Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-10-2002, 07:15 PM   #226
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Paul Clark wrote:
Niel,



Sounds like we may agree on many things regarding the Middle East, but I don't subscribe to any conspiracy theory here. To the extent that civil liberties have been abridged, which I think is an open question whose answer is not to be assumed, I tend to believe that occurs as an unintended consequence of what are prudent and necessary measures designed to enhance security (whew!) No wag the dog for me, sorry.

Now, whether or not this is the right time, and these the right circumstances, to "do" Iraq is another question entirely. I assume that the President has more information than I do, so it's likely there's a compelling need somewhere. My point has been that the HOW of getting it done is just as important, if not more important, than the actual doing of the thing. How will have more impact on the character of a post-war Iraq, and Middle East, than anything else, and on what the US standing will be there.

I favor the road to Baghdad running through Jerusalem; those in the government seem to favor the road to Jerusalem running through Baghdad. In the end, as long as you solve both problems, it may not matter the order they're done in. What worries me is that the road that goes direct to Baghdad may dead-end before it ever reaches Jerusalem, in which case I think we're much worse off.

The selection of strategy probably has more to do with domestic political considerations than anything else: the President cannot formulate a foreign policy with utter disregard for that political climate. It may be, for example, that while Jerusalem-first makes much more sense, it's not politically viable in this country as long as someone believes that Israel is mortally threatened by Iraq. Even if that's not true, it may be that many people believe it is, or that someone would like them to. If that were all the case, it might be easiest to solve Jerusalem with Iraq no longer a threat to Israel--that would leave Syria as the sole adjacent Arab power with no peace with Israel. Under these circumstances, it might be harder for the Isrealis to make the arguments they do about threat, therefor easier for the US to get domestic political traction for a policy that, after Baghdad, pressures Israel to comply with all those resolutions and get serious about a Peace.

The counter argument, that you can get all kinds of Arab backing to do Iraq once you've solved Jerusalem is also attractive, as I've said, probably more so. But if it's a non-starter as a policy for the US government, there's no Arab support to even go looking for since we have no initiative.

I always figure if I'm smart enough (or dumb enough, or imaginative enough, take your pick) to dream up arguments like this, someone else must also be--I'm just not that bright. So, ask yourself--if what seems to be the policy looks really stupid, what would have to be true (necessary and sufficient conditions)in order for it to not look or be stupid? Can those people making the policy know those things to be true? If they can, you may have just divined something that's not otherwise obvious. . .which "they" know, but you didn't, until now . . .

thoughts?

Paul
Yes, lots.

This is not a "wag the dog" theory. My mind boggles at the # of countries that we've bombed and invaded when Presidential popularity slips. But here's a brief fact for you number-crunchers:

American forces have intervened elsewhere around the globe 100 times. Indeed the United States has sent troops abroad or militarily struck other countries' territory 216 times since independence from Britain. Since 1945 the United States has intervened in more than 20 countries throughout the world.

Since World War II, the United States actually dropped bombs on 23 countries. These include: China 1945-46, Korea 1950-53, China 1950-53, Guatemala 1954, Indonesia 1958, Cuba 1959-60, Guatemala 1960, Congo 1964, Peru 1965, Laos 1964-73, Vietnam 1961-73, Cambodia 1969-70, Guatemala 1967-69, Grenada 1983, Lebanon 1984, Libya 1986, El Salvador 1980s, Nicaragua 1980s, Panama 1989, Iraq 1991-1999, Sudan 1998, Afghanistan 1998, and Yugoslavia 1999.

Post World War II, the United States has also assisted in over 20 different coups throughout the world, and the CIA was responsible for half a dozen assassinations of political heads of state.

See www.info-ghana.com/facts_&_dates.htm for more.

I agree that domestic political considerations take precedence, but it should be clear that those "domestics" are primarily oil and the military. Your whole explanation of strategy and policy is from a perspective of controlling the almighty river of oil.

And Paul, I do not buy the "prudent and necessary measures" theory. If we feel justified in using terrorist methods to achieve our ends, who are the terrorists, again?

And I'm sorry: the "unintended consequences" of a little thing like running 600,000-700,000 Palestinians off their land in 1947 to make way for Israel was neither prudent, necessary, nor did it create better security. Rather, it creates the problem we see today.

We give top-dollar support to a government intent upon harassing and making insufferable the lives of Palestinians in the west bank, and Gaza. We build the bulldozers, send over attack helicopters, etc. All this is done as a justification for the safety of Israel.

But Israel is not in danger. They are the 4th largest military power in the world, with the only superpower as their strongest ally. If an Arabic nation DID attack, it certainly wouldn't be through Israel.

If this is "prudent and necessary mesures designed to enhance safety," I'd like to see the blueprints for "Plan B," now...

Show of hands: how many of you are tired of having 52% of our budget sent to keep the oil flowing? Yes, many of you and the rest of the world, too. The Pres spent 10min calling all the relevent gov't's, recently to try to drum up support. As you know, the response was less than gratifying for Shrub.

And Paul, I'm afraid that you're probably a lot more intelligent than Shrub appears to be: he appears to think that Sharon is a "man of peace," just to name 1 of the many alternate views of reality to which Shrub adheres (even the most die-hard Jewish settler knows that Sharon is NOT peaceful). Personally, I liked the pretzel-up-the-nose thing: it had style and resembled certain tumbles I've seen on the mat

The way I see it (and there's a lot of documentation out there to support me), the ppl in power do what they can to placate the forces that got them to power (i.e., mostly corporate oil and military mfgrs) and then concoct what nonsense the American public will swallow to accept the status quo. It's why the American public is so out of touch with the world: the mainstream media wants it that way (7 corporations control the media. These same executives have stock many companies, including oil...get it?)

My major suggestion? The root of it all: campaign finance reform. Get the fatcats elected on oil $$ out of government, and then we'll see changes.
Quote:
Deb Fisher wrote:
Anyone out there doing more than writing about this in a discussion forum? Anyone organized? If so, can I join? I've called my representatives, I want to do more.
I wish I knew. I believe that the American public is so cut off from having an effect upon the decisions made in the world that writing your Congressman, sending letters to the editor, talking to others (what we're doing now), and going to marches is the biggest thing we can do.

International marches protesting the IMF, et al, have had a positive effect, and I might suggest boycotts.

Stay informed; ask questions, do not accept the status quo.
 
Old 09-10-2002, 11:47 PM   #227
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
...and one other thing: vote, serve jury duty (did you know, for instance, that juries have the right to veto a law. Trial jurors retain the right to veto, or "nullify" bad laws, though they are rarely told this by the courts), never assume that safety means a loss of civil liberties...what nonsense.
 
Old 09-14-2002, 06:14 PM   #228
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
...a TV show with Saddam Hussein's ex-mistress???

Oh jeez, what next: "Why Saddam Doesn't Floss: Film at 11"

Can you believe the ocean of propaganda that we're being bombard with?

Please Mr. Bush: if you want to send us off to war, why don't you practice what you preach. Put on an NCO army uniform and go to war yourself.
 
Old 09-15-2002, 12:30 PM   #229
Bruce Baker
Dojo: LBI Aikikai/LBI ,NJ
Location: Barnegaat, NJ
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 893
Offline
quagmire of Industry

Despite the many quips, knowledgable accounts of living in the middle east nations, and military experience of many of you, the obvious motivation intercontinental industrial umbilical chord has quickly been passed over.

We continue to be tied to a petroleum based world economy that causes war, crushes governments, and influences some outrageous events in our historical overview.

Are we bluffing in the anouncement to invade Iraq ... probably not. That situation is awaiting the approval of the world governments and restrictions to their economys to give the green light for an invasion.

The history of the world points to leaders and despots being the cause for change, war, and causeing kaos. The fact that we enable leaders to protect our interests, maintain our society, and intervene on our behalf is the because we do not make ourselves known as a force of power in the arena of individual citizens being able to settle international disputes with talk, not weapons of destruction. For some reason, the weapons are much more effective than words.

As citizens of a nation, we try to speak out when things are not correct, and enable our fellow citizens to unite to effectively cause this change. Problem is, cults, nationalistic pride, and economic necessity cause our best intentions to go awry.

I was hoping to see more of the writers who could step outside of themselves, much as we do for Aikido practice, and put aside our differences so that we would rise the petty emotional baggage of namecalling and insinuation, but then our humanity is a difficult thing to master, isn't it?

My opinion of the present middle east situation is that someone will have to get involved before we can have peace.

Our petroleum based economy if the avatar of our actions, whether we admit it or not. If the actual invention of a non petroleum engine was presented it would throw the world into a depression that would be beyond the writings of Nostradamus. Nearly every phase of our economy depends upon this substance, at least at the present time.

Our personal study of Aikido is the hidden weapon of national strength in moral fortitude as well as national pride. We find both morality in the interaction of practice, and strength in our morality to do the right thing.

American history has already shown its willing ness to commit mass murders in the name of resources, land, and personal wealth.

Our sorrow of manifest destiny shows we will commit genocide either politically expedience or economic expedience, by the slaughtering of the Native American population. I say let 'em set up casino's to take revenge on the white man's natural greed, who shoot Native Indian weekdays while professing the love of their religion on Sunday.

anyway .... there are many undercurrents that affect peoples decisions, and the honest truth of what we have to do is not always the moral or right thing to do, but what must be done for the harmony of the situation.

Not to rationalize killing, but sometimes that is the harmony of cutting off the evil that is uncontained by the morality of its own inconscious acts. It must be dealt with on its own terms with the energy being turned back upon itself.

If we learn anything in doing Aikido, it is that when faced with an evil that does not see the light, it must be dealt with, even if it means doing something we do not wish to do.

Of course there is the other moral imperative of letting them hash it out until one leadership is in charge so it unites the rest of the world into another world war,(bomb the bejesus out of one evil instead of many) but that would not morally acceptable either, would it?
 
Old 09-15-2002, 12:37 PM   #230
Bruce Baker
Dojo: LBI Aikikai/LBI ,NJ
Location: Barnegaat, NJ
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 893
Offline
Sorry if I wander, but I did read the entire thread in one sitting, and that would make anyones head spin.

Talk of peace never works unless it is more economically expedience than war. Maybe if we all lived two hundred years we could live long enough to learn the lessons of past history, and experience would speak louder than words.
 
Old 09-17-2002, 12:59 PM   #231
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
And so the US shakes its great, imperial fist and the UN is "stirred" by Bush's "speech."

Earlier, Deb Fisher asked what ppl can do, aside from write their Congressman. I've thought about this question for awhile, and I'm still asking it, to myself. I haven't come up with a complete answer.

But something Julia Butterfly Hill (who climbed a redwood tree for 2 yrs, to avert its getting cut down) said, about causing social change first on a personal level, then local, onto national, and finally, global.

I don't know if its so cut and dried like that, but I would think you start, one person at a time.

The war in Iraq is simply the newest bulging of military expansion by a superpower bent upon global domination by the most violent means available.

However, it is important to stop this insanity now, so you talk about the practical considerations. How is this going to help the world, exactly? What plans do we have for Iraq, other than to knock it back to the Stone Age, so we can have our almighty oil? Is this the way we want to exist and raise children, in a world with Presidents who wage wars in virtual media blackouts while whittling our civil liberties to nothing, running after faceless Arabic (ALWAYS Arabic) bad-guys outside the US while jailing 1000 Arabs in the US (still with no charges), setting up concentration camps, and...I could go on and on.

But ask them: how is this helping YOU? NAFTA takes away jobs in this country; do you REALLY think globialization run by ("our friends") the corporations is a good idea?

I disagree with Bruce's statement, above. Talk of peace is the first step to understanding of the problem. Talk ALONE does nothing (I've tried, lol), but it's a first step.

Our civil liberties are under attack. We need to use those liberties to their fullest advantage before they are taken away from us, by our own leadership.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-17-2002 at 01:07 PM.
 
Old 09-18-2002, 03:29 AM   #232
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Finally, this link might be a good last post for this thread, since no one is responding...it had a great run!

Seven Arguments Against Bombing Iraq

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13898
 
Old 09-24-2002, 04:32 PM   #233
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Finally, this link might be a good last post for this thread, since no one is responding...it had a great run!

Seven Arguments Against Bombing Iraq

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13898
Here is a story from Newsweek that argues FOR a bombing.... An interesting article - what do others think ?


Shock Therapy

Why a U.S. attack against Iraq could launch an era of pragmatism in the region

By Mohammed Al-Jassem
NEWSWEEK IN ARABIC
Sept. 30 issue — Even if the United States launched a full-scale propaganda blitz, it couldn't convince the Arab "street"—or general public—that overthrowing Saddam Hussein is a just and logical thing to do.

SOME ARABS ARE PROUD of Saddam's development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. The more the Bush administration tries to prove that Saddam possesses those weapons, the further it gets from achieving its goal of winning converts to its cause. But the irony is that only an actual invasion of Iraq and the overthrowing of Saddam would produce a radical shift in public opinion, changing the terms of the reference of the public debate.

For now, the rhetoric used to convince American public opinion does not work at all to convince Arab public opinion. In fact, this rhetoric has become a source of inspiration for Arab sloganeering. This is in part the result of widespread anti-Americanism. But, more importantly, it's a result of the fact that the Arabs are living part of their daily lives in a dream world. They sink into a political dream world, fed by the backlash to American rhetoric that is eagerly seized upon and spiced up by Arab intellectuals. The leaders of the Arab world are afraid to dispel or challenge those dreams, since they have no way to justify their own ineffective governments. As they see it, they have to employ doublespeak. In terms of the current crisis, this means publicly rejecting a strike against Iraq, while privately insisting that it should be a painful and final blow to a ruler and regime they all despise.
The Arabs need shock therapy, some kind of tremor that would bring them back to reality and away from their political dreamscape. Egypt's loss in the 1967 war against Israel was the sort of shock that did away with the nationalist slogans prevalent since the July 1952 revolution carried out by Gen. Gamal Abdul Nasser. If the 1967 shock laid the ground for the spread of Islamism as an alternative to the nationalism, the "Saddam Shock" might be what is needed to launch the era of pragmatism. The Islamist mantra has not been dropped yet, but it was tested in the Afghan war and did nothing for its supporters except spark a few demonstrations here and there, which soon died out.
Then the Islamic movements across the Arab world got busy trying to clean up their image and prove that they were in no way connected to terrorism. Some even tried to condemn the terrorist attack on the United States, and wanted that condemnation to serve as a certificate of innocence.
The Islamic movements also raced to present their approach to Islamic thought as "moderate" in an attempt to escape any connection to extremism. This has resulted in a loss of self-respect among Islamic movements.

But if the Afghanistan war has embarrassed the Islamic movements, there are at least two things that have prevented the collapse of the Islamic credo. The first is that, in purely operational terms, Osama bin Laden's attack against the United States was successful and very painful, and it changed the face of America. The second is the uncertainty about the fate of bin Laden, the lack of clear-cut evidence that he was killed by American firepower. The mystery surrounding bin Laden's fate has given the Islamic movements a chance to regain their balance. The fall of the Taliban was not a major coup for America, but the uncertainty about what happened to bin Laden is considered a coup for his supporters.
Nonetheless, the American war on terrorism will continue to weaken the Islamic movements. Most Arab regimes are only too happy to use this opportunity to further diminish their influence. I believe that the Islamic movements realize that it would be a mistake to support Saddam Hussein at this stage, and that they will not repeat the mistake they made when they supported him after the invasion of Kuwait.

Saddam's fall will cause the Arabs to be shattered psychologically. Political depression will set in. I do not rule out the possibility that some Arab regimes will suffer from domestic unrest, triggered by public outrage. Those regimes will find themselves face to face with their people, forced to deal with domestic issues after the United States succeeds in shutting down the last despot who maintained the illusion that Arab slogans can nurture a people. If Washington should also succeed in making the Arab countries mediators in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rather than parties to a broader Arab-Israeli endless war, then the region will really be transformed.
The Saddam shock will end an Arab era that has spanned more than five decades, beginning with the war of 1948 against the newly-created state of Israel. The Arabs have tried all sorts of political slogans during this era. The nationalists had the dream of pan-Arab unity. The Islamists had the dream of an Islamic state. I don't see any new dreams in the works these days. But after Saddam's fall, the dismantling of the extremist Islamic parties and the containment of the Palestinian issue, most Arab rulers will no longer be able to hide from their people by invoking the dangers of "external threats." The Arab leaders will lose the rationalization for the use of "crisis logic," a phrase coined by political scientist Mohammed Jaber Al-Ansari to denote the way the Arabs handle politics, as opposed to the logic of a normal state of affairs.
The next stage in Arab history will be one of internal domestic confrontations. After Saddam, not one Arab regime, including Syria and Libya, will dare oppose the United States, and most Arab regimes will be forced to pledge themselves to slogans like "renewal, reform and change" as a way of keeping their frustrated masses at bay. In this era, the United States will have to find ways to befriend the Arab masses, not the beleaguered regimes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mohammed Al-Jassem is the editor-in-chief of Newsweek in Arabic


 
Old 09-26-2002, 08:45 PM   #234
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Incredible. I'd expect such virulent racism from someone non-Arabic, but I guess I should not be surprised: consider his employers, after all.

His suggestion launching an "era of pragmatism" is, at best, wishful thinking. If you figure that the Arab nations have said as a group that they would consider an attack upon Iraq as an attack against them all, and you have to wonder how he arrives at the rationale that another US war upon Iraq will settle things down.

Also, the article, even though written by an Arab, is racist and counter-intuitive. Nowhere is mentioned the debilitating effects of the embargo. So now "our friend" the US is going to "liberate" the Iraqi's from Saddam and (no doubt) install a former Iraqi oil executive, friendly to the US. This act is going to instill confidence in the West?

Yeah, right. And I have a lot of Florida land to sell the Iraqi's after the war, if they're interested.

I'm sure that OBL cheered (if, indeed: he WAS the mastermind of 9/11....shrub has yet to produce any concrete proof, on that account) when he heard Shrub call the War on Terror a "crusade:" he'll probably get up from his dialysis machine and dance, if we go to war with Iraq. Plenty of Arabic nations will not take kindly to this assault, I imagine.

And if you doubt the implied racism of this article, just substitute "Iraq" for "America" in the article, for a moment. Do you think that we would "shake off our malaise" and "enter into a new era of pragmatic relations" with the country that invades us and implants their own, hand-picked leader?

If anything, this invasion-idea is exactly what OBL is hoping for.
 
Old 09-28-2002, 05:48 AM   #235
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
1) How on earth do you find racism in this article? By your standard YOU would be a racist if you disagreed with things people of your own race were doing. Were white you took part in the civil rights movement racist against whites? Vomiting out "RACISM" every time you disagree with someone is a sad move.

2) UBL is likely dead and as to any "case"(Bush is President not a bit actor on "Law and Order") made against him, UBL bragged about it on tape (no I don't have to "just believe the man" for translation. I have a number of Arabic Speaking friends).

3) [Q] If anything, this invasion-idea is exactly what OBL is hoping for.[/Q]

UBL would not have wanted a friend and safe haven over-run and removed anymore than a "criminal just wants to be caught."

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 09-29-2002, 05:35 AM   #236
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
Also, I laugh when I see someone who got all huffy about someone calling Barbara Lee a "Wacko" tossing out the term "Shrub" with such great comfort.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 09-29-2002, 08:46 PM   #237
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
*Sigh*

Let's get a few things straight, OK?

Firstly, no need to get all jumpy on me. I found the article this side of offensive, but did I insult anyone?

I define a racist as ANYONE who characterizes a certain ethnicity with stereotypical characteristics, positive or negative. An African American who calls all other African Americans idiotic is a racist...doesn't matter what color his skin.

Suggesting that all the Arab nations need is a good invasion (by "whitey," it is implied) to shake them of their malaise is a blanket stereotype of the Arabic nations. The writer implies that they'd be much better off, if they got a good slapping from us. That's racist, no matter whose mouth it issues from.

2. I don't care if OBL and the halleluliah chorus all sang it in unison, it's not proof... and besides: did you REALLY hear the WHOLE tape? Why is there no more evidence forthcoming?

I don't know the answer, nor am I suggesting a conspiracy. I just think that ppl take the point too much for granted.

3. If you think Saddam is a friend of OBL, then you don't know your politics in this arena enough. By the account of a British journalist who interviewed OBL several x's before 9/11, OBL detests Hussein. He thinks the man is a stooge for "the Great Satan."

4. I didn't get all huffy when he called Barbara Lee a whacko. I asked him where he gets his information for thinking that she's crazy (notice, that he did not back it up...he was just name-calling). Michael Neal has a tendency to make statements without backing them up, with facts.

5. I, on the other hand, name-call only with good precedent . Shrub is the nickname given to him during his term as the Governor of Texas: I'm merely carrying on a tradition. I think he earned this moniker; it suits him.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-29-2002 at 08:49 PM.
 
Old 09-30-2002, 05:46 AM   #238
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
What exactly did you straighten out?

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
*Sigh*

Let's get a few things straight, OK?
Italian food is delicious .... Oh, God I am a RACIST!!!!!

Your "definition" of racism is a little wanting. It fits everything and nothing. Under those guidelines I see why you find it so easy to find "racism" everywhere (except against Israel).

As to insulting people, it does not take any stretch of the imagination to see that your accusation of racism would taint anyone who found even a nugget of truth in Mr. Al-Jassem's writings. But, that is the point of making unsupported accusations of "racism."

Some of use merely long for the day that race is as relevant to society as somebodies shoe size.

As to your cavalier defense of your insulting language regarding public figures, while condemning others for doing the same. You do not hold out any evidence (the standard you would hold Michael up to) that the President of the United States is an ornamental plant.

But I do like you idea about insulting nicknames carrying down through the ages. This is a great exception to create in an all to polite society. Lead the way and change your screen name over to whatever nickname the school yard nasties called you in third grade. ("Mick" has some very cool rhyming possibilities that may bring back some fond memories )

Last edited by Brian H : 09-30-2002 at 05:50 AM.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 09-30-2002, 11:26 AM   #239
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Oh, please.

And so we descend to the elementary grade-school level. Don't you think I heard every combination of my name, up to the 7th grade (I wasn't much impressed then, either).

Also, I haven't been governor of Texas, presiding over 53 state-sanctioned murders in ONE YEAR. I did not imitate (over talk-radio) the pleas of one grandmother begging for her life.

If I did, maybe I deserve to be called something plant-like (or worse).

Brian, I'm glad you decided to bring along your ruler: obviously, you'll need to use the milimeters to measure my definition of "racism," with your attacks that lack everything but understanding.

Did you actually EXPLORE what I meant by racist, rather than simply attack?

For instance, the claim that the Iraqi's are "happy" with the idea of the upcoming US invasion, is also racist. You're making a blanket statement about a ppl you have no idea about their feelings. Have you read the Iraqi papers, listened to residents of Iraq? No? Hmmm (BTW, when I say "you," I mean ppl who wish to invade because the Iraqi's desire it. I do believe you made that claim earlier, though, Brian).

Now, there are degrees of racist remarks. Some are red-line, some are subtle. The idea of the "noble savage," for instance. While a generally positive stereotype, American Indians hate it, nonetheless, because it is not who they really are.

But you still misunderstand (and mis-measure) my definition by applying a faulty example.

To say Italian food is delicious, is not racist. You're applying a (aesthetic, not stereotypical) standard to a particular ethnic food, not its peoples.

However, if you said that those Italians all know how to make great food...now that is racist. Again, a mild form, perhaps, but still racist.

P.S. Obviously, I straightened out nothing, but not for want of trying. Rather than simply attack my definitions with unsuitable examples, why not try to figure out what I am trying to say?

P.P.S. What did you think of the 650 ppl arrested in DC, last Sunday? Being a police officer, I wonder how you see this wholesale abuse of civil liberties.

P.P.P.S. Funny you mentioned Israel: one of the few countries with no set ethnicity. Where is the racism inherent in a country with no set borders, receiving the most aid from the only superpower on the planet, who (even now) is discussing mass transportation of Palestinians out of a land where many of them can claim direct lineage on the same land for 500+ years...hmm. Yeah Brian, you're right: the racism IS obvious, in Israel's case...

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-30-2002 at 11:37 AM.
 
Old 09-30-2002, 12:40 PM   #240
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
P.P.S. What did you think of the 650 ppl arrested in DC, last Sunday? Being a police officer, I wonder how you see this wholesale abuse of civil liberties.
Ahhhh ....

Actually, I was there. I did not lock anyone up, but had to put on my riot gear when a group of marchers with urine filled balloons headed my way (they had run out by the time the got to where I was ).

The most fun I had was when the leaders of one of the many protests came over and warmly greated me by name in front of my crowd control detail. (You gain many interesting friends studying Aikido)

About all the people who got locked up ... Igues their mothers never taught them not to play in traffic.

Last edited by Brian H : 09-30-2002 at 12:47 PM.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 09-30-2002, 01:30 PM   #241
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
So you were there, huh? Very funny; if I still lived over in Baltimore, I'd probably be there as well, and I'd say hi to you, too. You'd start to get a rep

Yeah, getting locked up for nonviolent, peaceable assembly= playing in traffic.

And black is white, good is evil, and big brother is your friend.

...urine-filled balloons? Also funny, how they ran out, just as they got to you. I have not heard of any balloons, and it's all over indymedia. Where did you hear that they were tossing urine-filled balloons (not doubting you; just curious)?

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-30-2002 at 01:38 PM.
 
Old 09-30-2002, 01:58 PM   #242
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
The Pooolice Radio. (Isn't that how they say it in Baltimore?)

I only presume that they ran out because there was no shortage of cops to toss them at.

Sitting in traffic is not really "peaceful assembly," it is a petty crime. If I entered your home and staged a sit-in I would not be "peacefully assembled," I would be trespassing. (you can't REALLY trespass in a public road, but you are required to obey the traffic directions given by a policeman. The same principle applies when an Officer directs traffic at an accident, school crossing etc.)

Playing= people who are running around 1)naked 2) with giant puppets 3) dressed as animals or public figures. 4) place rude objects in the hands of statues or 5) have called in sick to their job at a record store to do all of the above.

Last edited by Brian H : 09-30-2002 at 02:04 PM.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 09-30-2002, 02:00 PM   #243
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
... Where is the racism inherent in a country with no set borders, receiving the most aid from the only superpower on the planet, who (even now) is discussing mass transportation of Palestinians out of a land where many of them can claim direct lineage on the same land for 500+ years...hmm. Yeah Brian, you're right: the racism IS obvious, in Israel's case...
Hi Neil,

(off the topic, but I just couldn't resist... One of my biggest problems.)

I know that when it comes to Israel vs. Palestine it's a neverending argument. I just figured from your previous posts that you're a reasonable and thoughtful person, and as such, you might agree that the fact that some people in Israel discuss the transfer policy towards the Palestinians is not enough to reach the conclusion about Israel being a racist country. Desperate - maybe. Out of options - possibly. Racist - never. This problem is very far from being black-and-white, and in my view should be treated as such.

Daniel
 
Old 09-30-2002, 08:54 PM   #244
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
My apologies, Daniel, for creating the impression that all Israeli's are racist. Obviously, they're not.

But let's look at something--you called it: "the transfer policy." We're talking about the mass deportation of a people fiercely tied to their land. To implement a policy would be devastating to all aspects of that people and their culture. It was tried over here, with the American Indians, and that's exactly what happened.

If this policy, targeting a group of people merely because of their ethnicity isn't racist, I don't know what is.

Israeli's are not racist, but their government is set up to limit the liberties of Arabs. The right of return is open to Jews but not Muslims (and likely always will be). Edward Said, an Arabic member of the Knesset, has many interesting insights on the limited freedoms Arabs have in Israel (look him up, if you get a chance).

It's not the Israeli peoples who are racist, its their government.
 
Old 09-30-2002, 10:34 PM   #245
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Brian Heanue (Brian H) wrote:
The Pooolice Radio. (Isn't that how they say it in Baltimore?)

I only presume that they ran out because there was no shortage of cops to toss them at.

Sitting in traffic is not really "peaceful assembly," it is a petty crime. If I entered your home and staged a sit-in I would not be "peacefully assembled," I would be trespassing. (you can't REALLY trespass in a public road, but you are required to obey the traffic directions given by a policeman. The same principle applies when an Officer directs traffic at an accident, school crossing etc.)

Playing= people who are running around 1)naked 2) with giant puppets 3) dressed as animals or public figures. 4) place rude objects in the hands of statues or 5) have called in sick to their job at a record store to do all of the above.
So then: you really don't know if they had urine in the balloons, or not...?

Stopping traffic, that's a good one. I guess it could just as well have been "loitering." Whatever works, right?

I guess re-directing traffic was too much work for all those masses of assembled police (many bused in from other areas) and military.

No slants to you, Brian, but what can I expect from the Defenders of the Corporate World? Protect those Starbuck's stores at any cost, right?

http://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?a...&group=webcast
 
Old 09-30-2002, 10:39 PM   #246
Chocolateuke
Dojo: Muhu Dojo
Location: Middle of nowhere in California 14 miles from Buellton
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 238
Offline
er.. this suxs

Don't get me wrong but a man in the senate wrote "35 questions about the war on Iraq that will never be asked" one of them really hit my nerve...

" Why is it that our generals are less intrested in going to war, when the politions are trying to make the war start?"

I mean, is it usually the opposite? just a question. cya

Dallas Adolphsen
 
Old 10-01-2002, 06:07 AM   #247
Brian H
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
The urine filled balloons were rather popular in Seattle, when some protesters were seen with balloons, the alert when out to all the cops. There was little we could do, so we just put the visors on our helmets down (clear visors Neil, only the protestors get to hide their faces). Beyond that I was only concerned with the area I could see around me. Everything else was left to the cops that were in all the other places and the arrest teams.

I understand why the protesters do "direct action." It is camera bait and it works. Every TV station started off with heavy coverage of the protests and the arrests. Protests are old news in DC so even the big ones gets short coverage. Spicing things up with a little rough stuff gets the protesters on the news.

But is it a "winning" strategy, I don't think so. Ultimately the protesters are playing the spider's (the Defenders of the Corporate World ) game in the spiders web (the streets) by the spiders rules (cut and dried traffic law). I have done crowd control for dozens of protests over the years, and my take on the IMF protests is that they focus to much on stunts and tactics and not enough on getting their message out. Using the Million Man March as an example - it was a moving experience just seeing how focused and intense everyone was, while last week most of the passersby were commenting stuff like "those guys need to get a job and take a bath."

I am not a fan of the IMF/World Bank (although I know some very nice/dedicated people who work there). I just don't like the big money solutions that they favor. Big money means big waste, big corruption, big unintended consequence and only help big companies. As a proud capitalist, I see a global small business administration giving much smaller amounts of money to many, many different small concerns. The help would be more broad based and the gain would be from the bottom up, not the top down.

And finally, yes Neil you got me. I am a major coffee hound. I spent several hours on Saturday down the block from a Starbucks. Though I was not called to action, I would run down there to stand alone and defend the bean.

Last edited by Brian H : 10-01-2002 at 06:19 AM.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
 
Old 10-01-2002, 07:15 AM   #248
Guest5678
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 135
Offline
Brian,

I'm with ya pal! Save the beans! Save the beans! Starbucks rules!..... well, first thing in the morning they do anyway! Ahhhh.. sumatra, colombia, mocha Java..... hmmmmmm...coffee..!!
 
Old 10-01-2002, 07:51 AM   #249
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
But let's look at something--you called it: "the transfer policy."
It's a translation of the Hebrew term they use sometimes in Israel for this thing.
Quote:
If this policy, targeting a group of people merely because of their ethnicity isn't racist, I don't know what is.
AFAIK, this policy is not widely supported in Israel (government or voters). The political parties that advocate it used to get very few seats in Knesset ("used to" being the key words here, I don't know what's going to happen on the next elections).
Quote:
Israeli's are not racist, but their government is set up to limit the liberties of Arabs.
There's a fair amount of inequality in the Israeli society, that's true. To my knowledge though, there were many signs of improvement (this is judging from my personal experiences, not from my expertise (or lack thereof) of the Israeli social situation).
Quote:
The right of return is open to Jews but not Muslims (and likely always will be).
"Always" is a very strong word. I'd agree that it's not likely to be resolved overnight, just as any complex issue isn't.
Quote:
It's not the Israeli peoples who are racist, its their government.
Unfortunately, as long as the terrorism continues, the support for those "racists" is just going to grow. Again, I think it's a product of desperation, and the sooner the other side understands that, the better it is. For both sides.

Daniel
 
Old 10-01-2002, 01:17 PM   #250
Paul Clark
Dojo: Yellow Springs Aikido
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52
Offline
Daniel,

I have a number of questions that you seem qualified to comment on, and maybe answer. None of them is intended to be rhetorical--I want to know what you think and what you think the policy is--please take these in that spirit and do what you can

1. When Israelis talk about "transportation" (the word I've read in most stuff in English), do they usually mean movement of Arabs out of the Occupied Territories, or out of Israel proper, or both, or none of the above?

2.Regarding right of return, a complex issue and no doubt. I've often wondered how an Israeli explains that to himself and to others. Now's my chance-can you take a swing at "why is it "democratic" that any Jew can come to Israel and be a citizen in a week, but no Arab who didn't or couldn't stay through the '48 war can do so?"

3. As an afterthought to 1 above, I guess an obvious question becomes something like "if "transportation" is something that Israelis can contemplate, how would they explain that this would be different from the ethnic cleansing that Milosevic attempted in Kosovo in 1999?"

thanks

Paul
 

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are you knew there Aikido in IRAQ? Wissam J. Faraj General 5 02-14-2006 06:45 AM
Iraq Aikido makuchg General 21 11-06-2005 04:36 AM
Help for soldier in Iraq?? ServinginIraq General 12 11-23-2004 10:10 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:32 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2017 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate