Was UPJ Behind Memorial Day Vandalism?

Many of you have likely been reading about the military graves having been vandalized on Memorial Day.

The vandals who desecrated the graves of U.S. veterans over the Memorial Day weekend were professionals, says a Vietnam vet who kept night watch at the cemetery in Washington State.

No one has taken responsibility for back-to-back flag desecrations at the Woodlawn Cemetery in Orcas Island, Wash., according to San Juan County Sheriff Bill Cumming.

Here's a fellow I might want to ask some questions. Or perhaps some other members of United for Peace and Justice.

WASHINGTON - It's not every day that Luke Ryan, an innkeeper from Washington state, yells at a congressman's chief of staff.

"I'm just furious. My mind is blown," said Ryan, 37 of Orcas Island, in a meeting Monday with the staff of Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., to protest the war in Iraq.

Ryan, along with nine other activists from his state, were part of a coordinated lobbying day by United for Peace and Justice, a non-profit coalition that organized Saturday's anti-war rally on the National Mall.

Comments

[seekeronos]

"Oh good grief, just because you neanderthals all think constitutional rights are only for pussies and that global warming is a hoax, doesn't mean any organization that supports these things is out of the mainstream."

--------- Constitutional rights are the best, man. Every American should feel free to own as many automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles and handguns and shotguns if they can afford them and ammo to go with them. Every American should also have the right to be well trained in the use of said firearms (i.e. the "well regulated" part of the 2d. Ammendment)

"I'm sure you also think the National Audobon Society and the Sierra Club are made up of freaks, hippies and nuts."

The Audobon folks aren't too bad, they have more of an interest in preservation and conservation without the extreme leftwing politics of the Sierra Club or the WWF (World Wildlife Fund).

That may be less the case today, but I had a membership to them when I was in high school, and they seemed to be conservationailists of the Teddy Roosevelt Stripe more than the Karl Marx Type.

[templar knight]

jong, what an idiot you are. People might want us out of Iraq, myself included, who hardly fit into the deluded groups so kindly listed by seek above. My wife wants us out of Iraq, but she can't stand the Democrats. See how that works, jong. Jesus, you're stupid.

And wingie, look at seek's list of misfits and miscreants. Yeah, boy, they are surely mainstream. To an anarchist, I suppose.

[nowingker]

Jewish Voice for Peace and the Shalom Center are also members are are Latinos for Peace. FYI...ending the Israeli occupation, considered illegal under international law and the UN is not the same as seeking to destroy Israel.

There are PLENTY of very mainstream organizations on that list as well as some that are quite left of center.

You can't pick and choose which parts of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution you like...keeping the right to bear arms but jetisoning due process, the right against unreasonable search and seizure or habeus corpus.

Another example of how wingers stick together, I suppose that is the only 'virtue' you possess, you are all willing to go down with the ship and fight to the death.

[Not a CIA Agent]

That's a solid game of duck, duck, goose you're playing there, Seek.
They're a pack of socialists cause I say so? NOW - socialist. Left Turn - really socialist. Green Party - secretly socialist. Democracy Rising - must be socialist. After Downing Street - I'm sure that doesn't have anything to do with the Downing Street Memo... where's my stamp?

And, as explored in previous threads, if there's one thing the Socialists support heart and soul, it's the Nazi Party. Brilliant.

And Fred, I do like how you've taken those goal posts and really run with them. Now its not a question of whether or not someone 3000 miles away committed grave desecration, but a question of whether or not police are allowed to investigate crimes? Because if we can't investigate you for witchcraft... I mean Nazi links, clearly you must be a wit-er Nazi Flag Waver. Perhaps we should throw Larry in the river to see if he floats. After all, if he's really innocent, he won't drowning. And if he didn't plant the flags, he won't mind a full police investigation. That'll teach those UPJers to talk to their own Senators. Police intimidation, what?

[nowingker]

Other members:

Friends of the Earth
Historians Against the War
Jewish Voice for Peace National Office
Latinos for Peace
Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers
Greenpeace
National Lawyers Guild
NOW
Military Families Speak Out
NETWORK
September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
Shalom Center
United States Student Association
Veterans for Peace
Vietnam Veterans Agaisnt the War

Are these all socialists and communists too?

[Not a CIA Agent]

Latinos for Peace? That sounds socialist.
Jewish Voice for Peace National Office? They're more anti-semetic than the Out of Isreal guys.
Shalom Center? Buncha ragheads.
United States Student Association? Veterans for Peace? Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Can you get any more anti-American?

[danni]

just reading back... don't understand those that are compelled to resort to insults, name calling (mature!) in lieu of posting their opinions in an articulate manner; one's credibility is compromised by resorting to aforementioned tactics......guess some things never change in the blogging world! absolutely nothing wrong with disagreement and intelligent discussion...unfreaking believable!....lol......i have been away from here for a while; the names may have changed, but i'll be damned...personalities remain the same...lmao.....apologies for interrupting discussion.....

[danni]

being just to the right of Attila the Hun myself...aren't there plenty of liberal blogs out there? liberals = clintonesque behaviour......no morals, ethics....jmho....hahaha!

[danni]

uh oh....how to clear a blog by danni.....sorry dan!!!

[jong]

Templar writes:

jong, what an idiot you are. People might want us out of Iraq, myself included, who hardly fit into the deluded groups so kindly listed by seek above. My wife wants us out of Iraq, but she can't stand the Democrats. See how that works, jong. Jesus, you're stupid.

****
Lots of people that don't like each other have managed to come together on individual issues to do what's right in spite of their personal feelings.

Ending this stupid war is much more important than your personal opinion of Democrats. Once the damn war's over, you can go back to trashing us again. But you'll be much happier having joined with people you might not agree with to do the right thing and end this stupid war.

[nowingker]

Hmmm,

Tom DeLay: indicted, going to trial
Scooter Libby: convicted
Bob Ney: in jail
Randy Cunningham: in jail
Ken Lay: convicted felon/dead
Jack Abramoff: in jail
George Ryan: convicted, think he's in jail

Now, I wonder which party is it that is really immoral and unethical, hmmmm......

[danni]

apologies ahead of this statement, but THEY KNOCKED DOWN THE TOWERS.....DO WE NEED HIT AGAIN FOR EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY OF THIS WAR?????? NO ONE WANTS WAR!!!!! BUT I SURE AS HELL WON'T TOLERATE TERRORISM NOR WILL I SHOW ANYTHING BUT THE UTMOST RESPECT FOR OUR SOLDIERS....GOD BLESS THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES FOR THEIR SACRIFICES! YOU CANNOT SUPPORT THE SOLDIERS AND NOT SUPPORT WHAT THEY ARE FIGHTING FOR! apologize for caps....this makes me crazy!!!!

[Not a CIA Agent]

Wingker, those were all set-ups and scams. And Democrats do the same thing too. Just you wait. It'll be Harry "Land Shark" Reid going into lock up next, for all his dirty land deals. Followed by Pat Fitzgerald, for illegally prosecuting poor Scooter Libby. He can share a cell with Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, who were conspiring with Saddam Bin Laden the entire time. And that's all before Bush personally lays the cuffs on Hillary Clinton for the murder of Vince Foster.

[danni]

Now, I wonder which party is it that is really immoral and unethical, hmmmm......

Posted by: nowingker | Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 05:56 PM

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

we ALL know there is corruption in both parties.....it's called POLITICS....politics and morals/ethics are an oxymoron; sad but true.....

[nowingker]

Oy God, Iraq had NOTHING TO DO with 9/11.

The Pentagon has admitted this.
The 9/11 Commission has stated this.
The CIA has admitted this.

Al Quaeda and Ossama Bin Laden knocked down the towers.
Al Queda was NOT in Iraq until 2005.

What about this do you people not understand?

Yes, I sure can support the soldiers but not the war, since I have a functioning brain that doesn't force me to swallow anybody's ideaology hook, line and sinker.

[LOL]

"you are all willing to go down with the ship and fight to the death."

Are you fing kidding me? Wingers know how smack their keyboards to death. The closest most of this group has been to fighting is when they had to use their teeth to open a rugged bag of cheetos.

[nowingker]

It was a methaphorical fight to the death, I realize that no winger actually has the balls to go to war and put his or her life in danger, not the internet wingers, not the neocons over at the American Enterprise Institute or the wingers in the White House. Just like I know that although the winger cowards always want to bomb cities and torture civilians they would all wet their pants and cry like babies if any 'enhanced interogation' techniques were used on them.

[danni]

Al Quaeda and Ossama Bin Laden knocked down the towers.
Al Queda was NOT in Iraq until 2005.

What about this do you people not understand?

Yes, I sure can support the soldiers but not the war, since I have a functioning brain that doesn't force me to swallow anybody's ideaology hook, line and sinker.

Posted by: nowingker | Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 06:06 PM
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

everyone here appears to have a functioning brain.....they may all not agree with each other, fine....however all mentioned in your post are TERRORISTS....you don't believe that iraq had nothing to do with the towers...irrelevent....the point is terrorism and mandatory to stop all who are guilty of collusion, hatred, threats of harm to the U.S. i may not agree with what you say, but i would defend with my life your right to say it....just as in iraq; NOT!

[danni]

you don't believe that iraq had nothing to do with the towers.....OOOOPS, correction: you don't believe iraq had ANYTHING to do with the towers.....(brain not functioning momentarily...ha!)

[nowingker]

We invaded Iraq based on the idea that it was the 'frontline' of the global war on terror, so I don't see how Iraq in fact not having supported any of the 9/11 terrorists, or conducted any terrorist attacks against the US can be IRRELEVANT.

It isn't 'my belielf' that Iraq had nothing to do wtih 9/11 it is a FACT verified by our own government.

Blood feuds are not terrorism. I guarantee you that when we leave Iraq the Sunni insurgents are not going to follow us back and neither are the Shia militias.

We have no business in Iraq, ALL it has done is increase worldwide terrorism, worldwide hate of the US and gotten a lot of innocent Americans and Iraqis killed wasting time and money that should have been spent finding Bin Laden and destroying Al Quaeda before it had a chance to reorganize.

[danni]

It isn't 'my belielf' that Iraq had nothing to do wtih 9/11 it is a FACT verified by our own government. (YOU BELIEVE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED FACTS VERIFIED BY OUR GOV'T? NAHHHHHHH!)

We have no business in Iraq, ALL it has done is increase worldwide terrorism,(DISAGREE....BUT OK) worldwide hate of the US and gotten a lot of innocent Americans and Iraqis killed wasting time and money that should have been spent finding Bin Laden and destroying Al Quaeda before it had a chance to reorganize. (YOUR OPINION BASED ON WHAT YOU CONSIDER "FACTS"......GOT IT!)

Posted by: nowingker | Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 06:23 PM

[nowingker]

9/11 is a fact, its a fact that Osama Bin Laden planned and that Al Quaeda carried it out.

There are no facts, not even in wingerland that point to any Iraqi involvement in 9/11, Saddam Hussein involved in 9/11 or any operational connections between Hussein and 9/11.

So, unless you think George Bush and Dick Cheney actually have this PROOF of a connection but have held back while the CIA, DOD and 9/11 Commission said the opposite, then you are going to have to admit that there WAS no connection.

It is my belief that George Bush and Dick Cheney tried very hard to confuse the American public about Hussein and 9/11 and that they lied about connections that didn't exist.

Yes, it is my OPINION we should have stayed focused on Al Quaeda, it is surprising that any conservative would disagree with this idea...but, again, the 28 percenters would probably support George Bush if he bombed Paris at this point, none of you are willing to admit the Iraq invasion was a mistake and is a fiasco, you are going down with your leader no matter what.

[danni]

Yes, it is my OPINION we should have stayed focused on Al Quaeda, it is surprising that any conservative would disagree with this idea...but, again, the 28 percenters would probably support George Bush if he bombed Paris at this point, none of you are willing to admit the Iraq invasion was a mistake and is a fiasco, you are going down with your leader no matter what.

Posted by: nowingker | Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 06:43 PM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

although our opinions differ...not to be an absolute pessimist, but we are far from the end of repercussions of this war...whoever in includes; i do strongly feel we have to prevent any and all future possible scenarios (i would not agree with bombing paris.....all that wonderful shopping and food!); one undeniable fact: all great powers throughout history are destroyed from within.....rome, greece,etc........before we fall (as a result of our great polititions!), we must defend ourselves against those hell bent on our destruction....jmho.......

[nowingker]

I agree the repercussions of the war will go on for a long time, maybe decades. I don't happen to believe we can turn Iraq into a thriving democracy, so I think, so far, the results have been to destabilize Iraq, make Iran stronger and more aggressive, foster more hate of Americans by muslims, cement the muslim view that America is not in a war on terror but a war against Islam, allow Bin Laden to escape and Al Quada to regroup, waste billions of dollars that we could use much more productively elsewhere, and expose a weakness in our military that should have been taken care of 30 years ago.

I also agree that all great societies/empires are destroyed from within and that we are well on our way to our decline, and that is the fault of both parties. We long ago ceased to be a country of honor or truth, instead, we've become a country of tricksters, ever ready to exploit a legal loophole or anything or anyone to make a buck. Today, if you can get away with it, you do it. If you can make the public/jury/Congress believe it, then its 'true'.

[Purple Avenger]

"I think that vandalizing cemetaries tends to be something done by drunk teenagers, not adult anti war activists"

Does the name Alexis Fecteau ring a bell? Last time I checked he was an "adult" who was doing some serious vandalism.

[seekeronos]

Heh. I step out for a few hours to go to church, and man, this thread keeps on tickin'.

OK.... lessee:

No-Wingker-Klingker: (again, what's with the extra "k"...?)

There are some groups umbrella'ed under the UPJ that aren't foam-mouthed, Chavez-loving Marxists. But, if you hang around in the bottom of the socialist outhouse for long enough, you are bound to get some of Karl Marx's or Joe Stalin's old doo-doo on you. Not saying, but just sayin', y'know?

The groups like Shalom Center or Vietnam Vets against the war probably aren't likely to be pushing the Communist Manifesto at thier meetings, but the fact that they are willing to be counted in the fellowship of true socialists like the "Black Radical Congress", or the Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, the International Socialist Organization, or the "League of Revolutionaries for a New America" tells me that they have probably compromised any bars they may have had against working with agents of a former foreign power (the CPUSA was internetworked with the KGB of the old Soviet Union).

SO, that makes them (even so-called "moderate" groups within the UPJ) just a little suspect in my estimation.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

As for that group calling for the "end of the Palestinian Occupation"... perhaps you don't realize this, but the PLO and its allies calling for this "occupation" to end are not griping about the lands grabbed during the 1967 or Yom Kippur war; they don't mean just a rollback and a return of Israeli forces to the 1948 borders of the armistice. They want nothing less than the dissolution of the Israeli State, to be replaced by a Palestinian state.

The only problem with that is, there never was a "Palestinian" state to start with. Those Arabs living in the Levant (stretch of Israel + Lebanon + Gaza + west Syria and west Jordan) were collectively Ottomans. The desgination of "Lebanese", "Jordanian", "Egyptian", and "Syrian" fell to the different lands that were carved up by the Balfour Declaration into the various British mandates. Most of the area which is now Israel was set aside as a separate mandate, and bits of Lebanon and Syria fell under French control.

"Palestine" was a bastardization of the word "Syria Palaestina", the Roman-Latin name for the Levant; this was done around the time of the Bar Kochba rebellion in the ealry second century (CA 130) which marked the end of the nominally Jewish kingdom of Judaea under the Idumaean Kings (the Herods). The Romans, wishing to forever eradicate the Jewish influence and entitlement to live in the area renamed the land "Syria Palaestina" which put the last nail in the coffin of the Judaean political entity in the Levant (it had been lingering in a much diminished form following Titus Vespasian's demolition of the Temple in AD 70).

The region was more or less depopulated (some historical reports claim that at least 540,000 Jews were ethnically cleansed from the region, and that number could go upwards of 1,2M Jews, which would include the war dead from the systematic ethnic cleansings later into the second and third centuries as the land was turned into a military garrison against the forward flank of the Parthian Empire.

Later, as Islam became ascendant, the territory was rendered into the Arabic "Filastina" under the Caliphates and the Ottomans, and finally anglicized as "Palestine". That word is a designation for the territory, and not a people of any ethinicity.

Any use of the term "Palestine" to define a nation, therefore, is incorrect. As for the Jewish people, they have a right to that land by right of cultural heritage and clear archaeological evidence which establishes that the Hebrew ancestors of the Jews had a kingdom there dating from at least ca. 3000 BC and possibly as far back as 3400 BC.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Iraq War:

In my opinion... the timing was not right for it, nor were the "reasons" given for it as well thought out and double- and triple- checked as they should have been. Through a combination of emotionalism, panic, a need to secure an oil corridor in light of two regimes that had stated their intentions to (a) convert from a petrodollar deenominated oil bourse to a Petro-Euro denominated bourse, and (b) to eventually secure nuclear arms, or at least, the ability to make nuclear fuel.

Iran is already well on its way to getting both the "fissiles" as well as strengthening its missile technology. Iraq was hobbled by the first Gulf War as well as the Israeli strike on the Osirak reactor in the 1980s, and probably would only attain nuclear power by way of black market connection to North Korea, China, or Russia.

As touching the denomination of the oil markets, Iraq and Iran were both looking to destabilize the American economy at a time when it was very strong relative to the other leading powers; by switching to oil trade in Euro, other nations would be forced to dump their holdings in petrodollars in order to buy shares in Euros. Over the long run, this has been somewhat averted by the war, as well as the weakening of the American economy via Greenspan's flattening of the housing bubble and the following "correction" by Bernanke's interest rate hikes.

After all, we are the biggest consumers of oil, and weaken us too much, and they slit their own throats at the same time. Mucking about with the balance of currencies that the oil trade is linked to would be bad for business all around, and undoubtedly, our oil-glutted Wahabbist "friends" in Riyadh had much to say about this.

Coming back to the timing of the war, I say it sucked big time. Afghanistan (and possibly Pakistan with it) was more than enough for us to chew on for the 8 years of Bush, and would have given us a back door to Iran anyway, if it were needed.

However, we would have ultimately needed to depose Saddam anyway, so as to prevent him from becoming a nuclear problem (which he would have, given another decade of decreasing monitoring and calls by the international community to lift sanctions). Revenge is a very powerful motive, and Saddam had not likely forgotten his humiliation by Bush-41 in 1990-91. Additionally, access to Iraq gives us a very viable beachhead in the region from which to project power into any part of the Middle East, which beats the snot out of having to fly stuff in from Diego Garcia, or beg King Fahd for use of his bases. Lastly, control of the oil resources in Iraq (however tenous and indirect) grants us a potential leveraging point with the Euros as well as the Chicoms and the Arabs themselves, were we willing to do the Machiavellian thing and seize direct control over it.

Setting up a democratic state was a nice, but thus far, an almost altogether wasteful effort. I still hold that with the exception of the Kurds in the north, the fractious Iraqi tribes care nothing for the workings of representative republican (not the party) government, and would have best been ruled as a US protectorate - a military dictatorship for at least 20-30 years whilst slowly working to "democratize" it, and eradicate Islam (or its extreme forms ar least) from the nation.

Personally, I would have liked to have seen some 10,000 Baptist missionaries deployed there to preach the gospel to replace Islam as all the mosques and Islamic details were torn down or reconverted to secular use. Maybe Ann Coulter had that part right (even though she was joking).

[templar knight]

winkie, you and LOL sure like to talk tough over the interwebs. A sure sign of a coward.

[templar knight]

seek, I admire you, but trying to teach these liberal idiots anything is a waste of time. They are so indoctrinated with totalitarianism and hate that they are busy supporting the likes of Chavez and Castro.

They claim to support free speech, then find reason after reason to prevent it, such as calling free speech hate speech, or corporate speech, or political speech, or something or other in order to ban it. They claim to support such things as habeus corpus, yet ask Randy Weaver's wife, or son, about it. They support it, all right, for terrorists.

And I could go on and on with the hypocrisy of this crowd on the Left, but it is useless. You either know them for what they are, or you don't care. Frankly, I detest them, and I know them for what they are.

[Evan]

Seek, apropos Israel/Palestine:

I don't deny anything you wrote here. However, in the Torah, it is written that after the Exodus, the Israelites (i.e. tribe of Jacob) conquered the promised land from the Philistine tribes who occupied it at the time, which I think is the ultimate origin of the word Palestine. What about their right to the land?

My point is that making an appeal to ancient history to determine who has a right to the land is problematic; ancient peoples were typically more localized, more tribal, and lacking any national identity to speak of. Appealing to modern law and history is easier, and possibly more useful. The formation of the state of Israel was legal, occuring under the auspices of the United Nations. (Whether this was good or not is an open question: substitution European colonial powers for Ottoman imperial ones and imposing Westphalian national entities in a region where such a thing was nearly unheard of had a lot of consequences.) People calling themselves Palestinians lived in the Levant at the time, and they were displaced, sometimes forcefully, so that the land could be given to Israelis. Is this right because there was a Jewish Kingdom on that land two thousand years ago?

A parallel question: what about the rights of Native Americans to the land they occupied two hundred years ago?

I don't have the answers, just more questions.

[Fred Beloit]

One thing seems clear, Evan, with regard to any disputed lands, and I hope you will agree. My belief that I am entitled to a certain piece of land does not entitle me to attack civilians on that land in a restaurant with a bomb, a rocket, a missile, a mortar round, etc.

[Fred Beloit]

Don't know if nowingkereringerwink will be rational or rabid today, but here are a few more things for her to think about for her list of elected miscreants comment she put up here yesterday. Cash in the freezer. Fancy boy running gay prostitute ring subsidized by Government money. Phony land deals in Nevada. Husband making big bucks due to wife's influence in Congress. Presidential perjury. Videotape of Congressman turning down a cash bribe "at this time". So I suppose you support term limits for both parties, nowohingnowinkggggggggrrrrrrr?

[Buzzy]

Guess if the left hadn't been chanting BushHitler for years this anti war activest wouldn't seem like such a "person of interest" but reading the story I have to wonder about this VN Vet who was "keeping watch during the night". Maybe he was asleep on watch, it happens, but then again there are sick twisted freaks on both sides of the issue and I'd be talking hard with him first.

[Not a CIA Agent]

"A parallel question: what about the rights of Native Americans to the land they occupied two hundred years ago?"

That fight has been going on for over the past 100 years. But you're right. Suggesting Isrealis or Palestinians have an automatic claim to given plots of land via ancient history would be tantamount to giving the Ohio Indian tribes back Ohio.

The original problem with the Isreali resettlement in the Middle East was that certain groups took it upon themselves not to simply build cities in the desert - like they did in Tel Aviv - but to steal private land from native Middle Easterners through government action, or at least government aquicence. The Isreali bull-dozers are what set the Palestinians off. If a bunch of Native Americans showed up at your front door with a wrecking ball and told you to get the hell out cause you were sitting on tribal land, I don't think you'd particularly care about pre-Columbian US History or land grants of the 1800s. Some dude just swung a wrecking ball at your house. This is the situation many native Palestinians find themselves in today.

[Fred Beloit]

Really, Not? How many? And even if thousands, OK to attack civilians on a school bus?

[Not a CIA Agent]

'Guess if the left hadn't been chanting BushHitler for years this anti war activest wouldn't seem like such a "person of interest"'

What does Les Majeste get you now-adays? Three years in the slammer for comments unbecoming of the President? Hey, Buzzy, do you think the FBI has a file on you between '92 and '00 when you were frothing at the mouth over Clinton?

[danni]

Really, Not? How many? And even if thousands, OK to attack civilians on a school bus?

Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, May 31, 2007 at 09:41 AM

gooooooooood morning freddy and all! hey, the innocent citizens that are victims in any war....well, so very sad, but hell, it is the nature of the beast!!!!! unfortunately!!!! one can never justify these deaths.....

question: why does our media focus on these victims and vilify our troops who are also dying? pretty stoopid question, but it never ceases to amaze me how our mainstream media makes us the "bad guys"....and actually relish the deaths of citizens to prove their point and disregard the loss of our soldiers in comparison.......it is WAR........it sucks......but most civilians die at the hands of their own....ya think?????

[Phoenix]

Poor Palestinians. Damn. Such a shame. You'd think they'd have evolved into a better strategy to take care of their own than blowing themselves up to kill a few Israelis or to stay huddled en masse in refugee camps. There are plenty of Palestinians who saw what progress and a good life was all about by watching the Israelis, and they did something about it. The poor who indoctrinate their children and brainwash them into continuing this schism need some serious intervention. Yeah, bummer for all of them, but too much time has passed, too many people stay in their situation content to kill and fight........... Sorry. Get an education and a job.

And tough if I sound like a simpleton. Many countries, including us, pay to feed the festering mass. Why not stop and let them get a taste of what it feels like to be totally unproductive and useless. And all aid should stop at the first sign of violence. Behavioral modification by outside forces as their leaders can't seem to do crap for them.

[Fred Beloit]

Behavioral modification. I like it Phoenix.

[jong]

“There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.”

That's Attorney General Gonzalez speaking, not some liberal. That's a pretty astounding statement coming from a supposed conservative.

And no, Liberals are not for totalitarianism, limiting free speech, etc.

Yes, suicide bombing is an incredibly stupid strategy for the Palestinians. Had they followed Ghandi's path, they'd probably be much further down the path. But it's a pretty bloody history with terrorism on both sides. Unfortunately, there's so much hate built up there, a solution is far off.

And the some wierd article - but the vast majority of coverage is overwhelmingly positive. That's 99%+.

[jong]

The vast majority of news coverage of our soldiers is overwhelmingly positive - that's 99%+.

[nowingker]

You realize that the Palestinians from Gaza aren't even allowed now to travel to the West Bank to attend school, right? Saying 'get an education and better yourself' is fine and dandy but if they don't have any means to get educated or even leave their villages, what are they supposed to do?

As far as this idea that there are no Palestinians, its pretty racist. The Third World was by and large created by the Colonial powers, the 'countries' as they exist today were carved up by Britain, France, Spain and the Dutch by and large. Unless we are going to redraw the map of the ME, Africa and South American based on the indiginous population groups/tribes and pre-colonial configurations then the 'no Palestinian' argument doesn't hold water. They self identify as Palestinians now and have for over a hundred years. There were jews in the area for thousands of years and there were arabs. This idea that the jews have precedence over the arabs due to the 2000 year old jewish heritage isn't much different than the Italians deciding they wanted to recolonize "Roman Gaul." Certainly, the Palestinians have been ill served by their 'leaders' but it is the Israelis that have siphoned off their water to jewish settlers, the Israelis that bulldoze their houses and farms, the Israelis that lock the entire area down making travel impossible. How are you supposed to earn a living if you can't get out of your village?

The result: a more radicalized generation that have more or less given up on the hope of their own state, self determination or prosperity. All they have left is hate and killing. I don't know why that is so surprising to people. When someone is discriminated against, humiliated, kept in poverty AND there exists a philosophy that enables them to direct their rage at a given spot the natural outgrowth of that is going to be violence. Why did the French start killing any aristocrat in sight? Same reason. Blind hate brought on by poverty and oppression. The Israeli occupation is considered illegal under international law, the jewish settlements are illegal under international law. It is what it is. If there was a foregn army on your doorstep that was destroying your neighbors homes, every so often shooting a couple of 10 year olds 'by mistake' and restricting your movements and your ability to feed your famliy how would you react?

Given the winger propensity for violence I would think that if the wingers were ever put in the same situation the Palestinians are in the intifada would look child's play. Wingers are always talkiong about violence and war to solve the problems, even wanting to round up and shoot the liberal hordes, yet you profess complete astonishment that the Palestinians would ever resort to violence in their situation. Seems very strange to me.

[Not a CIA Agent]

That works really well until you realize that it doesn't. I mean, normally, I would totally agree. If I were fifteen, homeless, and starving and a group of Islamo-fundies picked me up off the street, clothed me, feed me, included me in their gang, and then told me about a magical place called "Heaven" that I could get to by killing evil people, why on earth would I strap dynamite to my chest and rush an Isreali convoy of troops?

Clearly, offering US-sponsored food and medical aid to fifteen-year-old Palestinian kids would do nothing to resolve this problem. What we need to do is encourage Isreal to bomb more of its neighbors, so there will be even more homeless teenagers with no one to turn to except well-stocked rebel terrorists.

War and stupidity beget war and stupidity. At least the Palestinian teenager has the excuse of ignorance. The US and Isreal can't make an appeal to hapless naivete when they go on killing sprees.

[Not a CIA Agent]

"Had they followed Ghandi's path, they'd probably be much further down the path."

Some try. But there's no national unity like there was in India. Also, keep in mind, there was a great deal of violence between Muslims and Hindus all through the British occupation and long after. The big rift between India and Pakistan stems from their diverent religious beliefs.

But the Brits did a really good job of dividing up the Middle East. Constant internal conflict is a feature, not a bug. Those countries didn't end up Sunni-Shia-Sunni-Shia-Isreal-Sunni-Shia by accident.

[nowingker]

Though I hate to agree w/the Saudi princes on anything, they are right to say the Palestinains would be better served by non violent mass protests. When the Israeli army comes to bulldoze Assams house, the whole village should sit in front if it, if the Israelis choose to kill a half dozen or so non violent resisters, THAT will begin, even to turn American jews against them. Repeat this 50 times, adding in the shooting of a few Western journalists and you will see the United States pull its head out of its ass on the Israeli issue and a Palestinian state would miraculously become do able. When the Israelis come to take more Arab land to build new settlements, do the same thing. I mean since they are all already programmed for suicide bombings, ready ot the die for the cause, it should be easy to recruit dozens or hundreds of people willing to let the Israelis kill them. Non violent resistance is the only thing that will save them.

[nowingker]

PS, I absolutely believe that the US put Israel up to the stupid Lebanon invasion. It has all the hallmarks of a Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz operation: move toward a military solution w/out bothering with diplomacy, poor planning, lack of training for the job at hand, underestimation of your foe, over reliance on PR talking points, no Plan B, bad execution. And before you call me a freaking anti semite, please note that this was ISRAEL's OWN assessment of the Lebanon war!

[seekeronos]

I'd say that Israel was incredibly restrained in its response to the Hezzies firing missiles into Israeli territory. Notwithstanding the fauxtography and propaganda - erm, I mean, "journalism" typified by the "Green-Helmeted-Day-Glo-Vested-Guy" and "Shirtless Rescue Guy/Victim Guy" and the compelling photoshoppery like that "Airstrike-but-it-really-was-a-burning-garbage-dump-fauxto"...

...the Israeli military intervention in 2006 into Lebanon was of a surgical and highly tactical nature. Israel could have easily unleashed a carpet-bombing campaign to flatten everything with a 16km buffer zone into Lebanese territory, but it refrained from doing so.

For Evan:

The ancient territory given by the Most High God to the tribes of Israel were roughly within the same bounds as the modern state of Israel, to include much of the occupied territories, and even parts of Syria and Jordan on the _east_ bank of the Jordan River.

Like it or not, (and I will not argue this point) God commanded the ancient Israelites to carry out His judgment of execution (ethnic cleansing, for all practical purposes) against seven particular ethnic groups as follows:

:: (1) When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it,
:: and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites,
:: and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations
:: greater and mightier than thou;
:: (2) And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and
:: utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
:: (3) Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his
:: son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
:: (4) For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will
:: the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.
:: (5) But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their
:: images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire.
:: (Deuteronomy 7:1-2)

The reasons for this God-commanded ethnocide are:

(1) God, in His Holy and Sovereign capacity as the Judge of the Living and the Dead, passed a judgment and a sentence upon these nations who were exceedingly wicked. This is nothing new, as He had judged the Cities of the Plain (Sodom, Gommorah, Zoar, et. al) in Lot's time, and He judged Egpyt with the 10 plagues which essentially destroyed Egypt for several centuries as a regional power.

(2) The magnitude of the wickedness and idolatry of those seven nations was such that it was destroying the lives of innocent children (who were often forced into cultic prostitution at a very young age).

(3) God also moved to protect His people - as leaving any vestiges of the wickedness that those cultures practiced would ultimately infect His chosen people (the Israelites).

(4) God was keeping His promise to Abraham and Jacob, to make them progenitors of many nations, and to give them a land in Canaan. The time between the giving and fulfilment of the promise was 430 years, as He told Abraham that the "sin of the people is not yet complete". The Conquest may also be a fulfilment of a curse which Noah cursed Ham, regarding his sin against Noah. The children of Ham's youngest son, Canaan, were cursed with servitude to the Semites and Japethites.

(5) Conjecturally, the seven nations were guilty of a very deep level of astrology interwoven with demon worship that resulted in demonic/human hybrids or more likely, demonically influenced genetic selection which resulted in monstrously oversized humanoids such as Goliath (at 6.5 cubits or approximately 9 feet 6 inches tall!!) or Og King of Bashan, whose bed was 9 cubits long and 4 cubits wide (about 13'6" x 6'0")... proportionally, that is a single bed for a very tall man, or a very unusually long queen or king size bed!

Being a six-footer myself, and having slept in single/twin beds for a good part of my pre-amrried life, I can remember having only a few inches to spare above my head and below my feet. By simple comparison, Og may have been well over 11 feet tall, maybe 13 feet if he was a bit tight for space.

According to the Bible, there were many such giants in the earth during this time, mighty men of such size that some of the Israelites felt themselves to be like grasshoppers in thier sight by comparison.

Now as for the ancient Phillistines (settled in Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath along the western coast of southern part of the Levant), they were not originally co-ethnics of the above mentioned nations. In fact, they are not likely even of the same Semitic stock as the others - archaeological evidence has shown a clear link of the Phillistines to ancient Crete and Cyprus, where their antecedent (the Caphtorim) culture was a seafaring culture, from which also the Phoenician settlements in Tyre and Sidon (modern Lebanon) sprang from. These have been historically linked to Javan, who was a Japethite, or in another stream of study, to (ancient, Mizraim pre-dynastic/pre-Arab Egypt), a Hamite.

For a combination of reasons and perhaps God's will, the ancient Phillistines (who were non-Semites) and the Phoenicians (distant relatives, and also non-Semites) were left in their lands following the conquest, probably due in large part to Israel's disobedience to God's commands (He in turn, used the Phillistines and other nations to periodically punish the Israelites for their national sins, whereupon if Israel repented, He would raise up Judges like Samson and Jepthah to deliver them).

Over time, they ceased to exist as an ethnicity large enough or fertile enough to re-populate their ancient cities after they were subjugated by Tiglath Pileser in the 6th Century BC, or by Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon some 150 years later. Whatever pockets remained were likely assimilated into the Hellenic, Roman, Hasmonean, or Parthian (Persian) peooples that at various times, controlled the Levant. By the time of Christ, they had practically ceased from being a distinct people.

Arabs on the other hand, are largely descended (but not exclusively so) from any of the numerous Semitic tribes that had settled the Mesopotamian region, particularly Assyria, Babylon, and down the Tigris/Euphrates corridor, with some tribes taking up the archtypic life of the desert nomad in the Arabian peninsula, benefitting from the trade routes to the Orient. Most claim descent from Ishmael, according to Koranic sources and the Hadiths. Genetic and paleolinguistic evidence also support this hypothesis.

Therefore, we are left with the following conclusion: that the modern "Palestinian" Arabs are not discernably related to the ancient Phillistines. Moreover, they are transplants into the Levant, with no greater claim than the late 12th century, when again, the term "Filasteeni" was used to describe the locality they lived in, and not their nationality (for those Arabs thought of themselves as citizens of the Ummah, the Islamic Caliphate). After the break-up of the last Ottoman caliphate, the 19th century residents of the area began to adopt the geographic name as it was given to them by the British (the British Mandate of Palestine), which is more a result of European colonial gerrymandering than by choice of the former Ottoman satraps.

Bearing in mind that Arabs are much more tribalistic than the average, at the point they ceased from being Ottoman citizens, they readily grasped the notion of being "Palestinian", especially when they could not expect to find a home in the new mandates/nations of the Middle East.

Compared to the European and American aquisition of Native American lands... it is not an even comparison: for one, the Jews had had an established state long there before the Arabs arrived.

One can argue that the "First Nations" were also states, but even the most well known of these were but tribal confederacies which did not (for the most part) hold title to land in any way recognizeable or under any legal system. The Native American philosophy on land rights was much closer to a Luddite ideal of a largely non-agricultural, semi-nomadic civilisation, as contrasted with the Mexica civilizations of the Aztecs and thier neighbors, which did have more clearly defined lands.

Now, does any of that justify the treaty-breaking or other injustices perpetrated by the 19th century US government (or that of the Britsh Crown by proxy through Canada, or Spain through Mexico) to the native populations?

Not really. But at the same time, presently, the descendants of those same native Americans are very much integrated into the mainstream of American society. There is no mass call for a "Native American Homeland" to be seceded away from the Union, aside from two or three small fringe groups which have websites with extremely socialistic propaganda and what could be construed as "hate literature" against Americans of European descent. The one I am thinking of is so small that it has to team up with the MECHa to get airtime at those annoying "immigration rallies" which are more about flying the Mexico flag over US territory and proclaiming Aztlan.

There would be no viable economic point to it really: most Native Americans been assimilated, and for us whities to assuage our burdened consciences of "white guilt" for sins committed against brown people several generations befor present, we saddle ourselves with reverse-discriminatory policies like Affirmative Action and quotas and the like... and so we see that sin begets sin, and stupidity begets even more stupid policies.

Tying this back to Palestine, I could see no problem with the concession of the Phillistine port cities (Ashdod, Ascalon) and the Gaza strip as the nation of "Palestine" - under the condition that they could exist peaceably with Israel. But it will NEVER be: both Fatah and Hamas have said that their goal is to see Israel destroyed, and Jerusalem renamed to Al-Quds, and the land of Israel falling under "Palestinian" dominion.

And that won't happen as long as the IDF and the USA is there to back Israel up.

[nowingker]

Well, if you think destroying the entire infrastructure of Lebanon and displacing a quarter of the population while dropping millions of cluster bombs is 'restrained' have at it.

There isn't much point in arguing with someone who believes that "god" gave the jews Israel or that they jews are the 'chosen people'...nowhere to go with that discussion since its not only inherently illogical and unprovable, based on faith, but also extremely racist, in that 'god' chose one particular group over the rest of humanity.

[templar knight]

You liberal jerks apparently believe your own propaganda. If it's not white racism or white colonialism that causes all the problems in the World, then it must be white bread, I suppose. Just so long as it's white something. And for the record, are any of you geniuses any other color than white? I thought so.

Carrying all that guilt around must be tough, but if you will grovel some more, mayhap you will feel better. If it weren't so pathetic, it would be funny watching you white boys and girls setting yourselves up as the protectors of the brown and black people, groveling and groveling some more. But, alas, you bore me with your propaganda, so I'm out of here. Oh, a hint, try sniveling a little more with your groveling and ass kissing, just for a change.

[nowingker]

Save your faux indignation. History is what it is, a lot of the problems with the third world are because the lines of the countries were arbitrarily drawn based on which colonial power controlled which territory and did not take into consideration about any pre existing tribal issues, conflicts, etc. and that often one group was put in power over another group, creating new conflicts that never exited before.

That is reality and history it has nothing to do with 'white guilt' you just throw it in there so you don't have to be bothered with understanding the basis for many of these conflicts. Colonialism left a legacy, both good and bad. Calling the legacy 'propaganda' you do at your peril, it only increases the chances for more stupid mistakes like Iraq based on wishful thinking isntead of history.

[danni]

And all aid should stop at the first sign of violence.

Posted by: Phoenix | Thursday, May 31, 2007 at 10:31 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(applauding!!!!!!!)....if the US would apply this theory and not waiver from it, be very interesting to see the results....sadly, we of the UN, and sympathy for all...well, "no good deed goes unpunished"....the entire world knows we are such wimps.....watch our media....the majority of the population of the US wants the war to end....bullf'ingshit! ok....STOP THE WAR AND CUT EVERYONE OFF FROM OUR AID....FOOD, EVERYTHING......THE FREAKING BOMBS WOULD BE FALLING ON US BY NIGHTFALL.....LOL........