emails from your group for about two months.  I joined
because I am writing a book about my philosophy.  At one time, 30 years ago,
I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I wrote about that period in my
life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I had some idea of what an
existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the Internet and as I found
your group I was very excited.

My excitement was short lived.  As I written in early articles, I prefer a
working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of the mind.  I do however with
at least one definition of an existentialist as follows:

        The underlying concepts of existentialism are simple:
        �    Mankind has free will.
        �    Life is a series of choices, creating stress.
        �    Few decisions are without any negative consequences.
        �    Some things are irrational or absurd, without explanation.
        �    If one makes a decision, he or she must follow through.

I must say I do agree with this definition as it does agree with the way I
live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and believe in the
connectedness of all things and therefore, seek continuously a connection
with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the universe.

I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of may not agree or see a need
for connection.  I recalled a statement being written, that perhaps this is
not the right for forum for a discussion of connectiveness.  I must say,
Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can continue to intellectualize all
you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere closer to an understanding of
the way things are or may be.  There is another source of information that
comes as a result of being connected from within.

One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on balance.  Try it before you
poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a source of inspiration as
well.  It is my belief that we do not have free will unless we are connected.
  In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.

The reason I am writing to you at this time is because I can no longer
contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02, [Existlist] FWD: Robert
Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was waiting for some reply.  The
latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest to me.  At first, when I
saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or African-American and I
must say I don't like or agree with David Duke ideas or philosophy.)
However, I have promised myself to never again dismiss things, because I
didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this mindset, I can become as
closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides, it is not good science.

So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always asked when the writing is
controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek to find out if that is the
case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If I did, I would be as
guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if anything in any one of
these emails is true!

You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail," otherwise, you are being robotic
and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you have limited your
options.

In closing, I seek to understand the world, the universe, the nature of
things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes of the original Star Trek
series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the epitome of consciousness
is seen as intellectual based; as though the so-call "Left-Brain" led us to
an ultimate evolutionary development and at one time I agreed with this concep
t.

I now seek whole brain solutions and development; where there is a balance
with the left and right brain (and I am familiar with handedness and its
affect brain symmetry).  I further make a distinction between thinking,
emotions, and feelings.  Thinking (cognition) to me is a function of the
left-brain.  Feelings (connectedness) are a function of the right-brain.
Emotions are a subset of feelings but only the doorway to feelings.  When you
get emotional you lose that connectedness until the emotion has dissipated.
This explains why when get too anxious about a test, we forget what we know,
but once the test is over and the pressure is off, we remember again.  When
there is a balance between the thinking and feelings sides of the brain, we
have multiple choices and most if not all are good.  When there is not a
balance, then, the number of choices is reduced and most of them might be
considered bad.

At one time, I thought I might resign from this discussion group.  However, I
do find it interesting, so I shall continue to read them, and interact
perhaps more frequently.

Thomas III


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

eduard,

well, if u can get it, pass it to me as well.

james.


From: "Eduard Alf" <yeoman@...>
Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:08:51 -0400

james,

I was wondering about the author.  The statement
that there was a Jewish conspiracy in the media
sort of gave it away.

By the way, there was an excellent discussion on
the Charlie Rose program last night.  The
interview was with Thomas Friedman of the New York
Times.  I am wondering if it is possible to get a
free transcript on the internet.

eduard

-----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:56 AM
To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [existlist] Re: Fwd: Fw: The truth about
Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!



indeed, i have no idea who is this david duke
until chris pointed out he is
a kkk clan member. and thanks for the details. i
have seen films on the kkk
many years back, how they would torture
sadistically and kill blacks in
america for no reason other than they are blacks.
it hits me as totally
ridiculous. what they believe in is indeed akin to
the nazis' racist
standpoint, and as such i think this duke does not
have moral authority. as
chris pointed out, it was a junk mail.

james.









_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

thanks for the info. to think he is still wearing the nazi outfits these
days. fancy that. so, is he a popular guy in america, or least in louisiana?
did he get any votes?

james.


From: Tom Hickcox <cometkazie1@...>
Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not  Junk
mail!!!!!
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:10:27 -0500

At 20:59 4/9/02, james tan wrote:

  >indeed it is the same person. as such, i think u don't have to take
  >seriously what he wrote... ie, it was basically junk mail... i did not
know
  >about david duke until someone from other forum told me he is a white
  >supremacist...involved in the kkk clan. ie, he does not have moral
authority
  >or even basic integrity to talk about persecution; it is somewhat
ironical.
  >
  >james.

He is from here in Louisiana.  I remember him going back to his college
days when he would appear in Free Speech Alley in his Nazi outfits.

He used to be a state legislator from a district in the New Orleans
suburbs.  I don't think he spends much time in the state now.

Tommy in Baton Rouge









_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

am not sure if talking about neo-nazism and jewish conspiracies could be
considered as a degeneration; after all, such beliefs, if held by people no
matter how irrational, could produce actions which are unwise. and though i
could understand ur attempt to empathize with the palestinians (same here),
to say that we should celebrate the 'heroism' of sucide bombers is too hot a
tea to swallow, at least for me. just because a man has a sad history is no
reason for us to condone his murderous activity for revenge, let alone to
celebrate it. a better way can be worked out, but to condone an eye for an
eye seems maladative in the long run (what does it achieve really). suicide
bombing does not resolve conflicts, it only worsen it.

james.


From: Tommy Beavitt <tommy@...>
Reply-To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
To: WisdomForum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WisdomForum] Antisemite and Jew
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:40:26 +0100

I am sorry that this forum has degenerated into stuff about neo-nazis
and Jewish conspiracies. Unfortunately that says more about the times
we live in, I think, than any lack of rationality on the part of
contributors.

With regard to the similarity to the ideas of David Duke and Adolph
Hitler, point taken, it is true. The difficulty is that what we are
discussing are the flagrant racist and terrorist policies being
adopted by the zionist entity, the state of Israel.

Of course Hitler was wrong to conclude that the reason for the
inequity faced by ordinary Germans in the 1930s was the fault of the
Jews. People who have Jewish blood running through their veins are
not essentially different from you and I in any way whatsoever.  So
it was completely irrational (not to say immoral) to select for the
innmates of Auschwitz and Belsen those people who were believed to be
of Jewish blood.

This does not necessarily invalidate some of the arguments supporting
the premises upon which this racist creed was constructed. In other
words, Germany in the 20s and 30s was indeed the unfortunate victim
of a zionist conspiracy.

It is for very good reasons that we agree to deprecate racism as a
criteria for judging whether another human being is a friend or an
enemy. Such thinking leads to disaster for the human race and
civilisation on a far more serious scale than conflict based on other
criteria.

Unfortunately this self-same error was perpetuated in the aftermath
of the Second World War and especially in 1948 with the creation of a
state which has racism written into its constitution. In a move which
almost belies belief (and to a certain extent mitigates the racist
rhetoric of Hitler in the 30s) the Allied Powers connived in the
creation and maintenance of a state which bases its immigration
policy on the criterion of whether the applicant has Jewish blood
running through his or her veins. There is absolutely no justication
or precedent for this in the modern world and we should all agree
that Israel as it stands has no more right to exist in the modern
world than apartheid South Africa had.

Until this is agreed by the international community and Israel is
reconstitued to give equal rights of citizenship to all of its
residents there can be no peace in the land of Palestine and we
should celebrate the heroism of Palestinian suicide bombers in their
valiant attempts to obtain justice in the face of overwhelming
oppressive force.

It may also be that partitioning the land of Palestine to give a
state to Palestinians with a viable economy and borders it can defend
against its Israeli neighbours will be a necessary step to ensure
that peace becomes possible.

Tommy Beavitt








_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

first off i'd just like to say thanks to thomas for saying one of the most
rational things i've read on this list.  i too was
dissapointed/distressed/bothered  when i saw some of the reply's to duke's
article referring to it as junk mail and basically dismissing it. this
frightened me on many levels.  if we are so quick to dismiss something as
evil or give a bad rap to ideas just because they are coming from the mouth
and mind of someone whose philosohphy we disagree with then how are we ever
to reach a level of understanding at all. despite the attempts of the media
and movies and our illutrious mr. bush, there is no black and white.
despite what you may think there is no such thing as good and evil. nothing
is that simple.  basically, life is not like star wars or where there are
god vs. devil wars.  we cannot look at something say for instance  like the
holocaust and say "well all those guys were just evil and that's that and it
will never happen again." many people think this.  the nazi's were people
though.  they had families and children and feelings and ideas and in all
likelihood felt justified in what they were doing.  i honestly believe that
the potential for evil that existed in these people is in all of us as well.
   just as the potential for good is in us.  in these times people are so
cautious as well.  "well," they say "if i agree with anything that duke says
then i will be labeled as a sympathizer" and blah blah blah.  and this is
tricky because that would most likely happen and then what? then no one
would take you seriously after that.  that is the way things tend to go.
there was a certain congressman who said that a portion of the government
was being niggardly (miserly, cheap) and following that people got all up in
arms, his next campaign was trashed because of it, and he no longer has a
postion in our government.  just another write off you know? and one that
wasn't even for doing anything but saying a word that only resembled an
american taboo. we must look closer and even take view under the microscope.
   we cannot say the bin ladin's or the duke's or the nazi's of the world are
simply evil and write them off as thus.  by doing so we are not trying to
understand a side, ideas, and what makes people behave a certain way. this
is ignorance at it's best and most powerful and i'd be careful of people who
are so quick to label and disregard.  ---F.D.

>From: thomas3@...
>Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk
>mail!!!!!
>Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:47:12 EDT
>
>Hi There!
>
>I have been receiving emails from your group for about two months.  I
>joined
>because I am writing a book about my philosophy.  At one time, 30 years
>ago,
>I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I wrote about that period in
>my
>life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I had some idea of what an
>existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the Internet and as I found
>your group I was very excited.
>
>My excitement was short lived.  As I written in early articles, I prefer a
>working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of the mind.  I do however
>with
>at least one definition of an existentialist as follows:
>
>        The underlying concepts of existentialism are simple:
>        �    Mankind has free will.
>        �    Life is a series of choices, creating stress.
>        �    Few decisions are without any negative consequences.
>        �    Some things are irrational or absurd, without explanation.
>        �    If one makes a decision, he or she must follow through.
>
>I must say I do agree with this definition as it does agree with the way I
>live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and believe in the
>connectedness of all things and therefore, seek continuously a connection
>with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the universe.
>
>I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of may not agree or see a
>need
>for connection.  I recalled a statement being written, that perhaps this is
>not the right for forum for a discussion of connectiveness.  I must say,
>Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can continue to intellectualize
>all
>you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere closer to an understanding of
>the way things are or may be.  There is another source of information that
>comes as a result of being connected from within.
>
>One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on balance.  Try it before
>you
>poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a source of inspiration
>as
>well.  It is my belief that we do not have free will unless we are
>connected.
>  In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.
>
>The reason I am writing to you at this time is because I can no longer
>contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02, [Existlist] FWD: Robert
>Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was waiting for some reply.  The
>latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest to me.  At first, when I
>saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or African-American and I
>must say I don't like or agree with David Duke ideas or philosophy.)
>However, I have promised myself to never again dismiss things, because I
>didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this mindset, I can become
>as
>closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides, it is not good science.
>
>So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always asked when the writing
>is
>controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek to find out if that is
>the
>case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If I did, I would be as
>guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if anything in any one of
>these emails is true!
>
>You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail," otherwise, you are being
>robotic
>and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you have limited your
>options.
>
>In closing, I seek to understand the world, the universe, the nature of
>things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes of the original Star Trek
>series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the epitome of consciousness
>is seen as intellectual based; as though the so-call "Left-Brain" led us to
>an ultimate evolutionary development and at one time I agreed with this
>concep
>t.
>
>I now seek whole brain solutions and development; where there is a balance
>with the left and right brain (and I am familiar with handedness and its
>affect brain symmetry).  I further make a distinction between thinking,
>emotions, and feelings.  Thinking (cognition) to me is a function of the
>left-brain.  Feelings (connectedness) are a function of the right-brain.
>Emotions are a subset of feelings but only the doorway to feelings.  When
>you
>get emotional you lose that connectedness until the emotion has dissipated.
>This explains why when get too anxious about a test, we forget what we
>know,
>but once the test is over and the pressure is off, we remember again.  When
>there is a balance between the thinking and feelings sides of the brain, we
>have multiple choices and most if not all are good.  When there is not a
>balance, then, the number of choices is reduced and most of them might be
>considered bad.
>
>At one time, I thought I might resign from this discussion group.  However,
>I
>do find it interesting, so I shall continue to read them, and interact
>perhaps more frequently.
>
>Thomas III
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Hi Thomas III,

I tend to lean towards left brained as, if possible, knowledge and reason
seem to be the most important to me.  Yet when I started reading the article
on Duke I became inflamed, so much that I scanned it quickly and wondered
why it was included on this website (yes, probably just to show the extremes
that exist in the world) -- in other words I had a emotional outburst (ala
Spock).

The core beliefs of existentialism are the big attractor to the Philosophy,
yet much beyond the generalizations are difficult concepts to grasp and even
harder to hold on to -- even if I agree with them.  I found the 20th century
existentialist philosophers much easier to read and seemed more oriented
toward individuals finding purpose in life.

To me existentialism seems silent on the supernatural, it's proponents seem
such a mixture of beliefs and non-beliefs, that they are merely stating
their own preference rather than prosthletizing.  Though silent on the
supernatural, it seems abundant full of supplying an individual with the
tools for living the good life "for others."  You could not ask more of any
faith -- yet it is not a faith, but more of a personal code of human conduct
for our thought process.  No afterlife promise nor dogma requirements.

Your concept of balance (L & R brain) is well stated.  Earlier I stated that
I lean towards the L side, yet as an Existentialist I know that the
rationality I seek is potentially wrong as everything I perceive is
subjective.  Even if I filled the left side with objective truths if I am
dealing with another I must take into consideration that others have the
same subjective reasoning that I have and just finding the truth may not be
the best answer for all.  Would you have a problem of balance if the
rational process included the feeling process as yet another input, I would
hate to see feelings and emotion rule in the real world.

John






----- Original Message -----
From: <thomas3@...>
To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not Junk
mail!!!!!


Hi There!

I have been receiving emails from your group for about two months.  I joined
because I am writing a book about my philosophy.  At one time, 30 years ago,
I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I wrote about that period in
my
life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I had some idea of what an
existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the Internet and as I found
your group I was very excited.

My excitement was short lived.  As I written in early articles, I prefer a
working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of the mind.  I do however
with
at least one definition of an existentialist as follows:

        The underlying concepts of existentialism are simple:
        �    Mankind has free will.
        �    Life is a series of choices, creating stress.
        �    Few decisions are without any negative consequences.
        �    Some things are irrational or absurd, without explanation.
        �    If one makes a decision, he or she must follow through.

I must say I do agree with this definition as it does agree with the way I
live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and believe in the
connectedness of all things and therefore, seek continuously a connection
with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the universe.

I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of may not agree or see a
need
for connection.  I recalled a statement being written, that perhaps this is
not the right for forum for a discussion of connectiveness.  I must say,
Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can continue to intellectualize
all
you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere closer to an understanding of
the way things are or may be.  There is another source of information that
comes as a result of being connected from within.

One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on balance.  Try it before you
poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a source of inspiration as
well.  It is my belief that we do not have free will unless we are
connected.
  In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.

The reason I am writing to you at this time is because I can no longer
contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02, [Existlist] FWD: Robert
Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was waiting for some reply.  The
latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest to me.  At first, when I
saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or African-American and I
must say I don't like or agree with David Duke ideas or philosophy.)
However, I have promised myself to never again dismiss things, because I
didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this mindset, I can become as
closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides, it is not good science.

So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always asked when the writing
is
controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek to find out if that is
the
case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If I did, I would be as
guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if anything in any one of
these emails is true!

You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail," otherwise, you are being
robotic
and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you have limited your
options.

In closing, I seek to understand the world, the universe, the nature of
things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes of the original Star Trek
series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the epitome of consciousness
is seen as intellectual based; as though the so-call "Left-Brain" led us to
an ultimate evolutionary development and at one time I agreed with this
concep
t.

I now seek whole brain solutions and development; where there is a balance
with the left and right brain (and I am familiar with handedness and its
affect brain symmetry).  I further make a distinction between thinking,
emotions, and feelings.  Thinking (cognition) to me is a function of the
left-brain.  Feelings (connectedness) are a function of the right-brain.
Emotions are a subset of feelings but only the doorway to feelings.  When
you
get emotional you lose that connectedness until the emotion has dissipated.
This explains why when get too anxious about a test, we forget what we know,
but once the test is over and the pressure is off, we remember again.  When
there is a balance between the thinking and feelings sides of the brain, we
have multiple choices and most if not all are good.  When there is not a
balance, then, the number of choices is reduced and most of them might be
considered bad.

At one time, I thought I might resign from this discussion group.  However,
I
do find it interesting, so I shall continue to read them, and interact
perhaps more frequently.

Thomas III


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
(Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Josh,

I would agree with you that one should consider
what is said rather than to dismiss it because of
who the author happens to be.  Yet the conclusion
of "junk mail" is not with respect to David Duke
himself, but the content.  It is quite apparent
from the content that he has his own agenda.  In a
similar vein one can read Mien Kamph [however it
is spelt] and conclude that it is junk.  I grant
that an awareness of the content may be of benefit
... perhaps if more people had read and been aware
of the warning bells going off, we might not have
let Hitler get away with his early conquests.
Perhaps that is the responsibility that the
Existentialist must show ... that is to call
something for what it is.

eduard

-----Original Message-----
From: josh bokelman
[mailto:joshbokelman@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:56 PM
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about
Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!

first off i'd just like to say thanks to thomas
for saying one of the most
rational things i've read on this list.  i too was
dissapointed/distressed/bothered  when i saw some
of the reply's to duke's
article referring to it as junk mail and basically
dismissing it. this
frightened me on many levels.  if we are so quick
to dismiss something as
evil or give a bad rap to ideas just because they
are coming from the mouth
and mind of someone whose philosohphy we disagree
with then how are we ever
to reach a level of understanding at all. despite
the attempts of the media
and movies and our illutrious mr. bush, there is
no black and white.
despite what you may think there is no such thing
as good and evil. nothing
is that simple.  basically, life is not like star
wars or where there are
god vs. devil wars.  we cannot look at something
say for instance  like the
holocaust and say "well all those guys were just
evil and that's that and it
will never happen again." many people think this.
the nazi's were people
though.  they had families and children and
feelings and ideas and in all
likelihood felt justified in what they were doing.
i honestly believe that
the potential for evil that existed in these
people is in all of us as well.
   just as the potential for good is in us.  in
these times people are so
cautious as well.  "well," they say "if i agree
with anything that duke says
then i will be labeled as a sympathizer" and blah
blah blah.  and this is
tricky because that would most likely happen and
then what? then no one
would take you seriously after that.  that is the
way things tend to go.
there was a certain congressman who said that a
portion of the government
was being niggardly (miserly, cheap) and following
that people got all up in
arms, his next campaign was trashed because of it,
and he no longer has a
postion in our government.  just another write off
you know? and one that
wasn't even for doing anything but saying a word
that only resembled an
american taboo. we must look closer and even take
view under the microscope.
   we cannot say the bin ladin's or the duke's or
the nazi's of the world are
simply evil and write them off as thus.  by doing
so we are not trying to
understand a side, ideas, and what makes people
behave a certain way. this
is ignorance at it's best and most powerful and
i'd be careful of people who
are so quick to label and disregard.  ---F.D.

A person spends life aspiring to beliefs and then
reels at the thought that someone would disagree with
an obvious righteousness.
  The average looking girl in high school that
witnessed fights for the pleasure of taking her out on
prom night (Did they ever get to the prom?)grew up to
be trailer trash Barbie, and is no pissed that no one
takes anything she says seriuosly.
  The big guy on the football team that everyone loved
being around has grown into a fat, couch potato slob
that can't even get a return call from Domino's.

  Sometimes things change and sometimes they don't, as
far as (Mr.) Duke goes I have heard nothing conected
with him in a number of years, suddenly here he is and
we should take him at face value?? Only in America!!

  As always it just depends on the point of view; if
you are on their side then WE are the dregs of the
earth and if on ours, hunt them down, every one!

  Greg

--- josh bokelman <joshbokelman@...> wrote:
>
> first off i'd just like to say thanks to thomas for
> saying one of the most
> rational things i've read on this list.  i too was
> dissapointed/distressed/bothered  when i saw some of
> the reply's to duke's
> article referring to it as junk mail and basically
> dismissing it. this
> frightened me on many levels.  if we are so quick to
> dismiss something as
> evil or give a bad rap to ideas just because they
> are coming from the mouth
> and mind of someone whose philosohphy we disagree
> with then how are we ever
> to reach a level of understanding at all. despite
> the attempts of the media
> and movies and our illutrious mr. bush, there is no
> black and white.
> despite what you may think there is no such thing as
> good and evil. nothing
> is that simple.  basically, life is not like star
> wars or where there are
> god vs. devil wars.  we cannot look at something say
> for instance  like the
> holocaust and say "well all those guys were just
> evil and that's that and it
> will never happen again." many people think this.
> the nazi's were people
> though.  they had families and children and feelings
> and ideas and in all
> likelihood felt justified in what they were doing.
> i honestly believe that
> the potential for evil that existed in these people
> is in all of us as well.
>   just as the potential for good is in us.  in these
> times people are so
> cautious as well.  "well," they say "if i agree with
> anything that duke says
> then i will be labeled as a sympathizer" and blah
> blah blah.  and this is
> tricky because that would most likely happen and
> then what? then no one
> would take you seriously after that.  that is the
> way things tend to go.
> there was a certain congressman who said that a
> portion of the government
> was being niggardly (miserly, cheap) and following
> that people got all up in
> arms, his next campaign was trashed because of it,
> and he no longer has a
> postion in our government.  just another write off
> you know? and one that
> wasn't even for doing anything but saying a word
> that only resembled an
> american taboo. we must look closer and even take
> view under the microscope.
>   we cannot say the bin ladin's or the duke's or the
> nazi's of the world are
> simply evil and write them off as thus.  by doing so
> we are not trying to
> understand a side, ideas, and what makes people
> behave a certain way. this
> is ignorance at it's best and most powerful and i'd
> be careful of people who
> are so quick to label and disregard.  ---F.D.
>
> >From: thomas3@...
> >Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> >To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about
> Israel - This is not Junk
> >mail!!!!!
> >Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:47:12 EDT
> >
> >Hi There!
> >
> >I have been receiving emails from your group for
> about two months.  I
> >joined
> >because I am writing a book about my philosophy.
> At one time, 30 years
> >ago,
> >I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I
> wrote about that period in
> >my
> >life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I
> had some idea of what an
> >existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the
> Internet and as I found
> >your group I was very excited.
> >
> >My excitement was short lived.  As I written in
> early articles, I prefer a
> >working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of
> the mind.  I do however
> >with
> >at least one definition of an existentialist as
> follows:
> >
> >        The underlying concepts of existentialism
> are simple:
> >        �    Mankind has free will.
> >        �    Life is a series of choices, creating
> stress.
> >        �    Few decisions are without any negative
> consequences.
> >        �    Some things are irrational or absurd,
> without explanation.
> >        �    If one makes a decision, he or she
> must follow through.
> >
> >I must say I do agree with this definition as it
> does agree with the way I
> >live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and
> believe in the
> >connectedness of all things and therefore, seek
> continuously a connection
> >with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the
> universe.
> >
> >I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of
> may not agree or see a
> >need
> >for connection.  I recalled a statement being
> written, that perhaps this is
> >not the right for forum for a discussion of
> connectiveness.  I must say,
> >Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can
> continue to intellectualize
> >all
> >you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere
> closer to an understanding of
> >the way things are or may be.  There is another
> source of information that
> >comes as a result of being connected from within.
> >
> >One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on
> balance.  Try it before
> >you
> >poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a
> source of inspiration
> >as
> >well.  It is my belief that we do not have free
> will unless we are
> >connected.
> >  In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.
> >
> >The reason I am writing to you at this time is
> because I can no longer
> >contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02,
> [Existlist] FWD: Robert
> >Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was
> waiting for some reply.  The
> >latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest
> to me.  At first, when I
> >saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or
> African-American and I
> >must say I don't like or agree with David Duke
> ideas or philosophy.)
> >However, I have promised myself to never again
> dismiss things, because I
> >didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this
> mindset, I can become
> >as
> >closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides,
> it is not good science.
> >
> >So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always
> asked when the writing
> >is
> >controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek
> to find out if that is
> >the
> >case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If
> I did, I would be as
> >guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if
> anything in any one of
> >these emails is true!
> >
> >You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail,"
> otherwise, you are being
> >robotic
> >and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you
> have limited your
> >options.
> >
> >In closing, I seek to understand the world, the
> universe, the nature of
> >things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes
> of the original Star Trek
> >series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the
> epitome of consciousness
> >is seen as intellectual based; as though the
> so-call "Left-Brain" led us to
> >an ultimate evolutionary development and at one
> time I agreed with this
> >concep
> >t.
> >
> >I now seek whole brain solutions and development;
> where there is a balance
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

Well stated John!! Here Here!!
Greg
--- John Taft <J-Taft@...> wrote:
> Hi Thomas III,
>
> I tend to lean towards left brained as, if possible,
> knowledge and reason
> seem to be the most important to me.  Yet when I
> started reading the article
> on Duke I became inflamed, so much that I scanned it
> quickly and wondered
> why it was included on this website (yes, probably
> just to show the extremes
> that exist in the world) -- in other words I had a
> emotional outburst (ala
> Spock).
>
> The core beliefs of existentialism are the big
> attractor to the Philosophy,
> yet much beyond the generalizations are difficult
> concepts to grasp and even
> harder to hold on to -- even if I agree with them.
> I found the 20th century
> existentialist philosophers much easier to read and
> seemed more oriented
> toward individuals finding purpose in life.
>
> To me existentialism seems silent on the
> supernatural, it's proponents seem
> such a mixture of beliefs and non-beliefs, that they
> are merely stating
> their own preference rather than prosthletizing.
> Though silent on the
> supernatural, it seems abundant full of supplying an
> individual with the
> tools for living the good life "for others."  You
> could not ask more of any
> faith -- yet it is not a faith, but more of a
> personal code of human conduct
> for our thought process.  No afterlife promise nor
> dogma requirements.
>
> Your concept of balance (L & R brain) is well
> stated.  Earlier I stated that
> I lean towards the L side, yet as an Existentialist
> I know that the
> rationality I seek is potentially wrong as
> everything I perceive is
> subjective.  Even if I filled the left side with
> objective truths if I am
> dealing with another I must take into consideration
> that others have the
> same subjective reasoning that I have and just
> finding the truth may not be
> the best answer for all.  Would you have a problem
> of balance if the
> rational process included the feeling process as yet
> another input, I would
> hate to see feelings and emotion rule in the real
> world.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <thomas3@...>
> To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about
> Israel - This is not Junk
> mail!!!!!
>
>
> Hi There!
>
> I have been receiving emails from your group for
> about two months.  I joined
> because I am writing a book about my philosophy.  At
> one time, 30 years ago,
> I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I
> wrote about that period in
> my
> life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I
> had some idea of what an
> existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the
> Internet and as I found
> your group I was very excited.
>
> My excitement was short lived.  As I written in
> early articles, I prefer a
> working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of the
> mind.  I do however
> with
> at least one definition of an existentialist as
> follows:
>
>        The underlying concepts of existentialism are
> simple:
>        �    Mankind has free will.
>        �    Life is a series of choices, creating
> stress.
>        �    Few decisions are without any negative
> consequences.
>        �    Some things are irrational or absurd,
> without explanation.
>        �    If one makes a decision, he or she must
> follow through.
>
> I must say I do agree with this definition as it
> does agree with the way I
> live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and
> believe in the
> connectedness of all things and therefore, seek
> continuously a connection
> with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the
> universe.
>
> I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of
> may not agree or see a
> need
> for connection.  I recalled a statement being
> written, that perhaps this is
> not the right for forum for a discussion of
> connectiveness.  I must say,
> Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can
> continue to intellectualize
> all
> you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere closer
> to an understanding of
> the way things are or may be.  There is another
> source of information that
> comes as a result of being connected from within.
>
> One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on
> balance.  Try it before you
> poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a
> source of inspiration as
> well.  It is my belief that we do not have free will
> unless we are
> connected.
>  In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.
>
> The reason I am writing to you at this time is
> because I can no longer
> contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02,
> [Existlist] FWD: Robert
> Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was waiting
> for some reply.  The
> latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest to
> me.  At first, when I
> saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or
> African-American and I
> must say I don't like or agree with David Duke ideas
> or philosophy.)
> However, I have promised myself to never again
> dismiss things, because I
> didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this
> mindset, I can become as
> closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides, it
> is not good science.
>
> So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always
> asked when the writing
> is
> controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek
> to find out if that is
> the
> case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If I
> did, I would be as
> guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if
> anything in any one of
> these emails is true!
>
> You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail,"
> otherwise, you are being
> robotic
> and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you
> have limited your
> options.
>
> In closing, I seek to understand the world, the
> universe, the nature of
> things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes of
> the original Star Trek
> series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the
> epitome of consciousness
> is seen as intellectual based; as though the so-call
> "Left-Brain" led us to
> an ultimate evolutionary development and at one time
> I agreed with this
> concep
> t.
>
> I now seek whole brain solutions and development;
> where there is a balance
> with the left and right brain (and I am familiar
> with handedness and its
> affect brain symmetry).  I further make a
> distinction between thinking,
> emotions, and feelings.  Thinking (cognition) to me
> is
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

hi Thomas III,

In regard to the David Duke junk email, I should think it would have been
pretty obvious ... Jewish conspiracy and all that.  It is an old story, just
applied again to new circumstance.  Like using retread tires.

My own view on existentialism is that it stops short of giving the sort of
"connectiveness" that you mention.  In order to get the latter, you need to
move into religion.

The subject of brain processes is interesting.  In the end, it is only the
neurons that know anything or need to be satisfied by thoughts.  And since
the neurons only know anything by remote sensing, one could conclude that
there is no difference between what we might deem to be reality or illusion.

eduard
   -----Original Message-----
   From: thomas3@... [mailto:thomas3@...]
   Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:47 AM
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: Re: [existlist] Fwd: Fw: The truth about Israel - This is not
Junk mail!!!!!


   Hi There!

   I have been receiving emails from your group for about two months.  I
joined
   because I am writing a book about my philosophy.  At one time, 30 years
ago,
   I thought of myself as an existentialist.  As I wrote about that period in
my
   life, I realized I probably needed to make sure I had some idea of what an
   existentialist is.  I do most of my research on the Internet and as I
found
   your group I was very excited.

   My excitement was short lived.  As I written in early articles, I prefer a
   working philosophy as opposed to a philosophy of the mind.  I do however
with
   at least one definition of an existentialist as follows:

          The underlying concepts of existentialism are simple:
          �    Mankind has free will.
          �    Life is a series of choices, creating stress.
          �    Few decisions are without any negative consequences.
          �    Some things are irrational or absurd, without explanation.
          �    If one makes a decision, he or she must follow through.

   I must say I do agree with this definition as it does agree with the way I
   live my life.  However, I am also spiritually and believe in the
   connectedness of all things and therefore, seek continuously a connection
   with myself, "God," other people, as well as, the universe.

   I do understand that some of you perhaps, most of may not agree or see a
need
   for connection.  I recalled a statement being written, that perhaps this
is
   not the right for forum for a discussion of connectiveness.  I must say,
   Hogwash! (for like of a better term).  We can continue to intellectualize
all
   you want, however, it won't bring us anywhere closer to an understanding
of
   the way things are or may be.  There is another source of information that
   comes as a result of being connected from within.

   One respondent gave you an excellent exercise on balance.  Try it before
you
   poo-poo it.  It might give some understanding and a source of inspiration
as
   well.  It is my belief that we do not have free will unless we are
connected.
   In any other state, in my opinion is robotic.

   The reason I am writing to you at this time is because I can no longer
   contain myself.  There was an email dated 4-08-02, [Existlist] FWD: Robert
   Fisk:  No one responded to this email, I was waiting for some reply.  The
   latest email entry on the 4-09-02 was of interest to me.  At first, when I
   saw the author, I too, dismissed it. (I am Black or African-American and I
   must say I don't like or agree with David Duke ideas or philosophy.)
   However, I have promised myself to never again dismiss things, because I
   didn't like or agree with the source.  Without this mindset, I can become
as
   closed-minded as I perceive Duke to be!  Besides, it is not good science.

   So, I've read it carefully.  One question, I always asked when the writing
is
   controversial, is there any truth in it and I seek to find out if that is
the
   case.  I don't dismiss it willy-nilly anymore.  If I did, I would be as
   guilty as I see you!  So, I would like to know if anything in any one of
   these emails is true!

   You determine, if it is indeed, "junk mail," otherwise, you are being
robotic
   and not exercising "free will" and furthermore, you have limited your
   options.

   In closing, I seek to understand the world, the universe, the nature of
   things as it were.  I am reminded of the episodes of the original Star
Trek
   series.  In most, if not all of it's programs, the epitome of
consciousness
   is seen as intellectual based; as though the so-call "Left-Brain" led us
to
   an ultimate evolutionary development and at one time I agreed with this
concep
   t.

   I now seek whole brain solutions and development; where there is a balance
   with the left and right brain (and I am familiar with handedness and its
   affect brain symmetry).  I further make a distinction between thinking,
   emotions, and feelings.  Thinking (cognition) to me is a function of the
   left-brain.  Feelings (connectedness) are a function of the right-brain.
   Emotions are a subset of feelings but only the doorway to feelings.  When
you
   get emotional you lose that connectedness until the emotion has
dissipated.
   This explains why when get too anxious about a test, we forget what we
know,
   but once the test is over and the pressure is off, we remember again.
When
   there is a balance between the thinking and feelings sides of the brain,
we
   have multiple choices and most if not all are good.  When there is not a
   balance, then, the number of choices is reduced and most of them might be
   considered bad.

   At one time, I thought I might resign from this discussion group.
However, I
   do find it interesting, so I shall continue to read them, and interact
   perhaps more frequently.

   Thomas III


   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT




   Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
   (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

   TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
   existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

james,

looks like you have to pay for them ....

there is a site with some of Friedman's articles
at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/08/nyregion/08comme
ntary.1.html

You may have to subscribe to the New York Times
which is free.

eduard

-----Original Message-----
From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:46 PM
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: Fwd: Fw: The truth
about Israel - This is
not Junk mail!!!!!

eduard,

well, if u can get it, pass it to me as well.

james.

At 12:52 4/10/02, james tan wrote:

>thanks for the info. to think he is still wearing the nazi outfits these
>days. fancy that. so, is he a popular guy in america, or least in louisiana?
>did he get any votes?
>
>james.

No, he dropped the Nazi bit as well as the KKK when he formed the National
Assn for the Advancement of White People 20+ years ago.

He was the state representative for at least one term from a district in
Metairie, a suburb of New Orleans.  He ran for governor in '91 [I think] &
made the runoff.  Here in Louisiana we have an open primary system so the
top two vote-getters in the primary have a runoff, unless one gets a
majority the first time around.  What usually happens is a right-wing & a
left-wing candidate make the runoffs in state-wide races.

Duke made the news about a year ago as the tax people were looking at how
he used contributions for personal expenses, but for the most part he has
been below the radar.  My understanding is he is cultivating support in the
former USSR, basically via anti-Semitism.

We have state elections next year & I have not seen anything about him
running for anything.

Tommy