143775 40,000 children starve to death each day --------- 143578 We, the Urbana-Champaign IMC, support IMC Switzerland ---------143649 'Wild Party Girls' video maker must pay SWT student -------- 143164 + zeropaid.com (filesharing) ------------ 143070 autonarchy.org.il ------------ 143863 +20 Long altercation cascade around Poulsen and ChuckO ------- 143836 +3 about the middle east -------- 142683 +1 Bad habits in the middle east  ----------143775 40,000 children starve to death each day while you contemplate having another relica of your personal wonderfulness. COOTCHIE COO ======== Please remove (english) by ??? 3:07pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Why didn't Extinction Cartoon's parents follow the logic presented in this post? BTW, I thought there was supposed to be some kind of IMC policy against reposts. ========= Stop posting this! (english) by Outlaw 3:13pm Sun Mar 3 '02 You're wasting bandwidth. We've all seen this before and frankly it's disgusting. You are demonizing children and childbearing to compensate for the jealousy you harbor against those who can procreate. Yes overpopulation is a problem and so is homphobia but the only people who read this site are activists so if they all stop breeding then the only ones left next generation will be the ones who don't give a flying fuck. The population is going to plunge soon anyway whether we like it or not, what with Israel goading India and Pakistan in to nuclear war. ========== Mark Biaskmnmnfkkkfkldll is the Editor (english) by JC 3:31pm Sun Mar 3 '02 warrior1777@msn.com Download attached file: losing_youvbqmvf.wmv (mimetype: video/x-ms-wmv ) As long as it is the homosexual community on this "Progressive Newswire", it's ok to repost. Again I appreciate the chance to post my stuff but cannot stand someone who stands for nothing. Mark Bidhajkgfjfdkf edits out whatever "He" wants along with the other "Unknown Editors". At least we all know that the "Homosexual Community" is welcome here, all 4-10% of them. As far as Heterosexuality, without it we would not have to put up with idiots from the "Love Revolution", for they would not exsist, which is a good thing. hmmm... All I know is it seems us people with half our brains left are "Losing" the rest. Oh well see ya. Help Screw the CIA by signing the petition below. http://www.petitiononline.com/WARRIORS/petition.html In closing have a listen to the song made by a real "Peace Activist", one that was not so concerned with what hole and with whom you were having sex with. Later JC www.thelastamericanwarriors.com ======== Do you really care? (english) by Dhunter 3:36pm Sun Mar 3 '02 If the people who posted this really cared about overpopulation, they would advocate some useful policy or idea towards reducing population, like reviving family planning. Or they might post something that attacks people for having MORE THAN TWO children, which would make sense. But demonizing parenthood itself won't convince anyone of anything. And demonizing BABIES?!?! Egad! And claiming that heterosexuality isn't the norm? Maybe we're seeing the first evidence of homophile people who are also creationists. They obviously don't know a damn thing about biology. ========== the solution (english) by duznt matter 3:44pm Sun Mar 3 '02 As i said to you last time if you want to make a difference heres what to do. Invest in a rope and go neck yourself!!! That way you and all your sicko friends can help reduce overpopulaion!!! Please HELP make a difference!!! ========= Babies - Human Overpopulation (english) by Elaine 4:20pm Sun Mar 3 '02 address: Petaluma CA, USA ewood0220@aol.com I agree 100% about the babies and more babies--human, that is. What we need are more animal babies--wolf babies, wolverine babies, butterfly babies, whale babies, etc. The problem is--God, or the Creator. He created this world/universe/plane and made us the way we are--desirous of having sex and babies. So now the human population is destroying nature and our once beautiful earth which was populated by beautiful plants and animals. Now it is becoming more and more populated with ugly people. The way events are unfolding--more and more people, that is--there will eventually be widespread starvation and death of a large portion of the human population. Unfortunately, with the human propensity for blindly overpopulating its species, the whole miserable senario will start all over again with the few humans that will be left. But perhaps that is the way the Creator designed it--The world as a prison in which its inhabitants suffer. The world is a perverse paradox. We follow our instincts and kill ourselves off. We try to create shelter and feed ourselves and thus destroy nature by cutting down the trees and creating agriculture which destroys biodiversity. We solace ourselves from the misery of existence by enjoying a drink or food that we prefer and ruin our health. We eat meat and cause untold suffering for animals--factory farms, slaughterhouses that skin and butcher animals alive. Yes, that is true. The fast production of assembly-line butchering does not allow for cattle to always be rendered unconscious and so a great many butchered cattle are skinned and cut up while still conscious. Our hog factory farms are polluting our waterways. Ranching of cattle out west is destroying the ecosystems on which they roam, plus all the predators are being anilated--the coyotes, wolves, lions, jaguars, etc. A sad and ugly world. Created by God. Elaine ========== Another thing (english) by MsShel330 4:20pm Sun Mar 3 '02 I'd also like to point out that many Lesbians are becoming or trying to become parents biologically with the aid of sperm donors. Not to mention the many closeted gays that have children in marriages. So breeding isn't something that only heterosexuals do. ======== JC (english) by someone 4:25pm Sun Mar 3 '02 You know I really doubt this is representative of the vast majority of homosexuals. I think probably 99% of them would disagree highly. In any case I do wish they would stop posting this. =========== I again will say (english) ============ by JC 5:01pm Sun Mar 3 '02 warrior1777@msn.com Download attached file: american_pie_1st_cutqplegh.wmv (mimetype: video/x-ms-wmv ) I will say one more time...I could care less about your "Sexuality". The CIA, Bushes, Big Business, are screwing us, and all the Gay people want to say is "Look at us, look at us, accept us, accept us, etc etc". This sexuality crap has nothing to do with the "Worlds Problems", and if you believe it does, well have you heard the term dumber than dumb? There is plenty of food and everything else. What there seems not to be enough of is MONEY. SEXUALITY has nothing to do with it and is a waste of time! Be as Gay as you want, but not on my time! As far as Lesbians using sperm banks. There is more than enough evidence that shows when a child is fatherless the chances of them becoming degenerates rises rapidly. Facts are facts. So NOW you think just making fatherless babies is a good idea? You sure with a two woman relationship the chances of the bogus "Postpartum Depression" is doubled? Now you can have two crazy ass mothers with an excuse to kill their children? Just keep making the confusion more confusing...that always works. Later JC www.thelastamericanwarriors.com ======= Reducing overpopulation - Where to start... (english) by Injun Joe 5:09pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Fire up the ovens, stoke the flames white hot and burn alive every God forsaken faggot and dike on this planet! ======= Right on the mark, Elaine (english) by God 7:14pm Sun Mar 3 '02 =============- Man and NOW Women and their Free Choice (english) by JC 9:44pm Sun Mar 3 '02 warrior1777@msn.com Men and women and their "Free Will", screw up this world. Not anybody or anything else. God or Good, has nothing to do with that. Maybe Good should of made us all like robots. Always choose to do the "right thing". How you see otherwise I do not know. www.thelastamericanwarriors.com ------ -------- 143649 'Wild Party Girls' video maker must pay SWT student (english) ------ 9 comments total; here's 2 WTF?! (english) by Russ Schultz 1:48pm Sun Mar 3 '02 If you're stupid enough to get drunk and take your shirt off in public with movie cameras around, you shouldn't be too suprised it ends up being sold. Not to put too fine a point on it, but being in public pretty much waves your right to privacy. This has nothing to do with capitalism stealing the rights of any poor individual. Its all about stupid people who regret what they did when they got drunk. ========== Different things (english) by Mike 2:00pm Sun Mar 3 '02 stepbystepfarm@shaysnet.com Hey Russ, TWF in return. You are confusing two very different things here. Yeah, SHE is responsible for letting herself get drunk, going topless, etc. Which means she has no gripe against those who got a good look THEN. But that's an entirely different matter than "distributed" photos, etc. Here it's not only a matter of "a release signed while drunk" but NO SIGNED RELEASE. Duh...... it's only "public figures" photos of whom can be "published" without consent. "Public place" makes no difference. As anybody in photography can tell you, you cannot publish without a "release". ======= Judgment is worthless (english) by Cirus 2:28pm Sun Mar 3 '02 As the video company defaulted, my guess is that they've stripped their assets to zero (or didn't have much in the first place) and the judgment cannot be collected. I know this isn't a political analysis and far too practical for you anarchists out there, but here it is. ========== (Karl Kraus would have loved this as an illustration of his main gripes (public immorality commercialized while privacy repressed; he wanted it turned around too) -------------- --------http:143578&group=webcast We, the Urbana-Champaign IMC, support IMC Switzerland in its mission of providing an open and independent channel of public communication. We are saddened that IMC Switzerland is currently offline as a consequence of the legal action by Aktion Kinder der Holocaust. We pledge our solidarity and support. This controversy pits two important but irreconcilable principles against each other: on one hand, unfettered, uncensored free speech; on the other, the repudiation of racist and antisemitic rhetoric. The Urbana-Champaign IMC has also found itself caught between these two principles in the past, and we recognize the significant moral and ethical quandary IMC Switzerland finds itself in. The cartoon panel at the heart of the controversy is part of a series critical of Israeli policy toward the Palestinians. It bears repeating that it is not the pro-Palestinian stance which is at question here. It is only the final panel, which by implication equated the Israelis with the Nazis, which triggered the ADKH protest. We do not accuse the cartoonist Latuff of antisemitism, although we believe that he had not fully considered the moral implications of the cartoon panel at the time of its posting, and we believe he has not yet shown any real understanding of the core complaint against him. He boasts of "having struck a nerve"; he has, but not the one he thinks. In particular, we must explicitly reject as repugnant the rhetorical device of equating Israeli policy with Nazism, a hyperbolic comparison that is at best tasteless, deeply offensive to most Jews and Germans, and historically untenable. The Nazi "Final Solution" killed nearly one third of the world's Jewish population within half a dozen years; the AKDH is not wrong to assert that such ground should be tread lightly. We accept that their motivation comes not from a desire to stifle criticism of Israel, as has been alleged, but as a genuine cri de coeur. Nevertheless, the mission of the IMC movement requires that free speech must prevail. IMC Switzerland exercised sound moral judgement in deprecating but not removing the cartoon. We feel that this is a perfectly acceptable solution. We call upon the AKDH in friendship to reconsider their suit against IMC Switzerland. Proceeding against the IMC would be, we strongly believe, ineffective or even counterproductive. The Latuff panel is, ultimately, too insignificant to merit the closing of IMC Switzerland. Given its international nature, the Internet cannot be purged of all expressions of antisemitism -- or any other type of insanity. But the Internet also allows for new opportunities for education and bridge-building, and we find it more productive to concentrate our energies there. We send all our best wishes to IMC Switzerland in hopes that their site will soon rejoin IMCs throughout the world, giving voice to the voiceless. ucimc.org/front.php3?article_id=4239...   ========== ======== LATUFF HAS IT EXACTLY RIGHT (english) by FREE PALESTINE 6:02am Sun Mar 3 '02 What a bunch of zionist wimps they have over there at Urbana-Champaign. Or maybe I should say Urbana-Champagne, because it looks like they're drunk drivers. The Latuff cartoon depicts perfectly the relationship of the lowly IMC U-C peasants approaching their zionist sovereign lord and master. This attitude is why there need never be any compromise in depicting the zionazi foe. The reality is that no matter HOW you portray the zionazis, they will always cry "antisemitism" and run to their IMC internal allies for protection. This is further evidence that IMC which likes to pose as a "radical" group seeking social justice is nothing of the sort. It's just another group of Democratic Party moderate wannabes who have no real understanding of oppression or how to deal with it. In a few years, you'll see them doing a Jerry Rubin routine, working in the stock market for the next Enron, becoming government bureaucrats and heading up news desks at CNN and Fox. =========== Genocide is Genocide (english) by Lloyd Hart 6:59am Sun Mar 3 '02 dadapop@dadapop.com Genocide is Genocide regardless of the numbers. Walking softly with Israel is an obsurd policy. The fact is, the leadership in Israel under Ariel Sharon is not interested in peace and is actually following an expantionist policy. They are more interested in wearing the Palistinian Authority down by slaughtering Palistinians and proping up an alternative puppet Palistinian leadership that will do Sharon's bidding. The right wing and settlement population especially do not wish to let go of the water in the West Bank. Over the last 15 months Sharon's actions speak for themselves. These are the actions of someone who planned to kill a lot Palistinians. Only a strong PA can control Hamas, Islamic Jihad etc. who I see as Sharon's close colleagues in genocide. But this is clearly not Sharon's objective. This kind of maniacal thinking is completely equatable with that of the Nazis. And if you think that the entire global Jewish community acts as one completely united organism when someone points a finger an screams "Anti Semite" your completely wrong. I have personally put Latuff's cartoon's up on my site because he is right on the money when it comes to fundamentalist Jews who use their religion in the same manner as when the Christians exterminated Jews, Native Americans and any one else that stood in the way of their empire. So please do not beg at the feet of these fanatic fundamentalist Jews who think they are safe from criticism because we all are horrified at what took place in the Holocaust. And if anyone is wondering, my mother witnessed in horror as all of my Grandfather's Jewish colleagues were taken to mass graves and shot during the Holocaust in Latvia. I believe my mother would not lie about such terrible things considering she was almost sent to the ovens herself. Genocide is Genocide regardless of who is pulling the trigger. =========== This is bullshit! (english) by Aybe Sea 7:15am Sun Mar 3 '02 "Now get down on your knees and say your`e sorry"!What the hell is this? Would have been great if IMC Champaign/Urbana expressed a solidarity wish without the gratuitous asskissing accompanying it. Too fucking bad if a certain segment of a social/religious entity is offended by this or that.They have a choice.Like it or leave it. OPEN PUBLISHING NEWSWIRE!Fair warning right there!I don`t see any of entitled outcry against the photo with two entity soldiers standing over the body of a Palestinian man for a trophy photo op!Which I`ve seen about every day since it was published!Don`t tell me that that photo wasn`t published over there.What do they have to say about that? I certainly don`t like it even if the situation was reversed.But you what? I just skip by it.I don`t have the unquenchable desire to control what everyone else chooses to read. Champaign/Urbana IMC;get your heads out of your asses!The shutting down of IMC Switzerland for lawsuit purposes is censorship! Sure your`e upset and aware-just don`t kiss ass!I really don`t find Latuff`s art offending personally.If he or someone else posts something I don`t like, well, I`ll turn the page!Simple as that. So I hope you guys think before you embarrass your regular readers next time.You`ve just added to the fodder of the right! Thanks! ========== Free Palestine Censorship (english) by imc rules! 7:23am Sun Mar 3 '02 If there is censorship why are your stupid comments on here every day? ============ Let the Truth Be Known (english) by human 7:23am Sun Mar 3 '02 There are plenty of examples to show how Zionism equates with Nazism that would easily win in a court of law. Also, the term "anti-Semetic" does not equate exclusively to Jews, it does to Christians and Muslims as well when Zionists behave in a racist and hateful manner toward them in the Holy Land. I say, let them have their law suit and bring their own behavior out in the open in front of a court of law. Plus, even authentic Jews say the Holocaust has been overblown by the Zionist Jews. There are many anti-Zionist Jewish organizations who will vouch for the credibility of IMC Switzerland's right to hold up free speech in this particular matter. ============ blackmail (english) by 23 8:03am Sun Mar 3 '02 Indeed genocide is genocide. Indeed the Israeli government are behaving like nazi's No, Latuf's cartoon cannot be called racist or whatever. Yes, IMC Switserland is on it's knees, because of the double morale of a group of Israel supporters. IMC is an open newswire and can therefore not be responsible for all of it's post. Closing the site is a weakness. Yes, the Israeli warcriminals should be brought to justice and dealt with. That should be the discussion, and not the closure of the IMC, because of the weak knees of it's volunteers =========== Abused often become abusers (english) by profrv@etc 8:04am Sun Mar 3 '02 Comparing Israel to the old South africa might be closer to the mark but when it comes to free speech it doesnt matter what the alleged 'offence' is."Free speech I may tersely define as ,no opinion a law,no opinion a crime."Alex.Berkman.This is a basic human and civil right.The only response to an attack on free speech is massive retaliation up to and including capital punishment. Your fucking around with us? Not for long.KILL all CENSORS! "I'd buy that for a dollar." =========== Speak For Yourself, FreePalestine (english) by marco 8:13am Sun Mar 3 '02 I had a very long polemical response to you but I deleted it. I should just completely ignore you, but I have this urge to call you an asshole that won't go away. Asshole. marco ======== Chilled not shaken (english) by swiss miss 8:17am Sun Mar 3 '02 I was thinking about how to support IMC Switzerland and thought of recomending this new site, set up to counter this kind of problem. http://www.chillingeffects.org/ When I went there I was rather chilled to find it down. You can still see it with the google cache at http://www.google.com/search?q=  cache:BhVduLaD6qMC  :www.chillingeffects.org/+&hl=en How often are legal threats used to silence Internet activity? Help us to find out and counter baseless threats with the "chilling effects clearinghouse." This website is the beginning of a project being developed by the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Stanford Law School's Center for Internet & Society, Boalt Hall's Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic, and clinics at law schools across the country. The Chilling Effects clearinghouse will catalogue cease and desist letters and present analyses of their claims to help recipients resist the chilling of legitimate activities. The project's core, this database of letters and FAQ-style analyses, will be supplemented by legal backgrounders, news items, and pointers to statutes and caselaw. Periodic "weather reports" will sum up the legal climate for online activity. We hope to create a public resource by which people can know their rights when dealing with such issues as fan fiction, copyright and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, trademark and domain names, anonymous speech, and defamation. We expect the project will generate both a base of resources for Internet users who face legal threats and a set of data from which to analyze the out-of-court effects of those threats to chill legitimate activity, or, conversely, the extent to which unlawful activity on the Net proves resistant to legal action. Until the site is fully operational, please email news@chillingeffects.org if you have a notice to submit to the database or would like to be kept informed about the project's progress. ========== Thanks! --Wendy Seltzer Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society ============ The Critics Should Take Note (english) by ML 11:08am Sun Mar 3 '02 The critical comments above about the U-C IMC Steering group's statement reflect the inability of their makers to realize that IMC will NOT take a side in this dispute, other than to stand up forcefully for the Swiss IMC's right to conduct their editorial policy in the manner they see fit. The statement does not back away one inch (one centimeter?) from it being a call for the Swiss IMC to be able to resume publishing immediately. For the IMCs, this is a freedom of press issue. In this case, there are conflicts between this fact and other's freedom of speech. If an IMC makes a decision about what to do about any particular article, it is editing. If a government makes such a decision (or forces it on an IMC), that is censorship. We oppose censorship. We retain the right to edit as we see fit and support the Swiss IMC's right to do likewise. Point of clarification: The statement is specifically on behalf of the Steering group at U-C IMC. This should have been noted when it was posted. ML is a member of the U-C IMC Steering group. ====== Latuff as courageous as ever; but not UC IMC (english) by Tremblay 8:01pm Sun Mar 3 '02 I've always believed that Latuff was never afraid of calling a genocide a genocide. And I still firmly believe so. Latuff has courage to say things like they are. What saddens me is the absolutely lack of courage of the volunteers at the Urbana Champaign IMC who wrote their "letter of support" to IMC Switzerland. It looks like a group of pretentious intellectuals got together to tell AKdH that they "believe [Latuff] has not yet shown any real understanding of the core complaint against him." Who is UC IMC to say what Latuff (or anyone else) understands and doesn't? It goes even further in its prescription of thoughts and 'understanding' by saying "[Latuff] boasts of "having struck a nerve"; he has, but not the one he thinks." So UC IMC knows what people think? And then they go and say "a genuine cri de coeur." Crisse de calisse, how many hours did the UC IMC people spend looking in the thesaurus to find the expression "cri de coeur" in hope of impressing their AKdH pals? Not to mention their claim that Latuff's work was "insignificant".. Without the shadow of a doubt, Latuff is one of the most constant quality contributors to Indymedia, let's hope that he'll continue to contribute despite UC IMC's pretentiousness. ------------------------- COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM AT URBANA (4239): email this story | download as PDF | print article Urbana-Champaign IMC letter on IMC Switzerland by gehrig 6:23pm Sat Mar 2 '02 (Modified on 1:50am Mon Mar 4 '02) article#4239 zemblan@earthlink.net Here is our letter of support for IMC Switzerland. I have also posted it on IMC Austria and IMC Germany. We, the Urbana-Champaign IMC, support IMC Switzerland in its mission of providing an open and independent channel of public communication. We are saddened that IMC Switzerland is currently offline as a consequence of the legal action by Aktion Kinder der Holocaust. We pledge our solidarity and support. This controversy pits two important but irreconcilable principles against each other: on one hand, unfettered, uncensored free speech; on the other, the repudiation of racist and antisemitic rhetoric. The Urbana-Champaign IMC has also found itself caught between these two principles in the past, and we recognize the significant moral and ethical quandary IMC Switzerland finds itself in. The cartoon panel at the heart of the controversy is part of a series critical of Israeli policy toward the Palestinians. It bears repeating that it is not the pro-Palestinian stance which is at question here. It is only the final panel, which by implication equated the Israelis with the Nazis, which triggered the ADKH protest. We do not accuse the cartoonist Latuff of antisemitism, although we believe that he had not fully considered the moral implications of the cartoon panel at the time of its posting, and we believe he has not yet shown any real understanding of the core complaint against him. He boasts of "having struck a nerve"; he has, but not the one he thinks. In particular, we must explicitly reject as repugnant the rhetorical device of equating Israeli policy with Nazism, a hyperbolic comparison that is at best tasteless, deeply offensive to most Jews and Germans, and historically untenable. The Nazi "Final Solution" killed nearly one third of the world's Jewish population within half a dozen years; the AKDH is not wrong to assert that such ground should be tread lightly. We accept that their motivation comes not from a desire to stifle criticism of Israel, as has been alleged, but as a genuine cri de coeur. Nevertheless, the mission of the IMC movement requires that free speech must prevail. IMC Switzerland exercised sound moral judgement in deprecating but not removing the cartoon. We feel that this is a perfectly acceptable solution. We call upon the AKDH in friendship to reconsider their suit against IMC Switzerland. Proceeding against the IMC would be, we strongly believe, ineffective or even counterproductive. The Latuff panel is, ultimately, too insignificant to merit the closing of IMC Switzerland. Given its international nature, the Internet cannot be purged of all expressions of antisemitism -- or any other type of insanity. But the Internet also allows for new opportunities for education and bridge-building, and we find it more productive to concentrate our energies there. We send all our best wishes to IMC Switzerland in hopes that their site will soon rejoin IMCs throughout the world, giving voice to the voiceless. Make a quick comment on this article. your name your email (optional) comment heading comment add your own longer comments (including web links and multimedia uploads) Extremely well written by JW 3:15am Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4243 Couldn't have said it better myself. :) Is cowardice a way out for IMC? by Latuff 7:30am Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4244 latuff@uninet.com.br LATUFF HAS IT EXACTLY RIGHT by FREE PALESTINE 8:24am Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4245 What a bunch of zionist wimps they have over there at Urbana-Champaign. Or maybe I should say Urbana-CHAMPAGNE, because they're acting like they're driving drunk. The Latuff cartoon depicts perfectly the relationship of the lowly IMC U-C peasants approaching their zionist sovereign lord and master. This attitude is why there need never be any compromise in depicting the zionazi foe. The reality is that no matter HOW you portray the zionazis, they will always cry "antisemitism" and run to their IMC internal allies for protection. This is further evidence that IMC which likes to pose as a "radical" group seeking social justice is nothing of the sort. It's just another group of Democratic Party moderate wannabes who have no real understanding of oppression or how to deal with it. In a few years, you'll see them doing a Jerry Rubin routine, working in the stock market for the next Enron, becoming government bureaucrats and heading up news desks at CNN and Fox. This is bullshit! by Aybe Sea 9:29am Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4249 "Now get down on your knees and say your`e sorry"!What the hell is this? Would have been great if IMC Champaign/Urbana expressed a solidarity wish without the gratuitous asskissing accompanying it. Too fucking bad if a certain segment of a social/religious entity is offended by this or that.They have a choice.Like it or leave it. OPEN PUBLISHING NEWSWIRE!Fair warning right there!I don`t see any of entitled outcry against the photo with two entity soldiers standing over the body of a Palestinian man for a trophy photo op!Which I`ve seen about every day since it was published!Don`t tell me that that photo wasn`t published over there.What do they have to say about that? I certainly don`t like it even if the situation was reversed.But you what? I just skip by it.I don`t have the unquenchable desire to control what everyone else chooses to read. Champaign/Urbana IMC;get your heads out of your asses!The shutting down of IMC Switzerland for lawsuit purposes is censorship! Sure your`e upset and aware-just don`t kiss ass!I really don`t find Latuff`s art offending personally.If he or someone else posts something I don`t like, well, I`ll turn the page!Simple as that. So I hope you guys think before you embarrass your regular readers next time.You`ve just added to the fodder of the right! Thanks! Let the Truth Be Known by human 9:42am Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4250 There are plenty of examples to show how Zionism equates with Nazism that would easily win in a court of law. Also, the term "anti-Semetic" does not equate exclusively to Jews, it does to Christians and Muslims as well when Zionists behave in a racist and hateful manner toward them in the Holy Land. I say, let them have their law suit and bring their own behavior out in the open in front of a court of law. Plus, even authentic Jews say the Holocaust has been overblown by the Zionist Jews. There are many anti-Zionist Jewish organizations who will vouch for the credibility of IMC Switzerland's right to hold up free speech in this particular matter. The Critics Should Take Note by ML 11:44am Sun Mar 3 '02 (Modified on 4:00pm Sun Mar 3 '02) comment#4254 The critical comments above reflect the inability of their makers to realize that IMC will NOT take a side in this dispute, other than to stand up forcefully for the Swiss IMC's right to conduct their editorial policy in the manner they see fit. The statement does not back away one inch (one centimeter?) from a being call for the Swiss IMC being able to resume publishing immediately. For the IMCs, this is a freedom of press issue. In this case, there are conflicts between this fact and other's freedom of speech. If an IMC makes a decision about what to do about any particular article, it is editing. If a government makes such a decision (or forces it on an IMC), that is censorship. We oppose censorship. We retain the right to edit as we see fit and support the Swiss IMC's right to do likewise. Point of clarification: The statement is specifically on behalf of the Steering group at U-C IMC. This should have been noted when it was posted. ML is a member of the U-C IMC Steering group. Zionist-Nazi Cooperation by Holocaust Family Member 12:15pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4255 Those of us from Holocaust families who support the Palestinian liberation struggle know for sure that the Zionist State of Israel is no different from Nazi Germany in its actions against the Palestinians. This should come as no surprise. The Zionists have a history of cooperation with the Nazis, including the Transfer Agreement, a means by which certain Zionist lives were saved by breaking the boycott of Nazi goods, which existed in the 1930s. The State of Israel is a fascist, racist, militaristic, theocratic puppet state of US oil imperialism. Latuff's drawings are not anti-Semitic at all, and remember both Jews and Arabs are Semites. The horrifying actions on the part of the State of Israel against the Palestinians are completely indefensible and the Zionists who shake the Holocaust schtick are utterly despicable and hypocritical. The Zionists were in fact nowhere to be found when it came to resisting the Holocaust. Regardless of political ideology, it is understood by most of the Jewish Community that it was the Red Army of the Soviet Union that literally saved our lives, as the turning point of WW2 was the Battle of Stalingrad and it was the Red Army that arrived in Berlin first. In addition to the connection of Israel to Nazi Germany which does exist, the anti-Semitism which exists here in the US and has been expressed on Independent Media must be condemned and removed to "Hidden Articles." We had a series by some outfit claiming to represent Latinos, which spewed forth anti-Semitism since they wanted to be the capitalist representatives of the Latino population, and not the Zionists, although both support capitalism. I do not believe they represent Latinos; I believe they represent one of the many fascist groups we have in the US. There is a vast difference between asking an article be removed or moved to a different section and shutting down a website. The Zionists must be condemned for this censorship and for their torture and murder of the Palestinian people, and theft of their homes and orchards, all with American tax dollars. Defend Free Speech Si; Defend Zionist Racism No! by d elliott 12:45pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4256 quibono@aol.com Your coming to the defense of the Switzerland IMC is laudable; your remarks concerning the distinction you draw between Nazi and Zionist racist criminality shows a shallow grasp of the matter. "A There is a quantitative distinction which can be drawn between the two historical phenomena but not a qualitative one. Ideologically the two are siblings born of the same Blood and Iron Bismarckian context -- or as Herzl put it "Blut und Boden" (blood and soil); both reflected aspirations of emerging Central European bourgeois/petite bourgeois strata to get into the big game until then the playground of the Western powers UK, France, USA plus the Tsars: colonialist expansion into territories populated by, in Kipling's immortal phrase,"the lesser breeds without the Law". voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the future. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison for the land, or find some rich man or benefactor who will provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else-or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempt to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not difficult, not dangerous, but IMPOSSIBLE!... Zionism is a colonization adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important... to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot - or else I am through with playing at colonizing."Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism (precursor of Likud), The Iron Wall, 1923. "We must expel Arabs and take their places." David Ben Gurion, future Prime Minister of Israel, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985. The IMC movement is an institution in its infancy, including in its volunteer ranks many whose knowledge of communications technology is fantastically impressive. We who are about to become obsolete salute you. And the concepts of non-hierarchical relationships and cooperative work have advanced mightily. But. Many IMC people lack background in political issues other than the ones, like environmentalism and "globalization" as it has emerged in the last few years. Evidence of a lack of historical background is everywhere evident. Many seem to believe that the resistance to capitalism and the accompanying war-mongering began with the movement against the War in Vietnam, which itself is viewed as a chapter of barely relevant ancient history. Here are three texts, which if mastered, you can ignore everything Noam Chomsky ever wrote and still have a perfect grasp of the globalization phenomenon, as well as the key to understanding everything said and done by the zionists and their Ideological State Apparatus: Das Kapital, Vols. I,II,III: "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism" by Vladimir Lenin; (don't assume that I am a "marxist-leninist" because I am not, but I know expert analysis when I see it - this work predates the October Revolution); And: Three works by Dr Lenni Brenner, two downloadable from the Web: begin with "The Iron Wall: Zionism in the Age of the Dictators"., and don't miss "Jews in America Today" which you may find still available. While you're at it find Power Structure Research on the web and download the reading list. Start with H. Zinn and the Foners, and study US history in detail. That's where the bodies are buried, millions of them, in the sense of Corpii Delecti. Epistemological doubts? Check out Ignatiev. And Buddhist psychology. That should keep you from getting in a rut! And since communications is the chosen field, don't forget Brecht "theorie of radio", but Do read the "Diaries" of the first genius of mass communication: one Paul Joseph Goebbels. disappointing letter by deva 12:49pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4257 bleechk What a weak letter It gives the rabid zionists validity in their efforts to silence all criticism of Israel Latuff's cartoons do not say that what Israel is doing now is equal to the holocaust, but it is making the point that there is a similarity in nature - oppression and killing of another people. There is a reason over a hundred Israeli soldiers refuse to participate - also, Nazis called themselves a superior people, a racist statement - and the Jewish religion calls themselves the chosen people, which is also a fundamentally racist statement. The relentless cry of 'anti-semitism' is driven by an effort to be the chosen people, driven by a belief, conscious or unconscious to be superior. The zionists cannot stand to just be people, amongst all sorts of other people. They want their special place. Latuff is entitled to express his opinion on the matter, and it is an opinion that has some reflection of the current situation. He is making a reasoned point. Efforts at censorship should be refuted, without kissing up to the one attempting the censorship. Support for free speech rights for Latuff and IMC should be unequivocal, not also including statements on how justified the mouth foaming zionists are and would they please reconsider because the internet is just not policable, as if we would if we could. What ass kissing! One scientist published a paper on his genetic research which indicated that Palestinians and Jews are racially identical. The powerful zionist lobby, declared him anti-semitic, and managed to have the study completely squashed, with all issues of the magazine it was published in withdrawn and the researcher censored. It is completely unacceptable to them to have to be equal to Palestinians. They want to be superior. They are racists It is disappointing to see any IMC bowing down to racism. Suffering doesn't have a race by Dissenter 1:25pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4259 You are to be congratulated for having acted in support of Switzerland IMC, but some of your assertions are too reprehensibly dangerous to go unchallenged. Specifically: "In particular, we must explicitly reject as repugnant the rhetorical device of equating Israeli policy with Nazism, a hyperbolic comparison that is at best tasteless, deeply offensive to most Jews and Germans, and historically untenable." Dismissing the parallel between Israeli policy and Nazism as a "rhetorical device" is insulting to those suffering Israeli atrocities, as well as to thinking people to whom the similiarites are clear. The above assertion assumes arrogantly that your own bias is fact. The Israelis have gone out of their way to ensure that the Palestinians are under a virtual house arrest, as demeaning and murderous as any pogrom suffered under Stalin or the SS. There are more ways to kill than the gas chamber or lining up people and shooting them, and the IDF has done them all, including poisoning water wells and ripping up houses and farms. The list expands as the commanders "think outside the box" as it were. How many people have to die before parallels can be drawn with the Holocaust? How much blood needs to be shed today? Ironically, it seems "remembering the holocaust" precludes really internalizing what should be its lessons ... that we must be on guard and fight actively against repression of all people. The sacrosanct place "the Jewish plight" and the "Holocaust" seem to occupy for people seems to do the opposite. Meanwhile, the people who are suffering and dying must be experiencing horror similar, if not identical, to that of the Jews in Nazi Germany. Dogmatists like the AKdH are practicing the same racism they denounce. Comment from an Urbana-Champaign IMC member by Travas 3:01pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4260 As a member of the UC-IMC, I find it hard to believe that the Steering group would publish such a statement. Perhaps I should show up to more meetings. The Zionist policies of Israel should be equated with Nazism; the parallels are painfully obvious. "In art, Morality is nonsense In practice, it is immoral In people, it is a sickness." Please Read and Attempt to Understand by ML 4:06pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4265 Travas, I would encourage people to attend Steering group meetings and participate. We welcome the input. On the other hand, I also ask you to carefully reread the original post and my comments below it. Most of the criticisms are entirely misplaced and misconstrue what the statement says. The U-C IMC Steering group took no position other than in support of the Swiss IMC's right to follow their own editorial policy. Any assertions that the we took a position one way or the other on the conflict in the Middle East itself is simply wrong. I do not see us doing so, but you're welcome to bring it up, if you'd like. disappointed by loel 4:12pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4266 loel@coolrio.com As a cofounder of Houston IMC and having worked with both LA and NYC IMC's I want to express my extreme disappointment in the letter that UC IMC wrote concerning the closing of the Swiss Site and the Latuff cartoon. It is clear that the authors of the letter do not have a real grasp of what is going on in the Isreali - Palestinian conflict. Israeli policies are racist and fascist, just as those of the NAZI's were. The parallels and similarities between them are obvious. I am one IMC contributor and supporter for whom you do not speak. loel coleman otro vez by loel 4:23pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4267 "Any assertions that the we took a position one way or the other on the conflict in the Middle East itself is simply wrong" The following statement from the letter reeks of taking a position that the Isreali policy is not as horrendous as it is and is therefor suggestion that their policy ought be whitewashed. This is called "[taking] a position one way or another..., etc." "In particular, we must explicitly reject as repugnant the rhetorical device of equating Israeli policy with Nazism, a hyperbolic comparison that is at best tasteless, deeply offensive to most Jews and Germans, and historically untenable." a few personal comments by gehrig 6:30pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4270 zemblan@earthlink.net I'm speaking for myself here. And I'm scratching my head, trying to figure out what letter it is that some of you folks seem to have read, because it doesn't seem to be the one that got posted. Take another look to see what I mean. The letter posted here _explicitly supports_ IMC Switzerland's decision not to remove the cartoon. It _explicitly_ condemns censorship. Yet we're accused of promoting censorship. Wha-a? The letter posted here _explicitly refuses_, in as many words, to accuse Latuff of antisemitism. Yet we're accused of flinging the accusation of antisemitism around for political purposes. Huh? The letter posted here _explicitly_ notes that the bulk of Latuff's series was not controversial; only a single panel was, and for reasons the letter spells out _explicitly_ as being the "Jew = Nazi" bit. (Which, by an amazing coincidence, is what AKDH said too -- except that everybody was too busy shouting their hatred at them to hear what _they_ had to say.) The letter posted here _explicitly notes_ that free speech is the central notion of the IMC movement, and that free speech must prevail. So we're accused of being against free speech, natch. The letter _does not defend_ Sharon or current Israeli practices. I'll say that again: the letter _does not defend_ Sharon or current Israeli practices. Neither does it condemn them. Why? Because the letter isn't about the Mideast. It's about AKDH and IMC Switzerland. The letter also doesn't take a stance on conflict diamonds, global warming, Microsoft's monopolistic practices, African debt forgiveness, or Enron's ties to the Bush White House, for the same reason. Nevertheless, from the responses, you'd think the whole thing was one big valentine to Ariel Sharon and signed by Zionists Are Perfect, Inc. So I have to ask -- what letter did you guys read? The only points where there is anything like controversy in the letter's stance are these two: 1) The letter rejects, not criticism of Israel, not criticism of Zionist policy, not criticism of Sharon, not criticism of American support of the Israeli right, not criticism of international Jewish support for the Israeli right, not criticism of the IDF, not criticism of the conservative Evangelicals supporting Israel blindly, but _simply and solely_ the rhetorical trope of "Jew = Nazi." But even this little call for responsible rhetoric is enough to set off some people shouting, "Zionists! Eeek! Zionists!" And the letter goes on to explain _why_ the comparison should be rejected: not because Zionists should somehow be immune to criticism -- believe me, I hated Ariel Sharon before some of you were even _born_, and am not at all naive about what's going on now, even today -- but because there are some forms of pure rhetoric which do nothing but make respectful discourse needlessly difficult, and the cheap-shot exploitation of tragedy is one of them. Is that really so difficult a point? Is that really so hard to swallow? Again, that is the key word: "exploitation." It is no less skanky for an anti-Zionist to exploit the horror of the Holocaust as a vehicle for condemning Israel than it is for a Zionist to exploit the Holocaust as an excuse to build more West Bank settlements. Is that really so difficult a concept? Yet I read responses from people who seem to think that we have argued that any criticism of Israel is antisemitic (!) or some other such nonsense. Reread the letter; it's spelled out there, and it's not what some of you are saying it is. 2) The letter accepts that, without further evidence, there is no reason to attribute motivations to the AKDH other than what they say they are. It seems a not-very-buried assumption on the part of Latuff and his defenders that AKDH, a priori, is not really what its very name says it is, but is instead some sorta se-e-ecret Zionist front. Evidence? How dare a progressive ask for evidence! Let's all just stampede instead! How dare anyone suggest that there may just be two sides to the story? There's certainly no shortage of overt antisemites who delight in the "Jew = Nazi" comparison because they know how specifically hurtful Jews find it; give me five minutes at Google and I could pull up a hundred examples from the kinda guys who sign their posts "88" (a white supremecist code for "Heil Hitler"). Folks like David Irving, he of the "I am a Baby Aryan" jingle, who have no bones about their intention to spiff up ol' Uncle Adolf's image. If you think that doesn't happen, and happen a lot, you're being naive. But -- and this is where AKDH goes astray -- that doesn't mean that everyone who makes such a comparison is inherently an antisemite. Some people haven't thought it through; some people just can't be bothered to consider the kind of historical sensitivities you get when you lose a third of your people. Eventually, though, it's been my experience -- about two decades of it -- that those who are actually reaching for understanding about the Mideast (rather than excuses to hear their own voices) generally come to see that there are far better, more effective ways to express rage against Israeli policy than by intentionally jamming their thumb into the wound of the Holocaust and then wondering why people get so upset. @%< more explanation from a u-c imc member by Paul R. 6:54pm Sun Mar 3 '02 comment#4271 paul@mediageek.org I thank gehrig for clearly expaining the letter and pointing out exactly what it says and what it doesn't. That said, some further clarification on how this letter came to exist in the first place is necessary. At the Feb. 24 meeting of the U-C IMC Steering Group we consented to write a letter of support for the Switzerland IMC, as the Steering Group, not as the entire IMC, since we cannot speak for the IMC. In the course of the week the person who had brought the issue to the group and who agreed to write the letter asked another person, gehrig, to do it. That is the letter you see above. The Steering Group was not informed about this change, and a draft of the letter was not circulated before it was posted. When I saw it here I was surprised. At today's Steering Meeting we addressed the fact that the letter does not speak in the name of the entire U-C IMC and that the Steering Group did not indeed actually consent to the entirety of this letter, since it carries more commentary than simple solidarity with the Swiss IMC. However, it is also true that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak. The letter now lives on the Internet and cannot be recalled or edited to suit our actual consensus. While several of us are uncomfortable with the letter--all for varying reasons--we also seemed to agree that there was little to be gained in trying to change it or issue a clarification, retraction or rewrite. It would be an exercise in futility and our energies would be better spent on many other activities. It is my hope that the U-C IMC, its working groups and its members will be known for their actions and not just one letter that really wasn't written with full consent in the first place. As a founding member of the U-C IMC I would prefer look forward to what we can do to further the cause of independent progressive media and how we can help extend the power of media to the oppressed peoples of the world rather than worry over this letter. There is no full consensus of political position at the U-C IMC, as there is none in the IMC mov't as a whole. Its diversity, transparency and openness to dissent and debate are its strengths. Gehrig has made points that merit reasoned debate, and dismissing them and the U-C IMC out of hand furthers nothing. The U-C IMC is open to everyone, and anyone may come in and take part in any meeting. Consensus includes everyone in attendance, not just members. If you wish a new or different statement to be written, please join us and help us write it. Steering Meetings happen Sundays, Noon, 218 W. Main ST., Urbana, IL. Until then, I've got work to do. to gehrig: by deva 1:04am Mon Mar 4 '02 comment#4273 Latuffs cartoon series does not say Jew = Nazi It does say that Israeli National policy has a similarity in character to Nazi Germany. This is not an anti-semitic position to take and is in fact an argument that can be made with some justification You tell all the responders that they must have mis-interpreted the letter. . . take this quote: "This controversy pits two important but irreconcilable principles against each other: on one hand, unfettered, uncensored free speech; on the other, the repudiation of racist and antisemitic rhetoric." You are implying that Latuff's cartoons are anti-semitic, for if they are not, there is no conflict of two principles as you say then take this quote: "We call upon the AKDH in friendship to reconsider their suit against IMC Switzerland. ÊProceeding against the IMC would be, we strongly believe, ineffective or even counterproductive. ÊThe Latuff panel is, ultimately, too insignificant to merit the closing of IMC Switzerland. Given its international nature, the Internet cannot be purged of all expressions of antisemitism -- or any other type of insanity." What you are doing here, is calling Latuff's cartoon anti-semitic and insane, which is again in contradiction to the earlier statement otherwise. You are pandering to AKDH and their position. You are saying that they are right, but please have mercy on Swiss IMC because the internet is too hard to police. . .and because Swiss IMC does otherwise good work then take this quote: "In particular, we must explicitly reject as repugnant the rhetorical device of equating Israeli policy with Nazism, a hyperbolic comparison that is at best tasteless, deeply offensive to most Jews and Germans, and historically untenable." You may personally find Latuff's cartoon repugnant, however, it is clear that many other people, in fact the majority of replies to this post and others at a couple other imc's are critical of your letter. Perhaps there is a reason and you should not dismiss it so quick. Latuff's cartoons are legitimate expressions. There is nothing sacrosanct about 'the' holocaust. The Jews do not have sole claim there. There were more non-Jews killed in camps than Jews. The Nazis killed 3 million Soviet POW's in little more than a couple years. In Bangladesh in 1971, approx 3 million were killed by the Pakistanis in a mere 9 months, perhaps the most concentrated mass killing in history. Is that just a holocaust, while we are here talking about "The" holocaust? many people are deeply offended by this setting one horror so much above others that most people dont even hear about these others. It does a terrible disservice to the millions and millions of people who have died in horrific mass killings across time and the globe. The Jews have no special claim to suffering. Quote from reply: "Again, that is the key word: "exploitation." It is no less skanky for an anti-Zionist to exploit the horror of the Holocaust as a vehicle for condemning Israel than it is for a Zionist to exploit the Holocaust as an excuse to build more West Bank settlements." Using the horror of the mass killing of Jews by the Nazis as a means to stop a current injustice is certainly different than using it to perpetrate that injustice. That you personally agree with AKDH is up to you. It was disturbing that this attitude was being put forth as representing the UC-Imc. Now that it is explained otherwise by paul, his suggestion to move on sounds good. We all have plenty of work to do. ========== IMC is NOT UC-IMC by IMC Anarchist Organizer 1:50am Mon Mar 4 '02 comment#4274 I want to remind readers that no one IMC represents the network as a whole or any other IMC for that matter. UC-IMC's statement is theirs and theirs alone. Please remember that the IMC is a NETWORK of autonomous collectives, each with very different political perspectives and experience *and* politics. I come from an anarchist background emphasizing labor and class struggle. I have been working on the network infrastructure for IMC since the beginning. Many of us understand that an attack on one is an attack on all. So, in this spirit, we must not let IMC Switzerland get shut down. Personally, I don't like the UC-IMC statement for many of the reasons listed above, but in particular, the naivete expressed in asking AKDH to drop it's lawsuit. Are you serious? We must demand that they drop it because we are in solidarity with Swiss IMC and the politics of the newswire. We must protest this type of pressure tactic wherever it may occur. In Solidarity, V =========== ----------- Morpheus/KaZaA Controversy (english) by J. Fleming 11:33am Sat Mar 2 '02 (Modified on 6:09pm Sat Mar 2 '02) A DISCUSSION Administrator--Please let this stay up. I know it isn't hard news, but it is a gripping soap opera of events. Background: Users of the popular "peer to peer" file sharing network, Morheus, recently found that they could not connect to their system. Instead they recieved a notice explaining that their software needed to be updated. Morpheus' official explaination told the user that an unnamed partner had unexpectedly upgraded their software, causing a compatibility issue, and that the new edition would be available within days. In the meantime, that unnamed partner, KaZaA, launched it's own P2P network complete with a page greeting Morpheus users. The Gui and format of Morpheus is retained nearly line for line, and while Morpheus geuinely has a new edition coming out (both boast faster downloads and enhanced media capabilities), KaZaA beat Morphus in a mad race to the internet by at least two hours. It's the author's speculation that Morpheus was the lawers and money and KaZaA was the developer. Perhaps Moroheus's upgrade was engeniered so as to leave KaZaA in the dirt, causing KaZaA to wisley make a break for it. The object of discussion I'd like to open up is, OF KAZAA AND MORPHEUS, WHICH IS THE POLITCALLY PREFERABLE NETWORK? For instance, I found the legal documentation for KaZaA to be written for readability, which is reflective of an atitude i like to see in an organisation. I'll leave it open. add your own comments ========= you got it backwards (english) by blitzen 12:06pm Sat Mar 2 '02 Your speculation is almost exactly backwards. Check this out: http://www.zeropaid.com/  news/articles/auto/03012002b.php (the file sharing portal; over 20 miljon served) =========== THanx for the correction ... (english) by J. Fleming 6:09pm Sat Mar 2 '02 ...i'm getting that crap off my machine right now. =========== Morpheus is not the probem; KaZaA is the problem posted by jaquer0 on March 01, 2002 @ 06:55pm The frustration of many of us who use Morpheus when, beginning Monday night, increasing numbers were unable to log in, has mostly been viewed as a mess-up by MusicCity/StreamCast Networks, the parent website/company of Morpheus. This is not the case. To understand what is going on, it is important to realize that there really aren't three different programs (Morpheus, KaZaA, Grokster) but one core program from a Dutch company. To this core, different "skins" and different pointers to ad servers and the home page of the sponsoring group have been added. Largely decorative elements not essential at all to core functionality is what differentiates one from the other. The original one was KaZaA, which was based on the technology of FastTrack, a small Dutch software house also known as Consumer Empowerment. FT/CE created KaZaA as its consumer arm. The same small group ran both. From the beginning FT/CE wanted to run a way-cooler-than-Napster file sharing service but one that would operate with a suitable legal framework, i.e., licenses. It repeatedly, and unavailingly sought agreements with the music mafia monopolies. As a gesture of good faith, it configured KaZaA to not present MP3 search results of files encoded at more than 128kbs. Hit by a lawsuit by something akin to a Dutch equivalent to the RIAA, FastTrack/KaZaA was ordered to shut down file sharing on its network at the end of November; the company explained that it was unable to do so due to the architecture of the network; and was then threatened with $30,000/day fines for every day it refused to do so. It was days away from a court hearing/day or reckoning when suddenly, over a weekend in January, the original founders of KaZaA announced they had sold most of its assets to Sharman Networks. The announcement was very short on details. ONE detail however that eventually did come out --it is placed very prominently on the home page of the KaZaA web site-- is that the original developers of the FastTrack technology no longer have anything to do with this project and the new owners now control the further development of the program. It is a highly unusual announcement, a monstrously successful technology platform goes out of its way to PROUDLY BOAST that the people that brought you this way cool breakthrough platform no longer have anything to do with it. Why would you BOAST that you have lost the development team of such a smashing success??? My *suspicion* is that the original team INSISTED it be made clear they are in no way responsible for what THIS new outfit is doing, and Sharman networks is just trying to put a positive "spin" on what is essentially a statement disowning KaZaA. It is these new owners, and this new development team, that less than a month after the takeover of KaZaA announce THEY have a significant new upgrade to the program and begin distributing it publicly on Feb. 11. Like previous upgrades, this one is spread "virally," i.e., upon coming into contact with an upgraded supernode, a 1.3.3 version of the same "brand" of the program is asked to upgrade to the new version. The upgrade executable is kept on every upgraded user's computer, which makes it fast and easy to replicate a code change. There were no incompatibilities between the 1.5 client and the 1.3.3 versions reported for two weeks. The two different versions apparently interoperated well, even though the majority of the base of the network, people using Morpheus, weren't upgrading as there was no upgrade available for the Morpheus-branded product. Then the evening of the 25th, out of the blue, Morpheus users started to be locked out of the FastTrack network with the message about their software being too old. Go to the newsgroups and check out the posts. The first ones are Monday evening, and immediately there are "me too" replies. IT WAS A PLANNED, COORDINATED, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY EXECUTED ATTACK. It did not his EVERY Morpheus user at once because of the nature of the network, many Morpheus users were connected to the overall network through Morpheus supernodes. Over a couple of days, as fewer and fewer Morpheus supernodes survived, more and more Morpheus users were locked out. The existence of two auxiliary upgrade files offered by Grokster is damning evidence that this was a carefully planned purge of the morpheus client. One deletes Morpheus settings from your registry. The other deletes your old list of supernodes, replacing it with a new list. Upgrade instructions for Grokster, which seems to simply be a stalking horse for KaZaA/Sharman, tell users to uninstall the previous versions of the three programs AND run these two files. Why? For a long time I had ALL THREE installed. I did not see any issues. But it sure is an effective way of driving any Morpheus clients from the networks. Now, the grokster tech support people, who for once have been quite active, insist the fault lies with MusicCity/Morpheus for not going along with the upgrade. But MusicCity says it has no such upgrade available for a very good reason: it wasn't told about it, nor was it offered a software upgrade. As a licensee, it takes the fasttrack technology as is, in a black box, so to speak, and merely puts its own wrapper on it. The head of MusicCity says he isn't even sure who controls FastTrack technology now. Moreover, MusicCity confirms that the "you must upgrade" diktat isn't coming from them. That being the case, it MUST be coming from KaZaA through their new 1.5 client acting as supernodes. There is simply nowhere else for such a widespread message to originate: either it comes from the MusicCity logon server, or the supernodes. I tend to believe the statements by the head of Music City, if for no other reason than KaZaA/Sharman is not talking to the press. They won't answer emails, even from their special email address from press inquiries, even when the email came straight from the domain of one of the world's best-known and most prestigious news organizations. They have no phone or physical address that anyone can figure out. Their own website is nonexistent but the domain registered by some fairly low-level employee of this "brilliant digital" outfit. Given everything that's been going on this week, you'd think they would have said SOMETHING. If the purge had been accidental, or if they had a leg to stand on in blaming music city for the situation, they would have said something. Their silence condemns them. In the court of public opinion, on an issue like this, there is no fifth amendment. There's no Sharman statement because this wasn't an accidental, or even foreseen but unavoidable result of the advance of the technology. This was planned, premeditated, with malice aforethought. I stress that there is no inherent conflict in the two technologies, and if there were, we can assume by now KaZaA would have made it public to explain what is going on. And I do not believe there has been the slightest change in the core technology at all: you do not learn, as a programmer, how a complicated code base like KaZaA works in three weeks, and you CERTAINLY aren't ready to release to MILLIONS of users a change in the way the core of the program works in that short a time, and MORESO without the help of the original programmers. The capacity to lock out older clients was, unfortunately, already built into the FastTrack code base. It was used in the fall to do the upgrade to version 1.3, to fix the "security" issue, which, as not many people know, was simply that an independent team had reversed engineered the technology, what FastTrack used to call its "peer to peer stack," and was ready to go public with it. The 1.3 version of the technology was evidently done in a hurry, as it required a couple of 1.3.X revisions to fix bugs, and the truth is the PREVIOUS versions worked better. I'm willing to bet what the new development team changed in version 1.5 was the revision number and perhaps a typo or two and the copyright notice. I suspect they turned off the super nodes' capacity to log on clients directly, so that people MUST go through a central server that, it turn, unleashes some ad server on them. At least I suspect so, because I don't see any johndoe@?????, which, it is believed, is how users who

bypassed the logon servers were identified. And whatever code already existed in the program to spread upgrades and eventually shut out previous versions was turned on. Those are all the changes. So the truth is that Morpheus users were locked out by supernodes running version 1.5 of the client software. They were locked out by decision, not by inherent interoperability problems, unexpected clashes, software bugs or anything else like that. That decision came from Sharman Networks, and if ever a corporation deserved the adjective "shadowy" this must be it. Another person here has detailed the results of an investigation into Sharman, and everything seems to point to is being a front for or associated with brilliant digital. And who is brilliant digital? Go to their web site and have a look around. Look closely, for example, at the biography of their executive team. Takeover. Buyout. Management buyout. Sale. Again and again and again. The CEO does not boast of the way cool products he shepherded to market, the insanely great companies he built, the technology awards his people garnered. The bio reads like the typical rap sheet of a vulture capitalist. Look at their products. What do they produce? Tools for adware, spyware, snitchware. Look at their "piracy" policy. In addition to making all sorts of outrageous claims that have no support in law, like the typical LIE that their product is "licensed" not "sold" (a lie because the law regulates these sorts of contracts; a purchase sale contract is what is involved in over-the-counter retail boxed software purchases, no number of statements by one side can change it); they also explicitly PROMISE to load your computer down with spyware and snitchware and cooperate with the Microsoft stooges from the Business Software Alliance in getting you reamed. And the question naturally arises: WHAT are people associated with such an outfit and such extreme views doing buying control over the leading p2p file-sharing network and its technology? And why are they doing EVERYTHING in their power to DRIVE OUT the largest of the companies associated with the network, even at the cost of losing MILLIONS of users? What is it that they have planned that requires that MusicCity be out of the picture? Given the silence of Sharman, the extreme and peculiar way they have approached the beginning of their ownership of KaZaA, the precarious state of the company given the legal threat hanging over it at the time of purchase, the statement conveying the message from KaZaA's founders dissociating themselves from this current outfit; the links to brilliant digital; the nature and character of brilliant digital management, products, and statements; I think the file sharing community must become extremely alarmed. I do not think it can be excluded at this point that KaZaA is being turned into, in effect, a trojan horse controlled by the corporate cartels and the monopoly mafias. Will future versions of the software report back to the RIAA and the Business Software Alliance what you're sharing and downloading? What is the relationship between sharman and brilliant digital? How much did they pay for KaZaA? And ... whatever did happen to the lawsuit that was potentially going to bankrupt KaZaA in a matter of days? I have, alas, no real answers, but answers are required. ------------- jaquero al | March 1, 2002 @ 8:55 pm | hawcable.net | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; Win 9x 4.90; Q312461) That really sucks! Morpheus was really good, despite the countless adds, i hope they manage to outsmart and outplay the evil kazaa corp(sounds like the survivor tag line doesn't it? MikeHunt | March 1, 2002 @ 9:32 pm | .........dsl.lsan...pacbell.net | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98) ...good job - jaquero!! I'm sure some answers will surface over the next few days.... nathan | March 1, 2002 @ 10:23 pm | hawcable.net | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Q312461) what do Mulder and Skully have to say about this? Crazy Horse | March 1, 2002 @ 10:26 pm | .........dsl.sntc...pacbell.net | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98; T312461) Something REALLY stinks over at Kazaa/Grokster. BEWARE !!! BOYCOTT !!! Blubster !!! Foreverboard | March 1, 2002 @ 10:56 pm | View Profile ....client.attbi.com | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows XP) Opera 6.0 [en] " I think the file sharing community must become extremely alarmed." I agree beware. Brian | March 1, 2002 @ 11:41 pm | ...........dynamic.ziplink.net | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98) So many questions, and so few answers from Sharman/BD. Something isn't feeling right with the KaZaa program anymore. They are planning something. They are hiding too much. eos_venus | March 2, 2002 @ 12:23 am | .ns.resnet.cua.edu | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0) as an oper for the morpheus irc chat, let me just say how hellish these last few days have been, and that there is very little that pisses me of as much as kazaa's actions over the past week. their homepage is encouraging morph users to ditch morph for kazaa, etc etc, which i find revolting. I hope... (Read More) TheSacredEdge | March 2, 2002 @ 1:23 am | alink..com | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows XP) Opera 6.0 [en] Some sorta plot to shut down file sharing, i spose? Pitiful thing is its WORKING... I've been in the MC chats all night, and people are so ticked off about Morpheus being down that they're going to Kazaa... They won't listen to any real details. wiggum | March 2, 2002 @ 2:26 am | View Profile ... | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; UTVI) Great article! I think a Boycott of Kazaa is called for. I wonder what implications this will have for the US court case against fasttrack? Now that Morphesus has converted to Gnutella, effectively AOL Time Warner are now suing what it created (Read More) Alx5000 | March 2, 2002 @ 3:05 am | View Profile ..libre.retevision.es | Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) well, after this best-seller like story, i dont really know what to think... kazaa, morpheus, audiogalaxy... all of those have repeatedly filled our computer with their ads or their spyware... isnt it time to boost open-source development? there are a few good OS P2P programs [most of them for ... (Read More)  --------------------- This pamphlet consists of five articles : 1. Autonarchy - Direct Democracy for the 21st Century. ----  In 1968, when the French Unions and Communist Party realized they lose credibility by opposing the strike, they joined it so as to take it over and use it for their own purposes. The French Communist Party ordered its Union, the C.G.T., to demand a wage increase to buy off the workers and stop the strike. Pompidou's government realized that the Communist Party wants to save itself, and the system of representatives, and agreed to a 15% increase of basic wages, plus a reduction in working hours. To everybody's surprise the workers rejected this offer. They declared : "We do not want a larger slice of the economic cake, we want to run the bakery". This demand was, of course, rejected by the French government, by the Communist Party, and by the Trade Unions. Accepting it would have made them all redundant. Gradually, after weeks of strike people began to drift back to work and the strike gradually subsided. Why ? The reason for the failure of this unique strike was the inability of the strikers to unify the decisions of all meetings all over the country into a single decision. Society must have the means to unify many decisions into a single decision. This is necessary for running an electricity grid, transport and communication systems, health and education services, etc. The main justification for Central Government is its role as unifyer of decisions. The inability of the strikers to produce an alternative system for unifying many decisions taken all over the country into a single decision binding the entire society enabled the Central Government to reassert its authority. Gradually the old system of representatives in France reasserted itself. Is this the end of the story ? NO WAY ! The motives for this strike have not disappeared. Quite the opposite. The motives for the 1968 strike are stronger today than ever before, not only in France but everywhere. The 1968 strike in France was directed against antiquated authority relations, against hypocrisy and corruption of politicians, against all Political Parties and Unions, and against the inability of citizens to have a say in decisions affecting their lives. These motives are stronger todaythan in the past. Since 1960 at least 40% of the electorate in the USA never bothered to vote in any election to Congress and at least 30% did'nt vote for Presidents. People abstain because they find elections ineffective in bringing about real change. Today, as in 1968, Political Parties and leaders inspire boredom and disgust. Most voters in the West today vote "against", not "for". The 1968 strike was unexpected and faced problems never faced before, it lacked means to unify decisions taken all over the country into a single decision . This enabled the French government in 1968 to reassert its authority. Today electronic communication provide the means to solve this problem in a new manner. 3. Magnetic Card Direct Democracy ( M.C.D.D.) Personal computers, Computer networks, magnetic-card technology, faxes, cellular telephones, and communication satellites, did not exist in 1968. Today their use is widespread. Millions today use magnetic cards daily to handle their finances. Autobank Computers add decisions taken by millions of magnetic cards and display the totals within seconds. By equipping every telephone with a magnetic card-reading device magnetic card technology handling our money can easily be adapted to handle our politics. It can add, within seconds, decisions made by millions of citizens, and display totals immediately and continously on TV. Direct voting on every political issue, and proposing decisions to vote on, by each and every citizen, never possible in the past, is possible today. The technical reasons for having representatives are no longer valid. The old battle cry of the citizens against the absolute authority of the King: " No taxation without representation" must be changed today into a new battle cry against all forms of representative authority : " NO DECISION OBEYED WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON IT ". It is technically possible today for every citizen to propose and vote by means of a magnetic card on any issue at any time and to see vote totals on TV within seconds. DirectDemocracy is on the cards, technically, and historically. It will replace the complicated and expensive system of Representative Democracy. It is far more democratic than Rule by Representatives. It is the ultimate democracy. It is too democratic for many democrats. It will save a lot of money by abolishing all jobs of political representatives, deputies, officials, etc. NO ONE WILL BE PAID FOR MAKING POLITICAL DECISIONS. This will save millions spent on running Houses of Representatives, Governements, Presidents. Moreover, it will abolish corruption and favouritism. No one will have extra authority worth buying. Buying and selling votes will be a criminal offence. Political Parties will have to change from vote collectors into spreaders of ideas. Autonarchy means 'self rule', direct rule by all citizens. Autonarchy is not Socialism, Socialism is rule by the Socialist Party, and State ownership of the economy. Autonarchy is direct rule by all citizens with employees ruling their places of work. Autonarchy is not A-narchy. A-narchy means 'without rulers' or State, Autonarchy is a State run directly by all its citizens. Autonarchy combines aspirations of original Socialism and Anarchism for a society based on freedom, justice and equality, updating them for the 21st Century.  ===snip===  Understanding makes possible liberation from repetitive undesired outcomes. In Direct Democracy the ruled are the rulers.   ===snip===  Dec. 2. 1996 IS AUTONARCHY POSSIBLE ? Dear David, Thanks for your letter. Since the collapse of the USSR all discussions on alternatives to Capitalism have stopped. Socialists stopped suggesting State ownership of the economy. Anarchists barely mention communes. The collapse of the USSR has ruled out Socialism as an alternative to Capitalism. The anarchist option cannot even be tested by history due to its rejection of any kind of State. As a result all those who reject Capitalism nowadays produce critiques of Capitalism but no alternatives to replace it. We must go beyond criticizing and start to consider new alternatives. Return to 'True Marxism', 'True Leninsm', Trotskyism, or Anarchism, is backward looking. Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, or Trotsky, knew nothing about Magnetic Cards, Computers, Sattelites, Optical fibres. These technologies were beyond the boundaries of their imagination. The political implications of electronic communications revolution are ignored by all political thinkers. The revolutionary changes in communications technology make it possible, for the first time in history, to transfer and add up millions of decisions taken far appart into a single total in seconds and to display it continously on millions of TV screens. Political decision-making by millions of people is now possible. Politics is decision-making, and when means of communications change, decision-making changes. Traditional political thinkers, Left, Right, and Centre, ignore the consequences of the communications revolution on political decision-making and thereby render themselves irrelevant to 21st Century politics. We need NEW ideas taking account of new technologies, not return to old ones. Political systems like those of the USSR/China are outdated and reactionary. We need a political system more democratic than Capitalism and more egalitarian than Socialism. Magnetic Card DirectDemocracy (M.C.D.D.) is such a system. It can also be named Auto - narchy meaning Self - rule. You asked : " How can 200 million people rule themselves directly ? " " What about production, distribution, police, courts, and the army ? " " How can one guarantee that a small group will not take over power ? " " What about the Constitution ? " Let me try to aswer your questions : FIRST. Every telephone must be equipped with a magnetic card-reading device enabling users to pass a magnetic card through a slit and send its data to a local computer as is done in supermarkets today. The udials a number and slides the card through the slit for identification. Computer programs at the other end check the identity and prepare for further input. Just as in an Autobank. Every citizen will have an additional secret PIN (Personal Identification Number), or Voiceprint, to prevent people from using cards that do not belong to them. In remote areas wireless telephones will transmit this data via sattelite to the computer. Peoples decisions enter computers which add up totals. This technology functions in most banks and supermarkets all over the world today. In the 21st Century much of telephone transmission will be by optical fibres greatly increasing capacity and speed. Using this technology every citizen can make every political decision. The guiding principle of Autonarchy is: EVERY CITIZEN CAN PROPOSE AND VOTE ON EVERY POLITICAL DECISION. Magnetic card technology can easily handle 200 million data inputs. A million or two can be fed into a local computers calculating totals to pass on to central computers. Solutions to problems of production, distribution, etc, will be given by panels of experts for production and distribution when facing the need to do so. There is a fundamental difference between creating solutions to social and political problems and DECIDING WHICH SOLUTION TO USE. Experts invent solutions to problems. Politics is about deciding which solution to use. Many believe expertise grants authority to decide.It does not. Deciding is choosing. Choosing depends on preference.  ==<snip>== PRINCIPLES OF AUTONARCHY Every citizen has the right to propose, and vote on, every political decision. People represent themselves only. Representing others is illegal. Every citizen has one vote, and only one vote, on every political decision. All votes have equal weight. Majority decisions are binding. Needs of the poorest must be attended before needs of the less poor. Needs of the sickest must be attended before needs of the less sick. Excepting these two, needs of the many must be attended before needs of the few. Protecting species from extinction and Nature from destruction and pollution is compulsory. All employees must have the right to propose and vote on every decision concerning their work. All employees in a country, trade, or firm, can form employee autonarchies of the country trade, or firm. Employees at a site are the highest authority to decide matters of their site. They have the right to veto any other decision concerning their site. Teachers, students, and parents, have the right to propose and vote on the content of their education and how they should be taught, on a national and local level. At any educational site, staff, students, and their parents, are the highest authority to decide policy and practice at that site. Staff and students at an educational site can veto any decision concerning their site. Students have the right to veto decisions by staff and parents. Any minority, while obeying majority decisions, has the right to campaign for its views and to propose - after a year - a new vote on previous decisions. Any minority has the right to express its view. Minority rights are irrevocable. They do not depend on the minority's views. All cultural groups have equal cultural group-rights irrespective of their size. People can be appointed to carry out decisions. Appointees have no authority to make policy decisions. They have authority only to carry out decisions of those who appointed them. Appointees can be changed any time. Each member of a family has equal authority in deciding matters of their family. Wives have same authority as husbands, and from the moment they ask for it so have the children. Obstacles to Autonarchy are neither technical nor financial, but political, social, and psychological. Autonarchy is more democratic than any Democracy. It is the ultimate democracy. It gives people more political freedom than any other system by enabling them to live according to their own decisions. Freedom means living by one's own decisions. In society, work, family, freedom is limited by decisions of others. Autonarchy allows more freedom to more people than any other system. Of the many objections to Autonarchy I consider here two: 1. Is it desirable that all citizens decide directly all political issues ?. 2. How can one prevent the 'Dictatorship of the majority ' ?. Here are my answers: 1. There are many examples of majority decisions producing disasterous results. Is it therefore wise to allow majorities to decide every political issue ? Whatever the answer it cannot serve as a justification for any other political system as there are examples of every decision-making system producing disasters for the decision makers. No political system can provide a guarantee against decisions producing disasters for the decision makers. We can leave aside unforseen factors not taken into account by the decision-makers. Such factors will always emerge and cannot be avoided nor can decision-makers be blamed for failing to foresee them. We must consider cases like, say, the majority which voted the Nazis into power in Germany in 1933. The disasters resulting from this decision were not brought about by unforseen accidents. They resulted from the priority principle of a majority which put its own wellbeing above the wellbeing of all others, and was willing to dominate, oppress, and exterminate 'inferior people'. Such preferences by majorities, minorities, or individuals, can occur again in the future. They prove nothing about a decision-making system. The question that matters is : Can disasterous consequences of decisions change priority principles that led to such decisions ? The possibility that decision-makers will stick to a priority principle that produced disasters decreases as the number of decision-makers increases. A single person is far more dominated by anxieties, obssesions, and fixations than a group. Had Hitler's generals succeeded to assasinate him in 1944 they would have surrendered long before he did thus saving Germany, and the rest of the world, much suffering. Hitler survived the assasination attempt and due to his obssesion he continued with a lost war for another year causing much suffering to Germany and to the rest of the world.. Autonarchy, based on political decision-making by all citizens, is less prone to personal whims than any dictatorship, or representative democracy. 2. Majorities can do worse than err, they can try to oppress minorities. Minorities oppressed by majority decisions will resist as best as they can, and undermine the stability, security, and prosperity, of the entire society. A wise Autonarchy will introduce measures to safeguard minorities from oppressive majority decisions. Laws protecting minorities from oppression and requiring a special majority to modify them must be introduced. Minorities need laws protecting them from oppression by majorities. A good example is the regime established by the ANC in South-Africa. Having won an absolute majority in the last elections the ANC could have introduced laws granting rights to blacks while denying them to whites. This could have been done democratically, by majority vote. Black racism would have been met by White resistance. This would have plunged society into violence, insecurity, and instability, as in the former White racist regime. Wisely, the ANC did not use its majority to grant special rights to blacks. It created a regime where rights do not depend on colour of skin. Autonarchy must legislate laws to safeguard minorities. An Autonarchy will be viable, durable, and prosperous, only if it grants minorities the same group-rights which the majority enjoys and desists from imposing the majority's beliefs, culture, or language, on any minority. In cases of differences between geo-cultural regions, as in the European Community, there is a point in creating a federation of smaller Autonarchies rather than a single, large, Autonarchy. A system can be devised wherein some decisions are made directly by all citizens of the federation while others are decided by citizens in each Autonarchic member of the federation. The right of an Autonarchic member of the federation to veto decisions of the entire federation must be ensured. Laws protecting minorities from majority oppression enhance the cohesion of the Autonarchy. Creativity in this direction can produce a political system which its citizens will enjoy rather than just endure. I'm sure I did'nt answer all your questions and probably created more than I answered. Answers will be invented by people facing actual situations. ==<snip>== . In politics "impossible" often masks "undesirable". Check if those saying DD is impossible desire it. Remind Elitists that, contrary to Plato's critique of Athenian Democracy 2500 years ago, both Aristotle and Socrates supported it, and even today we benefit from its achievements in art, philosophy, and politics. Direct Democracy will stimulate people's involvement in their community and society. It will awaken their responsibility for their community and society. It will inspire political creativity and goodwill stifled by all other political systems. It will raise humanity to a higher level and will change not only society but also individuality. It will transform the "person" from a bored, and indifferent, member in a static, corrupting and alienating political system into an active shaper of a consciously evolving society concerned with the well being of the community, society, and humanity. Return to begining of Manifesto email aki_orr@netvision.net.il ============= Two parties, both for war and domination (english) by DutchMoon 7:50am Sat Mar 2 '02 Hello, I thought you might be interested in a website called youngrebels.com. Example of content: "There are many of us who are determined to live a life of peace. We're not supposed to recognize each other. We're not supposed to hear about each other. We're not supposed to think for ourselves. It's simply not in the best interests of the dominators. But we are here. There are infant minds of all types in every direction desiring a peaceful existence in order to explore our minds, our lives and the universe we find ourselves in. For the first time in human history, our technology allows us to witness the condition of life on Earth. We can choose to proceed along a destructive path, or we can reach out to each other and exist in peace. There's no reason why we should be anything other than a community of friends. It is our choice to make." www.youngrebels.com Please forward this e-mail to anyone interested in a peaceful future. Thank you www.youngrebels.com no it doesn't (english) by ooga booga 10:35am Sat Mar 2 '02 direct democracy doesn't work. It leads to total anarchy! ========= your point being. . .? (english) by liberAtion 11:42am Sat Mar 2 '02 "Direct democracy doesn't work. It leads to total anarchy!" And why is this a BAD thing?! What's wrong with anarchy?! =========== whether (english) by junglejaws 8:00pm Sat Mar 2 '02 whether it leads to anarchy or not, that wasn't the thrust of the post, which was to present a GOOD reason for those fucking chip IDcards. The reason was excellent, but the other adverse affects ARE NOT! bigbrother, privacy, individualrights... Vote or no Vote, it don't fucking matter (english) by Adam Weishaupt 11:53pm Sat Mar 2 '02 The powers that be will make sure profit and corruption will win, or they'll make the economy squeellll like a pig! ------------------ The Movement under pressure and danger from Ultra More Radical than Thou Whites (english) by disgusted 5:39pm Sun Mar 3 '02 (Modified on 10:22pm Sun Mar 3 '02) A trip down memory lane for Chukee and others? The Movement under pressure and danger from Ultra --------------- 143863 +20 the old hullabaloo around ChuckO's cheering again (only a couple of commenters here) militant dunces (english) by Mark L. 10:48pm Sun Sep 30 '01 emptyflagpole@hotmail.com I hate to quote the Economist, but the indulgent, imbecilic tactics of the BBloc and other such groups during such a sensitive time do indeed fit the archetype of the protestor as a "militant dunce". Consider for a moment the implicit elitism of intentionally using tactics that will only garner revulsion from the very masses you purport to serve.Or do you truely think that a person of color will be won over by the example of someone they generally see as a symbol of their having at least *some* representation within the present system being beaten and pepper sprayed? I don't mean to put Ramsey on a pedestal; clearly he's where he is today at least partially as a way to con the non-whites of D.C. into feeling represented and involved. However, the con has *worked*, and won't be undermined by such a non-sensical attack. You seem committed only to preserving your Fuck Shit Up boy's club, not in building a movement with a chance at changing the world. If our ideals are at all democratic, it should be broadly recognized that confrontational tactics in general only produce more resistance and reinforce the doctrines we supposedly stand against. If our ideals are at all anti-authoritarian, we should all see the irony in attempting to force ultraradicalism down the throats of an unprepared world through violent coercion. I think the truest "direct action" during these times is education through dialouge. If this cause is one that we believe in, we have to allow it to withstand the test of dialouge with people who disagree with it. If we can't handle that, then we have no business pretending to care about "the masses", because the masses can't choose to change until they have awakened to the ruse they have been indoctrinated to believe. I, for one, don't believe that awakening will come from the smoke of a burning flag on the scene of a terrorist attack. -Mark ============ <snip>  Finally, someone wrote that the ANSWER rally and march were not "in the here and now." The short answer is that during an imperialist war crisis the ruling class is almost completely controlling everyone's perceptions of reality, so if most people think you are "well-adjusted" to the here and now during a war crisis, you are probably doing something wrong. In the broader sense, in my view being an effective revolutionary means that you have to have one foot in the here and now, and the other foot in the vision of the socialist world to come. Also, please don't just go and start supporting the war just because some supposed Stalinist advised you to oppose it! :-) In the struggle, Lou Paulsen member, Workers World Party, Chicago www.workers.org ======== Many different thoughts....Kind of a critique (english) by Wankstor X. Muzzlebutt 11:59pm Sun Sep 30 '01 systemp@dog.com Hm. There are many parts to this story that seem yet to be confirmed, and others which, I believe, result from growing pains. First of all, I was helping out this weekend with a microbroadcast of the IMC-DC webfeed, so while I was comfortably sitting at home far away, I wasn't completely disconnected (in fact, we think some hams DFed us Saturday, and now we'll wait for the inevitable FCC letter). This did, however, give me a chance to watch the C-SPAN coverage of the second action Saturday (IAC). From the stuff I've seen/read of the ACC action, I haven't yet heard of either DC Cop Honchos getting knocked around. Chuck0, can you provide any confirmation? I DO know that asst. Chief Gainer was somehow exposed to pepper spray, but that apparently happened because somebody 'spiked' his helmet with it - noboby actually sprayed him. There's a pic of Gainer on DC Indymedia getting his eyes washed out with water. But I heard of no direct physical clash with either of those men. The second point is, I think this nascent movement needs to stay "on message" when it comes to specific events. I realize the ACC was still protesting the IMF/WB in its own way, but for fuck's sake, did we need two-plus hours of speechifying before the IAC march? Everybody and their fucking mother got up to speak out about a myriad of issues, from the destruction of the environment to gay rights to freeing Mumia. I think the thing that killed me the most was when C-SPAN did a shot of the crowd and right in the center-front of the screen is a guy YAWNING. Use your numbers to advocate a crystal-clear demand. In this specific case, it seemed that that message was supposed to be no war and racial tolerance. Don't get me wrong, all the issues brought up are worthy - but all should also be given their own time and place for protest, for maximum impact. Otherwise, it does begin to sound like a cacophony, which does absolutely nothing to win hearts and minds - and we need many more hearts and minds before we start affecting significant change on a global scale (or even on a national one). Which brings me to my final point - folks like Chuck0, who are the real revolutionary-types, pure in ideology and solid to the point of stubbornness in their convictions, are an essential part of any overall movement for change. However, they almost never get what they want: as masses for social change grow to that critical stage, where they actually GET SHIT DONE, the overall message of the masses tends to moderate. It's just a function of growth and size. This phenomenon helps grow numbers, even if it restricts the scope of potential change (for now) down to some 'key' demands. That's just the way social revolution works. It's why the revolutionary will never, ever be extinct. But you also NEED the middle class to get those numbers, because that's where the people are. And we all need to wake up and realize this fact. I mean, While out at the NAB Radio Convention/Media Democracy protest in SF last year, a friend and I went to a workshop at the convergence center with about two dozen other folks. We all sat in a big circle and introduced ourselves, explaining the reasons for being there. One of the guys in the group was an anarchist named 'Spaz.' He was the radical's radical, gutterpunk style - dreads, nails up thru the baseball cap brim, the whole nine yards. Hardcore in all perspectives on life. When it came to Spaz's turn to speak, he basically said (and I'm paraphrasing), "The middle class are my enemy. They are all consumerist sheep, and they need to go just as much as the ruling class are." And my friend and I are sitting in the circle across from Spaz thinking, wait a minute, WE'RE middle class, and we're here with you! My friend, as we walked back to our (gasp) hotel room, remarked, "Shit, I've got a mortgage. I wonder what Spaz would think of me if he knew?" It goes without saying (but I will anyway) that I don't want to be exterminated in the revolution - I wanna help. I'm here, after all. That weekend, Spaz stood in the face of the riot cops when we tried to bum-rush the Hilton (where the NAB was holding its radio awards banquet), and I stood between them in no-man's land, snapping photos and recording audio. We all did our part, and that protest (for such a just-budding issue like media democracy) was very successful. The important thing to remember is, you don't have to agree with everyone all the time. We're all working for a better world here, and I think it's safe to say that we all share the same genral direction when it comes to pushing in that direction. Remember that at the next big demo - who knows, when you need someone to watch your back, that someone may just be me. I have too much respect for Chuck0 to dis his politics. I mean, where would we be without infoshop.org? However, it does absolutely no good to overstate our gains, because if push ever came to shove, and we had to show our strength or lose for good, I'd want to be damn sure that I had the firepower to back up the confrontational rhetoric. I have a sneaky suspicion that we're not there yet. It's a critical juncture in the history of this movement. There may need to be an adaptation of tactics, depending on how situations unfold. Evolve or die, in effect. I am torn over the results of S29-30. It was good to see *something*, but the seeming lack of coordination over street/public tactics I think might have hurt. I hope we get another chance to get some of our points across before Armageddon comes. If y'all want me to leave now, just say so. -wxm ====== Me again very briefly (english) by Lou Paulsen 7:10pm Mon Oct 1 '01 wwchi@enteract.com I received a very friendly e-mail this morning informing me that the authors of the original statement are in fact solidly antiwar and that the question is just about what "rallying cry" is most appropriate. On reflection, I will leave all my remarks on people being "carried away by the war crisis" on a strictly if-the-shoe-fits basis, and I cheerfully apologize to anyone who thinks I was trying to make them personally wear a non-anti-war shoe that doesn't fit. If nobody wears the shoe and it turns out I was just talking to myself, it wouldn't be the first time. Past that there can be a whole lot of discussion but it doesn't have to be on this thread, and there will be plenty of avenues. I will say this, though: I honestly believe that we really do have to say that we are against the war as statement number one, because if we don't, we run the risk of being willfully misrepresented by the media and everyone else. And we have to watch how they are using ordinarily progressive demands/ideas to build the war drive. As an example, the Chicago Sun-Times, which is so crazy for war these days that it's like an old Nazi German paper, had a big article today reading "War is Only Hope for Afghan Women"! There's a spin you don't see every day: the Pentagon is now waging an anti-sexist war! Anyway, I'm done for now... see you all in the streets! Lou Paulsen ============ 10 Amherst rads burn flag make big news then (english) by another favorite 5:59pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Amherst dilettantes burn flag and go to posh apartments rented by mommy and daddy to eat veggie burgers and post news of their exploits on Indy media. Commandante ChuckO the overweight yet all knowing couch potato and veteran web page designer calls it a blow against the man. Right wing talk show hosts across the US last night and CNN interrupted their coverage of the fiasco abroad to focus on 10 self styled Patty hearst types out of that radical strong hold Amherst. Reporters giggled and the FBI was content as ten (wow) heirs to millions reacted to flag wavers by burning two flags denouncing shopping malls and marched away. Rush Limbaugh called it "exactly what I need to villify the blame America first crowd". When asked why he did it Amherst Anarchist Wing Nut said "why not man we are gonna turn this motha over biatch". His girlfriend Heidi Ann Seek threw in "he is soooo dreamy". Across the US radicals like ChuckO reported to his fellow computer geeks that this action "proves our militant movement and tactics are close to toppling the junta" he then got on his sat phone to inform a group of radicals sunning in the Riviera while begging unemployed Italians for money before they return to their hitch hiking forays into the North East. Sub Commandante Trash Talk of the Amherst Worms not Anthrax collective reprted from the Riviera that "they would return when the Junta has come to realize our power and we are poised to ascend to lead America". Trash Talk condemned "activists who look normal at working class campuses across the US who are currently assisting in doing security at Arab/Muslim buisnesses and trying to educate the public about the complexities of the situation overseas are a bunch of reformists helping their friends the Arab Capitalists to protect the means of alienation of the resources from the people" after taking a breath he added "when will these soft shelled sell outs realize you have to turn this motha over biatch" "you can't break eggs with out making a little Omlette" and " I don't have time to educate the masses they support Imperialism anyway"! It seems less cool activists and organizers from working class backgrounds across the USA are wasting their time trying to reach out to people in their communities to start a boring educational process to educate average people to the real issues facing us as we move into the future and trying to stop Anti-Arab/Muslim violence. Yesterday when a bunch of Crime Thinkers showed up having not taken baths in three weeks and wearing shirts that depicted a flag burning to assist in doing security for the local Mosque. Arab community leaders told them that their help was not needed. WIng Nut said "See these fascist Capitalist Arabs are just part of the problem" ======== It's good to be anti-Chuck0 (english) by Outlaw 6:37pm Sun Mar 3 '02 But you're doing it for the wrong reason. Chuck0 is not militant enough. He's a whiny little Marxian crypto-statist. He considers freedom of expression a 'bourgoise conceit' and attacks Bakunin by accusing him of being a 'dead white male'. ========== This is how COINTELPRO Works! (english) by Anti-Capitalist 6:39pm Sun Mar 3 '02 This is a good example of how COINTELPRO works. If this isn't the work of government agents, it's the work of somebody who is too cowardly to come forward and sign their name to their criticisms. Chuck0 has always been very open about his thoughts and opinions. Some folks may not like his criticisms of other groups on the Left, but he has always stuck to a principled critique of their politics, tactics, and methods. Who would have an axe to grind against Chuck0, that they would post an atatck like this? Bill White? The International Action Center? =========== I didn't know Indymedia had a reruns season (english) by justliketheteevee 6:55pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Hey, this is a good bit of marketing. If there aren't any hi-ratings slagging matches going on at the moment, just pull an old one out of the can. It works for the teevee, don't it? Maybe we can even keep reprising this bit long after everyone concerned is dead of old age- just like I Love Lucy! =========== Which is it? COINTELPRO or the Statists?Moron (english) by @DD$ 7:11pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Personally, it seems the original post was prophetic. To call it COINTELPRO is moronic. How many people left their EMail contacts above standing with the original post? Including IMC insiders? Come on AC aren't you just in denial? I would be more apt to think Chuck0 was the COINTELPRO puppet. Bragging on the internet about militant tactics? After 911? I do not think Chuck is COINTELPRO just horribly and acutely mistaken and amateurish. The fact is that the assertion Chuck made that militant tactics were alive and well has not been proven out. In fact, the opposite has been so. Why is it that any time anyone disagrees with you it is immediately called "COINTELPRO". Maybe the one who claims it the loudest and most often is the guilty dog barking loudest. Which is it? huh? IAC? Bill White? COINTELPRO? The original post is hardly indicative of the racist Mr. White, nor Communist friendly enough to be IAC. The poster seems to be voicing some very real and legitimate questions about how we move forward from here without being ground to red,white, and blue hamburger. ======== The IAC? (english) by Makhno 7:19pm Sun Mar 3 '02 There is one group that is really skilled at using racial politics to slime their opponents: the International Action Center. Since Chuck0 has been outspoken about them, it stands to reason that they had this little "bomb" ready for the next time he criticized them. ========== Hamburger (english) by Anti-Capitalist 7:42pm Sun Mar 3 '02 If the original poster is trying to prompt a fair debate, they aren't doing it in a constructive manner. This is quite clearly an attempt to smear one activist who spoke out about what he thought. Perhaps it doesn't really matter who spent several hours compiling the information for this attack, but it is quite clear that they are using race--among several other things-to attack a well-respected anarchist in the anti-capitalist movement. Perhaps this person simply fears militant tactics. Perhaps they have a vested interest they are trying to protect. Chuck0 was correct when he argued that militant tactics were possible after 9-11. This has been demonstrated at various protests since 9-11. The ACC held a militant, un-permitted march of over 2000 people on September 30th, at a time when people argued that there shouldn't have been any protests. This march was empowering for the people who participated and it encountered only a few problems with the police. There were only minor injuries from the cops and nobody got arrested for anything serious. What's more, this wasn't the only ACC action that had been planned for that weekend. Several ACC activists had also planned a takeover of D.C. General Hospital. If the occupation had worked, several hundred people would have taken over an abandoned building on the campus of D.C. General. There were plans to even start up a pirate radio station in the occupied building! This plan didn't work out, mainly because of sloppy post-9/11 security culture, but this action really demonstrated that members of the ACC had taken Genoa into account when planning for the World Bank/IMF protests. ========== Anti Cap is off base. Chuck cooked own goose (english) by @DD$ 8:12pm Sun Mar 3 '02 This is hilarious. Chuck is so self righteous. I am sorry I meant to say Anti Cap. You are soooo concerned about this aledgedly respected "Anarchist" and the personal attack on his stupid statements. Where has the ACC been? they couldn't take over DC general because they including Chuck advertised it on the internet.Nothing since Sept.29. NADA. They have done nothing and you know it. You talk about things they planned to do. You got nothing.You've done nothing. To be honest, I don't remember ever seeing the "well respected" ChuckO anytime we were ever getting arrested. ====== question.. (english) by onlooker 8:26pm Sun Mar 3 '02 So who appointed Lou Paulson as spokesperson for all people of color? a thought agent in our midst (english) by electron-proton ion helium plasma 8:50pm Sun Mar 3 '02 the atricle wasnt very objective, chuck0's statements do not properly fit the question asked nor form a proper rebuttal. needless to say, i'm disappointed that a true activist would paint someone in a manner not befitting them. however, after perusing the pro-anti chuck0 comments, i quickly concluded that chuck0 en masse with his organization is bereft of the anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist movement. i was appaled at chuck0's comment on the african american police chief that was knocked down. it seemed rather senseless and sadistic, an inept tactic that can endanger the entire gathering. to add, the police (albeit, foes at the moment of protest) arent the proverbial cossacks (a few perhaps). the gathering isnt centered around them, rather the govts policies, that endanger the basic functions of human life (police included). the police arent an extended arm of the draconian politician, rather "sheeple", an unthinking, unfeeling entity. we protest for their sake as well. conc: chuck0 is a mole ========== what the fuck? (english) by Mark Bialkowski 9:31pm Sun Mar 3 '02 mbialkowski@rogers.coMAPSBLOCK Someone remind me what the point of this article is again? platdragon.cjb.net ========== Who is "disgusted"? (english) by IMC Volunteer 9:33pm Sun Mar 3 '02 It turns out that "disgusted," who posted the screed above, is infamous Washington peace nazi Carol Moore. Ms. Moore has an axe to grind with Chuck0, as well as anybody who advocates tactics that include acceptance of violence. Moore also has shown in the past a willingness to use race-baiting to discredit and attack her opponents. Here is a key passage: "US:ChuckO we know one thing. You didn't knock anyone down. So a bunch of white kids running over the African American Police Chief is inherently anti-capitalist? Attacking a chief who is trying to pull together a predominantly black city of many nationalities after being terrorized is inherently Anti-Capitalist? We are working for a new world without capitalism but we do not see this as Anti-Capitalist. We see it as stupid, shallow,and possibly sabotage!" This reads almost exactly like the rants that Carol Moore posted to various email lists before A16 happened in Washington. Moore attempted to discredit violence against police officers by pointing out that they were mostly black. This is of course true, but Moore ignores the fact that the Washington police force has consistently attacked activists without any provocation. In essence, she is using the race of many of the police officers as a reason against activists defending themselves from police violence. Of course, this hunch could be totally wrong. I don't remember Ms. Moore being that concerned about Crimethinc books. In any case, another rant on Indymedia. ========= I Think Not (english) by Anonymous 10:22pm Sun Mar 3 '02 Volunteer, I suspect you're mistaken. The last time I checked, Carol Moore was pro-capitalist. Remember, she is a member and elected official of the DC Libertarian party. ------------------ ----------- The Arabs have 80 percent of the British Mandate Borders. Israel has 20 percent (english) by Baruch Cohen 4:36pm Sun Mar 3 '02 (Modified on 6:35pm Sun Mar 3 '02) Baruch_Cohen@hotmail.com Read article Originally the British Mandate Territory included Jordan or the East Bank. The British gave the entire East Bank to the Arabs in 1946. Thats 75 percent of the land. Israel has only 20 percent of the land, since the British Mandate in 1917. While the Arabs have 80 percent. U never here about the Palestinian state as such, created in 1946, built over more than 2/3 of the British Mandate and with no Jews allowed to live in it. The name of that state is Jordan. So what do we have now in the Middle East: The the Palestinians have a country (Jordan). There, they have evolved faster than any science could ever explain, to become "Jordanian People". This "people" made peace with Israel. The other Palestinians, who were left on the back burner, managed to make you think, that Jordan is something else. Think about it for a while. Jordan which is Palestine. That is one big Palestinian state and I guess that is not enough for Palestinian imperialism. add your own comments The Israeli's were givin 20% as a gift ! (english) by ZIONAZI Moron 5:31pm Sun Mar 3 '02 They were given 10%and they stole another 10% and that isn't enough?n The Arab people made room for a down trodden people to have a home and they turn it into a police state apartheid regime. reposting... (english) by Omar Farook 6:23pm Sun Mar 3 '02 address: Brossard, Montreal Before I begin, I would like to declare my biases, not only is my name Arab, I am a Muslim, Arab, Palestinian refugee. This article conveniently fast forwards history to 1948 and misrepresents the attack of 1967 as a defence. Please afford me the courtesy of a few lines of comment in which I would like to clarify a Palestinian perspective 1- The league of nations had declared Palestine under the mandate of Britain. A superpower at the time, Britain was required by international law of the time to look after Palestine while creating an infrastructure that would enable the people living there to eventually reach a stage when they can rule themselves. Prior to that Palestine, like the rest of the region, was under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. 2- Where the Ottoman succeeded in fending off the Zionist conspiracy of settling in Palestine from 1897 till the fall of the Ottomans, the British did not attempt to block the attempt. Behind the scenes, Zionist capitalist conspired with the inherently racist British rulers of the time not to only to look the other way while Zionists started flocking to Palestine but to actively set up an environment that would support the creation of a Jewish State. Laws were instilled by which Palestinians would hang for carrying a knife while Zionist settlers were build armed militias. The Palestinians resisted. Revolutions, hunger strikes, general strikes. The British looked the other way and the second world war eventually started. British "Lord" Belford had given a promise on behalf of British government which conflicted directly with an agreement made with the Arabs (Hussein McMahon)to allow them to create an Arab state in the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant (Currently the area Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan) as well as Iraq. 2- WWII came and the Zionists used every hook and crook to settle Palestine. They broke an embargo enforced on Nazi Germany in return for allowing certain individuals (and only these individuals) to leave to Palestine. The Haavarah, as it is known, is well documented. By the end of WWII the Zionists had managed to bring to Palestine the Jewish platoon that fought with the Allies. This was the core of the Zionist forces. A well-trained army in the camps of the Allies equipped with its arms. Arabs Palestinians were managing resistance by buying hunting rifles from Syria and smuggling them to Palestine. After the second of WWII the Zionist started attacking the British as well as Palestinian villages which they had been doing in raids (similar to those of nomads). In 1947 the resolution of the UN to divide Palestine came to be after the assassination by the UN envoy Count Von Bernadot on the hands of ex-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and his gang. This first plan of division of Palestine divided the land disproportionately to the ratio between Arabs and Zionists. THE EXISTANCE OF THIS PLAN IS CRUCIAL TO THE REFUTATION OF THE CLAIM THAT ISRAEL HAD BEEN ATTACKED UNPROVOKED. The area known as the triangle of the Galilee was supposed to be Arab. In 1948, some 300 towns villages had been erased off the face of the planet in that region and the area was under Zionist control. Surely, you no one would presume that this area had demolished and forced its inhabitants out of itself on its own accord. The Israelis started an intentional and pre-planned operation to take over Arab land and terrorise the Palestinians out of their towns and villages by committing massacres in strategic areas and keeping a few alive in each even to spread the news about the horrendous acts the Zionists were committing. The story ignores the disproportionate force between Palestinians and Zionist forces. To present a picture of this disproportion, by May 1948 the Zionist were bombarding the British garrison Jaffa (Yafa) the largest Arab population centre of the time. Keep in mind, the Arabs had been denied arms since end of WWI. There were several revolts where Zionists were killed. All went severely punished by the British all the while killing Arabs went unpunished. Arab brethren did try to come to the aid of Palestinians and the Zionists used that to their advantage in two folds: First they made sure that the Palestinian population overestimated the power of these armies thus facilitating the flight from their hometowns and villages hoping to come back when the Arab armies arrive. Second, they have been milking the subject for all the sympathy and rationalization towards their attempt to explant Palestinians and replace them with settlers victims of WWII persecution. The truth is, Saudi Arabia was not independent yet, neither was Jordan effectively. The trans-Jordanian army was lead by a British General, Glob. The Syrians had just removed the French and so had the Lebanese and the Iraqis and the Egyptians with the British. The whole invasion was a fallacy. An HONSET attempt to help Palestinians nevertheless an attempt that lacked any sophisticated military equipment or planning. It was mostly honourable Arabs with the exception of a very few regulars. Israel followed its 1948 organized terror campaign with direct participation in the 1956 attack on Egypt. SURELY A COUNTRY SEEKING PEACEFUL EXISTENCE WOULD NOT HAVE VENTURED INTO AN ATTACK ON A NEARBY COUNTRY AFTER 8 YEARS OF ITS CREATION!?! This was unprovoked and under and in coordination with the French and British. You should check with the USS Liberty later on.. The description of the 1967 war is childish and lacks morality. The attacker of three countries is the protector and the attacked are the aggressors? Israel is one the of the top 10 exporters of arms. True but the type of weaponry is what matters. Or may be at this stage what would have mattered a while ago. Israel has been known to have had 220 nuclear war heads since late 1980's. Check the story of the honourable gentleman Mordechai Vanounou. Israel has been created on the land of my father and fathers and mothers of the men and women of my generation. You may see it as survival of a country or a people if you so wish to. I, and my people, see this as a question of oppression since the end of WWI and a question of property rights. And please keep in mind that this is the same entity, Israel, that champions the return of property to victims of rule Nazi (1939-1945) while denying the well documented property rights of Palestinians after its creation in 1948. The rights are there, the deeds and best of all, the people who will continue the struggle with your blessing or without it. While you make of us heroes who stand up for their rights no matter what the odds are or while you dehumanize us in animalistic imager of men and women who slaughter their own children or hide behind them for media attention. Thank for reading this far. AND THIS IS A BIT BY MARK BIALKOWSKI THAT IS REALLY WORTH A SECONBD READ After the smoke clears (english) by Mark Bialkowski 4:11am Sat Mar 2 '02 mbialkowski@rogers.coMAPSBLOCK I find that the numerous history lessons that come attached to any article on the Israel-Palestine conflict always end up as finger-pointing sessions, an excuse to avoid the existing issues. -Are there people who currently exist under military occupation? Yes. -Are there people on both sides who would see the other side wiped out? Yes. -Are there people on both sides who want peace of some sort without wiping out the other side? Yes. -Does a 2000-year-old land claim nullify the right of an existing population to live on a piece of land? Not bloody likely. -Are there people who legitimately want peace and have plans that allow both populations to exist peaceably? Yes. -Are the Israelis going into the sea? Not likely. -Are the Palestinians going into the desert? Probably not. Working from the above realities, it is simple to determine who wants a peaceful solution, and who simply wants blood. Blessed be the peacemakers. platdragon.cjb.net ---------WELL SAID MARK! ONE SHOULD NEVER CONFUSE OR OBSCURE THE MAIN ISSUES ----------------- www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=... actually . . . (english) by A 6:35pm Sun Mar 3 '02 The Arab states did not, in fact GIVE any territory to Israel. The Ottoman Empire was dissolved for their part in the First World War on the side of the Central Powers. This area was divided into the Arab States, with much of the territory controlled by British or French mandate. After WW2, the UN/Britain created the state of Israel. A high percentage of the population living there was Jewish before Israel was even constituted. The Arab response to this perceived theft of their territory was to invade Israel from all of the surrounding countries. The result of that and the subsequent Arab-Israeli wars was the present arrangment of occupied territories. It is important to mention two facts here, though. 1.) The Palestinian Authority is only the "representative" of the Palestinian people because the Arab League was angry with the King of Jordan for refusing to go to war with Israel. 2.) It is widely rumoured that after the creation of Israel there were severe abuses of power on the part of the new government, which at least partially led to the subsequent war. This, however, follows decades of persecution of the Jewish Kibbutzim by Arabs before Israel was created. I don't know all the facts, and would appreciate anyone who can add to this for me. Thx. ----------------- 142683 Bad habits in the middle east Bad Habits in the Middle East (english) by Bruce Thornton 10:08am Fri Mar 1 '02 (Modified on 11:46am Fri Mar 1 '02) Some Americans and Eurocrats are all atwitter over Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah's proposal to offer the Israelis "recognition" and "normalization" if they withdraw to their pre-1967 borders SOME AMERICANS AND EUROCRATS are all atwitter over Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah's proposal to offer the Israelis "recognition" and "normalization" if they withdraw to their pre-1967 borders. Any chance of ending an increasingly surreal and bloody conflict obviously will be attractive. But as W.C. Fields used to say, "Count your change before you leave the window." A skeptic might wonder why this offer, which could have been made thousands of lives ago, is coming at this moment. Could it be because the Saudis have a PR disaster on their hands, given that the majority of the Sept. 11 murderers were Saudi and some of their citizens have been financing Al Qaeda? And that's just one of their problems. A ruling elite of 6000 princely parasites sitting over a vast population of dispossessed fanatics and a middle class suddenly compelled actually to work for a living instead of getting money for nothing, can hardly afford alienating too much its prime Western sponsor. So we get some flashy PR, since PR crises are usually solved not with substantive changes but with more PR. Time will tell if that's the case here or whether the Prince really means it, or even if he does, he can deliver the rest of the Arab world. Meanwhile more revealing is the reaction of the West and even some in Israel. We Westerners have a bad habit of assuming the whole world shares our values. We are secular materialists who assume that physical comfort and freedom are the prime motives of humans, or will be once they are educated out of their ancient superstitions. Also, we are ethical pluralists: there is no single absolute good, but a multitude of goods, and these are primarily material and hence negotiable and reconcilable. Finally, we are believers in rationalism: discussion and factual information applied to a problem will come up with an answer. Armed with these assumptions, we believe that conflicts can be resolved through rational discussion, negotiation, give-and-take, and the timely wielding of the carrot of material goods or the stick of material deprivation. The problem is simply one of removing or disarming the old-fashioned fanatics and other irrational throwbacks; patiently explaining to those involved how their material lives and freedom will improve; providing material carrots and sticks; and overseeing negotiations in which all parties sit down and dicker over what quid will be given up for what quo. This has been the modus operandi of the West in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for decades. And it's been a complete failure. So perhaps it's time to reexamine our assumptions. Perhaps we should recognize that there exist peoples for whom spiritual reality and imperatives trump material ones. Such people are absolutists: there is one transcendent, immaterial God and his truth is one. True reality is not this material world but that other world of reconciliation with God. Our job in this world is to live in accordance with God's truth and to work to realize God's intention, which is to spread that truth to the whole world. For people such as these, there is no negotiation, no give-and-take and no quid pro quo. What part of the truth, what part of God does one negotiate away? What material carrot is big enough to compensate for the stick of God's eternal wrath? Armed with the confidence that they are on the side of God, peoples of this sort will rely on force to work out God's will. If weak, they will temporize by playing the other's game of discussion and negotiation, knowing that these agreements and concessions are merely temporary. They can be patient, since God's time is not human time. After all, Islam has been here before. For roughly 200 years the Crusader Kingdoms were outposts of the West in the land of Allah. During that time there were numerous contacts between Arabs and Franks, from trade to intermarriage to military alliances. But the long-term goal was never lost sight of--driving the Franks out of Palestine. One of the greatest of Islamic heroes is Saladin, whose capture of Jerusalem broke the back of Frankish rule. Israel is like a Crusader Kingdom: an outpost of the West, a modern liberal democracy with individual freedoms, a market economy, sex equality, and a secular government that limits religious interference in politics. And like the Frankish Kingdom of Jerusalem, Israel's existence is an abomination in the House of Allah. Unfortunately, the Arab world is unlikely to find a Saladin who can militarily take on Israel, let alone the United States. Four attempts to do so have ended in defeat and humiliation. But Israel has existed for a mere fifty years. Another bad habit we Westerners have is slighting the longer historical view and demanding immediate resolutions. But the struggle between Islam and the West has been going on for almost fourteen centuries. What's fifty years? Or even a hundred? Let the Western dogs snarl and bark, but Allah's caravan moves on to its historical fulfillment. Until then, play the Westerners' game, flatter their pretensions, palaver with their diplomats, posture for their cameras, take advantage of their ethnocentric gullibility, and chip away at their resolve until time and circumstance work out the will of God, and like the Franks the Israelis--not the Jews, who have been tolerated in Islam for centuries--will be driven into the sea. The big question obscured by talk of borders and "recognition" and holy sites is precisely whether Islam is ready to reconcile itself with the modern, that is the Western, world, or whether like their ancestors they are biding their time until the outpost of that world, Israel, can be destroyed. So far nothing the Crown Prince or anybody else in the Middle East has done or said suggests that they haven't opted for the latter. ======= Israel the Outpost of the West? (english) by Rob 11:46am Fri Mar 1 '02 I agree with the article's overall assessment, but have two quibbles that might somewhat undermine it: (1) Islam's "tolerance" of Jews is, like all tolerance, conditional. It is true that Islam formally recognizes Jews and Christians as People of the Book, but just as true that those people may not proselytize (a behavior Jews have long since learned to avoid like the plague), and in various locales have had other restrictions placed upon them. It is true that Jews and Muslims have had periods of mutual success and cross-pollenization (see for example Malachi Martin's "The New Castle"); but it is also true that longstanding Jewish communities in the Muslim world were made to pay after 1948, and have largely collapsed (with some Israeli encouragement, and a lot of good reason to leave). (2) The distinction made between Israelis and Jews is necessary to the author's argument, but does not correspond to history or to current reality. Zionism developed in response to a new wave of pogroms in Russia, using the new doctrines of socialism. Cynically perhaps, early Zionists advocated the return to the ancient land as most likely to appeal to the religious sentiments of their target audience. But the hope the prospect of return gave to that audience was not cynical. A long-standing tradition among eastern European Jews (faintly similar to the Hajj) was that one might, at the end of one's life, strive to emigrate to the Holy Land. The Left, in the US and worldwide, is out of power. Its only recourse therefore is to construct and elaborate a compelling, seamless theory regarding the behavior and agenda of the Right. The Left's analysis largely succeeds in explaining and predicting the conduct of the Masters of the Universe, but relies on some broad generalizations about the structure of world power to enhance its appeal to the disenfranchised. One of those generalizations redefines militant Islam as part of the worldwide resistance to capital's global domination. Another generalization collapses Israel's nature into an outpost of western imperialism, erasing the historical struggle for survival of what was, until recently, one of the world's unambiguously threatened peoples. Rob