Interesting article, further to 'wag the dog' below
-
Anna :) wrote: if I can cope with the community here But you're a girl. We're nice to girls.:) We guys just rip each other apart. :laugh: David Stone But Clinton wasn't a predictable, boring, aging, lying, eloquent, maintainer-of-the-status-quo. He was a predictable, boring-but-trying-to-look-hip, aging-and-fat-but-seemingly-oblivious-to-it, lying-but-in-sadly-blatant-ways, not-eloquent-but-trying-to-make-up-for-it-by-talking-even-more, bringer-in-of-scary-and-potentially-dangerous-new-policies. And there was also Al Gore. It just wasn't *right*. Shog9
-
I read an interesting article in The Telegraph a couple of days ago, and reading through the 'wag the dog' thread below reminded me of it. I thought others might be interested too (it's a bit long though...) "How do the young Muslims of the Middle East reconcile a fascination for Western life with their intense loathing of America? Graham Turner vists Beirut and Damascus"[^] Any comments? (As a first-time poster to the Lounge, I'm too scared to make my own :~ )
"We are the knights who say Ni" (The Knights Who Say Ni)
Looks like he knew what he was going to find before getting on the plane :suss: Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Mike Upton wrote: Any comments? (As a first-time poster to the Lounge, I'm too scared to make my own ) Hi Mike...welcome to CP. :-D Don't be scared to post - if I can cope with the community here (and believe me it was interesting at first) I'm sure you can. Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia GraeschI wonder if the US has a comedy like 'Men Behaving Badly' :eek: Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
David Stone wrote: We're nice to girls. *lauren chokes*
"... and so i said to him ... if it don't dance (or code) and you can't eat it either f**k it or throw it away"
sonork: 100.18128 8028finder.comlauren wrote: We're nice to girls. *lauren chokes* *pats Lauren on the back* Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
I read an interesting article in The Telegraph a couple of days ago, and reading through the 'wag the dog' thread below reminded me of it. I thought others might be interested too (it's a bit long though...) "How do the young Muslims of the Middle East reconcile a fascination for Western life with their intense loathing of America? Graham Turner vists Beirut and Damascus"[^] Any comments? (As a first-time poster to the Lounge, I'm too scared to make my own :~ )
"We are the knights who say Ni" (The Knights Who Say Ni)
I just hope the Muslims in the Middle East learn from their encounters with Europe and America over the last 200 years. Regardless of who's fault it is, the middle eastern countries have faired poorly in every conflict they have been in with modern western powers. Provoking another all out war is a good way to be invaded and "recolonialized".
-
I wonder if the US has a comedy like 'Men Behaving Badly' :eek: Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
Trollslayer wrote: I wonder if the US has a comedy like 'Men Behaving Badly' hehe I shudder to think! :laugh: I suspect it's a little too off the wall for the US. Maybe one of our US colleagues could enlighten us? Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch -
Anna :) wrote: if I can cope with the community here But you're a girl. We're nice to girls.:) We guys just rip each other apart. :laugh: David Stone But Clinton wasn't a predictable, boring, aging, lying, eloquent, maintainer-of-the-status-quo. He was a predictable, boring-but-trying-to-look-hip, aging-and-fat-but-seemingly-oblivious-to-it, lying-but-in-sadly-blatant-ways, not-eloquent-but-trying-to-make-up-for-it-by-talking-even-more, bringer-in-of-scary-and-potentially-dangerous-new-policies. And there was also Al Gore. It just wasn't *right*. Shog9
David Stone wrote: But you're a girl. We're nice to girls. We guys just rip each other apart. Thank you David. :rose: In fact there were a couple of people who were a little off with me when I first started talking last October (I don't think they knew what to make of me), but at least that's all in the past now. :) Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch -
Reverend Stan wrote: So, lets agree that the culture which has changed the least in the last 1500 years be the first to show some flexibility. i'm not sure that's vaild a criteria. but, i'm sure we'll all work something out eventually. until then, keep your eyes out for disgruntled arabs... -c
Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.
Chris Losinger wrote: until then, keep your eyes out for disgruntled arabs... I think we should keep them busy looking out for disgruntled rednecks. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
interesting article, scary too. i'll make the same comment i always do: They really do hate us for what we do. and i'm sure the same people will make the same comments they always do. then i'll say something like "GWB is a fool" and someone will accuse me of being a "liberal" because i dare question the govt. and so on. -c
Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.
Chris Losinger wrote: and i'm sure the same people will make the same comments they always do. then i'll say something like "GWB is a fool" and someone will accuse me of being a "liberal" because i dare question the govt. and so on. Now Now Chris. I would never call someone who questioned the Govt. as being a liberal. I would classify that person as a independant ( quasi Rebublican ). Democrats and liberals think that the Gov. IS the solution - there is nothing wrong a new law or a new tax or a new policy or a new federal level committe won't fix. Repuclicans and independants look at ANY interference with a juandiced eye. We belive in less Gov. less taxes , less regulation, more dependance on oneself. So welcome to the club !! As far as I'm concerned the feds should stick to national defense and interstate commerece and let the States do the rest but I know that isn't going to happen. One can hope however. GWB may be a fool but he's your fool so back him up till 2004. Then you can throw him back to Texas. Richard When we mean to build, We first survey the plot, then draw the model; And when we see the figure of the house, Then must we rate the cost of the execution. William Shakespeare (King Henry IV)
-
Chris Losinger wrote: and i'm sure the same people will make the same comments they always do. then i'll say something like "GWB is a fool" and someone will accuse me of being a "liberal" because i dare question the govt. and so on. Now Now Chris. I would never call someone who questioned the Govt. as being a liberal. I would classify that person as a independant ( quasi Rebublican ). Democrats and liberals think that the Gov. IS the solution - there is nothing wrong a new law or a new tax or a new policy or a new federal level committe won't fix. Repuclicans and independants look at ANY interference with a juandiced eye. We belive in less Gov. less taxes , less regulation, more dependance on oneself. So welcome to the club !! As far as I'm concerned the feds should stick to national defense and interstate commerece and let the States do the rest but I know that isn't going to happen. One can hope however. GWB may be a fool but he's your fool so back him up till 2004. Then you can throw him back to Texas. Richard When we mean to build, We first survey the plot, then draw the model; And when we see the figure of the house, Then must we rate the cost of the execution. William Shakespeare (King Henry IV)
-
Chris Losinger wrote: until then, keep your eyes out for disgruntled arabs... I think we should keep them busy looking out for disgruntled rednecks. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
Reverend Stan wrote: I think we should keep them busy looking out for disgruntled rednecks. if i thought that that would work, i'd think it too. but, fighting terrorists with armies hasn't had much of a history of working. ask israel, india, britain or russia how effective there military is in stopping terrorists. -c
Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.
-
Overall, a good article. I'd recommend it, with a few notes. The strangest thing about Israel-Palestine is that they are both outraged over offenses that they both commit. For example, it's no secret that Israel is the holy land for the Jews. Jerusalem is the most holy city. Now Palestinians (rightly) hate that the land is being taken from them. But, I have to ask the question, "If Jews were in control of Mecca (the holiest place for Muslims), how many Muslims would be fighting to take it back from the Jews?" Why there's simply no debate that there would be thousands (millions?) of Muslims willing to kill the Jews to take back Mecca. At the same time, the Muslims see the Crusades as an example of Western evil. But, the land of Israel was their holy land, too! How can Muslims look at the Crusades as evil if they themselves would do exactly the same thing today if Christians were in control of Mecca? Additionally, a poll in Saudi Arabia showed that a large number of Muslims hated the fact that US troops were in "the holy land". The fact that "the dirty infidel's" foot was in the holy land was an offense, and yet, they can't understand why the Jews want their holy land??? It makes no sense at all, unless you take into account that people ONLY see things from their own viewpoint. Other examples from the same article: "After what Jews have said about us, calling us pigs, refusing to recognise that Islam is a great religion - even if we got our land back, the agreement would not, in my opinion, last very long. Muslims have been calling Jews names for a long, long time. Recently in California, someone found a copy of the Koran from the early 20th century which had footnotes which were blantent anti-Jewish sentiments. (Wow, they're even writing hatred of the Jews into their holy books?) I'm not saying that one side or the other started it, but I absolutely disagree with the implication that the Jews are completely to blame. Other notes: The Jews, al-Azmeh went on, seemed utterly blind to the irony that they were now doing to the Palestinians exactly what their own persecutors had done to them in the past.... The Nazis had treated them as Untermenschen: they were doing exactly the same to the Arabs, he said. And they were driving out thousands of young Palestinians into the same kind of diaspora as had once been inflicted on them. Sorry, the Nazi-Jew comparison is WAY overstated. If the Jews put millions of Palestinians in work-camps and begin gasing them, I'll believe it. B
Just wanted to comment on one thing Yes, it is no secret that Palestine is holy land to the jews. It is no secret that it is holy land for the Christians. It is also no secret that it is holy land to Muslims. What concerns me (I am a palestinian, and I am speaking for myself) in the Jew-Palestinian conflict is not the 'holiness' thing. We both come even with it, as Muslims and Jews, so it can be taken out of the equation. What concerns me is that we have been forced out of our land. Put yourself in my place. If, for example, Russia manages to occupy the USA, and you are an American. The push all americans and squeeze them in only a couple of states and settle in the remaining huge area. Would you ever give up your claim of right in the lands they settled? even after 50 years? even after a 100 years? I am a university student. This semester, out of 4 study months, we managed to attend 5-6 weeks only. The semester before 2 monthes. All in the name of Israeli security. My university is 10 minutes from Ramallah, where I live, and it lies 'inside' the west bank, people going to and from it cross a road that leads to Ramallah and no other way. There is a (what can I call it.... 'Security' gate? ) midway between Ramallah and the Uni, and recently another at the entrance of the road to the Uni gates. Who are they protecting and how? Sure, they can say that it is our doing that caused this. I can say their doing is what caused this, and we can play the 'you did it' game for hours. I don't agree with suicide bombings, and consider them against our cause and belief. I don't think that the Israeli response is the going to change anything. At least not for the better. The only solution to this situation is a fair one. And until such a solution arrives, you can safely bet it will be worse. -- Young Basic programmers never die... they just GOSUB and never RETURN.
-
Just wanted to comment on one thing Yes, it is no secret that Palestine is holy land to the jews. It is no secret that it is holy land for the Christians. It is also no secret that it is holy land to Muslims. What concerns me (I am a palestinian, and I am speaking for myself) in the Jew-Palestinian conflict is not the 'holiness' thing. We both come even with it, as Muslims and Jews, so it can be taken out of the equation. What concerns me is that we have been forced out of our land. Put yourself in my place. If, for example, Russia manages to occupy the USA, and you are an American. The push all americans and squeeze them in only a couple of states and settle in the remaining huge area. Would you ever give up your claim of right in the lands they settled? even after 50 years? even after a 100 years? I am a university student. This semester, out of 4 study months, we managed to attend 5-6 weeks only. The semester before 2 monthes. All in the name of Israeli security. My university is 10 minutes from Ramallah, where I live, and it lies 'inside' the west bank, people going to and from it cross a road that leads to Ramallah and no other way. There is a (what can I call it.... 'Security' gate? ) midway between Ramallah and the Uni, and recently another at the entrance of the road to the Uni gates. Who are they protecting and how? Sure, they can say that it is our doing that caused this. I can say their doing is what caused this, and we can play the 'you did it' game for hours. I don't agree with suicide bombings, and consider them against our cause and belief. I don't think that the Israeli response is the going to change anything. At least not for the better. The only solution to this situation is a fair one. And until such a solution arrives, you can safely bet it will be worse. -- Young Basic programmers never die... they just GOSUB and never RETURN.
I agree with that. I agree that it's terrible that Palestinians are being pushed out of the land. But, it's almost a case of what happens when an "unstoppable force" hits an "immovable object". It seems that one person says, "It's an unstoppable force - therefore the object will move". Another person says, "It's an immovable object - it will not move!" It seems the same with Israel/Palestine. One side says, "It's our holy land, we will never give it up!" The other side says, "We were living here, so we will never give it up!" As far as Israel/Palestine being the holy land, I generally lean towards the Jews on this one. Why? Because it's the only holy land for the Jews. For Muslims, Al Aqsa is the third most holy site for them. The site where Mohammed ascended into heaven, correct? (Being third is not something to be ignored, and I think in the current state of things, the Muslims aren't going to be willing to give anything to the Jews - because they're the Jews.) So, I think Jerusalem / temple mount is more comparable to Mecca. (I absolutely disagree that Israel should be able to touch the temple-mount, however. The existing mosque has to stay there. But that's rather obvious, isn't it?) And, I disagree that Muslim and Jewish claims to Israel/Palestine as "their holy land" are equal. Both are important, but equal? Similarly, I don't think Christian claims to Israel/Palestine as their holy land are as important as Muslim/Jewish claims. Fortunately, the Christians aren't pushing their claims, and Christianity doesn't see as much significance in holy sites, anyway. (Maybe I'm just speaking as someone with a Protestant background.) The only solution to this situation is a fair one. I agree. It will be a bit tricky to convince each side that any particular solution is fair, however. The US has done some work to try to satisfy both sides (like when Clinton offered the PA $30 billion dollars as part of a deal to work-out peace between the Israelis and Palestinians - that's nearly $10,000 per man, woman, and child living in Gaza and the West Bank!). Unfortunately, the PA called it a "bribe" and turned it down. (Personally, I think Arafat isn't decisive enough to actually accept a deal.) I think a "third party" offering benefits to both sides could allow each side to say, "Yes, this is a good deal, we both get 70%". Nevertheless, there will always be some Palestinians who feel they were short-changed and will probably continue attacks on Israel (even after any final agr