At 03:14 PM 9/24/01 +0200 Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM wrote:
>> >> Iran, Libya, and Syria call the US and Israel racist countries
>> >> that abuse human rights?
>> >
>> >According to Amnesty International, the US and Israel *do* abuse human
>> >rights. It is not just countries like Iran, Libya and Syria that make
>> >that claim.
>>
>> Some very simple questions for you, Jeroen:
>>
>> Do you believe that the US's record on human rights is comparable to
>> the record of human rights for Iraq, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan,
>> Iran, Syria, and the Lybian Arab Jamahirraya?
>
>No. (Simple question, simple answer.)
>
>
>> If no, please describe why you posted such inflammatory remarks that
>> will surely generate much outrage on the part of list-members, at
>> what appears to be the comparison I just described.
>
>I did not post anything inflammatory, John. I said that according to Amnesty
>International, the US and Israel *do* abuse human rights. Nowhere in my post
>did I compare those two countries' human rights records to the human rights
>abuses in countries like Iran, Libya and Syria.
>
>If you read the initial post carefully, you will see it boils down to "Iran,
>Libya and Syria claim that the US and Israel abuse human rights; Amnesty
>International makes that same claim".
Jeroen, what you posted *was* inflammatory for this reason:
Iran, Lybia, and Syria call the US a country that abuses human rights as a
means of defending their own human rights record. The seek to intimidate
nations like the US that criticize their human rights record by trying to
insinuate that the record of the US is no better than their record because
they *all* violate *some* human rights.
By entering into the discussion to defend this statement of Iran, Lybia,
and Syria, you gave the distinct impression of defending the tactic as well.
Here is where a "concession statement" might have saved everyone a lot of
frayed emotions. If you had said, "Now, while I don't agree with Iran's,
Lybia's, and Syria's contention that there is little difference between
their human rights record and the US's human rights record, those countries
do have a point - even Amnesty International recognizes that the US's human
rights record is far from perfect" it would have been quite clear what your
position was. Instead, the context of what you are writing created the
impression that your position was something quite different. This, of
course, led to further allegations of intentional misinterpretation, and
left everyone feeling quite upset.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Freedom itself was attacked today, and Freedom will be Defended."
-U.S. President George W. Bush, 09/11/01
