Arafat

Terrorist?
Freedom fighter?
Opportunist?
Peace-maker?
Peace-breaker?
Failure?

My thought:

Too small-minded and limited a person for the huge historical role handed to him.

You can't really predict what history will make of him. History is a fickle bitch.

it's just that on all these 1000s of threads about the middle east i've never heard you say anything about the middle east that wasn't almost cartoonishly vitriolic.

and yes, the subjects you choose probably deserve it. i fully understand why hamas inspires vitriol, i just don't understand why you're so obsessed with hamas.

you're like the guy who says "i don't hate [group x], i just hate the fucking junkies and thieves and welfare moms and drunks that infest their neighborhoods" and then goes on to gleefully spew hours of racist anecdotes, appended with a "mind you, not all [x] are bad, there's one at my office who seems like a nice person".

seriously, man. you fucking go off on every single one of these threads. i think you just enjoy insulting middle easterners.

clearly, the biggest factor in what happens wrt palestine and gaza and so on ISN'T RELATED to the islamist boogeyman you can't enough of. it's much more about how the peacenik israelis and the hardline settlers, and all the citizens inbetween, are going to compromise WITH EACH OTHER over israel's security, not how they deal with the threat of external radicals.

why don't you ever have anything interesting / impassioned / chewed-over / etc. to say about that??

Aren't we all.

It's surprising to me how many times I've heard this book referenced in the last couple days. Nobody knew just how successful the "latte libel" has been... except for Thomas Frank.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0394703170/ref=wl_it_dp/002-2021599-3524011?%5Fencoding=UTF8&coliid=I2B39D0YOH8PAN&v=glance&colid=2FLU2JV9P1HEV

Nah. Only latte-sippin', Volvo-drivin', gay-toleratin', heavy-tax-payin' idiots will buy that.

i'll grant you that it may be more or less factual
And with that, we should be done here, since you don't disagree with what I wrote.

I am, however, confused how you can acknowledge that what I write is factual, yet at the same time claim that it's also bigoted. That doesn't really make sense, does it?

But let's ignore that, because you obviously think that I am in fact a bigot. And again, we should be done here because I challenge you to find one single thing I wrote on ILX that attacks Arabs or Muslims AS A PEOPLE, as opposed to my criticism of a particular person or regime or government.

Because you're "hiding" behind the same arguments, right? You don't hate Jews, do you, you just hate certain Israeli policies.

clearly, the biggest factor in what happens wrt palestine and gaza and so on ISN'T RELATED to the islamist boogeyman you can't enough of. it's much more about how the peacenik israelis and the hardline settlers, and all the citizens inbetween, are going to compromise WITH EACH OTHER over israel's security, not how they deal with the threat of external radicals.

It's about both, obviously. Israel has made mistakes, but the PA and the other Arab governments have ill-treated the Palestinans have made far more mistakes, and far bigger ones. That has always been my point.

If there's any bogeyman in Middle East politics, it's the spectre of rampant Anti-Semitism. And if you don't think that exists over there, and if you don't believe that some Arab and Muslim regimes actively promote and cultivate Anti-Semitic fervour as part of their ongoing conflict with Israel, then you have a serious problem. Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger.

Whose? Frank's? His other books are impenetrable, for the most part. He's a smart guy, but his pet issue is the economy, which is a staggering topic for most people. In "Kansas," he at least has the courtesy to cast the economy into terms of culture... which, as luck would have it, is very useful in this case.

xpost

no barry, i've actually NEVER discussed israel on ILX. do a search for my name and israel. i've never brought it up. ever.

oh, except when i was describing my pilgrimage there (as a baha'i) and how some islamic dudes wouldn't let me or my dad in to see the dome of the rock.

is that what gave you your impression of me??

It's frustrating. Unreadable, and full of great insight. I so torn with him.

Unless you count the Arafat thread I started today. And if so, that is the lone exception.

is that what gave you your impression of me??

If you're asking if I got a particular impression of you from your Dome of the Rock story, then the answer is no, I've never seen that thread.

Can we reign in the number of multiple threads on the same topics, it's getting hard to follow.

Israel has made mistakes, but the PA and the other Arab governments have ill-treated the Palestinans have made far more mistakes, and far bigger ones. That has always been my point.

"Israel has made some mistakes" is putting it quite lightly. Like it or not, the whole nation of Israel was founded on injustice, and that injustice has been quite systematic ever since. Obviously, this is no excuse for PLO, Hamas and the Arab governments for the things they've done, but I'm not sure if you should play a game of "Who's the biggest crook?" here.

OK, now what we do is you say that recent immigrants don't deserve half a country, i bring up the holocaust for no good reason, you bring up ben-gurion saying, "land without a ppl for ppl without a land", I cite the bible, you say zionism is inherently racist (and rockist), we all cry, then we call each other names, seriously it's an endless and pointless argument.

xp I agree, tho the current gang of each has plenty blameworthy material of their own. they fuck you up your mom and dad...

Both stubbornly allowed their personal hatred for each other to override the duty to their citizens.

Sharon refused to deal with Arafat - Sharon wins

Arafat refuses to relinquish control - Arafat wins

Stalemate.

And the Palestinians obviously are less likely to compromise as well than they were before the second Intifada.
This is misleading because the Intifida started IN PLACE of the PA's willingness to compromise.

Then again, in 1948 the UN had drawn plans to divide Palestine into an Arabic and a Jewish state. This never happened, because the Sionists wanted the whole area, and declared it the nation of Israel.

Completely and utterly untrue. The UN drew up the plan, the Jews declared the nation of Israel on their part. As for the Arab part, Gaza was immediately occupied by Egypt, and the West Bank was immediately occupied and annexed by Jordan. Then the war started. Neither Egypt or Jordan ever took a single step toward the creation of a Palestinian state.

And don't forget about the Jewish refugees (driven out of the West Bank by Arab armies) a result of that war.

I can't be bothered to xpalin for the hundredth time but Palestine now = South Africa 1970s.

This is like saying Sharon = Nazi, i.e. if this sort of junk is what you really believe then there's no point in even starting a discussion about it.

In 1974, in a speech to the United Nations, Mr Arafat waved a leafy branch above his head: "I come bearing an olive branch in one hand," he said.

Then he pulled out his pistol: "And the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1805000/images/_1807449_arafat_150ap.jpg

Whereas the United States and Israel were founded entirely by legions of stout-hearted men brandishing olive branches.

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/002827.html