RE: Benjamin Netanyahu on Bush's Speech

[Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM]

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Verzonden: Monday, September 24, 2001 3:21 PM
> Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Onderwerp: Re: Benjamin Netanyahu on Bush's Speech

> > >      And Israel, the Middle East's only democracy and its purest
> > > manifestation of Western progress and freedom, must be wiped off
> > > the face of the earth.
> > 
> > Does Netanyahu know that "Western freedom" includes freedom to freely
> > cross the borders of the land where you live, and includes the 
> > freedom to publicly protest when you disagree with those who rule
> > your land, without being shot at?
> 
> That freedom to protest does not in any case in any western country
> allow violent protests.
> 
> So you are saying that anyone should have the _right_ to strap a bomb
> to themselves and go blow up crowded pizza parlor?

No, I said that "Western freedom" includes the freedom to go out into the
streets and publicly state your opinions (as an individual or as a group),
without being shot at. You know, demonstrations and all that.


> > Whether an act is an act of terrorism is not only defined by the
> > nature of the action, but also by who was attacked.
> 
> There is a difference.  The Israeli actions are defensive measures,
> taken to prevent those groups from further acts of terrorism.

Let's say that Syria fears an Israeli missile attack, and launches a
preemptive strike in which it destroys Israeli missile launchers. Syria will
call it "defensive measures", but Israel will not see it that way, even
though they call their own preemptive strikes "defensive measures".


> > >       These regimes, like all terrorist states, must be given a
> > > forthright demand: Stop terrorism, permanently, or you will face
> > > the wrath of the free world - through harsh and sustained
> > > politicial, economic and military sanctions.
> > 
> > Ah yes, economic sanctions. A method Western governments love, but
> > also a method that usually only hurts the population of a country,
> > not its leaders. 
> 
> Good.  And when those people see their leaders living it up while they
> are starving, they should revolt against those leaders--And if they
> don't that is their problem.

This may come as a surprise to you, but people who are starving are not in
the habit of revolting -- they are more concerned with getting something to
eat, and basically staying alive for another day.

Besides, if you are starving, you are not even physically fit to fight
against your leaders.

I find it disgusting that you seem to believe it is OK to punish innocent
civilians for the crimes of their leaders.


Jeroen

_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website:                    http://go.to/brin-l