So are citizens of Lebanon no longer people?

[ComerPerro]

There's reports of a rocket hitting Nazareth, "killing many Israeli citizens, including two children".

That's bad.


Then, "Also, Israeli attacks in Lebanon, many deaths reported, two Israeli soldiers have been killed".



Wait a second...


What about the death tolls on the other side of this conflict?


Israel isn't the only country with innocent people dying...

[saltpoint]

1. You have that correct. The people who actually ARE people are the

people who benefitted from President Bush's tax cuts.

Which makes it incredibly easy to determine who is a legitimate person and who isn't.

One's personhood is directly correspondent to how close one is to that beneficial tax bracket, and how far one is from oil deposits.

[everythingsxen]

4. Ah thats a good arguement!

Israelis are legitimate persons because they benefit from Bush's tax cuts, because they are rich. They control all the worlds money don't they? Maybe they control the media too? right?

[saltpoint]

5. You missed the point.

I'm not doing an Israeli polarization thing.

I'm doing a Bush slam thing.

[everythingsxen]

6. Well for being a "Bush slam"...

it sure sounds like you were saying "Jews have all money = Bush helps them".

[saltpoint]

8. I believe you'll find a titanic shitload of Protestants in the Bush clan.

In as much as he's anything religious, Bush is Protestant. A messy-minded vacuous Protestant perhaps, but a Protestant in the marginal, half-assed way that he is.

His clan is mostly Protestant also.

Many of the PNAC folks are Protestant. They're interested in oil in the Middle East.

My post did not concern ethnic or religious distinctions, however. That's the point you're on and it's a point for another post by some one else at a time and place to be named later, if at all.

U.S. conflicts under Bush tend to involve nations with oil under their soil.

The filthy rich income tax bracket, which is an economic distinction not an ethnic or religious distinction, wildly benefits from Bush's tax cut initiatives.

[everythingsxen]

10. That's all well and good...

except you posted in referance to why only Israeli casualties were being reported (which is untrue, I see plenty of Lebanese casualty reports); that in and of itself affects what you are posting.

[saltpoint]

11. Quote me the passage where I refer to foreign policy at all, except

in the specific context of the Bush administration's interest in oil-rich countries and the subsequent conflict with those countries.

Iraq.

Iran.

Venezuela.

Etc.

You missed the point completely. I'm sorry you missed it, but you missed it by a long country mile.

[everythingsxen]

13. Let's see...

Original post:

ComerPerro: So are citizens of Lebanon no longer people?


There's reports of a rocket hitting Nazareth, "killing many Israeli citizens, including two children".

That's bad.


Then, "Also, Israeli attacks in Lebanon, many deaths reported, two Israeli soldiers have been killed".



Wait a second...


What about the death tolls on the other side of this conflict?


Israel isn't the only country with innocent people dying...

So this thread is clearly about how the news is skewed to only report Israeli deaths and the Lebanese are "no longer people".

Your reply to above OP:

Old Crusoe: You have that correct. The people who actually ARE people are the

people who benefitted from President Bush's tax cuts.

Which makes it incredibly easy to determine who is a legitimate person and who isn't.

One's personhood is directly correspondent to how close one is to that beneficial tax bracket, and how far one is from oil deposits.

You do not *need* to cite foreign policy as the subject of debate was the lack of media coverage to Lebanese deaths (which again is untrue http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=Lebanese+casualties )

The very clear implication you make in your post is that Israel somehow benefitted from Tax cuts and/or "they are all rich" so they count more than the Lebanese.

If I missed the point it's because the point you were making was on another topic of conversation entirely. The policies you cite in your current reply:

Quote me the passage where I refer to foreign policy at all, except

in the specific context of the Bush administration's interest in oil-rich countries and the subsequent conflict with those countries.

Iraq.

Iran.

Venezuela.

Etc.


Have nothing to do with the current conflict with Israel and Lebanon and even less to do with the original post.

[saltpoint]

14. You may want to update your file.

In a General Discussion forum, viewpoints are in fact encouraged.

Whether they align with yours or not.

Whether they are on the same topic as you are or not.

Do consider, please, my passage:

"an economic distinction not an ethnic or religious distinction"

--and you will be closer to the point I was making.

To date you've missed the boat. All of it. Start to finish. You're not even at the right port.

[everythingsxen]

15. Well you do not make any sort of point...

until two posts after your first.

If I missed the boat, it's because it's a U-Boat and hidden underwater.

And I realize that all viewpoints are encouraged, however you may want to re-read your post. Whatever you intended, that's not what you said, originally. Now you are backpedaling and saying you meant something else. Which is fine, however, don't come to me talking of how I missed the boat or misunderstood your point when your original post was pretty clear.

[saltpoint]

17. You are welcome to browse through my journal here on DU.

If you locate any signs of ethnic or racial bias, I would honestly welcome a PM from you and the two of us can discuss them.

I do not believe you will find any, however.

Nor was there one in my post. My take on "people" was the point, and I slammed the Bush adminsitration for its legendary insensitivity toward the underprivileged and those in the way of a greedy, oil-based foreign policy.

That was my position in 2000 when Bush cheated to win and it's my position this afternoon.

[everythingsxen]

18. And that's fine, however...

I would say that in the context of this thread, it sounds like bias.

I have not read your journal, i generally don't have the time to stop and read someones journal before making a reply to them. I also don't have the ability to read someones post and know what they were thinking at the time.

If you simply meant it as a slam on Bush, then I may have been overly harsh, however there is no way that I could know that from your post.

[saltpoint]

19. Well, I'm no Joan Didion.

But if you were in doubt, you had only to ask.

[EFerrari]

40. Old Crusoe, what an ugly day at the mines.

And how would you know if you were no Joan?

:)

[saltpoint]

41. Well, having a penis would seem to disqualify me right off the bat.

Beyond the physiological, I can't make sentences like Joan Didion.

She's tops as far as I'm concerned -- my favorite living American writer.

Her DEMOCRACY is just a tour-de-force, and all the non-fiction stuff also.

I owe her a huge debt.

[EFerrari]

42. Salvador. And lately, "Where I was from".

I peg you definitely Joanish. Definitely.

She's a hero of mine. If I ever grow up, I'd like to be like her. :)

On edit: penises or whatEVER. :rofl:

[saltpoint]

43. LOL! I'd love to have one-millioneth of her talent, sfexpat. You are

among the DU folks with a very evolved sense of language -- your poem hunts and references on these boards really do shine. Thank you for mentioning SALVADOR. A horrifying account, but told by a master of sentences. Such a thin book but such a titanic wallop.

And WHERE I WAS FROM. 'Read it on an Amtrak train last winter. I find myself reading slowly through her work -- to prolong the enjoyment of spare prose.

She's the cat's pajamas.

[EFerrari]

44. She's the Louvre Museum.

:toast:

[saltpoint]

45. Ja.

:toast:
:hi:

:yourock:

[Rex]

29. Jeez, just tell him he won and it will be over!

Some people just have to win, even if it has nothing to do with what you post. I get what you're saying, it is rich vs poor not this religion vs that religion.

[saltpoint]

30. Hi, Rex. I'm thinking how strange it must be to one of those people who

have to make sense out of what Dubya does.

On one hand they have to defend his anti-stem cell position, which is anti-science, essentially. Even Nancy Reagan is for it. And she's hardly a fire-belching socialist.

On the other they have to explain why he just sits by and lets New Orleans flood, pretending that "we've dodged a bullet," or as he blathers about a pig roast while the Middle East goes up in smoke.

I'll tell you, I wouldn't want the job of defending this president's positions.

On anything.

[Rex]

31. It all comes off as looking so irrational, bizzaro worldish.

I agree, how people can defend George Bush on ANYTHING is beyond me. I understand that just today, for his first ever veto, he learned some moral boundries about 'taking innocent life'. I tell ya, my head just wants to explode sometimes over the double standards & obvious conflict of interest we see every day with Bush/Cheney.

[saltpoint]

32. Yes. A friend of mine thinks it might be a good idea for the

Republican Party to splinter into two or three parties.

One would be the extreme far-right nutcase faction -- the Sam Brownbacks, the Tom Coburns, the Judge Roy Moores.

The other would be the so-called moderates, like Giuliani (I think of him as a gangster), and a handful of others the press dubs "moderate," maybe because they're slightly left of Bush and a bit more sentient.

And then a newer wing of deliberate bi-partisan Republicans who can't find a home in the other two factions and who are left on social issues. Mike Bloomberg, for instance.

None of them will get many votes on DU, but it would force the Republicans to shove the far-right out of their operations. If the nutcase fundies want to operate as their own party, it would be better for everyone if they were forced to do it immediately.

Otherwise we get days like this one, when the President vetoes stem cell research, even though over 2/3rds of the nation's citizens are for it.

[leftchick]

33. he refuses to take life in order to preserve life!

his words! I heard him say that on NPR a couple of days ago. I wanted to run my car into a tree but I had two post-borns in my car. That I concieved through IVF and tossed many eggs and embryos to have. The circle jek hypocrisy is astounding.

[saltpoint]

34. Yep. I think it's fair to say that Dubya is not the most intense and

inquisitive thinker we've ever had in that job.

I think a President Gore or a President Kerry -- the two guys Dubya cheated -- would be much more qualified to address the issues of the day.

[Junkdrawer]

28. I didn't get that from Old Crusoe's post, but now that you protest...

so long and hard, it does get one to thinking....

[RedStateShame]

2. "NO LONGER?!"

The Lebanese are people? When did they get oil? :sarcasm:

[ComerPerro]

3. my bad

[winter999]

7. Is Hezbollah treating their own women and children as people

when they use them as human shields? While Israel is evacuating their people, Hezbollah has forbidden their people to flee to safer locations. Sad, sad world.

[ComerPerro]

9. It was especially cruel of Hexbollah to destroy the airport

oh wait....


Why are Israeli lives apparently worth so much more than Lebanonese (sp) lives?

[leftchick]

39. and the hospitals and churches and homes and apartment dwellings

and people. :(

[MadHound]

12. LOL, got any proof of that? Any links?

Or are you just spewing? Because quite frankly, from all I've seen or heard, Hezbollah isn't operating inside the urban areas, haven't been for awhile now. All the reports I've seen is that Hezbollah is operating in the mountains of southern Lebanon, or out in the deserts. Makes sense too, since the blowback from a rocket launcher would set a city block on fire, and it is also very hard to manuever an artillery piece around a city. In addition, cities are generally top targets in wars, so it is better to protect one's weapons by keeping them on the move out in the countryside.

[blonndee]

16. Yes, and I think most people really do know that

It's just they won't admit it because they feel compelled for whatever reason to justify warmongering. As long as it's not on the people who "count." Search will tell you quite a bit here on DU. :)

[winter999]

20. Where's the trust??

Seriously, I wouldn't have believed it unless I had read it. It's hard to really believe the inhumanity.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278026,00.html

[everythingsxen]

21. Sorry..

that's not a valid source for most of the anti-Israeli crowd (the IDF runs the media dont'cha know?); the only legitimate news sources for the conflict that are unbiased enough are Iranian state media and Syrian state media. I am sure I can think of a few other "legitimate" sites that they would be happy to quote from. ;-)

[winter999]

22. And here I though Faux News was the only true source of info

:sarcasm: ;-)

[MadHound]

23. OK, I should have stated this a bit better

Do you have any OBJECTIVE news sources confirming what you are claiming? Because quite frankly using YNet(which is part of the Israeli propaganda machine) quoting an unnamed IDF source is about as reliable as using Aljazeera or Faux News.

From the steady stream of reports coming from OBJECTIVE sources, the number of Lebanese refugees is quite large, and getting larger by the day. Therefore I find it hard to believe that Hezbollah is hodling entire villages as human shields. Besides, they've probably gotten the message loud and clear by now that Israel doesn't care whether or not the target they blow up is civilian or not. Therefore why bog themselve down in an area that is hard to manuever in, and easy to hit. It strikes me as strategic stupidity.

[everythingsxen]

26. Actually.. Aljazeera is pretty unbiased...

they just report stuff.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

27. why don't you ask him/her? S/he has been here OVER a year!

[Ignoramus]

35. Person != Organization; Person != Country

It's not justified to kill people because they come from a country who's government has a policy, or to kill people because they come from a country in which an organization exists that has a policy.

Governments are accountable for their policies.
Organizations are accountable for their policies.
Individuals are accountable for their actions.
Populations are not accountable for the policies of the governments they are subject to, nor the policies of organizations within the country who's government's they are subject to, nor are they accountable for the actions of other people around them that happen to also be in the country who's government they are subject to.

[stranger81]

25. you forget the primary rule of American politics

white folks = precious and unique
brown folks = expendable artillery practice

Racism pure and simple. And don't give me any of that "anti-semite" BS.

[cracksquirrel]

37. Oh yes indeed

Because Israel is just chalked full of nothing but white folks:

[malaise]

36. Fugg MSM

Lies and spin.

[Joe Fields]

38. I guess it depends on your news source.