| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| GHcool |
Posted - 05/09/2007 : 23:16:24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi-c6lbFGC4
This shocks and depresses me. Mickey Mouse has occasionally been criticized as being a tool of American hegemony, but has this popular image ever been used to incite hatred or intolerance before this clone? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 18:50:25
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Utterly hilarious.
Worthy of South Park .
Incidentally, according to humanforsale.com, Farfur was worth $1,449,010. 
I'm worth more! So there!
($1,904,650)
Mazel tov!
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 18:12:14
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Utterly hilarious.
Worthy of South Park .
Incidentally, according to humanforsale.com, Farfur was worth $1,449,010.
I'm worth more! So there!
($1,904,650) |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 02:00:56
Utterly hilarious.
Worthy of South Park .
Incidentally, according to humanforsale.com, Farfur was worth $1,449,010.
|
| GHcool |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 08:01:26
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
 I actually found that funny, although I suppose it isn't. 
I did too, in a tragic and disgusting sort of way.  |
| Sean |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 07:07:58
I actually found that funny, although I suppose it isn't. |
| GHcool |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 05:50:49
It seems that unfortunately, Farfour, the lovable jihadist mouse, has passed from this world.
"'Farfour was martyred while defending his land,' said Sara, the teen presenter. He was killed 'by the killers of children,' she added."
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 15:10:09
What a shame that a bunch of crazies made the label "zionist" into a dirty word. Of course, the UN is partially to blame as well, but that was mostly a reaction to those nut jobs.
|
| Downtown |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 13:50:32
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
I'm sorry, but a fair judge must display some form of sympathy to anyone who is forced to leave their homes against their will. I did not agree with the settlers or their politics and thought that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be easier to solve without the settlements. However, after supporting the denial of their homes and livelihoods, I will not under any circumstances deny them the sympathy they deserve. I'll even go one step further and say that I do not deny Palestinian refugees (the original 1948 refugees, that is) their share of sympathy.
Where Downtown and ChocolateLady are correct, however, is that sympathy, like most human emotions, comes in degrees. I am infinately more sympathetic to Eastern European Jews disposessed of their home and forced into ghettos by Nazis for no legitimate reason whatsoever than I am of Gaza settlers forced to leave their homes because they foolishly cling to an outdated vision of "Greater Israel." I am also much more sympathetic to Gaza settlers forced to leave their homes for security reasons than I am toward Palestinian refugees that were pressured into leaving by Arab leaders and expected to return with their enemy vanquished.
I may have stated my case over-emphatically, I wanted to let it be known that I don't play favorites, since on most issues I tend to side with or at least sympathize with the Israelis. But there are many aspects of the Zionist movement I'm very uncomfortable with. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 12:06:11
For those interested, here is an excellent article about Gaza today.
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/articles/2007/rubin/06_18.html
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 06:59:01
One small thing I really should say in defence of the Gaza settlers is that some of them (a minority, mind you) were technically "betrayed" by Israel. The Israeli government actually encouraged people to move to Gaza, by making it as attractive as they could. This was done by those in the government who never believed that we'd ever give Gaza back and certainly, never foresaw the huge problems of security that the area posed. However, in general, those people to moved to Gaza because it was made artificially economically attractive, were the most cooperative during the pull-out, and my hats off to them. Those who went for purely political and ideological reasons were the ones who were nasty and did dispicable things like spitting on and hitting female soldiers, and trying to extort more money from the government. I have no respect for them at all.
For those of you who are listening to former President Carter these days about how the world should have accepted Hamas when they won the election, I beg to differ. All you have to do is take one look at those Palestinians who are trying to escape Gaza to understand why Hamas can't be accepted as a legitimate political body. Moreover, they've kicked out all the international humanitarian groups who were giving aid to sick, hungry and homeless citizens there before the civil war broke out. So not only are the innocent being caught in the crossfire, they are also being deprived of basic human rights, as well as emergency assistance - by their own leaders! Lovely, isn't it?
|
| GHcool |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 06:33:49
I'm sorry, but a fair judge must display some form of sympathy to anyone who is forced to leave their homes against their will. I did not agree with the settlers or their politics and thought that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be easier to solve without the settlements. However, after supporting the denial of their homes and livelihoods, I will not under any circumstances deny them the sympathy they deserve. I'll even go one step further and say that I do not deny Palestinian refugees (the original 1948 refugees, that is) their share of sympathy.
Where Downtown and ChocolateLady are correct, however, is that sympathy, like most human emotions, comes in degrees. I am infinately more sympathetic to Eastern European Jews disposessed of their home and forced into ghettos by Nazis for no legitimate reason whatsoever than I am of Gaza settlers forced to leave their homes because they foolishly cling to an outdated vision of "Greater Israel." I am also much more sympathetic to Gaza settlers forced to leave their homes for security reasons than I am toward Palestinian refugees that were pressured into leaving by Arab leaders and expected to return with their enemy vanquished. |
| Downtown |
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 15:20:37
I don't feel sorry for the Gaza settlers at all. Only days after the 6 Day War, Israel was already sending out signals it was willing to give back the territory it had captured in war in exchange for a peace of paper with the word "Peace" on it, the only real exceptions being Golan and Jerusalem, for defensive and political reasons respectively. Of course, the Arab response to that was "The Three No's" policy, but the point is, everyone who chose to live in the occupied territories knew full well that the status of that land was still unresolved, and that it might eventually be given back or simply abandoned, and it might happen the next day, the next week, or a full generation later. Any of the Jewish settlers who acted surprised or claimed they were "betrayed" by Israel when it unilaterally pulled out of Gaza simply aren't being honest. I mean, come on...Golan and Jerusalem were annexed almost immediately after the war, while Gaza and the West Bank are still in limbo forty years later! They knew full well that eventually the land might be given back.
If anything, they should be thankful Israel didn't use them as political fodder, which they most certainly could have. When word went out that the government (specifically the military) was pulling out of Gaza, instead of "and we're taking you with us whether you like it or not," the settlers could have been told, "you can ride with us and we'll buy out your property, but otherwise you're going to be left behind and you'll be on your own." We all know what would have happened if they'd been willing to leave them behind: the settlers would have been slaughtered within hours of the Palestinian Authority taking control. That would have given Israel the leverage it needs to take the moral high ground, which of course it should have anyway but much of the world likes to pretend Israel has been the aggressor in its 60 years of existance. But they did the right thing and took the settlers out of there anyway, even against their own will when leaving them could have been politically adventageous (at least, globally...I'm sure the Israeli electorate might have viewed it differently). |
| GHcool |
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 07:11:42
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
According to Jewish law, the act of saving a human life overrides everything and anything. Getting those settlers out of Gaza was a life saving act - literally. That many of those people decided to ignore this fact and put dirt and bricks above their own lives, but the State of Israel had to override that, and make sure that they were out of harms way. We tried to lessen the blow as much as possible. Sometimes it hurts to save someone's life, and yes, I know it hurt these people to leave their homes, and I'm sorry it had to be that way, but that's just the way it goes. They're alive and safe, and that's what is most important.
Remember - a home can be built and re-built many, many times, but you can't bring a dead person back to life.
I agree with you on this specific case, but not with your general principal. To take the logic of your argument to the extreme, the Israeli government should take Ahmedinejad's advice and move all of its citizens to Alaska. Israel is a far more likely place to be targeted by terrorists and giving terrorists everything they want would certainly lessen the chance of harm coming to it citizens. This, of course, is unthinkable to any reasonable person, but I imagine that if such a scenerio were considered and carried out, we would see much more resistance (with a much better case) from Israeli citizens than we saw from the Gaza settlers. Therefore, even though houses can be rebuilt while the dead cannot be revived, it seems that even pikuach nefesh has some boundaries. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 06:06:53
According to Jewish law, the act of saving a human life overrides everything and anything. Getting those settlers out of Gaza was a life saving act - literally. That many of those people decided to ignore this fact and put dirt and bricks above their own lives, but the State of Israel had to override that, and make sure that they were out of harms way. We tried to lessen the blow as much as possible. Sometimes it hurts to save someone's life, and yes, I know it hurt these people to leave their homes, and I'm sorry it had to be that way, but that's just the way it goes. They're alive and safe, and that's what is most important.
Remember - a home can be built and re-built many, many times, but you can't bring a dead person back to life.
|
| GHcool |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 16:53:22
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Of course, it wasn't all hearts and flowers here. Much like the experience you all witnessed with Gaza's settlers, the people living in the Sinai weren't happy campers. There was one town in the Sinai called Yamit that was very much opposed to giving the land back to them. There were riots and protests and things of that ilk, and lots of unsavoury behaviour. I think seeing that was more shocking than the peace treaty.
What's sad is that many of the Sinai settlers became Gaza settlers, and the Israeli government literally evicted the same exact families twice in two generations. The news did not cover this aspect of the 2005 Gaza withdrawl very clearly and I had not even known about it until recently.
I think you misunderstood. While I'm sure there were some Sinai settlers that moved to Gaza, I wouldn't say they made up most of the people there. Different types of people entirely went to Gaza than those that went to the Sinai. Gaza got lots of religious people, trying to make a statement about God and the land, blah, blah, blah. Sinai got mostly people who were just trying to find cheap housing and work towards a better life - people from the lower income strata who couldn't afford the prices in the cities. While I'm sure some of them had political reasons for going to the Sinai, most were there for economic reasons. It was only just before the Sinai pull-out that some religious groups trapsed in and squatted to make their point, did a good deal of rabble rousing and caused trouble.
But I would be willing to bet that those late-comer squatters in Sinai who did move to Gaza, were probably at the heart of the opposition to the pull-out in Gaza as well. I have no sympathy for those who fought the Gaza pull-out. They were offered sufficient advance notice, very reasonable compensation, a period of free housing, special non-interest, long-term loans to help them find new apartments, help with finding jobs and/or relocating their businesses, and lots of other things to help them. But they only got that if they agreed to leave peacefully. The guys who cried and ripped their garments and put on sacloth and ashes and injured the soldiers that were trying to take them out, were doing it for effect and to garner international sympathy, and they got little to nothing in compensation. Nor did they deserve anything. Frankly, I don't really care how hard their lives are today, since they brought it on themselves.
(And I doubt they're starving anyway. These types of people know how to get back on their feet just fine, trust me.)
Firstly, I said "many," not "most," of the Sinai settlers became Gaza settlers immediately after.
Secondly, while I was and am personally against the settler movement, I have deep sympathy for anyone forced to leave their homes. The withdrawl from Gaza, in my opinion, was one of the most difficult things Israel ever had to do ... and unfortunately, many Israelis and Israeli sympathizers abroad are ambivalent about the results of this trauma, even those of us that were in favor of the withdrawl like myself. On the other hand, you are 100% correct when you said earlier something to the effect of "Thank God that Israel evacuated those idiot settlers [I wouldn't have called them idiots, but that's beside the point] before Hamas took power." |
|
|
