At 10:36 04-05-2002 -0400, Gautam Mukunda wrote: >It is quite possible that those people were not considered anti-Semitic by >the UN, and perhaps not even *are* anti-Semitic. I have noticed that some >people are very quick to label someone anti-Semitic (sometimes so quick >that it borders on paranoia) even when they are not. I for one am not >anti-Semitic, yet you and some others have repeatedly accused me of being >just that. > >Me: >That's not the point, Jeroen. The man compared the Star of David to the >Nazi swastika.
That was in relation to organisations being given the same status as the International Red Cross and has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. In the process he will undoubtedly also have mentioned "Star of David" and "Crescent Moon" in one sentence. By your logic, the man must therefore also be anti-Islam (and anti-Western World because he must also have mentioned the Red Cross). BTW, the swastika in question had nothing to do with the Nazis but is used as a symbol for IIRC an India-based humanitarian organisation. The symbol of the swastika existed long before the Nazis. >Now, maybe he's not anti-semitic. Maybe he is. But it is >reasonable to think that he might be. Then you must also believe it is reasonable to think he is anti-Islam and anti-West (see my comment above). Personally, I think you are so anxious to label anyone who disagrees with you "anti-Semitic" that you are seeing things that are not there. >Does fairness to Israel matter to you, or is that not a disqualification? Anyone who stands accused of anything deserves a decent investigation into the accusations. You think the investigation is a bad idea because the members are allegedly anti-Semitic. Well, we could let *you* pick the members for that committee, but someone will then probably be able to find something that indicates an anti-Palestinian bias with those people. Heck, one could also argue that given America's policy towards the Middle East, there should be no Americans on the committee because they are likely to have a pro-Israel bias. >But I don't think anyone in the world whose opinion matters does think that >Israel is guilty. Everybody's opinion matters. You may not agree with them, but they all matter. Let's give your statement the worst possible explanation. You think Israel is not guilty. You think nobody whose opinion matters thinks Israel is guilty. IOW, only the opinions of people who agree with you matter, everyone else's opinions do not matter. Do you realise how arrogant that sounds? Note: I am not saying that this precisely reflects your views, I am giving a most-negative interpretation as an example of how such a blanket statement could be viewed by people who do not share your views. >The _Palestinians themselves_ say that no massacre took >place. Photographs and eyewitness testimony have been produced of the >Palestinians faking the deaths of people at Jenin. They themselves say that >56 people were killed, almost half of them Israeli soldiers. Then what does Israel have to lose? If both the Israelis and the Palestinians say no war crimes were committed, the UN is not likely to find any evidence to the contrary. >Now, there was one person on the commission I trusted - Bill Nash, the >military advisor, who happens to be an old friend of mine. Since you trust him and call him an old friend of yours, it is reasonable to assume he shares your views on the issue. Therefore, he should not be on the committee because he is likely to have a pro-Israel bias. >The Israelis say there was no massacre. The _Palestinians_ say there >was no massacre. The only person who seems to think that one might have >happened is...you. I was not there, so I do not know if a massacre happened. However, such claims *were* made and thus an investigation is warranted. If it turns out there was no massacre, it will discredit Israel's opponents who made the claim. If it turns out there was a massacre, then we can deal with it properly by arresting the people responsible and put them on trial. If Israel refuses to cooperate, the claim of a massacre can never be disproven and will live on to be used as evidence that Israel has something to hide (after all, why would they refuse cooperation if they have done nothing wrong). Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
