Another popping-in point.

AE, I would agree with you that's likely the "strategy" on Clawson's part; hence, the abhorrence of Nazism and the embracing of anti-Semitism in the same breath. Of course, I am not a mindreader, and for all I know Clawson gets off the subway car after seeing a woman with a Mogen David necklace, and curses "damn Jews" all the way home. I have no idea.

However, taking for granted that Bob is having fun with language, I see the inherent disrespect to Jews, or to Arabs and Jews collectively, as an obvious exercise in -- you guessed it -- anti-Semitism. If the point is to deny the world this term, it would seem more apt to deny the world opportunity for this term to have meaning. At the very least, one could do so by example if not activism on the point.

I would think having no personal experience of anti-Semitism might give one pause when evaluating one's ability to consider it a moot point, and to ridicule its existence in the bargain.

If indeed this is Mr. Clawson's intent, the only difference is that he is unaware he's speaking the truth.

Mature (and I would hope, accurate) reading on your part; thanks.

Dan

Just a general comment on the debate:

The purpose of this debate in not to discover whether Bob in an anti-semite (in the traditional sense of the word). He may disclose any bias he may have if he thinks it will further his argument; it’s his prerogative. Not to put words into his mouth, but his stance in the debate is that Israel are the aggresive warmongers, and those who chose to fight (with whatever means available to them) Israel’s injustices, are the underdogs who deserve our understanding/support. Bob will correct me if I’m wrong.

Stephen

Bob,

How did you find the MySpace pictures of me and Lilith? But you have to admit that she's totally hot. Adam was a loser for dumping her, since she was hot even back in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Kevin

RJ

from a Sept 09 post:

From the comment concerning accuracy, I sense that their very inaccuracy implies they have no more effective value than terrorising?

I state factually: high inaccuracy does not equate with only the 'terror tactic' aspect. High inaccuracy killed, maimed, ruined, damaged and shattered. Fortunately for the Israeli side (and sorry for repeating points already made a long way back) there was perhaps less killing simply because not one single building of any kind whatsoever is allowed to be constructed throughout all parts of Israel, without highly efficient bomb shelters, and it is a sad fact per se that this is how a country needs to operate, but it is a fact not emulated by the Lebanese and others of Israel's neighbours and if it were to be applied, would go a long, long way to reducing unnecessary civilian loss of life (and one wonders, indeed, why these countries leave their civilian population in a state of possible insufficient protection...).

However, there was so much damage and ruin, but which simply did not interest the media sufficiently to warrant the kind of coverage Lebanon merited. In any event, it is not my intention to balance the kind or scope of damage each country suffered; but Israel did NOT 'take out' (a term I've seen employed elsewhere) the new Rafik alHariri International Airport, or other important/strategic/newly reconustructed sites or areas of Lebanon, because decimation of Lebanon at large was not its goal.

Nor did Israel, at any time, during or prior to this last bout of war, take captives -- an important point to keep in mind, being that same issue which triggered the whole messy and bloody and ruinous sequence of events.

Now: it is time for an admission. During this war, and with much family and many friends in northern Israel, I decided to go visit and spend a full week boosting morales, and another almost 2 weeks ferreting goods and people up and down, north south, to the best of my ability. Interestingly, we got a lot done at night, as Hezbolla rarely fired after nightfall (about 8.45 pm) so that infra red equipment couldn't pick out their positions.

I can therefore give you first hand facts: because of the high inaccuracy of Katyushas, WHEN it was possible to track their inflight, we had from 5 to 50 seconds to find shelter. (Humor always helps. You have just gone to shower, all soaped and shampooed... ooopsie, what to do as the WOOOOOO of the siren gets closer and louder?? If it's not smoke gets in your eyes, it's soap gets in your eyes...)

But more often it was zero seconds - first we heard the tremendous screech in the sky, then the massive boom, and then it was time to say 'whew, that one was close' and continue going about whatever we were up to or checking the vicinity to see who needs help. Within the first couple of days, I lost count of how often it was 'inaccurately' necessary to dash for cover ...

Another real life fact: it is hot in that area. It never rains the whole summer. Summer can be 9-10 months long. The ashpalt on the road never cools off during that whole time. What do you do if you are travelling and happen to pass an inhabited area and hear the sirens? IDF Home Front Guidelines: You stop the car, throw yourself on the ground, arms around your head as best as possible. This is because Kathyushas carry thousands of metal pellets, nuts, nails, screws and bolts, and sharpened slivers of metal, all intended not only to blow you apart but to make it as gory and painful as possible. Therefore, by rules of physics, a Katyusha landing close to you will scatter its array of gory possibilities in an arc and hopefully you will be out of the range of that arc... but yes, they are inaccurate, so you have a 50/50 chance at any given time. Therefore, before you travel, you toss a blanket or such into the car, one per person, to try and grab with you as you brake suddenly (while trying not to cause a traffic accident) , throw yourself down and slam your face down ASAP, and more-or-less position the blanket so that you don't get 3rd degree burns on the delicate skin of face and arms, as you try to stay alive. And what do you do if you are travelling country roads and don't hear the sirens? Ignorace can be bliss....

One story of the many many I could describe: At the moment, two little girls I personally know, aged 6 and 8, are undergoing psychotherapy because, when they returned to their home in the north, not far from the border, the <u>only</u> room in their family home that entirely disappeared when a Katyusha landed on it, was <u>their bedroom</u> and they clearly understood what the outcome could have been, if they had remained one more day in their house... indeed a fascinating age and way to understand one's fragile mortality.

I think I have made it clear in earlier posts that I am sorry for all losses of life that are unnecessary, but a Katyusha is as deadly a weapon as they come, in fact, with the added factor of being 'inaccurate' and thus harder to track; a weapon not to be taken lightly and dismissed as nothing more than a tool for terrorising. It kills, it maims, and it does so horribly. And it has been doing so for six whole years.... (or perhaps, Israel should just grin and bear it for Kevin's suggested six more...)



[This message has been edited by Seree Zohar (edited September 10, 2006).]

Thanks for the vivid and interesting post Seree, always good to get on the ground impressions that bring those abstractions to horrifying life. Two things that snagged at me though:

That word, 'wonders', might seem innocent enough, but, as I'm sure you're aware, it carries in this instance a whole freight of speculation, some of it rather smug, along the lines of: 'Do those countries really care about their civilians? Naw, not as much as the Israelis do about theirs.' And I know you're not actually saying that Seree, but it IS in there, isn't it? And that makes ME wonder. Because, why wonder in the first place? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine Isreal's superior resources and organisation (and MONEY) have at least something to do with this particular inequality. No? Do you believe then, that the Lebanese care less about their civilians than the Israelis do about theirs? And if you DON'T believe that, why not suggest at least one alternative, rather than leave us wondering...?

This discussion of the finer points of weaponry seems like another attempt to claim a moral high ground for the IDF. Why? From what you've said Katyushas, at their worst, are about as evil as the mines sown by the IDF, apparently illegally, which children are so fond of playing with.



[This message has been edited by Mark Granier (edited September 10, 2006).]

Mark:

What a shame you choose to mis-read my words. So here is one possible, accessible, doable option to balance

-- what percentage of the world population is the Jewish population? (sorry, insufficient time to backtrack and check the figure though it did appear here); and of that world Jewry figure, what percentage actively identifies with Israel and supports it?

well, that percentage of world wide Jewry is multiplied many, many times by the equivalent world wide Christian and/or Muslim Arab populations. So, one can only wonder why these brethren feel the need to fund terror in millions and billions and gadzillions of dollars, rather than build up equivalent resources, education and so on. It is my humble suggestion that you approach leaders of these Arab world populations and request your answer, of why they don't share more good and beneficial support, direct from them.

Mark,

“the Lebanese care less about their civilians”

By “the Lebanese” who are you referring to? I thought you were concerned about precision in language. You are too quick to read whatever you choose to in the comments of the opposing argument, and woefully unable to see what is inferred in the comments from those you choose to align yourself with.

Why is that?

Stephen

Mark:

Further to my above point (sorry, had to go away for a couple of minutes...) - I would wonder, first, why leave a citizenry unprotected in general by maintaining a terrorist presence in its midst; and if terror warfare is to be engaged in, (why else would the terror organisation be there, otherwise...), why not protect the citizenry?


Mis-read #2:
and a most interesting mis-read too, (and a most disappointing one) and surely not purposely directed that way, particularly after I specifically stated my comments are relative to Katyushas being termed a tool for terrorizing and their efficacy nothing more than that.


----------

RJ:

Little problem: picture this - farmhouse in the olive grove; two families in 12 rooms, one room dedicated to Hezbolla arsenal or being actively appropriated as a position from which to target the other side. Little problem, no? I would be interested in hearing your possible rational solution. (BTW, the picture is not fictitious nor isolated or occasional; it is real and it is a norm; and even if the host family is against its home being used thus, the host has little say in the matter).

[This message has been edited by Seree Zohar (edited September 10, 2006).]

Stephen, although far too much time and attention has been given to Mr. Clawson's anti-Semitism, it does indeed bear on the need to take his discussion of the matter seriously or not; hence my last post. I also did look back and see myself having proclaimed that I'd not waste another word on the bigot; but obviously, I was not up to the task http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/ubbhtml/wink.gif

Still guests in town, and Lo is saying "Dan..." in that way that makes me wonder if I'm in for the naughty chair.

Will return,

D

Seree, my apologies if I misread you re. the specifics of the discussion. But you can see where I'm coming from, can't you? Anyway, I'll be more careful to read the relevant posts if I make any similar criticisms in future.

Stephen, I am curious that you would think to question me, since you haven't deigned to answer any of the questions I put to you, not one. Surely you don't think ALL of them impertinent? But I guess you won't answer that one either.

[This message has been edited by Mark Granier (edited September 10, 2006).]