Conference back40::soapbox

    
      Given the number of electoral votes in New York, Florida, and
     other close states, with significant American Jewish voting
     populations that sometimes swing to either party, I expect to
     see more scenes like Clinton denouncing the Arabs before Perez
     and the Knesset the other day.  Dole will follow suit.  No US
     politician will criticize Israel in 1996.  What votes would he
     or she expect to get in return for alienating a swing constituency ?
    
      bb

      Z   Given the number of electoral votes in New York, Florida, and
      Z   other close states, with significant American Jewish voting
      Z   populations that sometimes swing to either party, 
    
    I took Valuing Differences a few years ago.  Your remark above can be
    in line with Marlon Brando's comment claiming the Jews own Hollywood.
    
    You may owe us an apology!

    
    
    
    .2 your kidding right? Like U.S. Policy with Cuba is not defined
    by how important Florida is and the money that follows?
    
    

    That's for you to know and me to find out!!!

      Who cares?  The media is bought.  It doesn't matter...

    
    
    .0 Collateral Damage(sp?)? 
    
    Where did I hear this word first to describe unintended civilians
    being killed. Yes, the Gulf War. 
    
    

    Is collateral damage the doing of the tricollateral commission?

    re.6
    
    You heard this first during the Gulf War?
    
    My, oh my, but you must be a green little sprout, 'cause it could be
    heard durn near every night on the news between 1966 and 1975.
    
    

   re: .5  -< Mute Point>-

   Arrrgh...  What, it can't talk?  It's "moot point".

   My wife says this all the time and it drives me crazy.  Like my Dad used
   to say "demin" for the fabric...

   -- Sam

    .0 regarding media bias....
    
    NPR (the non-commercial National Public Radio in the US) was chided
    by its listeners for 
    a) continuously coupling the term "Ketuysha (sp) rockets" whenever it 
    aired ANYthing regarding the Hazbullah attacks on northern Israel, but 
    only saying  "attack helicopters", not "Apache attack helicopters" when 
    the Israelis did the shooting. 
    
    The bias is so subliminal but speaks volumes:
    We are now suppose who armed the Hazbullah (the Russians, of course!)
    but not the Israeli (Americans, of course!)??
     
    b) Israeli victims had names and a few had a brief profile aired, but
    the 102 Lebanese victims were nameless and faceless.
    
    Before I get slammed...I do NOT condone terrorism on EITHER sides.
    Bombing civilians is wrong, whether they were riding in buses or
    seeking shelter in a UN compound. I do NOT support the Hazbullah;
    they are terrorists and I wish Yasser Arafar could muster some
    leadership to get them under control.
    
    What I find frustratingly lacking in news reports, including by the
    more esteemed NPR, is that no reporter ever mentioned that a 1982
    UN resolution was passed ordering Israel out of Lebanon which it
    occupied illegally since 1978. To the American media and govt., Israel
    can do no wrong, however horrendous the deed might be.
    
    I appreciate the fact that Israel feels compelled to be armed to the
    teeth to protect itself especially since it believes that it is totally
    surrounded by enemies, but does that justify occupying a sovereign
    country like Lebanon? How would we in the US like it, should Cuba under
    the same rationale, occupies otehr neighboring Carib. nations in order
    to extend its "security zone"?
                                                          

    
    
    
    .6 >    My, oh my, but you must be a green little sprout, 'cause it
    
    
    	I was alive....but pretty upset when man landed on the moon and
    	all the adults hogged the T.V. and my cartoons were gone.
    

    
    re .10
    
    You are correct.. we definitely do not see both sides of the story
    regarding the Israelis and the Hezbollahs.  Many people automatically
    accept the Israeli position without examination.
    
    I see this as typical of people thinking that Republicans, or Democrats
    are always right and correct. It takes away their responsibility for
    thinking for themselves so that they can hide behind a label.
    
    Please don't take this as an endorsement of either side's actions,
    BTW..
    
    John
    

    I read .0 as more a question regarding the lack of foreign topics in
    general in this conference, rather than a critique around the lack of
    discussion on Israeli policies.  Am I missing something?

Wannoor,

I agree with most of what you said about the media bias.. especially you are
right on this one..

>>To the American media and govt., Israel can do no wrong, however horrendous 
>>the deed might be.

but.. 

>>    I appreciate the fact that Israel feels compelled to be armed to the
>>    teeth to protect itself especially since it believes that it is totally
>>    surrounded by enemies,                      ^^^^^^^^

Its more than just a belief.. Its a reality. These enemies have the will, money
and the power to destroy Isreal. This is a major difference between the Cuba-US
scenario. Cuba at max. could be just an irritant and not a real threat to US.

>>but does that justify occupying a sovereign country like Lebanon? 

Not really. But thats just simplifying the issue. Do you think Isreal would
would have been left alone to live in peace if they hadn't occupied part of 
Lebanon? I don't think so. In fact I guess Isreal would be facing more 
terrorist attacks from the north without this occupied buffer zone.

-Jk

    Hey, EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR, you aren't allowed to write anymore until you
    introduce yourself!

>>    Hey, EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR, you aren't allowed to write anymore until you
>>    introduce yourself!

From the tone of this note, I am puzzled as to, if this a threat or just out of 
would-like-to-know curiousity.

Since Mark is a mod, I more inclined to believe this is a threat. Till this
is clarified I am not introducing myself.

    I was kidding. It's customary for people to introduce themselves if
    they are going to be active participants, that's all.

    
    	hmmpf.  I never introduced myself.  I like it better this way.
    

    EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR was born in a small shanty town in the Northwest.  He
    was a member of National Rifle club and was voted most likely in his
    class to shoot Buckwheat.  
    
    Says Mrs. Cunningham, scout leader for troop 66...
    
    "EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR was a good young man...he kept to himself pretty
    much but he was a polite young man..."
    
    Commentator:  Do YOU...believe he shot Buckwheat?
    
    Cunningham:  OH YES....That's all he ever talked about!!
    
    

    "EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR was a good young man..."
    
     What makes you think EDSCLU::JAYAKUMAR is not a woman?

    That's the price you pay when you don't sign your notes and you aren't
    in ELF!

    .14 mr/mz? jayakumar
    
      ...but now we really ought to look at one of the root problems,
    right? which is way back in 1946-47, the British decided to carve
    out Israel by uprooting the local population there, happened to be
    some Palestinian Arabs, who to this day, would like to at least have
    that acknowledged, if not compensated. After all they do have the
    deeds to these properties.
    
    OK, so hell will freeze over until this wrong is corrected....
    
    So then how about having Israel to at least obey UN resolutions
    like any other member countries? Why aren't these exercised; after all
    they were made via a global, rather democratic process, right?
    
    My contention is, until the basic problems are addressed, there will
    always be opportunists (Iranians, Syrians, Libyans, etc) to ignite and
    make volatile situations even worse, as we have seen. 
    
    By the way, Israel is NO longer surrounded by enemies; Jordan and
    Egypt certainly are at peace. Syria is tricky, but again if it is
    presented with opportunities, it's meddling would probably diminish
    given time.
    
    

    
    err, .-1 I mean NOT presented with opportunities....

    I want to agree with WANNOOR that I do not condone terrorism, shooting
    of innocents, and pillaging civilian areas by ANY party.  
    
    On the other hand, one has to recognize the plight tiny Israel
    (geographically speaking) Israel is in.  With modern warfare, there
    size is like a postage stamp.  From the Golan Heights, the enemies of
    Israel can launch rocket attacks that can reach over 85% of Israel -
    all the major population centers.  From any border, an enemy terrorist
    can target almost every civilian AT ANY TIME in Israel.  
    
    The problem of displacements actually go back much farther than
    1946-47.  Try 4,500 years, and through the course of centuries since,
    either an Arab or Jewish descendant can name scores of ancestors who
    were displaced by either side.
    
    It also hurts that the enemies of Israel hide behind civilian
    protection.  I wish Israel could/would use another method of filtering
    the terrorist elements out of civilan areas instead of what they did 3
    weeks ago.  
    
    George Bush came the closest to any American President from breaking
    with Israel.  He actually pushed the Israeli government into serious
    negotitating with their Arab allies with these veiled threats.  On the
    other hand, Jimmy Carter was the only President who successfully used
    diplomatic relations to get two combatants, Egypt & Israel, to
    negotiate a peace.
    
    Ron

>>    It also hurts that the enemies of Israel hide behind civilian
>>    protection.  I wish Israel could/would use another method of filtering
>>    the terrorist elements out of civilan areas instead of what they did 3

Its almost impossible. The biggest strength a terrorist has is not his weapons,
but his hostages - direct and indirect. Indirect is when they use mosques,
temples, schools and hospitals as their safe-havens and staging grounds. The 
Sikh terrorists had their Golden-Temple in Punjab, and LTTE operations in 
Srilanka to this day are classic examples.

-Jk

    
    .TROOA::BROOKS                                         3 lines  
    2-MAY-1996 12:33
     .                        -< clarification on .0 pls. >-
    .    I read .0 as more a question regarding the lack of foreign topics
    in
     .  general in this conference, rather than a critique around the lack
    of
     .   discussion on Israeli policies.  Am I missing something?
     .End of note 
    
    
Sorry, I've been on holidays and just got back.
    I was pointing to the lack of general topics here not specifically the
    Israeli.
    	It just seemed that in the diverse range of topics they all seemed
    to be "Internal" to the U.S. and I wondered why this was the case?
    
    Bill.
    
    

    
      Because this is an election year, and it has been proven over
     and over that foreign policy causes 99.9999% of American voters
     to click the remote.  It just isn't worth a warm spit here.
    
      bb

    
      Case in point (about the Box being extremely US parochial), is
     that in the world's largest democracy, India, the Congress Party,
     which has led that country since the forties, was finally turned
     out of office.
    
      The 'Box (and the US media as well) will spend gigabytes of disk
     space on spanking versus timeouts, or on whether a US trial outcome
     was just or not for one defendant, but a change in political
     direction for 400 millions goes mostly unanalyzed and unmentioned.
     
      If you want to know about the US, the 'Box can give you a pretty
     good view of wnat is on American minds.  If you want to know
     about the world, my advice would be, "Do your computer search
     somewhere else."
    
      bb

    brilliant observation, Bill. I don't think it ever occurred to anyone
    here that soapbox is not the be all and end all of world events and
    issues discussion before you pointed it out.

    I would not really expect Americans to take special interest in India.
    There is little historical association between the two countries -
    unlike India's colonial association with Britain.  (Although some
    historians point out that Britain's burgeoning interests in India
    diverted attention & resources from the American colonies, making it
    easier for them to win independence.)  During the Cold war, India sided
    with Russia, and investment was prevented so there is no reason why
    investors would take interest in events there.  After the cold war 
    thaw, there were some unfortunate incidents that India views as
    corporate colonisation - Bhopal was one.  These incidents maintained
    mistrust on both sides.  It's a big world, and if a country does not
    have specific interests in another, there are few vehicles for
    exchanging cultural information.
    
    Colin
    

>              <<< Note 718.29 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "exterminator" >>>

	Er, but that's what this note (or at least .0) is about,
	no?  Billbob didn't point it out.