skinheads in france??

Paul,

> i can't believe this is happening. f*****g french skinheads
> going around spreading their violence, then blaming it on
> muslims and immigration policy,

I had not even considered that as a possibility. You
are saying that there really is some sort of racial
separatist movement in France? And they are the ones
burninig the synagogues and not Muslims?! OK, that is
what you are saying. I guess that is possible, though
it seems very different from the French I know about.

>and then people like you believing them.

People like me?

>> Clearly it is time to start asking what
>> is wrong with that picture and what can be done to fix
>> it. Jean-Marie offers an open discussion of the problem
>> and does not pretend there is not a problem.
>
> except when it comes to the holocaust, or other minor
'details
> of
> history'.

What do you think he believes about the holocaust?
My understanding is that he never said the holocaust is
a detail of history and no one can come up with an
actual quote, though the claim is often repeated. What
he says he said is that when asked about the gas
chambers in particular, he said they were a detail of
history. That seems reasonable. The details of
execution are details. The important fact is that there
were systematic exterminations of Jews, Gypsies,
Catholics, Jehovahs Witnesses, and the mentally
retarded. Have they were murdered by the psychopathic
Nazis is a detail of history. That doesn't change nor
question the fact that it happened. Is the holocaust a
detail of history? No it is one of the most significant
events of history in this millenium. It was the
watershed event in the refounding of the state of
Israel, and event that threatened antisemitic Arabs and
the effects of which continue to this day and are a
critical key in understanding much of the history of
this century.

I have heard the claim that Jean-Marie is antisemitic.
That could be, but nothing presented so far indicates
that. Now if he DID actually say that the holocaust did
not happen or such, that would be a serious problem,
but I am not aware that he has ever done so. Jean-Marie
does seem to be almost radically pro-Israel, by the
way.

Anyway, main point I wanted to make is that I don't see
the small level of political support he has recently
received to be proof of french racism.

- Jeff

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J .Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> > i can't believe this is happening. f*****g french skinheads
> > going around spreading their violence, then blaming it on
> > muslims and immigration policy,
>
> I had not even considered that as a possibility. You
> are saying that there really is some sort of racial
> separatist movement in France? And they are the ones
> burninig the synagogues and not Muslims?! OK, that is
> what you are saying. I guess that is possible, though
> it seems very different from the French I know about.

it's cowardly young male vandals throughout europe, france included,
that are using the current conflict in the middle east as an excuse
to attack synagogues, jewish cemetaries, and the like, almost every
hour of the day. nearly no one has been arrested for these actions --
how do you single individuals out from a mob of the local sons of the
bourgeoisie? or arrest them en masse? i don't think so.

> Jean-Marie
> does seem to be almost radically pro-Israel, by the
> way.

another reason to be wary of him. the only thing one should be
radically pro- is radically pro-human rights.

by the way, i'd wager that among far-right christian anti-semites,
israel controlling the holy land is a lot more popular than the
apparant alternative. so pro-israel says nothing to me.

> Anyway, main point I wanted to make is that I don't see
> the small level of political support he has recently
> received to be proof of french racism.

he's feeding off the "us vs. them" mentality, the very same one you
decry among Islamic fundamentalists and much of the Arab world. this
is only going to lead us to an "us vs. them" war, where many of us
and many of them die needlessly, and nothing else is accomplished.

let's face it -- far right is far right. and i'm not.

>he's feeding off the "us vs. them" mentality, the very same one
>you decry among Islamic fundamentalists and much of the Arab
>world. this is only going to lead us to an "us vs. them" war,

There's another kind of war?

>where many of us and many of them die needlessly, and nothing
>else is accomplished.

So how would you describe Israeli actions in Palestine? I mean
this at face value -- I've heard only anecodotal things about
the war.

-Carl

On searching for articles on racial violence in France, I found this
document:

<http://membres.lycos.fr/sosracismereims/infos/france/pdlamanche0900.pdf>

It mentions the National Front several times. Note I was not using "Front
Nationale" as a search criterion. My French isn't that good, and it is
getting late, but it looks like an FN member is implicated and other
members took an interest in the trial. I assume "menaces de mort" are
death threats.

Le Pen deliberately moderates his public statements to capture the more
mainstream vote. This policy has been taken up by far right parties
across Europe and beyond. They deny all connections with racist thugs.
But if you look at the situation more closely, the links are there.
Everywhere from Burnley to Gujurat.

Graham

--- In metatuning@y..., "clumma" <carl@l...> wrote:

> >where many of us and many of them die needlessly, and nothing
> >else is accomplished.
>
> So how would you describe Israeli actions in Palestine?

exactly what i was thinking. many of those actions are motivated and
exacerbated by such a mentality on the part of certain violent
isrealis. ariel sharon seems to be a leader more motivated by anger
than by wisdom. as a result, orphaned children on the other side will
become more angry and less wise. the future of israel looks a lot
bleaker as a result, let alone the future of palestinians.

meanwhile, there's a glaring disparity, overall, between the value of
human life and the dignity of others on the part of isreali society
vs. on the part of the multifarious Arab society in the other 99% of
the region (remember, i said "overall"). the israelis will happily
donate the kidney from a suicide bombing victim to a palestinian
patient in need. neither their government nor their religious schools
call for the unmitigated killing of those of a different nation or
faith, even when not speaking in english. their secular education
systems don't spread self-contradictory fables about world history
and current events, nor are their media restricted to voices that toe
the official line. the attitude on the other side is a bit different -
- donate an arab organ to save a jewish life? you won't see it on
that continent, at least not before a thousand years or a devastating
nuclear/biological/chemical war.

of course, the past is ultimately irrelevant -- all that's needed is
hope for the future. such feelings, unfortunately, are all too rare
on both sides.

on the muslim side, poverty and despair are whipped up into a frenzy
of hatred. the security measures israel now has in place will no
longer be sufficient once new and better terrorist groups get new and
better weapons, which seems inevitable, even should the "war on
terror" block 90% of the channels for such development. the average
isreali jew increasingly feels his or her days on this earth are
numbered. it doesn't seem likely that isreal will soften its
responses to future attacks, as much as we may wish for one side to
unilaterally take up a nonviolent position. this jew vs. arab
situation of course looks rather small compared to what appears to be
brewing in south asia, but gets ignored by the first eight pages of
our newspapers. and the conflict of words now taking place over
the 'axis of evil' moniker could easily escalate all this into a
giant world war iii, iv, and v.

i don't have any kind of solution to offer. but if i were a voter in
france, i'd steer clear of anyone who attempted to pit one unwanted
side against the other unwanted side (which is what the arab world
does to palestinians against israelis), or to restrict openness in
the name of nationalism or security (which is what israel does to
palestinians and what Arab nations do to their citizens). otherwise,
it won't be long before europe looks like just another part of the
middle east.

Paul,

I have very little info base comments on. It's tempting to
think that Muslim culture turns poverty into hate while
Western culture has perfected the art of humane organ
transplants... but I don't think it's so simple. It sounds
from the Saudi Arabian statement that was posted here (or
somewhere) that they're making the classic declaration of
war... which is only as evil as it is. I don't consider
myself completely innocent of doing things that would cause
them to want a war, and I may or may not have reliable
information about grievances they may or may not have. At
the same, I am unable to understand why Israel cannot let
Palestine be. What is it P. wants that Israel cannot agree to?

-Carl

--- In metatuning@y..., "clumma" <carl@l...> wrote:

> Paul,
>
> I have very little info base comments on. It's tempting to
> think that Muslim culture turns poverty into hate while
> Western culture has perfected the art of humane organ
> transplants... but I don't think it's so simple.

i didn't paint it that way -- you're twisting my words.

> At
> the same, I am unable to understand why Israel cannot let
> Palestine be.

you mean all the jews should just get up and leave home? where would
they go? (in case you didn't know, israel is a people, and palestine
is a place that is mostly now the country of Jordan, and jews and
arabs are fighting for control of the rest.)

maybe you're referring to the recent (three-week) military operation,
which is roughly analogous to the u.s. operation in afghanistan? the
aim is "rooting out terrorism" -- in both cases, i feel, with
insufficient emphasis on root causes. other isreali actions over the
past year seem geared mainly toward intimidation

> What is it P. wants that Israel cannot agree to?

the expulsion of the jews from the "holy land" (unless you only pay
attention to their english-language statements). no one today seems
to question the necessity of a palestinian state. but agreeing to
palestinian statehood would mean agreeing to israel's existence
alongside it, and the palestinian leader has therefore turned down
several fair and increasingly generous proposals along those lines.
with 19 of the 22 nearby arab countries essentially breathing down
his neck to continue warring against israel, it is little wonder.

meanwhile, innocent palestinians have had to live in a state of
military occupation and blatant human rights abuses. knowing no life
other than brutal hardship, it is little wonder that many are ready
to jump at causes to die for, in the hope that it might somehow
better their people. seeing little hope for dignity in this life,
many heed fundamentalist promises of great rewards for
their 'martyrdom' in the next life.

i don't see either side as the evil one. i don't see either side as
the victim. i see a lot of religious fanaticism, in symbiosis with
the baser human instincts of aggression and group mentality. how
hopeful am i that humankind can rise above them? well, considering
some of the events that led to the declaration of the state of israel
in 1948, and the growing movement to deny that these events occurred,
i'm not all that hopeful. considering that Oil is the driver of the
government and policy of the world's only superpower, i'm not all
that hopeful.

>>At the same, I am unable to understand why Israel cannot let
>>Palestine be.
>
>you mean all the jews should just get up and leave home? where
>would they go? (in case you didn't know, israel is a people,
>and palestine is a place that is mostly now the country of
>Jordan, and jews and arabs are fighting for control of the rest.)

Israel is also a State, with borders on a map. It's definitely
a tricky situation. Is the demand that all jews leave Palestine?
Is any government explicitly demanding this? How many jews live
there? More are moving there all the time, no?

>maybe you're referring to the recent (three-week) military
>operation, which is roughly analogous to the u.s. operation
>in afghanistan?

Don't really know about it. Last I heard, they had Arafat
surrounded, and Colin Powell was dispatched. I had great
hopes that something good would come out of this. I know
nothing of Powell except that his State Department has been
against an invasion of Iraq, which I view as a good sign.

>the aim is "rooting out terrorism" -- in both cases, i feel, with
>insufficient emphasis on root causes. other isreali actions over
>the past year seem geared mainly toward intimidation

I was told they have bulldozed Palestinian settlements, paved
over them, and put in Jewish settlements.

>>What is it P. wants that Israel cannot agree to?
>
>the expulsion of the jews from the "holy land" (unless you only
>pay attention to their english-language statements).

This includes only the Gaza strip?

>meanwhile, innocent palestinians have had to live in a state of
>military occupation and blatant human rights abuses. knowing no
>life other than brutal hardship, it is little wonder that many
>are ready to jump at causes to die for, in the hope that it might
>somehow better their people.

This is a great shame. It does paint a very different picture to
this reader than the motivations of poverty, religious extremism,
and doctored schoolbooks suggested by your previous messages.

>i don't see either side as the evil one. i don't see either side
>as the victim. i see a lot of religious fanaticism, in symbiosis
>with the baser human instincts of aggression and group mentality.
>how hopeful am i that humankind can rise above them? well,
>considering some of the events that led to the declaration of the
>state of israel in 1948, and the growing movement to deny that
>these events occurred, i'm not all that hopeful. considering that
>Oil is the driver of the government and policy of the world's only
>superpower, i'm not all that hopeful.

My friend recently undertook a comprehensive research project to
figure out who was at fault, so he could figure out which group
he hated more. His search ended without any conclusion.

I don't know why the survival of Israel has anything to do with
oil. I view our involvement as a necessity based on our large
jewish constit'cency, and very pro-Israel thus far. That's as it
should be, I guess.

From what I've heard this war sounds very standard -- two
different groups fighting for control of land. It seems from
what I've heard that Israel should either purchase or conquer
the area, or get out.

-Carl

--- In metatuning@y..., "clumma" <carl@l...> wrote:

> Is the demand that all jews leave Palestine?
> Is any government explicitly demanding this?

would you like a list? the entire arab summit on the peace plan was
about (at least supposedly) ending this standing declaration of war
on the part of most of its members.

> How many jews live
> there?

4-5 million?

> More are moving there all the time, no?

the big exoduses are complete . . . few remain in russia, south asia,
africa . . . one could exaggerate and suggest europe could be in for
another wave . . .

i'm afraid that's all i have time to say on this topic. you've missed
some of my earlier posts on this here on metatuning, so you could
search those.