h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I missed the mention of Nevada... I'd like to see that, actually - it'd be rather surreal. Kind of like London Bridge in Arizona, right?

Talking points from a small leaflet printed by the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace within hours of the start of the bombing... (NOTE: I haven't checked this for accuracy, so I'm just reporting what they have to say.)

'US bombs and missles will very likely harm the Afghan people. Already there are reports that the initial bombing knocked out the electrical system in Kabul. Hospitals, for instance, will likely be immediately affected'.

'Pres. Bush's promise to air drop food and medicine, after bombing Afghanistan, is a cruel public relations hoax. Various int'l humanitarian monitors have said millions of Afghan people have just days of food left. Unless the US will commit its whole airforce to just dropping food and medicine, Pres. Bush's promise is a horrible joke'.

'The US is supporting the Afghan Northern Alliance to possibly take power. This same Alliance is also responsible for the horrible massacres and terror against the Afghan people'.

There's more, but you get the idea.

Point of clarification. I'm talking about relocating Israel (America's gigantic land-based middle eastern aircraft carrier) to Nevada.

I would of suggested moving it to Utah, but with the Israelies track record, I doubt the Mormans would agree

Okay - and yes, that would fix just about everything. Except then we have to decide what to put in its place. I vote to trade them East Texas. Full of rednecks, mosquitos, and swamp. They should love it.

Heck, the Mormons would love having a little bit of Israel. You know that their religion is based upon the idea that a couple of Christ's disciples made it to America, right? (There's a lot more about flaming salamanders and a planet for every male, but that's Mormons for you.)

"Thinking" out loud here. The city of Jerusalem could be administered by the UN as a sort of international Mecca. Jews, Moslems and Christians would have the right to visit their holy sites but would not be able to live there permanently. Set up properly the city would also become a beacon for tourist.

A new Palestinian State (that didn't include Jerusalem) could then be established.

Pigs may also fly

I think that's a good idea.

And yes, this will happen when monkeys fly out of my behind... (tickles!)

Hmm, Nevada, does that include Las Vegas. If not could you pick something with OIL under it this time please.

Then we can all go back to where we never came from.

Nevada, with the exception of Las Vegas and Lake Tahoe, is a desolate wasteland. Utah is pretty much the same, except for the preponderance of Mormons. There should be plenty of room to squeeze Israel in there somewhere.

(why am I knocking Mormons so much today? They're nice folk, despite their weird religion... oops, there I go again.)

Gee Lentilla, when someone tells you that you have no history, are not a "Proper" people or nation, and denies your right to exist, and then declares they are going to do something about it, well I guess the "non-people" might get a little miffed. Which is what the Pal Charter and other statements have said. Too bad I exist.

I'll let you all get back to your demographic re-arranging of the world now with just one last word of support for America.


U.S. Foreign Policy

THE DEAL

American Salesman - "Arms package No. 2 is definitely you, and includes a free toaster worth USD40M in Aid."(Skips off to report to the State Dept.)

Foreign Customer - "We accept your offer as a firm friend of the USA and its people."(Skips off to report to his Minister, unless he is the Minister, in which case he confers with the Dept. of Information, unless......)

THE TIFF - usually referred to as a "Rift in diplomatic and Trade Relations"

American Newspaper Headlines - Trading Ally Breaks Off Contact-State Dept. to Attempt to Re-establish Relations.

Foreign Newspaper Headlines - Interference in our Sovereign Affairs by Imperialist America is Not Acceptable.

THE OUTCOME

I dunno! People just won't stay bought anymore. What is the world coming to!

*exits thread to the beat of a Tango*

I'm sorry, EtherZev, I missed the intent of your previous statement.

(Had to do some quick research... ) The 'PAL Charter' is the agreement that defined the state of Palestine? Of course the Palestinians have the right to live in the place they call their home. But lots of other people want it too, and have a rightful claim to it.

So what do we do? You have several groups of people that claim that spot as their holy land, and refuse to share it with anybody else. Then they're going to fight over it to the last man to claim it for themselves. Take away the guns, they'll fight each other with rocks. There's always plenty of rocks.

We could cut through all this b******t if we weren't so concerned about whose patch of land it was. If Pakistan, Afghanistan, Israel, and Iraq could get together and become one country, with Palestine/Jerusalem as their capital (kind of like Wash DC) I think everybody would get along much better. Very simplistic, I know...

Oh no - here come the monkeys again... (eeek eek eeek)

p.s. Please tell me more about the PAL charter, EtherZev - I didn't have time to do the research that I wanted, and I'd like to know more.

there is a practical solution:
Isreal gives back the land it occupied in 1967 (Including East Juersulem), give back the Golan heights, which was occupied also in 1967 to Syria, let the Palestinies have their country becuase it IS their Country.
and if Israel does not want to give East Juersulem to the Palestinines,then share the city.

btw, did all know that G.W.Bush was the first american president to say the he belvied that the Palestinies deserve a courty !! the next day, mass murder aka prime minister of Isreal warns the AMerican president not to sacrifies Israel !! and that the US...just because the president was brave enough to say the truth about the Palestinines' case


Peace&Justice for ALL

I refer you to a posting I made two days ago in another thread. I don't generally comment about Israel, because I don't sit very comfortably on the fence on this issue and I *refuse* to be noisy on either side. This posting is probably going to end up more pro-Israel than I would wish, but maybe that will iron out the anti-Israel balance. I can't sit by and watch one side being slated while the other is not. Writing something that seemed to me to be fairly factual rather than biased actually took longer than an hour, but it was worth it. No one has responded to the other Posting but the questions are not rhetorical.



This is a general comment to Arab-sympathisers and Israel-sympathisers - and I would hope to be counted as both, given my fence-sitting tendencies - both sides have reasons; both sides have faults. Some people have made me uncomfortable recently, by being vitriolic about Israel. The same people have made me uncomfortable by being too generous to the Arab opponents to peace.

Israel has labelled America's politics as 'Appeasement'. Shockingly insulting, and America is hurt. America says Israel has "no greater friend" and reviles the accusation. I agree with the accusation, even though I am probably the only person in my city to . America was ignoring Israel in hopes of Arab alliance. On September 11, the first person I heard to talk about "a global coalition to route out terrorism" was a previous Israeli leader. It seemed to be a good time to route out the terrorists from Israel. These are not the Arab-Israelis, nor even the Palestinians (not the same thing, did everyone know?)

Since that day, there have been suicide bombs, largely ignored. There was an announcement by Israel that it will maintain the ceasefire. (The way this was reported in England, it seemed that most of the world felt both that Israel was solely responsible for any aggression, and that any ceasefire wouldn't last.) I also heard a news item quoting two groups (usually called terrorist organisations) "Islamic Jihad and Hamas will do all within our power to disrupt the cease-fire".



Just two questions: How would you feel if your greatest friend told you to 'hush up' while they begged favours of someone you perceived as a friend to terrorists? and How much of the politicking of this 'war' got to do with Terrorists, and how much to do with Oil?


If I have been biased, tell me. If my country has heard different facts from the country you are in, tell me.

x x Fenny (looking for Zero Intolerance now more than ever)

Jeez, gone for a day.....

re:694

Whatever consolation it may be to you, (or not, depending) you know that I for one agree.

Story time. So I'm at Burger King the other day. With my daughter who is about 18 months old. We're waiting in line, and this couple walks in. I don't know what religion they were, I didn't ask. But the woman did have a scarf type thing around her head (her face was showing though) and the man was dressed fairly common. I couldn't help but notice that quite a few people in the place noticed them come in. But nobody was really staring them down per se. Most people were looking at the couple in open curiosity. Myself included. At which point my daughter, who is learning to talk, looks at these two people and says what I perhaps should have said....Hi! she says. And you know what I laughed and so did everyone else in the room who heard. My daughter doesn't seem to care if the woman does have a scarf on her head.

Neither do I really, nor would anyone else I know. In fact as I said before most people where looking at them in curiosity rather than animosity.

So moral of the story?.....I don't think most Americans hate muslims. There are always the idiots in our society, and indeed others as well, else where would this guy have come from in the first place? Very few Americans know anything about Islam, or Arab people in general. In fact I would venture to say that the ONLY reason we are even remotely interested now is that we have been attacked by someone who claims that they are a Muslim. Our indifference in this instance I think is somewhat redeeming. To us, a muslim is just another person on the street who, curiously enough, may dress different than us, or talk different than us, or even practice a different religion than us. For that matter, has anyone heard of Godsmack? Those guys dress (what most people, besides myself) would call strange, he's an open Wiccan, and yet I don't think anyone really cares what he looks like or who/what/it he worships. He's just as strange to the average joe. Yet I would doubt that people hate him, probably more like curious, as in the instance of these two folks I ran into at the Burger King.

Dear Fenny,
there are extremists on both camps, there are ones who try to undermine the peace process on both sides. However, if the current Israeli govmnt was serious about peace, it would have wanted to talk long time ago. the PM of Israel "Ariel Sharon", whom by the way inflated the current Palestinian uprising by visiting the Holy Mosque in Jerusalem with guards just to prove that the Israelis have this Mosque for them, refused to let his Foreign Affairs minister "Shimon Perez" to sit with Yasser Arafat.
As for calling for an international coalition, that was an obvious call to let Israel to try to wipe out whom IT considers as "Terrorists".
No body has ever tried to answer my questions: the Root of the problems for Palestine/Israel is that Israel is OCCUPYING land that belongs to the Palestinians, and that’s not my facts, this is the United Nations facts. IF Israel does not want to listen to the UN resolutions, and consider itself ABOVE the rest of the world countries then that is a different matter. But these actions only feed to the general feeling that US foreign policy in the Middle East is very unjust. BTW, what have the Arabs or the Israelis done before the creation of Israel to make America Israel "Greatest" Ally? the term in itself is biased don’t you think??

and btw, the suicide bombings that took place, while they are ugly in nature, after the Israeli Army, on 12/9 started shooting and killings of Palestiniens in the Occupied territories?

Peace & Justice for ALL

What to do about this situation? hmmmmm


I cannot agree with putting Israel in Nevada. Kind of a joke in bad taste really, but then, loony what else would I expect from you...

But I do agree with making the city of Jeruselem an international city, governed by the UN. I think that is a fascinating concept, so much would change because of it. The UN would have a homesoil for the first time. Think about that and what it means for a second. It would make the UN have a decidedly religious slant if they weren't careful. Wouldn't that be strange. All eyes would turn to Jeruselem for global leadership. They would have an economy of sorts for the first time. Fascinating as I said. Perhaps the UN is the wrong group to go there and govern. Maybe a UN type organization then. Representatives from many different governments maybe.

What about the people that live in Jeruselem already? I wonder what they would become? Just thinking out loud here. But on the flip, at least now each would have equal rights to the "holy" lands as much as the other. Myself, the concept of owning something that I thought was "holy" seems kind of foolish. I don't think that the Israelites/Palestinians/Syrians/Iraqis/Iranians etc etc would be excited about the idea either. But what I like about it is that each is called on to sacrifice that which they hold most dear, the cause of so many wars and death, not to one gov't, but to each other and the rest of the world.

I'll be back to tell you what I think America should be doing about Osama. Duty or should I say dooody calls.

Back to what I think that America should be doing now....

I posted this earlier on my homespace and was moderated on ground of it being to offensive to some. I'll try and edit it a little bit here, and see how it goes. I've said some things that may seem offensive before, but hey glutton for punishment.


In any event I think the best way to go about this would have been completly covert. No bombing of Afghanistan. No ground war. Nothing like that. Just a quiet sneak/peak/snatch/exfiltrate. Suddenly the leaders of Al quiada (mis spelling, probably) appear on planes bound for the U.S. or hey, just about any government willing to do a fair trial, followed by execution. No explanation of how they got there, just them on planes, and then an arrest by the police. Preferably NYPD, I think that would be poetic justice.

Why execution? I think that the evidence is there, else I don't think that Bush would commit us to War. Then I think that for the crimes(s) plural, that he has commited on our soil, a life for a life is due. Payment is PAST due. But there is no reason that he shouldn't be exposed to the world, as to the how, the why, and with what assets he and his compatriats (don't forget them, they are just as dangerous as he) did this to us.

That being said, I think that we could use either one of several groups. SAS comes first to mind. These guys are considered to be the best anti-terrorism group in the world. Their training is more difficult than many I can think of off the top of my head. They've had the practice (if you'll excuse me for the offhand reference to Ireland, no disrespect meant), they've got the training, and they've got our respect in the American military. And last because it wouldn't be an American team. You cannot deny the political benefits of that.

If not the SAS than definitely the SEAL teams. Six comes to mind. They've also got the training, and the will. They just don't have as much practice (that I know of, doesn't mean that they don't). My confidence in them is un paralleled. They are the best, in my opinion, we have to offer.

Next, the un-official Delta would work out nicely.

Maybe all these assets in concert would be better.

But in the end, I think that a quick nab would be better, than this bombing campaign.

Course, we have to find them first right?

ME@SF, this one's for you. I am a fence-sitter, albeit slightly biased, and I acknowledge the following with tears. Seriously. And I have had sleepless nights from my fence, over the past year. Seriously.

I'm not denying the wrongs Israel does, I'm painting a more unbiased picture for people who don't know.

Point by point, then:
The current Israeli government is led by a hawk, which is to say someone who is extreme in his view of Israel's further boundaries. I don't know his military history, but in a country with National Service, aren't the majority experienced in army-kills (ie murders, to the other side?) Yes, he was solely responsible for the anger, from last year when he visited the site of the Holy Mosque. And that was wrong.

The current government may not have been serious about peace, but has been making the right noises about it. As has Yasser Arafat. As did Ehud Barak (with more<?> success). What did convince me: holding off (or claiming to hold off) on attacks for days while the Intifada surged - during that time, I only heard about Arab aggression.

The call for a global coalition may have been an "obvious call to let Israel to try to wipe out whom IT considers as "Terrorists"." That's so, but consider that I, from an English viewpoint, consider the offshoots of the IRA as Terrorists (that would be "Real IRA", for example) as well as the groups "Hamas" and "Islamic Jihad". This war is not even touching those three groups - hence my call to examine the politics of this war.

The causes of the Israel/Palestinian crisis: Yes, Israel occupied land in 1967 which it hasn't given up. And Israel's actions since have in part been offensive for a country which is the homeland of a People who were persecuted throughout history. (And before anyone gets me for being off-the-fence, I'm one of those People.) Does this mean the Israeli population should be wiped out, as in EtherZev's Posting above? Let's not forget the hatred existed long before 1967, and let's not forget that that war and others were begun by collaborations of the Arab States and Nations surrounding Israel, in order to wipe Israel at that time. One last thing on that score - no one expected Israel to survive some of those battles.

As for US Policy towards Israel, that's something I can't get a handle on. I have no idea. What did Israel do? What made America decide to support Israel? Anyone got any ideas? And can anyone comment on whether America *is* Israel's greatest friend???
(Yes, the phrase is very biased. But I didn't write it, I only quoted it.)

Suicide Bombings: Ugly in nature. Ugly and unnatural. But they didn't start *after* September 12 (when the Israeli Army went back into the Occupied Territories). They've been going on, infrequently, since I was a kid.

Why is hate so ugly??? Sometimes I just want to cry. Seriously .

x x Fenny (now crying for real)

Re: my sign off. I really didn't mean to put the last bit. Please disregard. My personal emotions shouldn't have escaped, but I hit the button too early.

Not on-the-fence enough. I've had enough today.

Just a quote from the "holy Qur'an" I found intersting....

When news is brought to one of them, of (the Birth of) a female (child), his face darkens and he is filled with inward grief! With shame does he hide himself from his people because of the bad news he has had! Shall he retain her on (sufferance) and contempt, or bury her in the dust? Ah! What an evil (choice) they decide on? (Qur'an 16: 58-59).

And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but man have a degree (of advantage as in some cases of inheritance) over them (2:228).

O Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and the believing women that they should draw over themselves their jilbab (outer garments) (when in public); this will be more conducive to their being recognized (as decent women) and not harassed. But God is indeed oft-forgiving, most merciful. (33:59)




Source::
The Holy, Qur'an: Translation of verses is heavily based on A. Yusuf Ali's translation, The Glorious Qur'an, text translation, and Commentary, The American Trust Publication, Plainfield, IN 46168, 1979.


Aisha said, "Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr (that is, Aisha&#8217;s sister), entered upon the Apostle of God (pbuh) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of God turned his attention from her and said, "O Asma, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her except that she displays parts of her body except this and this," and he pointed to her face and hands. (Sunan Abi Dawud)

Source::
Hadith(interpretaions of the Qur'an)and the second holy book.


These are just some of the quotes attributed to Islamic teachings, I got the from a set of essays, they are not my own findings. Interpret them how you will. I find them restrictive of the rights of women, and I am insulted by them, if not for my sake, but my mothers, and my sisters.