User Tag List

First 233132333435 Last

Results 321 to 330 of 341

  1. #321
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    About IHH, the Turkish NGO that sent the flotilla to Gaza, here is what our counterterrorism magistrate, Jean-Louis Bruguière, has written about them, after one of his personal enquiries made with the help of Turkish policemen (1998):

    "It appears that the detained members of IHH were going to fight in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya... The essential goal of this Association was to illegally arm its membership for overthrowing democratic, secular, and constitutional order present in Turkey and replacing it with an Islamic state founded on the Shariah. Under the cover of this organization known under the name of IHH, [IHH leaders] acted to recruit veteran soldiers in anticipation of the coming holy war. In particular, some men were sent into war zones in Muslim countries in order to acquire combat experience. On the spot, the formation of a military unit was assured. In addition, towards the purpose of obtaining political support from these countries, financial aid was transferred [from IHH], as well as caches of firearms, knives, and pre-fabricated explosives."

    An official review of the phone records from the IHH's office in Istanbul revealed two calls to the Bosnian Mujahideen Brigade unit headquarters in Zenica, five phone calls to a member of the Algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA) based in London, and at least one call to Anwar Shaaban's notorious Islamic Cultural Institute in Milan, Italy.

    The IHH's connections to international terrorism have even surfaced in sworn witness testimony in the U.S. federal court system. During the trial of attempted Millenium bomber Ahmed Ressam, noted French counterterrorism magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere took the stand and testified that IHH had played “[a]n important role” in Ressam's bomb plot targeting LAX. Under repeated questioning, Bruguiere insisted that “[t]here’s a rather close relation”: "The IHH is an NGO, but it was kind of a type of cover-up… in order to obtain forged documents and also to obtain different forms of infiltration for Mujahideen in combat. And also to go and gather[recruit] these Mujahideens. And finally, one of the last responsibilities that they had was also to be implicated or involved in weapons trafficking."


    ---

    Of course, since 2003, "light" Islamists of the AKP now officially rule Turkey. Maybe it could explain why the attitude of its government has slowly changed towards organizations like IHH, from hostility (1998 report), to neutrality (2003), to direct contribution and support (2010).
    The AKP has an agenda of course. But it is a clever one because it knows how to slowly unfold it, in fear that the Turkish Army and other nationalistic milieux might have reacted preventively. Now that they have neutralized the most active Kemalist movements (in 2008-2009), well, we can see more clearly where the AKP is really going, and where it is leading Turkey now.

    ---

    As a matter of fact, IHH is considered to be ideologically close to the (unfamous) Muslim Brotherhood.

    But anyway, I will ask Tcda:

    1/ Do you think Islamism or similar movements like the Hamas will allow working classes to emancipate, and to eventually reach freedom of thoughts?

    2/ To speak like Marx, is Anti-Semitism an "acceptable contradiction" within the People?

    3/ Why are Troskysts often allying with such organizations?

    4/ In the hypothesis that you could destroy Israel overnight, what should happen to Jews living there? And I'd like to have a REALISTIC answer. Remember that the FLN had promised not to take actions against Pieds Noirs after its victory and the independence of Algeria, and to integrate them. We eventually saw what really happened...
    So, do you want to relocate the former Israelis in Uganda, in Madagascar, in Birobidzhan, in Algeria, in Poland or directly in Auschwitz?
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  2. #322
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Just because I believe in the right to use force when fighting against oppression doesn't mean I believe "might is right" in general.
    You believe you're right. The Zionist believe they are. If belief is all that is required to validate a position, then how do you settle the dispute except through force?

    [quote]
    For example, I argue that it's justified to resist with force when someone is forcing you into ghettoes and exile and stealing your land, but not when you are using force to take over someone's ship in international waters which is being used to deliver aid to a population which needs it.
    You dogmatically asserted your preference without support. A Zionist can do the same. How do you resolve the dispute?

    International law.
    Blockades are legal under various "international law".

    Terrorism is illegal under "International law". You can't just cherry pick the laws you like and ignore the rest.

  3. #323
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    They are both Fascists who don't seem to have a true experience of what Israeli society really looks like.
    Get down from your high horse. Obviously I have not lived in Israel before. But that's irrelevant. My position is based purely on the consistent application of ethical principles.

    Whether Israel is the Palestinian Utopia you are portraying, or the Apartheid state claimed by the opponents is irrelevant to the points of contention.

    They don't support Israel, they support Liberman's ideology.
    Wrong. I support applying ethical principles equally to both sides.

  4. #324
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    Get down from your high horse. Obviously I have not lived in Israel before. But that's irrelevant. My position is based purely on the consistent application of ethical principles.

    Whether Israel is the Palestinian Utopia you are portraying, or the Apartheid state claimed by the opponents is irrelevant to the points of contention.


    Wrong. I support applying ethical principles equally to both sides.
    I must confess I was rather refering to IlyaK.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  5. #325
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sp/sx
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    Last edited by wolfy; 06-12-2010 at 02:03 AM. Reason: edited insult

  6. #326
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    BlakcMail:

    You made the highly ideological claim that "only democracy allows for improvement". In the context of this discussion you were clearly adhering to the narrative that Israel is a mroe progressive outpost of "western democracy" ina sea of "totalitarian" states, and therefore that it offers some kind of opportunity for "improvement". But this is rubbish: 80% of native Palestinians were expelled to make Israel possible. The great majority live in exile or in ghettoes, and there will be no change in this as long as Israel exists, there cannot be, and you know it.

    Your and Victors claim was "simplistic"; therefore my rebuttal only had to be simple.

    The fact is that most people under a dictatorship are better off than the Palestinians are as a result of Israeli "democracy". It is your commitment to an ideological liberal-democratic narrative that means you make contortions to deny this.

    As for Arab Israelis being second-class citizens - of course they are. Having rights on paper does not mean you are in practice not a second class citizen. Muislims, blacks and Latinos are second class citizens in yoour own country, France, and in the UK. Turks are second class citizens in Germany. etc.

    And in Israel, the Arab minority is the poorest large minority, the least socially mobile, and discrimianted day to day. The Electoral Commission alst year even tried to ban their parties from the Knesset and the majority of Israelis support that measure. Just liek the great majority of Israelis supprot waging war and blockade against those same peoples borthers and sisters. And just like the very foundation of the state is based on making Arabs an artificial minority in their own land.

    So how are they not "second class citizens" just because a few peices of paper say so (and even those "garuantees" are contradicted by the explicit committment to Israel being a mjaoirty Jewish state)?

    Regarding your questions: they're based on the premise that I've made concessions to anti-semitism or Hamas in this discussion. But you can't show me where. I disagree with their tactics and realize that their strategy will not be successful long-term.

    However I defend their right to resist, because they represent a people fighting against occupation. I don't think you can preach to people under occupation to reach a fully revolutionary class-consciousness, and only then can they resist occupation. Rather that the international working class must take up the demands of all those sectors fighting agaisnt national oppression.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  7. #327
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Not Me

    You believe you're right. The Zionist believe they are. If belief is all that is required to validate a position, then how do you settle the dispute except through force?

    [I]For example, I argue that it's justified to resist with force when someone is forcing you into ghettoes and exile and stealing your land, but not when you are using force to take over someone's ship in international waters which is being used to deliver aid to a population which needs it.

    You dogmatically asserted your preference without support. A Zionist can do the same. How do you resolve the dispute?
    How would you "resolve the dispute"? By asking the Palestinians to accept starvation in refugee camps and ghettoes?

    When you say I' "dogmatically asserting my preferences", do you mean that I'm asserting my "preference" for those who fight against ethnic cleansing, colonization, expansionism and racism; over those hwo fight for those things?

    Becuase if it's a simple case of publically explaining those "preferences" to the global majority, I fancy the chances of my view being more effective than yours.

    you don't seem to realize tht I'm not concerned with "proving" to you in some abstract way that you should oppose those thigs: it's enough to publcily show that you support those things and I oppose them, in order to make sure any sane person will agree with me and not with you.

    I'm jsut giving you some advice: debating in purely abstract logical terms is not very effective, if it leads you to assert publicly that "the preference against colonialism, expansionism and racism is unsupported and dogmatic".

    Blockades are legal under various "international law".
    Umm no, it's not legal to police another countries borders, only your own.

    Terrorism is illegal under "International law". You can't just cherry pick the laws you like and ignore the rest
    And so is Israel's refusal of the Palestinian right to return to their lands. If Internatonal Law were implemented equally in Palestine, the Palestianians would be the great benefactors, and be most happy to stop their terrorism in return for Israels topping its own terrorism.

    Therefore, if you're happy to see all violations of UN resolutions overturned in Palestine, I welcome that. No "cherry-picking" necessarry.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  8. #328
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    Wrong. I support applying ethical principles equally to both sides.
    So in all cases you maintain that a country occupying another nation is "morally equivalent" to the nation fighting occupation?

    Meaning ironically that you don't hold "both sides to the same ethical standards" at all; because as long as they both play by your abstract rules (which you pulled out of God knows where?), you implicitly accept that there is nothing inherently wrong with one nation subordinating another.

    On this question, I recommend:

    Leon Trotsky: Their Morals and Ours (1938)
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  9. #329
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    I must confess I was rather refering to IlyaK.
    And you'd be wrong there, too. I am no fascist. It's just that on the one side, you have the most nobel laureates per capita and on the other side, a bunch of people who shoot rockets at said nobel laureates.

    The support here is a no-brainer...

    As for TCDA:

    There are a ton of other islamic nations in the region that all the arabs in Israel, if they don't like it, are free to pack up and leave and move to.

    If their standards of living in Israel are so bad that you need to be an apologist for them, what exactly is keeping them from just getting up, taking their pail and shovel, and going to play in a different sandbox?

    Oh, could it be because even as second class citizens, their standards of living are better in Israel?

    Oh, right!
    I am an ENTJ. I hate political correctness but love smart people ^_^

  10. #330
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    How would you "resolve the dispute"?
    Through rational and pragmatic negotiations.

    When you say I' "dogmatically asserting my preferences", do you mean that I'm asserting my "preference" for those who fight against ethnic cleansing, colonization.........
    But you support terrorism as long as it is done in the name of the stuff you fancy, against the people you hate.

    Becuase if it's a simple case of publically explaining those "preferences" to the global majority, I fancy the chances of my view being more effective than yours.
    Fallacious angry appeals could have more sway on the uninformed masses, but what does it matter? They're followers, not leaders.

    Umm no, it's not legal to police another countries borders, only your own.
    Tell that to all the nations who ever fought a war.

    Therefore, if you're happy to see all violations of UN resolutions overturned in Palestine, I welcome that. No "cherry-picking" necessarry.
    Both sides in the mid-east already had a good laugh at the UN resolutions. Who really takes them seriously these days?

    Adhering to a self-righteous attitude will ensure that "might is right" is the only principle that can be applied to resolve the conflict.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-17-2009, 06:45 PM
  2. The Murder of God
    By Mole in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 02:56 AM
  3. Do you make a lot of T.V. references in conversations?
    By ladypinkington in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 12:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO