Ex-Premie Forum 7 Archive
From: Oct 02, 2001 To: Oct 09, 2001 Page: 2 of: 5


Sir Dave -:- Back by popular demand -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:13:15 (EDT)
__ gerry -:- well I may as well draw the shutters and -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:37:10 (EDT)
__ __ hamzen -:- Yeah yeah -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:45:00 (EDT)
__ __ Francesca :C) -:- Cheer up Gerry, the more the merrier -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:09:53 (EDT)
__ __ Joey -:- Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 12:53:38 (EDT)
__ __ __ gerry -:- Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 14:50:51 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ JHB -:- Where's Abi's Post? -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 19:30:03 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Gina -:- Re: Where's Abi's Post? -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 21:57:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Joey -:- Have a good think, gerry -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 17:33:48 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Thanks for that Joey -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 17:58:06 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- I thank YOU, gerry -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 23:35:50 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ jOHNt -:- wHAt the F**%& -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 08:23:57 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ salam -:- Re: wHAt the F**%& -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 08:38:58 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- To Salam and JohnT -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 09:05:41 (EDT)
__ __ Voyeur -:- Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:44:57 (EDT)

Rick -:- First strikes on Taliban today... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:46:44 (EDT)
__ bill -:- the start of this mess, april 1948 -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:24:42 (EDT)
__ __ bill -:- More on that -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:53:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ bill -:- Rabbi's opposed to Zionism speak. (beautifully) -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 19:03:22 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Thank you bill. -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:39:44 (EDT)

Is contributing money to Mr. Rawat's -:- cult similar in any way ... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:07:08 (EDT)
__ Well Decca morphed -:- into a company -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 22:12:09 (EDT)
__ salam -:- Re: cult similar in any way ... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:21:07 (EDT)
__ Tim G -:- Re: cult similar in any way ... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:29:48 (EDT)

The Birthday Goddess -:- Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :| -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:53:14 (EDT)
__ AJW -:- Thanks Everybody. -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:15:45 (EDT)
__ salam -:- Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :| -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:16:01 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :| -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:20:15 (EDT)
__ Tim G -:- Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :| -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:01:38 (EDT)

michael donner -:- arizona -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 00:39:38 (EDT)
__ AJW -:- Are there still 600 wealthy premies left? -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:21:09 (EDT)

salam -:- a bit of diversion. -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:21:06 (EDT)
__ hamzen -:- Neat Salam -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 09:59:32 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- Re: Neat Salam -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:29:42 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Neat Salam but -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:42:50 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ })}) -:- })}) -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 05:23:42 (EDT)
__ __ __ hamzen -:- I'm not going near your pubics -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:36:00 (EDT)
__ such -:- cool. p.s. most links not working [nt] -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 00:40:19 (EDT)
__ __ salam}) -:- Re: cool. p.s. most links not working -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:25:26 (EDT)
__ silvia -:- nice work -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:32:51 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- funny pictures? -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:26:13 (EDT)

Jim -:- From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 17:49:35 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- Hamzen and Rick, since you mentioned me -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:31:45 (EDT)
__ __ hamzen -:- Thanks for acknowledging it -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 15:47:58 (EDT)
__ hamzen -:- Yet more head wanking & reality denial -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:42:06 (EDT)
__ __ JohnT -:- Pacific Islanders flee rising seas -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:36:02 (EDT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave }( -:- The flood season's started here -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:33:59 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- The paddy fields of England -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:16:54 (EDT)
__ __ __ hamzen -:- Re: gulf stream -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:53:52 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Re: gulf stream -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:48:55 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Rick -:- Re: gulf stream -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:24:25 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Good question Rick -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 16:16:35 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- You could make thousands in US, Trainspotter -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:55:32 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Rick -:- Re: Good question Rick -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 17:35:31 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- It's not just in America -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:39:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yeah, but what about these guys, Ham? -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:46:33 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rick -:- Re: It's not just in America -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 19:06:43 (EDT)
__ JohnT -:- What Afghan Women say -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:22:24 (EDT)
__ Rick -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:30:22 (EDT)
__ __ Jerry -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 09:06:21 (EDT)
__ __ __ Rick -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:24:40 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:08:54 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Adventures of Herman Neuter & Happiness Stan. -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:31:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ Rick -:- Re: Adventures of Herman Neuter & Happiness Stan. -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:54:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- The locus of responsible dissensus. -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:28:33 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Rick -:- another question... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:30:04 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: another question... -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:37:34 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Where to start -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:26:35 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: Where to start -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:50:12 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Rick -:- Re: The locus of responsible dissensus. -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:04:00 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: The locus of responsible dissensus. -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:32:56 (EDT)
__ __ PatD -:- Muslim kids and BMW's -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 20:30:03 (EDT)
__ __ __ Rick -:- Re: Muslim kids and BMW's -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:00:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ PatD -:- Wait and pray Rick -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:14:21 (EDT)
__ Tim G -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:01:50 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:12:19 (EDT)

cq -:- A call for Caution and Prudence -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:55:57 (EDT)
__ cq -:- A call for Caution and Prudence - reformatted -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 07:26:17 (EDT)
__ Scott T. -:- Re: A call for Caution and Prudence -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:37:40 (EDT)
__ __ cq -:- Re: A call for Caution and Prudence -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:03:48 (EDT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Turner and other things. -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 00:04:48 (EDT)
__ __ JohnT -:- international sovereignty -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:15:45 (EDT)
__ Jim -:- Fine, but ....... -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:01:22 (EDT)

cq -:- Islam - does it really preach peace? -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:48:51 (EDT)
__ Vera -:- actions louder than words -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:48:51 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Re: actions louder than words -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:30:49 (EDT)
__ __ __ gerry -:- 'integrated War' how lovely -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:32:16 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: 'integrated War' how lovely -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 02:00:50 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Fear not, Scott -:- Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 09:15:46 (EDT)
__ Jim -:- WELL, IT'S ABOUT TIME! -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:56:25 (EDT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Right. It's about time. -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:17:36 (EDT)
__ __ don -:- Re: WELL, IT'S ABOUT TIME! -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:22:03 (EDT)

Magnolia -:- M's 'special message' and cancellations -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:10:59 (EDT)
__ Magnolia -:- The Special Message -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:14:23 (EDT)
__ __ Old Ex -:- Re: The Special Message / Dalai Lama Quote -:- Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:03:19 (EDT)
__ __ salam -:- Re: The Special Message -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 11:58:31 (EDT)

JHB -:- New Jouneys Entry - Bryn Davies -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:35:15 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- Thank you, John and Bryn [nt] -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:09:11 (EDT)
__ Tim G -:- Re: New Jouneys Entry - Bryn Davies -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:10:02 (EDT)
__ Brian S -:- Bryn Davies - Great story, a must read -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:07:03 (EDT)
__ __ Marianne -:- I agree- great story, Bryn -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:28:24 (EDT)
__ __ such -:- yep [nt] -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:38:05 (EDT)
__ __ __ Zelda -:- B-r-r-r-raaaavoO-O!! ; )))))!! [nt] -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 20:04:53 (EDT)

Tim Matheson -:- ashamed of LORD MAHARAJI??-Why? -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:32:07 (EDT)
__ DEVOTEE #1 -:- Bihari ()) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:02:47 (EDT)
__ __ from me -:- You're nicely bonkers!! nt -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:07:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ DEVOTEE #1 -:- You're nicely bonker? -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 13:53:54 (EDT)

don -:- sea below -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:29:09 (EDT)
__ Pat:C) -:- sea below, sky above -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:59:01 (EDT)
__ __ don -:- Re: sea below, sky above -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:23:35 (EDT)

don -:- -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:27:22 (EDT)

Rick -:- Political Question OT -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 00:26:30 (EDT)
__ Sandy -:- Such A Stupid Question/Show -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:29:39 (EDT)
__ Scott T. -:- Re: Political Question OT -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 00:47:08 (EDT)
__ __ Rick -:- interesting about Clift (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 10:44:59 (EDT)
__ __ Barbara -:- Re: Political Question OT -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 03:16:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- I love that idea! -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:41:25 (EDT)
__ __ __ YES -:- ****BEST OF FORUM**** ;) nt -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:28:56 (EDT)
__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Bin laden - snip - Fatima -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 03:52:42 (EDT)

Desperate Dan -:- If you're well fucked -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:52:26 (EDT)

Jim -:- To anyone who's emailed me this week -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 11:31:21 (EDT)
__ Barry -:- Good! -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 18:15:35 (EDT)
__ __ bill -:- My favorite financial analyst -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:25:52 (EDT)
__ __ __ bill -:- you gotta love religion -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:35:57 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: you gotta love religion -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:42:48 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- April and May 1948 -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:40:11 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ bill -:- Jethro -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:08:59 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- To Bill & John T from Jethro -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 16:24:38 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ bill -:- thanks, and lucky him! [nt] -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:14:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- There's a big difference -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 20:39:09 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ berni -:- I like to think that's true -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 07:03:39 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ dimwit -:- Re: I like to think that's true -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 07:05:22 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ bill -:- I didnt write that^ [nt] -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:37:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- You didnt write that^ ? -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:50:34 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ bill-:) -:- I left off the authors name by accident [nt] -:- Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:04:32 (EDT)

JohnT -:- RAWA -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 08:06:05 (EDT)
__ salam -:- Re: RAWA -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 10:29:08 (EDT)
__ __ JohnT -:- The women's war -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 12:37:00 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- Re: The women's war -:- Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:18:32 (EDT)

Suedoula -:- Bravo, John, Well Said -:- Thurs, Oct 04, 2001 at 20:54:15 (EDT)
__ JHB -:- Thanks, Sue -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 02:56:30 (EDT)
__ Susan -:- hello Sue Doula -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 00:52:37 (EDT)
__ __ Suedoula -:- Re: hello Sue Doula -:- Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 16:45:35 (EDT)


Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:13:15 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Back by popular demand
Message:
People have often expressed a need for a forum for ex-premies where flaming and objectionable posts would not be allowed. Such a place is needed. Click the above link to go there.
[ The Secret Garden ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:37:10 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: well I may as well draw the shutters and
Message:
lock the doors on this place. 'Recent Exes' private club has siphoned off a lot of traffic and now this new, possibly soon to be password protected private club opens up.

Of course Recent Exes is an exclusive cosy little club where only special, vetted people are allowed in, and here we have to wade through acres of OT political junk. I'm starting to resent hosting a war council for egghead war mongers. I thought I was host an Ex-Premie site. Now that traffic has other places to go and I don't blame them. I'd go myself except I could never get in...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:45:00 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Yeah yeah
Message:
The speed the threads go here is crazy, the more the merrier, I see no lessening of traffic, in fact think we could do with a pro-boards type forum, where only thread headings show, but once opened show all the thread posts in one screen.

The speed of throughput here drives me nuts, I quite often don't post because I know I won't be around for a couple of days when the thread has completely gone, so won't get to respond to responses, a regular occurrence.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:09:53 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Cheer up Gerry, the more the merrier
Message:
Gerry,

I think you'll see that the OT stuff is melting away, as people get back on topic here. The whole purpose of this forum will be lost if we don't. I think the OT stuff will happen from time to time, because we all do understand that Maharjism and wierd religions are not the only thing going on in our lives. I will continue to post everywhere I feel like it, here, there and everywhere.

We do want to give the EV monitors more stuff to read, after all!

Bests,

F

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 12:53:38 (EDT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and
Message:
lock the doors on this place. 'Recent Exes' private club has siphoned off a lot of traffic and now this new, possibly soon to be password protected private club opens up.

Of course Recent Exes is an exclusive cosy little club where only special, vetted people are allowed in, and here we have to wade through acres of OT political junk. I'm starting to resent hosting a war council for egghead war mongers. I thought I was host an Ex-Premie site. Now that traffic has other places to go and I don't blame them. I'd go myself except I could never get in...


---

I'm sure it doesn't help that this forum reeks of anti-semitism. Not that I expect you to see that, Gerry. You've certainly contributed in making that way.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 14:50:51 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and
Message:
lock the doors on this place. 'Recent Exes' private club has siphoned off a lot of traffic and now this new, possibly soon to be password protected private club opens up.

Of course Recent Exes is an exclusive cosy little club where only special, vetted people are allowed in, and here we have to wade through acres of OT political junk. I'm starting to resent hosting a war council for egghead war mongers. I thought I was host an Ex-Premie site. Now that traffic has other places to go and I don't blame them. I'd go myself except I could never get in...


---

I'm sure it doesn't help that this forum reeks of anti-semitism. Not that I expect you to see that, Gerry. You've certainly contributed in making that way.


---

Joey,

Perhaps I am anti-semitic. I'll have to think about that. Thanks for pointing that out. What I really want to be is pro-people and I'm probably failing miserably at that, too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 19:30:03 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Where's Abi's Post?
Message:
I clicked on Abi's post and got this spat between Gerry and Jerry. Looks like a forum corruption.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 21:57:24 (EDT)
From: Gina
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Re: Where's Abi's Post?
Message:
JHB,

I read it earlier today but it seems to have disappeared.

Abi, care to repost?

Gina

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 17:33:48 (EDT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Have a good think, gerry
Message:
Perhaps I am anti-semitic. I'll have to think about that. Thanks for pointing that out. What I really want to be is pro-people and I'm probably failing miserably at that, too.

Personally gerry, I think anti-semitism is a strange way to express a 'pro-people' approach to things...unless of course, in your own mind, Jews really aren't people?

Whatever gerry. Keep your chin up, and all the best! :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 17:58:06 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Thanks for that Joey
Message:
I'll try to keep my anti-semitism to bare minimum. I have to say though, if you persist in this weird notion that I am somehow anti-semitic your ass will be blocked from here. I think a much more productive route for you to take would be perhaps to contribute some more material on Amtext. Your choice.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 23:35:50 (EDT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: I thank YOU, gerry
Message:
I'll try to keep my anti-semitism to bare minimum. I have to say though, if you persist in this weird notion that I am somehow anti-semitic your ass will be blocked from here.

Well that makes it clear that there really isn't much point in persisting in this exchange, not that I had much of a desire to do so, but then there's this:
I think a much more productive route for you to take would be perhaps to contribute some more material on Amtext. Your choice.

Gerry, I'm not about to be so obnoxiously patronized by some fuckbrain anti-semite.
So go ahead, block me if you want... and stew in it! :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 08:23:57 (EDT)
From: jOHNt
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: wHAt the F**%&
Message:
Could you not give URLs or references to instances of racism committed by posters here?

Name calling merely lowers the tone and damages credibility.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 08:38:58 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: jOHNt
Subject: Re: wHAt the F**%&
Message:
what this all a boot?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 09:05:41 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: To Salam and JohnT
Message:
I have no idea what Joey is on about. I like Joey, he's very intelligent and he made some great contributions awhile back. But now he seems to revel in unsubstantiated accusations of racism, that certain people are 'EV plants' that sort of thing.

He'll sort it out for himself, I'm sure.

I really don't want this to become any big deal or any sort of deal at all. I'm not taking the bait, but focusing on love and cultivating peacefulness for my own benefit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:44:57 (EDT)
From: Voyeur
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Re: well I may as well draw the shutters and
Message:
I agree with your sentiments entirely. Would someone explain to me, why Sir Dave, who foreswore not to have anything to do with ex-premie sites ever again in his entire life, is now hosting an ex-premie forum. Gerry, you saved the day at that time and you are now being treated deplorably having seen this place degenerate into a nasty political forum.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:46:44 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: All
Subject: First strikes on Taliban today...
Message:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20077-2001Oct7.html
[ U.S. attacks Taliban regime ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:24:42 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: the start of this mess, april 1948
Message:
thanks to John T for the link

THE PALESTINIANS WERE DRIVEN INTO THE SEA IN APRIL AND MAY 1948

by

Nizar Sakhnini

Security Council Resolutions # 242 and 338 were issued to deal with the
results of the 1967 War. They were not meant to resolve the Zionist-Arab
conflict. Resolution # 242 emphasized 'the inadmissibility of the
acquisition of territory by war'.

As a result of Oslo and its aftermath, the American sponsored 'Peace
Process' is focused on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Israel and its
strategic ally, the US, consider the Zionist-Arab conflict as a dispute
over the ownership of the West Bank and Gaza in a clear effort to arrive at
a compromise that divides the areas that were occupied in 1967 between the
Arabs and the Zionist entity.

While the Zionists dig into thousands of years of their version of distorted
history and religion to claim that they own Palestine, they want the Arabs
to forget the fifty-year old documented history. They want us to forget
that each and every square inch of Mandate Palestine was occupied and
ethnically cleansed by the Zionist forces using brutal force under the
protection of Great Britain in 1947-1948.

While the U.S. and 'Great' Britain keep on killing thousands of Iraqi
children because Saddam Hussein dared to occupy Kuwait nine years ago, they
reward Israel for its continued occupation of Palestine.

The Zionist forces initiated the 1948 war in early April 1948 by launching
their offensive according to 'Plan Dalet'. In my message that was posted on
19 January, it was shown how the 1948 War started at a time when the British
Mandate Government was in charge of Law and Order in Palestine, but did
nothing to keep law and order.

The following message gives a summary of how the Zionists occupied other
important areas of Palestine before 15 May 1948 under British protection and
tacit encouragement.

Nizar Sakhnini

CAPTURE OF TIBIRIAS:

Within a few days from the massacre in Deir Yassin, the Zionist forces
focused their efforts on capturing Tiberias. A Haganah force, on 12 April,
captured the village of Khirbet Nasir ad Din and the Sheikh Qaddumi hilltop,
overlooking Tiberias, cutting the city off from Lubiya, the major Arab
center to the west. Some non-combatant civilians were killed and some
houses destroyed. Most of the population fled to Lubiya or to Tiberias,
from where British troops evacuated them to Lubiya.

On the night of 16-17 April, units of the Golani Brigade and the Palmach's
3rd Battalion attacked the Old City of Tiberias, using mortars and dynamite,
and blowing up houses, which caused great panic to the Arab inhabitants.
The Arab notables sued for a truce but the Haganah refused to negotiate;
they wanted unconditional surrender. The Arabs then appealed to the British
to lift the Haganah siege on the Old City and to extend their protection to
the Arab areas. At the same time, they asked the ALA contingent to withdraw
from the town. The British said they intended to evacuate the city within a
few days and hence could offer no protection to the Arabs beyond 22 April.
The Arab notables then decided, perhaps with British prompting, to evacuate
the city with British help. A truce was instituted. The British then
brought up buses and trucks that carried the Arabs, under British escort, to
Nazareth and Transjordan. (Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian
Refugee Problem, 1947 - 1949, P. 71)

CAPTURE OF HAIFA:

As part of Plan Dalet, an operation called 'Misparayim' (Scissors) had been
prepared for a massive attack against the Arab quarters of Haifa in the form
of a hit-and-run offensive against major Arab targets in the city.

Haifa was the principal port of Palestine. It had a population of 140,000,
a little over half of which was Jewish. British troops withdrawing from the
rest of the country were to assemble in Haifa before leaving to Britain.
Launching of operation 'Misparayim' posed a dilemma to the Haganah because
it would bring it into direct confrontation with the British army, which
patrolled the borders and no-man's-land between the Arab and Jewish quarters
of the city.

On Sunday, 18 April 1948, Major General Hugh C. Stockwell, British Commander
in Haifa, summoned to his headquarters Harry Beilin, the Jewish Agency
liaison officer with the British army in the city. Stockwell informed
Beilin that he intended immediately to begin withdrawing his forces from the
borders and no-man's-land between the Arab and Jewish quarters in Haifa and
that the withdrawal would be completed by 20 April.

The noninterference of the British Army in the fighting in Tiberias and its
evacuation of the Arab population as well as the green light given by
Stockwell encouraged the Haganah into action in Haifa. Operation Misparayim
was revised to produce a repetition of the Tiberias outcome: permanent
occupation of the Arab quarters and the evacuation of their inhabitants.
The revised operation was called 'Bi'ur Hametz' (Cleaning the Leaven) to
reflect the operation's new scope [cleaning the city of its Arabs].

British withdrawal was completed by sunset on Tuesday, 20 April. In the
morning of the following day, Wednesday, 21 April, Stockwell summoned
sequentially to his headquarters representatives of the Haganah Command and
the Arab community formally to notify them of his intentions to withdraw
from the border areas. He met with the Haganah representatives at 10:00
A.M. and with the Arab representatives at 11:00 A.M. The notification took
the form of a written statement, which Stockwell read out and distributed,
to both parties at their respective meetings.

At 10:30 A.M. on Wednesday, 21 April, the Haganah launched its offensive.
The orders to the attacking units were 'to kill any Arab you encounter set
on fire all flammable objects. and force open doors with explosives.' The
Carmeli Brigade's full force was unleashed on a civilian Arab population of
some 75,000 crowded into a small area less than two square kilometers. When
the Haganah Command learned that the Arab authorities were calling upon the
civilians to gather for shelter in the old market place, three-inch mortars,
according to the official history of the Carmeli brigade, were ordered to
shell the market place. 'When the shelling began and shells fell inside the
market a great panic ensued. The crowd broke into the port and pushing
aside the police who guarded the gate it stormed the boats and began to flee
the city.' The scene at the port was described as follows: 'Men stepped on
their friends and women on their own children. The boats in the port were
soon filled with living cargo. The overcrowding in them was horrible. Many
turned over and sank with all their passengers.'

At 6:00 A.M. on Thursday, 22 April, the Arab National Committee of Haifa
held an emergency meeting and prepared a letter to Stockwell protesting his
decision for withdrawal. The letter referred to the contents of the written
notice handed the previous day. It stated that the withdrawal was a
flagrant violation of the declared policy of His Majesty's Government to be
responsible for the maintenance of peace and order up to and including the
15th of May 1948. The letter went on to state that 'the painful events of
last night when the Jews indiscriminately fired at and bombarded the Arab
hospital and Arab residential quarters in the old city.are irrefutable proof
of the wrongfulness of your policy.' The letter charged Stockwell with full
'responsibility for the cold-blooded and brutal murder of innocent persons
by the Jews, the perpetration of which was encouraged, and indeed induced,
by the arrangement described in your aforesaid note.' Representatives of
the Arab National Committee in Haifa met with Stockwell at 10:00 A.M. and
handed him the letter they had prepared earlier in the morning. Stockwell
informed the Arab representatives that he was unable and therefore not
prepared to fight the Jews and put an end to the massacre taking place in
Haifa and that he was not willing to allow Arab Armed Men to enter the town
to help the Arab inhabitants. He further suggested that he could intervene
with the Jewish Authorities for a Truce. He told the Arab representatives
that he will only intervene if they agreed to negotiate a Truce. The Arab
delegation, desperate to stop the bloodshed and destruction, asked Stockwell
to obtain Haganah's truce terms. Stockwell handed the terms within 15
minutes.

A meeting was held at the Town Hall at 4:00 P.M. to discuss the Truce terms.
The Arab representatives protested the terms as unfair and destructive of
Arab political rights. They asked that a condition be added to the effect
that the agreement did not imply recognition of the jurisdiction of the
Haganah or any change in the political status of the country. Upon the
Jewish rejection of this request, the Arab delegation asked for a
twenty-four-hour adjournment to consult the Arab governments on such a
momentous issue. Both Stockwell and the Haganah representatives refused.
At this point, Stockwell said emphatically that 'the delegation must sign
the agreement as it stood that same evening if they wanted to avoid 300-400
additional casualties'. After repeated and insistent requests for an
adjournment to consult their colleagues, Stockwell granted an adjournment
until 7:00 P.M. that same evening. Meanwhile, operation Bi'ur Hametz
continued in full swing.

The Arab delegation was faced with a difficult situation. Either they
surrender or face a merciless massacre. They could not themselves assume
the tremendous national responsibility of endorsing an agreement that did
not contain an article about Haganah jurisdiction and the political status
of the country. Upon reentering the Town Hall meeting, they declared their
inability to endorse the proposed truce agreement and requested the
evacuation of Haifa's Arab citizens, which in any case had been ongoing
under duress the whole day, because of Stockwell's refusal to protect their
lives and properties.

A meeting was held at 11:00 A.M. the following day, Friday 23 April, to
discuss evacuation arrangements. Prior to the meeting, the Arab delegation
prepared a document to put on record Stockwell's position at the Town Hall
meetings of 22 April. It was handed to Stockwell at the meeting. As he
refused to receive it, it was given instead to the district commissioner.
The document was in the form of a letter addressed to Stockwell, in his
capacity as the Military Commander. It stated 'We submit this note by way
of confirmation of the statement which you made to us at the meeting in the
town hall of Haifa, on Thursday the 22nd instant, to wit, (a) that unless
the Arabs accept the terms of the Haganah Command for a truce in Haifa, the
murderous attack by the Jews upon the Arab quarters will be renewed
resulting in some 300-400 casualties, in dead and wounded; and (b) that you
are neither able nor prepared to take any effective measure to prevent the
contemplated assault.' The document went on to state 'We wish to reiterate
our statement at that meeting that while the removal of the Arab inhabitants
from the town is voluntary and is being carried out at our request, yet the
request was to the greatest extent prompted by your refusal to take any
action to protect the lives and properties of those residents.'

The Arab delegation made desperate and somewhat pathetic attempts to
minimize the scope of the evacuation and if possible even to reverse it.
There was an organized and systematic looting of Arab properties. Houses
and business premises had been virtually emptied from all movables, and many
Arab families had been deprived of all their belongings save the clothes,
which they wear. Repeated requests to the Jewish authorities to put an end
to this state of affairs proved to be futile and there was little response
from Stockwell to put matters in order.

Commenting to the colonial secretary in London on Haganah's conduct, General
Cunningham, a WWII veteran and high commissioner in Palestine wrote on 30
April 1948: 'Recent Jewish military successes (if indeed operations based on
the mortaring of terrified women and children can be classed as such) have
aroused extravagant reactions in the Jewish press.'

Stockwell's conduct in Haifa took the British government in London (as it
took all Arab capitals) by surprise. Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin was
furious with the army authorities and accused them of letting him down.
(Walid Khalidi, 'Selected Documents on the 1948 War', Journal of Palestine
Studies, 107, Volume XXVII, No. 3, Spring 1998, pp. 60-105)

Referring to the Haganah conquest of Haifa and the flight of its Arab
population, Yosef Weitz, Director of the JNF Lands Dept., wrote the
following in his diary: 'I think that this state of mind should be
exploited.and [we must] hound the rest of the inhabitants so that they
should not surrender [and then stay put]. We must set up our state.'
(Benny Morris, '1948 and After', p. 100)

On 1 May 1948, the JA chairman and Prime Minister-designate, David
Ben-Gurion paid a visit to newly occupied Haifa. According to Yosef
Vashitz, a member of Mapam and the Arab affairs correspondent of the party's
daily, al-Hamishmar, Ben-Gurion spoke during that visit of 'his plan
regarding the future of the Arabs of Haifa. Their number would not exceed
15,000; two-thirds would be Christians, one-third Moslems; all the
Christians would be concentrated in Wadi Nisnas; the Moslems would be
concentrated in the Wadi Salib neighborhood. (Ibid, p. 150)

CAPTURE OF JAFFA:

Jaffa was the largest Arab City in Palestine. It was close to Tel Aviv.
However, it did not pose any strategic threat to Tel Aviv, the major Jewish
City. According to Benny Morris 'The Haganah siege would eventually bring
the town to its knees; it would fall like a ripe plum when the British
withdrew.' On the other hand, Jaffa was in the territory allotted to the
Arabs in the UN partition plan. Notwithstanding, the assault on Jaffa
started by an offensive launched by IZL on 25 April 1948.

IZL used 3-inch mortars and 20 tons of bombs in their attack. The
ceaseless, three-day mortaring of the city broke the back the of its
civilians morale and military resistance. The objective of the mortar
barrage was described by IZL OC operations, Amihai Paglin, in his pre-battle
briefing to his troops: 'To prevent constant military traffic in the city,
to break the spirit of the enemy troops, [and] to cause chaos among the
civilian population in order to create a mass flight.'

When the news of the IZL attack reached London, Bevin 'got very excited.and
[instructed] the CIGS.to.see to it that the Jews did not manage to occupy
Jaffa or, if they did, were immediately turned out.' He wanted to
compensate for the wrong done in Haifa. Accordingly, the British went into
action on 28 April. Some 4,500 troops, with tanks, were moved into the
city. The British troops tried to stem the Arab exodus, but to no avail.
It was too little and too late. Part of the reason why the British were
unsuccessful in persuading the Jaffa Arabs to stay put was Operation 'Mivtza
Hametz' launched by the Haganah during the same period. The operation was
launched against the Arab villages east of Jaffa. The Haganah cutting Jaffa
from all centers of Arab population and its rural hinterland occupied the
villages of Yazur, Salama, Al Kheiriya and Saqiya. Most of the inhabitants
left the city under British protection.

On 13 May, with the final British evacuation, the Jaffa Arab Emergency
Committee, representing the 4,000-5,000 remaining inhabitants, signed a
formal surrender agreement with the Haganah. (Benny Morris, The Birth of
the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949, pp. 95 - 101)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:53:24 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: More on that
Message:
Nearly 800,000 Palestinians would be displaced so as to allow for the creation of Israel: around 600,000 of whom, according to internal documents of the Israeli Defense Force, were expelled forcibly from their homes. At the time, these Palestinians, most of whose families had been living on the land for centuries, constituted two-thirds of the population and owned 90% of the land. Though some Zionists claim Palestine was a largely uninhabited wilderness prior to Jewish arrival, early settlers were far more honest. As Ahad Ha'am acknowledged in 1891:

'We...are used to believing that Israel is almost totally desolate. But...this is not the case. Throughout the country it is difficult to find fields that are not sowed.'

Indeed, the large presence of Palestinians led many Zionists to openly advocate their removal. The head of the Jewish Agency's colonization department stated: 'there is no room for both peoples together in this country. There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighboring countries, to transfer all of them: not one village, not one tribe, should be left.' Herzl himself conceded that Zionism was 'something colonial,' indicating again that we were not discovering or founding anything. We were taking it, and for reasons we would never accept from others. As Shimon Peres--seen as one of the most peace-loving Israeli leaders in memory--said in 1985: 'The Bible is the decisive document in determining the fate of our land.' Such is the stuff of fanaticism, and we would say as much were a fundamentalist Christian to make the same statement about the fate of the U.S., or anywhere else for that matter.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 19:03:22 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Rabbi's opposed to Zionism speak. (beautifully)
Message:
hodox Jewish Rabbis Opposing Zionism in Speak In Durban South Africa

Neturei Karta speech presented by Rabbi Dovid Weiss of Neturei Karta

International at a seminar on issues of Islamophobia, hosted by the Islamic Human Rights Commission. It was delivered at the NGO Forum of the United Nations World Conference Against Racism in Durban , South Africa on August 29, 2001 .

With God’s help; By the grace and kindness of God, the Almighty – My dear guests and delegates, may the Creator’s blessings be upon this assembly and may His wisdom inform all its actions.

Judaism – an Alternative to Zionism

N

Abraham, the mutual forefather of the Jewish people and their Arabic cousins, is described by Efron in the Bible as “a prince of the Lord in our midst.(Genesis 23:5)” Since man does not live in isolation, one of the goals of the true religious personality is to achieve a degree of devotion capable of evoking the praise of all men and their desire to emulate his piety.

From Abraham’s days this was the sole agenda of the Jewish people. The revelation at Mt. Sinai placed an enormous burden upon our people. We were summoned to be “a kingdom of priests and a Holy nation. (Exodus 19:6)”

Down through the ages Jews lived a humble, holy existence, at peace with all men and served as loyal and co-operative citizens in the nations amongst whom they dwelled.

One hundred years ago, a Jew, far removed from his faith and in total ignorance of its basic beliefs, launched the movement today known as Zionism. Its early adherents were almost uniformly drawn from the ranks of Jews who had previously abandoned their faith.

Time does not permit us to catalogue in detail the evil effects of this ideology upon Jews themselves and how it led them to abandon the beliefs and practices of the Torah. Rather for the purposes of this conference we will, God willing, explain why Zionism is a rejection of Judaism and how its demise is the only path to true peace.

All mankind stands aghast at the terrible suffering in the Middle East . Innocents on both sides are swept up in a spiral of seemingly never ending bloodshed. The world searches for a solution.

Our perspective is representative of the Torah view, maintained by hundreds of thousands of Jews worldwide, which offers a real alternative to the current impasse.

Our position is that of the Talmud and Midrash which explicitly prohibit premature attempts to end exile. Indeed, we are told that it is metaphysically impossible for there to be a real cessation of hostilities so long as the Jewish people are in violation of the terms of their exile.

With this introduction complete let us now turn to the details of the dilemma now before us.

What is the traditional Torah belief concerning the Holy land ?

The Holy Land was a conditional Divine gift. It was a place set aside for God’s worship. But it was given conditionally. The Bible foretold that if the “children of Israel ” should fail in their spiritual task, they would be banished from the land and sent into exile. This exilic punishment will last until the Lord in His mercy, sees fit to end history as we know it, by ushering in the Messianic era – a time of universal brotherhood and peace. This utopian future will feature the worship of God by all mankind, centered in the Holy Land and the city of Jerusalem .

In the Additional Service recited on every major Jewish holiday we find the following prayer, “And because of our sins we were exiled from our land and removed from our soil and we cannot now go up and appear and prostrate ourselves before You.”

These prayers represented nothing new in the way of doctrine to those who instituted and recited them. From the time of the Temple ’s destruction and throughout Jewish history our people always regarded their exile as a Divine punishment. Indeed, no Jews ever dared suggest in the thousands of years of our exile that the Romans had destroyed the Temple due to a lack of Jewish military preparedness or resources. Rather, the Temple was lost physically because of the Jewish people’s failure to live up to their spiritual obligations to God.

Indeed, despite thousands of years in exile, frequent exclusion and persecution, no Jew ever suggested that the Holy Land could or should be retaken by force of arms. Exile was, indeed, a physical state. Yet, it was completely caused and perpetuated by spiritual forces. Thus, the only means to end exile and usher in the promised era of peace and worldwide brotherhood, were and are spiritual. They consist of the essential practices of our faith -- repentance, prayer, Torah study and good works.

In the words of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (German Jewish leader 1808 – 1888), “During the reign of Hadrian when the uprising led by Bar Kochba proved a disastrous error, it became essential that the Jewish people be reminded for all times of an important, essential fact, namely that (the people of) Israel must never again attempt to restore its national independence by its own power; it was to entrust its future as a nation solely to Divine Providence.” (Hirsch Siddur, 1969: 703)

Again Rabbi Hirsch writes, “We mourn over that which brought about that destruction (of the Temple), we take to heart the harshness we have encountered in our years of wandering as the chastisement of a father, imposed on us for our improvement, and we mourn the lack of observance of Torah which that ruin has brought about. . . This destruction obliges us to allow our longing for the far away land to express itself only in mourning, in wishing and hoping; and only through the honest fulfillment of all Jewish duties to await the realization of this hope. But it forbids us to strive for the reunion or­­ possession of the land by any but spiritual means.” (Horeb, 1981: 461)

The attempt to explain the exile in this-worldly terms is not simply an error of doctrine or a distortion of Jewish history. It strikes at the core of Jewish belief. In fact, the Maharal of Prague (Czechoslovakian Rabbi and pivotal medieval Jewish leader, 1525 – 1609) writes that a Jew should rather give up his life than attempt to end exile by conquering the Holy Land . (Netzach Yisroel, 24)

Why? Why was this seen as so basic to our belief system?

In simple terms -- if one views the exile as the result of military cause and effect, then the very heart and soul is ripped out of Jewish destiny and Divine guidance. By asserting our right to alter the Divine plan of exile as punishment, repentance, expiation and miraculous return, we assert that the essence of Jewish destiny is fundamentally capable of being altered by other than spiritual forces. God is then exiled from the drama and final resolution of mankind’s hopes.

Of course, exile is far more than mere punishment. The Jewish people were sent amongst the nations in order to proclaim by word and deed the truths of God’s existence and His revelatory injunctions for all men.

In the words of Rabbeinu Bachya (12th century Saragossian Biblical commentator) “The Jewish people should spread among the nations in order that those nations should learn from them belief in the existence of God and the flow of Divine Providence regarding the particulars of men.”

Tragically, two events coalesced to cloud over the above, once universally recognized truths among the Jewish people. First, the exile dragged on for hundreds and eventually thousands of years. Second, in the aftermath of the Enlightenment, many Jews abandoned Torah faith. Thus, those Jews who no longer saw exile in Divine terms sought to explain it as nothing more than the result of this worldly powerlessness.

In their frustration at the length of the exile they demonized all nations. In their view all Gentiles would forever hate the Jewish people. Therefore, they reasoned, we must immediately end exile by political and, if need be, military means. Thus, was born the pseudo religion of Zionism.

This necessitated ignoring the Palestinian inhabitants of the land. When this strategy became impossible, the Zionist movement and later the Israeli state sought to depict them as unreasonable enemies for whom military conquest was the only just fate.

Accordingly, both exilic missions (repentance and serving as a “light unto the nations”) were damaged by the ideology of Zionism.

We are called upon by Zionism to view all Arab nations as our enemies. We are forever exhorted to dwell on anti – Semitism, real and imagined, in order to justify the creation of the state and its subsequent aggressions. This obsession with wars, terror and counter terror, the subjugation of the Palestinians, reparations and claims upon all nations and ever wilder charges of anti - Semitism provide an inviting substitute for many Jews. This heresy was particularly tempting to Jews ignorant of Torah and due to historical and cultural forces, estranged from their faith.

The costs of all this in terms of our true exilic tasks are staggering. In place of fulfilling our quiet role of being a “light unto the nations”, we are forever dragged into a bloody conflict with the Palestinian people. Thousands of innocents on both sides continually suffer. Jewry worldwide has little time or patience for its primary task -- the worship of God and its derivative benefit -- the sanctification of His Name.

There is no need for Jews to be seen as the enemies of the Islamic world. There is no need for Jews to be forever accusing Popes and governments of having insufficiently apologized to us for past wrongs – real and imagined. There is no need for Jewry to base its collective political strategies in America and Europe on a “Is it good for Israel?” basis, thus alienating and angering their fellow citizens.

Beyond these factors, there remains the tragic fact that much of mankind sees the Israeli state as representative of the Jewish people. Thus, the state which has rejected or, at best, ignored God, conveys the message to humanity that the essence of Jewishness is a secular nationalism.

Further, the claim of Israel to represent world Jewry links all of our people to the state’s acts of violence against the Palestinian people. This is a frustrating and embarrassing lie. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many Jews in the Holy Land and around the world are greatly pained and anguished by the suffering and persecution of the Palestinian people. Of course, our hearts bleed whenever innocent Jews suffer. But, this need not blind a moral people to the similar sufferings of the other. This is precisely the point—Zionism is a recipe for endless suffering among both Jews and Palestinians.

In the words of Grand Rabbi, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum zt’l (of blessed memory, originally of Hungary, who lived in New York after WW II, 1888 – 1980), “In sum, the hatred against the Jewish community is because it is said that those who are not Torah observant, who are heretics, are the leaders of Jewry. The nations of the world are misled by them and acquire a hatred of Jews. One of the greatest commandments there is, to be observed with utmost self-sacrifice, would be to make known to the nations of the world that they (Zionists and irreligious leaders) are not the representatives of the Jewish community. (And to tell them) that observant Jews have no connection with them.” (Dibros Kodesh, 1986: 210-11)

The vast majority of Jews rejected Zionism when it first began. In the early part of the century, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (not to be confused with the Chief Rabbis of the State of Israel), Rabbi Yoseph Chaim Zonnenfeld negotiated with King Hussein in order to help the Orthodox Jewish community escape the Zionist machinations. This resulted in the assassination by Haganah operatives in 1924 of the Rabbi’s advisor, Dr. Jacob Israel de Haan. In 1948 Rabbi Yosef Zvi Duchinsky of Jerusalem sent an urgent petition to the United Nations, asking that the Orthodox community in the Holy Land be exempted from Zionist rule. These were not isolated incidents. For over a century Zionism has been opposed by large segments of Orthodox Jewry in Jerusalem, the Holy Land and around the world. Many continue to do so today. In fact, they refuse any form of recognition of, or co-operation with the state. They frequently pay for their opposition to the state by being arrested, beaten and, at times, murdered. Their voices are generally ignored in the Israeli press and throughout the world.

Zionist assertionso having solved the “Jewish question” by “ending exile” have proven a dismal failure. If anything, the Zionist’s claim to having created a safe haven for Jewry is patently false. The truth is that Israel today, whether governed by “doves” or “hawks” is the most dangerous place in the world for Jews. Such was to be expected, as Israel’s very creation was an act of defiance against the Creator’s guidelines.

Our position is the only one offering a real alternative to the status quo. Anti – Zionist Jews believe that the one path to peace in the Middle East, the only means for Jews to fulfill their proper role in exile and the only path demonstrating justice and kindness towards the Palestinians, is the total dismantling of the Israeli state. Only then, with sovereignty transferred to Palestinian rule, will a true peace be attained.

After 53 years of having our blood shed on the altar of a nineteenth century colonial, nationalism, misapplied to the Jewish people, having spilled rivers of blood of other peoples, it is high time that world Jewry subject the first assumptions of Zionism to criticism.

What has been accomplished by linking our people’s fate to that of the state?

At root, Zionism has succeeded in changing the definition of Jewry from that of a people of faith, intent on achieving closeness to the Creator in this world, to that of a barren secular, ethnic identity. It has exacerbated anti Jewish sentiments around the world.

It behooves those Torah Jews who have known, since Zionism’s inception, that only ill could come of its dreams, to urge world Jewry to accept the only suitable alternative.

This alternative would not demand Jewish political rule over the Temple Mount or Jerusalem. The “non negotiability of Jerusalem” is not a Torah concept. Indeed, the true Torah concept is to relinquish the notions of Zionism and abandon, in a peaceful fashion, the current Zionist sovereignty over the land.

This need not sadden any Jew. It is far better to relinquish political power than fail in our religious/moral task as the Torah nation. It is far better to practice kindness and fairness to all men as dictated by the Torah, than it is to be drawn into a never ending battle with the Palestinians, the Islamic world, the entire Third World and increasingly the nations and peoples of Europe and North America. We Jews have a task, but it is not to be dispossessors or aggressors.

The serious alternative to Zionism is the faith of Judiasm. In Rav Hirsch’s powerful description:

“Picture every son of Israel a respectful and influential priest of righteousness and love, disseminating among the nations not specific Judaism – for proselytism is forbidden – but pure humanity. .. . .How impressive, how sublime it would have been if there lived a people . . .. . who beheld in material possessions only the means for practicing justice and love towards all, a people whose minds imbued with the wisdom and truth of the Law, maintained simple, straightforward views, and emphasized them for themselves and others in expressive, vivid symbolic acts.” (Nineteen Letters, 1960:108-9)

To the Palestinian people and the other peoples here represented: You have no quarrel with the Jewish people. We are not your enemies. Our message is simple. Let us endeavor to live in peace and true mutual respect.

To our fellow Jews we ask that you all embrace the faith of ancestors as revealed on Sinai; that you deal justly and kindly with all men and that we all work towards the day of ultimate brotherhood and redemption for mankind.

Our prayer to God is that the Israeli state be speedily and peacefully dismantled without any further shedding of Jewish or Palestinian blood and that we be worthy of seeing the full revelation of God’s glory in the world. Amen

Neturei Karta International Jews United Against Zionism 102A Saddle River Road - Monsey, New York 10952 Telephone: (845) 371-0490 / Fax: (845) 371-4291 visit us at: www.netureikarta.org

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:39:44 (EDT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Thank you bill.
Message:
Thank you for posting this and the others, Bill. Much appreciated. Also your post about listening to endless debates about war which led no where and changed nothing. It's been difficult for me to discuss any of this with my Jewish sister, who has tried to remain neutral, but has been greatly influenced by her new 'cult'ure. My (Danish resistance fighter) father was with the British 'peace'keepers when the boats of Jewish settlers arrived in Palestine, and was appalled by the reality of it - he gets as emotional as he does when he talks about the Nazis. I wish I could remember more details, but it came out in a torrent, and maybe most of it is left unwritten.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:07:08 (EDT)
From: Is contributing money to Mr. Rawat's
Email: None
To: All
Subject: cult similar in any way ...
Message:
to contributing to Osama or the Taliban?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 22:12:09 (EDT)
From: Well Decca morphed
Email: None
To: Is contributing money to Mr. Rawat's
Subject: into a company
Message:
that was eventually acquired by Adnan Kashnaggi.... the arms dealer.

Alas, I doubt if the PWIKS whose silence was bought will come forth and explain just how a cult leader, jihad leader, whatever moves their funds around the globe.

Hey Dettmers... how did Rawat get the money flowing around the world? Also, is Deltek still part owner of the jet? That would be interesting as Deltek is quite entrenched with the US Military.

eeshhh.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:21:07 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Is contributing money to Mr. Rawat's
Subject: Re: cult similar in any way ...
Message:
What about the Krishna story, doesn't that incite racial hatered and violance? Seeing that Rawat perpetuate and adopt the story as his own.........

[huh they say?]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:29:48 (EDT)
From: Tim G
Email: timgitti@indigo.ie
To: Is contributing money to Mr. Rawat's
Subject: Re: cult similar in any way ...
Message:
Only in that it is contributing towards forwarding a world goal. Both of them mistaken of course and M's one seems to be purely for personal financial gain and no signs of physically violent means being suggested.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:53:14 (EDT)
From: The Birthday Goddess
Email: sundogs@hotmail.com
To: All
Subject: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :|
Message:
Dear Anth,
Happy Birthday you old sod! :) Isn't my English getting better! Hope it was a good one. I spent it moving, hope you did something more fun.
I guess I missed your internet birthday too, and JM's for that matter. The Goddess has been overloaded with nonbirthday matters this year.
Well dear friend, another year older and wiser, look forward to seeing some evidence of that! :)
Love,
Robyn
PS Anyone wanting to send me birthdays just email. I will start giving 100% to my duties in 2002, I promise! I will do my best from now till then.
I can't fathom why they haven't fired me by now, really.
The Goddess
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:15:45 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: The Birthday Goddess
Subject: Thanks Everybody.
Message:
A most wonderous day began with a walk on the beach in the sunshine, and ended up with a wild, noisy, party with much mayhem and love, celebrating in pagan fashion. It was attended by several premies, several ex-premies, several nearly became premies but didn't, and several who think 'premie' is part of the new European currency.

Anth, who was once part of the new European currency.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:16:01 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: The Birthday Goddess
Subject: Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :|
Message:
Because we love you ()):)()):).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:20:15 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: The Birthday Goddess
Subject: Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :|
Message:
I hope you celebrate you birthday for at least a week, Anth, so we don't all feel bad about being late. May the Muses always smile on you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:01:38 (EDT)
From: Tim G
Email: None
To: The Birthday Goddess
Subject: Re: Happy Birthday Anth, one day late :|
Message:
Happy Birthday Anth.nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 00:39:38 (EDT)
From: michael donner
Email: None
To: All
Subject: arizona
Message:
does anyone have any news re the meeting of wealthy people who met in arizona recently? i heard about 600 people attended,is that possible? and many thousands dollars per person was raised?

anyone have info?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:21:09 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: michael donner
Subject: Are there still 600 wealthy premies left?
Message:
Hi Mike,

I'm surprised there are any wealthy premies left at all. After all, 'A Fool and his money are soon parted.' This has definitely been the story for me personally. (The 'fool' bit, I was never a wealthy premie.) But at least it's a happy parting that happens nowadays.

If any wealthy premies are reading this, DON'T GIVE ANY MONEY. IT'S A CULT. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT MASTER. There are however, lots of perfect prats.

Anth, buddy can you spare a dime?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:21:06 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: All
Subject: a bit of diversion.
Message:
No, the guru is still on the agenda, only when?

Consider this

This is still under the hammer, so don't get all exited.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 09:59:32 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Neat Salam
Message:
Much better Salam.
If you want a spell correction & you still need someone to help with that other stuff you know where to get me.
Some nice touches there.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 21:29:42 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: Neat Salam
Message:
e-mail me. I don't want to talk about it in pubic !!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:42:50 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Neat Salam but
Message:
Salaam, oh master of the apt typo.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 05:23:42 (EDT)
From: })})
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: })})
Message:
())
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:36:00 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: I'm not going near your pubics
Message:
I can tell ya, will e-mail though
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 00:40:19 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: cool. p.s. most links not working [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:25:26 (EDT)
From: salam})
Email: None
To: such
Subject: Re: cool. p.s. most links not working
Message:
I said don't get excited. it's only a dummy test aimed at diversion.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:32:51 (EDT)
From: silvia
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: nice work
Message:
Do you want more 'funny' pictures?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:26:13 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: silvia
Subject: funny pictures?
Message:
what sort?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 17:49:35 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
Seeing as the political issues aren't subsiding here -- and yeah, this IS much more important and interesting than the Hamster now -- here's an essay from the National Post today I really like:

From delusions to destruction

How Sept. 11 has called into question the attitudes by which our society lives

Robert Fulford
National Post

Suzanne Plunkett, The Associated Press

People run from the collapse of World Trade Center Tower in New York. Much about Sept. 11 was new; we had seen nothing like it in the way of terrorism.

Magnus Johansson, Reuters

A Palestinian youth hurls a rock at Israeli border police during clashes in the West Bank town of Bethlehem.

(Photo of a man with a racism sign behind him.)

The frontal attack on Western civilization by Islamic radicals produced terrible death and destruction on Sept. 11 and has since re-ordered global politics. But its effect on our mentality may be even more enduring. It has called into question the attitudes by which our society has lived for years. It has challenged the gentle and self-deluded way we have thought about human relations, forcing us to reconsider many of our most cherished attitudes and practices. It is a radical challenge in the most literal sense: It goes to the root of our thinking.

We live in a world fatally addicted to euphemism. We try desperately to be agreeable and to deny that ugly differences among us exist. In this milieu, the atrocity of Sept. 11 was a foreign object, hard as anthracite, a foreign object that suddenly lodged in our souls. Perhaps we can identify it with an ancient word, evil. That term frightens us: liberalism decided long ago that 'evil' should not, if one follows liberal thinking, exist. It is therefore distinctly uncomfortable to realize that, whatever we might wish, it nevertheless has always existed and will always exist. We also have to consider the dreadful possibility that Sept. 11 was not only the most deadly but also the most successful act of private terrorism in history -- in other words, that it altered us in ways its perpetrators wanted to alter us. It made some of us afraid, it made some of us blind with anger, it made some of us conciliatory.

Sept. 11 revealed the pieties by which we have been content to live. It has led me to the uncomfortable proposition that many of us, maybe most of us, have for years been denying reality. For many reasons, some of them quite benign, we have been playing elaborate games with the truth, as if we were joining unconsciously in a plot to help each other avoid seeing the reality of the world we live in. When I say 'we,' I mean all of us, including me.

A decade or so in the past, intellectual and social history took an odd turn. In the early 1990s, after the nuclear threat of the Cold War receded, something unexpected happened among us, something we neither anticipated nor knew how to deal with. There fell upon all of us, every single one of us, a plague of conformity -- and with it an epidemic of accusations. In this new and fearful atmosphere it became our habit to purchase social peace at any price -- including the price of truth.

We call the 1950s the era of McCarthyism, a period of intellectual oppression. So it was, in a way and for a time. But my observation is that when it comes to moral paralysis, pervasive self-deception, evasion of the truth, and general all-around pusillanimity, the 1990s made McCarthyism look harmless.

What happened to our spirit in the 1990s has no name. For a while we called it 'political correctness,' but it has since metastasized so spectacularly that the original term no longer even begins to cover it. It lives on the fear of giving offence. We can't agree where it flourishes most exuberantly. People who work in universities believe it principally affects universities. On the other hand, journalists consider it endemic in journalism. If you work in a law firm you may believe that the law has been suffocated by it. In organized religion you feel its unrelenting pressure, always expressed in terms of sweet reason.

It is a style of thought that puts limits on the way we can speak about even the subtlest issues. It imposes a party line on public life and on life within public institutions. It turns everyday human relations into an emotional minefield. One of my readers wrote to me last week: 'In 1992 while I worked for the Toronto Board of Education, we were all taught the party line: Racism was a power thing and those who had power (white people) were always the perpetrators and simply could not be the victims.'

Perhaps 1992 was the year everything changed. Whenever it happened, people all over the world were affected year after year by a plague of carefully organized insincerity. The recent Durban conference -- the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, to give its pretentious and elephantine title -- was part of this movement, possibly the climax of it, conceivably the beginning of the end of it.

The Durban conference brought into sharp focus certain issues that have been blurred or ignored in the past 10 or so years. And there is a link between the rhetoric of anti-racism as expressed in Durban and the atrocities in New York and Washington. Uri Avnery, the Israeli journalist and peace activist, considers the connection obvious. He asked why the atrocity happened on Sept. 11 rather than three months earlier or three months later; it had after all been planned for years. The reason it occurred when it did, Avnery said, is that early September brought a unique cluster of events: the steadily intensifying Palestinian Intifada, the continuing sanctions on Iraq and the Durban conference. Avnery argued earlier this week that Durban helped create the moment when terrorist action against the United States was most likely to be popular in the Arab nations. No terrorist sets out to lose popularity: Terrorist crimes are calculated acts of symbolism, aimed at their target audience. The killers of Sept. 11 obviously thought that those three events together created an opportunity for popular success that might not soon come again.

So Durban, billed to the world as a well-intentioned and progressive UN conference, helped provide the setting against which the atrocity of Sept. 11 could be staged.

It would be silly to suggest that Durban was Canada's fault; we can't argue that it was born in Canada's 1990s culture. But Canada played a larger part in it than any other nation. We sent twice as large a delegation as any other country, their fares and expenses of course paid for by Canadian taxpayers. They were also among the more fractious delegations, the nongovernmental Canadians openly opposing the government officials who had signed their travel expenses a few weeks earlier.

As Jeffrey Simpson put it in The Globe and Mail: 'The government gives millions of dollars for NGOs to organize conferences, attend meetings, prepare papers and engage in demonstrations ... the government underwrites a counterculture foreign policy that runs parallel, and frequently in opposition, to the government's own policy.' This is the Canadian way.

Durban, with all this Canadian support, became a huge success for those who make hatred of Israel the centre of their lives and hatred of the United States a reflexive emotion. Durban gave fresh legitimacy to people everywhere holding those views. And these people, if sufficiently inflamed, can eventually make it possible for Islamic terrorists to achieve their central goal: to establish in Arab countries strict theocratic regimes like the Taleban regime in Afghanistan.

Egypt, for example, is the perfect market for such a campaign. It's often described as a 'moderate' country, 'moderate,' as applied to certain Middle East nations being a classic euphemism, a word that embodies hope rather than truth; we should never use it without quotation marks.

Still, we might imagine Egypt as a place where Muslim feelings are not necessarily poisoned against the West. Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979 and sided with the West in the Gulf War, for which the United States forgave a $7-billion debt. Apparently Egypt is helping the West in the current emergency. It is a place whose sensibilities we are advised to respect. On Sept. 15, Anthony Lewis warned in The New York Times that 'hasty, ill-targeted military action could arouse anti-Western sentiments right across the Middle East. That could threaten such important U.S. friends as the governments of Egypt and Jordan -- and Saudi Arabia.'

Of course, anti-Western sentiments in Egypt do not need arousing. The former Egyptian foreign minister, Amr Moussa, is the hard-line leader of the Arab League and did much to create the climate of Durban. Last week a CBC reporter in Egypt encountered little but anti-Western sentiment. He discovered that the most popular song in the country is called I Hate Israel and the second most popular is about hating Americans. For people holding those views, the predominant voices at Durban all delivered good news.

So far as I can tell by reading the Web sites, Durban was in essence an exchange of accusations, which makes it a typical product of our time. But why were we Canadians so profusely represented at Durban? The curious reason is that race, racism, and anti-racism are major political themes in Canada. In the past 15 years we have found new ways to worry about them, new structures in which to package our worries, new language to express our anxieties.

An objective observer might find it astonishing that this subject obsesses us. Racism is a factor in the life of all societies, but almost all countries are far more racist than Canada. That would include the African dictatorships, all Arab countries, and at least two major democracies, India and Japan. By comparison, the problems of race in Canada are minor. Five years ago Richard Gwyn wrote this in The Toronto Star: 'Canadians, whether white or non-white, whether in Metro Toronto or any place else, are almost certainly the least racist people in the world.' He invited readers who disagreed to name a less racist country, if they could. None did.

If in any other field we were world leaders, we wouldn't lavish government money on organizations designed to make the situation better. It would make no sense. But race is like no other field of human concern. Racism has become the sin of sins. More than any other form of immoral behaviour, it causes us endlessly to search our souls, blame our fellow citizens, and cry out for remedial legislation. It's as if we wanted it to be far worse than it is. If we can't have cross-burnings, then we can have a federal minister who will dream them up and insist they are happening until she's proven wrong. We invent new kinds of racism, apparently for the thrill of experiencing them. Not long ago, a sociologist in Montreal said that if you oppose the Quebec language laws you are guilty of 'neo-racism.' The Globe and Mail, rather than ignoring this nonsense or jeering at it, solemnly reported the sociologist's claim, as if it were serious new information.

That's because race has become the most potent word in our culture. It has unprecedented force. It paralyzes judgment and ends argument. Anti-racism as a movement depends on one principle: Anyone who can claim to be the member of an oppressed minority must be taken seriously. And a second principle: A charge of racism, no matter how irresponsible, sustains itself through the rhetorical force of the word.

When we discuss racism, we impose on ourselves a kind of moral disarmament: We are cowed into silence or acquiescence by the magic authority of a word. That tendency has created an extensive industry staffed by conciliators, consultants, compliance officers, and of course, full-time advocates for the oppressed, all of them professionally dedicated to finding racism.

Our situation differs sharply from the 1950s. Most of those who perpetrated McCarthyism also maintained busy working lives as politicians, broadcasting executives, university administrators, journalists, etc. But the new class that was spawned by 1990s thinking consists of people who do little else. They have careers to defend. This means that 1990s conformity, unlike McCarthyism, has been professionalized and institutionalized. The plague of the 1990s has become entrenched in institutions.

There were events in Canada in the 1990s that demonstrated the harm being done by this new ethos. The case of June Callwood, a leading citizen of Canada for 30 or so years, should have taught everyone a bitter lesson, but I'm not certain that it did. In 1992, fellow board members at a women's shelter she had helped create decided she was a racist, and began saying so in public. Eventually they hounded her out of that institution. She was not a racist, and it was in following her case that I realized a dreadful truth: The language of civility had been turned on its head to create a language of hate and shame.

June Callwood's problem was intellectual and historical. She was operating within an intellectual and historical framework that her accusers had declared obsolete. Callwood is a liberal pluralist in a post-modern multicultural world. She insisted on treating her colleagues as individuals, in the manner of a good small-l liberal. They demanded she instead treat them as representatives of ethnic groups, and respect them for that reason alone. They had invented a new logic of human relations, and they set out to convict as racist everyone who did not conform to it. The Callwood case became an essential event of the 1990s -- it expressed the essence of the period.

It also became emblematic and symbolic because of the response of the community. The Toronto Star shamefully colluded with Callwood's tormentors by publishing their charges anonymously. Others, including even the Writers' Union of Canada, watched in paralyzed horror. Some said privately something along the lines of: Where there's smoke there's fire. There was no fire, but there was smoke, generated by people using the new morality of anti-racism as a tool of power. As McCarthy's generation of demagogues used communism, a new generation of ambitious power-mongers used race. None of Callwood's accusers were known outside their own circle or (so far as I'm aware) were heard of again. They demonstrated that to make her life miserable they did not need reputations of their own. The strength inherent in the word racist was -- all by itself -- sufficient.

Another rule goes beyond race and encompasses religions: If a cluster of individuals claim that anything spoken is hurtful to their community, in their eyes and by their standards, then that complaint must be taken seriously.

This became clear in 1988, after the Iranian government issued an order to kill Salman Rushdie as punishment for his book, The Satanic Verses.

Muslim clerics appeared on the CBC and elsewhere in Canada to tell us that Muslims were hurt by his book, and that we should sympathize with them. They demanded our sympathy because, they said, The Satanic Verses was blasphemy -- and blasphemy, they implied, was universally offensive. They asked for our understanding. Our culture's response was to nod quietly. We grasped that this was a serious matter because they said it was.

For a brief, horrible moment, the government of Canada even froze distribution of Rushdie's book, on the grounds that it might be hate literature because it was blasphemous. Few Canadians had the courage to speak the truth: that what Islam calls blasphemy, the West calls Voltaire. Few cared to recall openly that the Enlightenment, from which our civilization flows, was grounded in blasphemy -- and that without that essentially blasphemous period in the 18th century, humanity could not have freed science and democracy from the chains of superstition.

That was a line we neglected to draw. We should have drawn it, not because doing so would have dissuaded Rushdie's enemies in Tehran, but because it would have helped us clarify our own principles, the principles we are now called on to protect, the principles on which freedom depends. The truth is that a secular society cannot afford to entertain the idea that blasphemy is socially unacceptable. It may be abhorrent to a believer, but a liberal society that condemns blasphemy is a liberal society committing suicide.

The Durban conference was a pre-atrocity event. After Sept. 11, would it be encouraged or even tolerated? Or have we learned that there are issues we should never again deal with in such a thoughtless and dangerous way? The Canadian Foreign Minister, John Manley, has asked why Durban was ever necessary. To him it appeared to be nothing but an exchange of platitudes and insults. At Durban, anti-racism turned into racism. Perhaps we will learn from it a truly terrifying truth: that anti-racism is worse than the disease it claims to cure.

Durban aside, much of the reaction to Sept. 11 has been painfully predictable. CBC Radio has run earnest little pieces, written by assistant professors, who urge the Americans to restrain themselves and express the pious hope that this crisis will somehow enlighten our impetuous neighbours to the south and make them more mature. The reigning ethic of these commentaries is moral equivalence: Yes, terrorists are bad but we should remember the flaws of the Americans, too.

We Canadians love to lecture Americans on their shortcomings in world affairs, not because the Americans listen but because it makes us feel we are part of great events and bring to them a superior wisdom. While we habitually denounce all generalities made about culture, we are able to identify with ease what we consider the sins of the United States.

In this sense the former president of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, Sunera Thobani, was taking her place in a long Canadian tradition on Monday when she declared that U.S. foreign policy is 'soaked in blood' and the United States is the 'most dangerous and the most powerful global force.' Usually our anti-Americanism is less direct, more subtle. Condescension is our preferred style. Ray Conlogue in The Globe and Mail says: 'America, as many observers have noticed, is a country which does not recognize the tragic dimension of life.' No doubt Conlogue is one of those who insist that we should never make generalizations about another culture, but as usual, in the case of America he's willing to make an exception. Possibly there is something to be said for the notion he expressed; certain Americans would support it, others deny it. But it takes a very particular kind of arrogance to deliver such a judgment from Toronto at a moment in history such as this one.

Wherever the plague of the 1990s strikes, honest language becomes a victim. At Reuters news agency on Sept. 23 an order was issued to the staff: Do not use the words 'terrorist' or 'terrorism' in reporting on Sept. 11. Apparently those words are inflammatory. They could offend someone, perhaps a terrorist or the admirer of a terrorist. The head of Reuters, Stephen Jukes, said: 'We're trying to treat everyone on a level playing field, however tragic it's been and however awful and cataclysmic for the American people and people around the world.'

The idea of dealing even-handedly with both sides holds a particular appeal for Canadians. It, too, provides a feeling of cool superiority. Unfortunately, it may also leave us incapable of the one act that has always been essential to survival, distinguishing friends from enemies.

And where did this simple-minded idea of even-handedness come from? It emerged in its current manifestation from the universities, in the form of postcolonial theory.

Western civilization grounds itself in certain principles, all of them imperfectly applied: democracy, free speech, an independent judiciary, secular government, private property, and equality before the law. We not only believe these ideals are crucial to us; we also imagine that in local adaptations they can be of use to all of humanity

But postcolonial theorists look on these ideas not as natural developments of ordinary human desires and needs but as 'ideological constructs,' systems we have organized for our own use because they please us, or make us richer.

Postcolonial theory holds that one culture cannot reliably condemn another because there is no objective standard by which a culture may be judged -- and if the culture doing the judging is the West, that judging will always be motivated by greed and the lust for power. This theory produces a logical outcome such as the following: a culture that enslaves women, and a culture that recruits women for law school, are moral equivalents since we have no objective method of determining they are otherwise.

In this light we can see that Western imperialism causes terrorism, just as it causes all other evils in the Third World. On Sept. 19, Haroon Siddiqui wrote in The Toronto Star that Islamic terrorists did not attack America because they hate freedom and liberty but because of 'American complicity in injustice, lethal and measurable, on several fronts' of which he of course gives first place to 'The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which America stands by decades-long Israeli defiance of United Nations resolutions ... and the most basic standards of human rights ...'

This has become a favourite theme in the days since the atrocity. Everyone from the German chancellor to Rick Salutin in The Globe and Mail has told us that a solution of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians will be a necessary step on the road to ending terrorism. No one who makes this point seems to recall that the Barak government offered a settlement that contained just about everything the Palestinian leadership had asked for, and was turned down.

This kind of thinking has made it difficult to come to an honest understanding of what happened on Sept. 11. As Edward Rothstein remarked in The New York Times, that atrocity 'seems to cry out for a transcendent ethical perspective,' not relativism -- in other words, it cries out for a philosophy that recognizes a difference between good and evil. But that recognition is beyond the powers of anyone who accepts postcolonial theory as universities now preach it. A transcendent ethical perspective, the postcolonial theorists will argue, is an attempt to impose our ideas of universal truth on everyone, which in the end is nothing more than a 'strategy of imperial control.'

Much about Sept. 11 was new; we had seen nothing like it in the way of terrorism -- nothing so clever, nothing so well planned, nothing so efficient. Never before in all of history has private terrorism been so confident, so accomplished.

Perhaps it was this very newness that made many among us reach for comfort to trite and sentimental explanations. Almost our first impulse was to depict the killers as victims. Many jumped quickly to the explanation that poverty explains terrorism. This idea always seems to me an insult to those many millions who struggle with poverty and manage nevertheless to live lives of dignity and honour. But apparently we cannot resist the alluring simplicity of this answer. In some part of ourselves we are all Marxists, committed to economic determinism. Harold Pinter summed it up in a phrase: 'To prevent terrorism, we must make war against poverty.' But in this case as in many others, that impulse was misplaced.

The biographies of the terrorists of Sept. 11 in fact appear to demonstrate precisely the opposite. Far from being miserably housed refugees, they were the children of the affluent, in several cases young people who were sent abroad for higher education. And of course the chief terrorist, bin Laden, has been fabulously rich all his life. This is no reason to abandon aid to the poor countries, but it suggests we should stop hoping that economic help will reduce terrorism.

Germany at the height of its economic success had one of the most flourishing terrorist movements in the world, the Baader-Meinhof gang. The Americans had given all possible economic aid to create a new German economy; and the German radicals decided that this very success, the flourishing of liberal capitalism, was an affront, so offensive to humanity that it justified bombing and killing.

Given the evidence of Sept. 11, it would be just as accurate to say that prosperity causes terrorism. But that, of course, would be ridiculous, and also demeaning, like most explanations that attempt to reduce subtle complexities of evil to the banalities of materialism.

These fundamental errors have crippled public discussion and made us less able to understand what has happened to us -- and that, in turn has limited our ability to defend ourselves. Public discourse in the last decade has tried desperately hard to teach us that there is nothing in the tradition of Western civilization that should arouse our pride. But in truth only a high degree of justified and thoughtful pride will give us the courage to defend and develop the traditions to which we are the fortunate heirs.

So far, in this country, the articulated response to tragedy has for the most part been pathetically inadequate. It need not be that way indefinitely. Perhaps in time Sept. 11 will teach us to reassess the habit of banality and euphemism that has poisoned the wells of argument. Perhaps Sept. 11 will lead us toward both a more profound understanding of evil and a revived faith in ourselves and our shared beliefs.

In recent weeks my favourite modern poet, W.H. Auden, has been showing up often on the Internet, his words passed along by people anxious to see through the gloom produced by the terrorists. In a much worse time, as the Second World War was beginning, Auden too was haunted by the false pieties and distorted moralism of the decade just ending. The poem that gets quoted often these days is the one he called September the First, 1939, the one that ends with the hope that the poet,

Uncertain and afraid

As the clever hopes expire

Of a low dishonest decade:

can somehow teach himself and others in this painful moment to (as he puts it)

Show an affirming flame.

Finding grounds for intelligent affirmation in the midst of mindless devastation and horror, rising above the despair induced by Sept. 11 -- that will be the central task of our civilization for a long time into the future.

robert.fulford@utoronto.ca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:31:45 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hamzen and Rick, since you mentioned me
Message:
Hamzen re global warming: Yes, we have to take it seriously but I don't think we can turn back the clock. The only way forward now is climate control. After all there have been huge fluctuations in climate before and I don't think you Brits really want another ice-age. The solution is not to scrap human interference in nature but to increase it.

Rick, you obviously have my number. Yes, I am an old fogy but I disagree with Fullford who is after all only a journalist not an historian. Liberal paralysis and PC euphemisms did not start in the 90s (okay maybe it started in Canada then.) It started with then PM of UK, MacMillan's visit to Africa in 1957 when he delivered his famous ''Winds of Change'' speech to the South African Parliament in Cape Town. That signalled the beginning of Britain's post-colonial shame and abandonment of it's responsibilties to its former colonies and the beginning of the Age of Racial Euphemisms.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 15:47:58 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Thanks for acknowledging it
Message:
Energy reduction doesn't have to be turning the clock back to some luddite pre-industrial age,
think packaging (most of it completely irrelevant)
transport of goods (huge waste of energy)
solar, wind, whatever energy production boosted, even if it increases costs
cars, something has GOT to be done about that one
The list of things we could be doing NOW are endless

but they all refer to one thing, energy consumption, and we're all living like there's no tomorrow.

As for your comment re increasing our interference with nature, not sure what you are referring to.

But thankfully you have acknowledged it this time, coming from someone as intelligent & articulate as you I found your comments the other day REALLY depressing, and can't see much point in sorting out the terrorist problem if there is no planet left worth living on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:42:06 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yet more head wanking & reality denial
Message:
Think he's right about our not wanting our cozy existence interrupted, yet is there even ONE mention of global warming in there, something that is already affecting some pacific islands, that will be catastrophiocally destructive for ALL humans within fifty years, and loads of people within 25 years.

Typical example, and sorry for using you as an example Pat C, but the other day he was saying how he had faith that evolution or us, would find a way to deal with it, wished it all away, yet in the present terrorist situation action needed doing and now. Why is it any different with regards global warming?

We have left it so late that we can't stop it now, just reduce the catastrophic effect of it, and even that we're not interested in.

The classic one is to ask everyone you know or meet about global warming, the reality denial and magical thinking you come across is almost universal.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:36:02 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Pacific Islanders flee rising seas
Message:
Rising sea levels are causing problems already, as reported in the article I've linked to. Apparently the global climate is still within the natural margins of fluctuation, tho by the time the changes can be seen to be unambigously manmade, it will likely be far too late to reverse them.

Despite being so far North (London is further north than Winnipeg in Canada, even), Britain is quite temperate. We owe our temperate climate to an oceanic flow of warm water from the tropics called the Gulf Stream. But the Gulf Stream is weakening. This is due to the melting Arctic ice forming a layer of lighter, not-so-salty water on the surface. This lighter water will not easily sink to the depths to make room for the water in the North flowing Gulf Stream.

If the Gulf Stream does continue to weaken and finally switches off, the northern part of Britain could be covered in an ice sheet within about a decade - frighteningly quickly. Many other parts of North Europe would also be severely affected of course.

Have a Nice Day, y'all -- and don't burn too much oil, y'hear?!
[ Pacific islanders flee rising seas ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:33:59 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave }(
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: The flood season's started here
Message:
Well here we are again, the start of the flood season in Britain. We used to call it Autumn but now it should be renamed, ''The Flood Season'' because hundreds of square miles of Britain are flooded, causing millions of Pounds worth of damage, not to mention inconvenience.

It never used to be like this and floods used to be rare.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:16:54 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Sir Dave }(
Subject: The paddy fields of England
Message:
Was a time when Kent was called The Garden of England.

I suggest we move the Kentish locals back into London, and move the denizens of Gerrard Street and Chinatown generally out into the rural paddy fields of Kent.

Unless that suggestion is un-PC, of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:53:52 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Re: gulf stream
Message:
The circulation rate of the gulf stream is already down 20%, and the first signs of diversion from the west of ireland to the bay of Biscay is already happening, due to the melting of the artic ice cap, 40% of which has already melted.

Re natural variations, that is true, but it is also true that there is now well documented research on the effects of our lifestyle effects on the atmosphere which are totally consistent with the effects already seen.
For a while the effects were slightly below what was expected, then they found tree growth was increasing which took some of the effects out, the amazon is a natural co2 sink, but that the limits for trees on being able to do this was being reached.

What a species eh, in one hundred years we could have undone billions of years of evolution, it's almost impressive.
And all so we can lead comfortable consumer lifestyles.

It should be highly amusing(sic) to see the reaction of our children and grandchildren when they realize what we have bequethed them.

So buying a new house, look to the hills.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:48:55 (EDT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: gulf stream
Message:
You should hear David Suziki talk about us ... something along the lines of the greatest pestilence on the planet. :(

Native American tradition always considered the consequences of their choices for 7 generations - but we're living in a very convolutedly twisted 'Be here now' 'cult'ure of push-button self-gratification.

I'll stop now.

Anna

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:24:25 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: gulf stream
Message:
What would the world look like if effective steps were being taken to attempt to correct global warming? I mean on a personal day-to-day living level how would we be living differently?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 16:16:35 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Good question Rick
Message:
Basically everything that doesn't increase co2, ie energy consumption of the oil/coal based variety should have been drastically reduced ten years ago, so any effective changes which will do no more than neutralize the increases, will have to be even more drastic.

Short term this would have a huge impact on our economic systems which are based on continual expansion and oil/coal usage.
There has been some attempt to increase minimal polluting energy production but really it's been piffling.

So you're looking at reduced industrial production, huge reduction in car use, drastic reduction in air flights (probably the worst pollutant of the lot), drastic reduction of packaging (my personal bete noire), increased heating and electicity costs, short term our standard of living would have to drop.
But the political implications are enormous, it HAS to be a global solution, and there is no political system other than the standard economic model of capitalism for increasing quality of life yet devised, so the difficulties are horrendous, since China, India, Indonesia, Brazil etc are already gearing up to ape our styles, and we aren't even prepared to accept ANY lifestyle reductions, even the Kyoto agreement was only 15-20% of what was required.
It's going to require a drastic review of EVERY aspect of our lives.

If we don't the implications are horrendous. One thing people don't realize about global warming, it's not just heating everything up, it's not just increasing flooding through rising sea levels, it's creating HUGE instabilities in weather systems, and water based systems. The kind of violent weather patterns that are already increasing are minimal compared to what's coming in thirty years.

We'd definitely be less obese, probably have less time, work from home (already increasing) would go up dramatically where possible, and short term I suspect there would be a huge increase in unemployment.
What we define as quality of life would have to change drastically too.

But that's just off the top of my head. Will get back to you on that one.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:55:32 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: You could make thousands in US, Trainspotter
Message:
With your accent and world weariness you would be taken for an aristocrat over here in the land of drinking chardonnay in a jacuzzi while watching Pacific sunsets. You could be a consultant for the Sustainable Earth Coalition - or better a fund-raiser. Non-profit corporations don't pay much if you're on staff. Think only $70,000 max a year. But fund-raisers are paid on commission and many drive SUVs the size of your flat and costing many times as much per month.

Alternative energy is THE topic here. We already generate more windmill electricity than anywhere else in the world and wave-power is no longer on the backboiler. Did you read the article about SF? Or was it too boring for you? It was for me. Now you know why I think it is essential to look at a sustainable earth. But the green movement has it's fair share of cliche-driven hangers-on.

But I read you seriously. Something needs to be done. Come and have some fun in the sun. The rave scene here is just as mellow and loopy as there and I'm sure you're bored with the trainspotters by now. I think of the UK as a place where I had an uphill battle to get anywhere or do anything. Here, people listen if you've got something to say.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 17:35:31 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: Good question Rick
Message:
Capitalism/Democracy/Western Civilization seems better at putting out fires than planning for disasters. We saw that on Sept. 11 and the days following. At least in America, people aren't ready to give up much until they're scared shitless.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:39:28 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: It's not just in America
Message:
I've come across no signs of wanting to deal with it anywhere.
Over here I can at least mention the topic now and have it acknowledged as a genuine problem, that usually lasts about one minute, then it's off the agenda.
I knew it was starting to reach local awareness when a friends dad who is completely unaware of anything but business, starting thinking about the sale of mosquito nets! That won't be needed here for about 10-15years, by then our weather will be like southern spain.

Usual reaction is to accept we're doomed, most young people are more aware of it as an issue, even those less politically aware, but they have no hope that any politician will deal with it.

What I find so appalling is how we have become so selfish that we don't give a monkeys about what we are bequeathing to those we love, our children and grandchildren, even more so from those supposedly committed to family values.

One backlash from the inactivity is the anti-globalization movement, my daughter who for ages was an out and out party girl has got very involved in the last year, but that is an anti-government/big business more than a global warming issue. Even in that movement it's no more than 5th or 6th on their agenda..

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 13:46:33 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Yeah, but what about these guys, Ham?
Message:
I asked you a while ago if there wasn't still scientific debate on Global Warming and you thought there wasn't. But what about these guys? Out to lunch? Paid hacks? Hwo do you know?
[ Cooler Heads ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 19:06:43 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: It's not just in America
Message:
Probably the many who deny global warming is an issue, don't worry about the effect on their descendants, because they don't think it will be too difficult. Traditional sources of info about the urgency of global warming aren't very convincing, so it isn't any wonder people aren't acting. And, as with most things that happen slowly, the real convincing doesn't start till people see solid results. Yeah, America and anywhere else. But you can bet there's some action when the mosquitos start biting.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:22:24 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What Afghan Women say
Message:
RAWA statement on the terrorist attacks in the US

The people of Afghanistan have nothing to do with Osama and his accomplices


On September 11, 2001 the world was stunned with the horrific terrorist attacks on the United States. RAWA stands with the rest of the world in expressing our sorrow and condemnation for this barbaric act of violence and terror. RAWA had already warned that the United States should not support the most treacherous, most criminal, most anti-democracy and anti-women Islamic fundamentalist parties because after both the Jehadi and the Taliban have committed every possible type of heinous crimes against our people, they would feel no shame in committing such crimes against the American people whom they consider 'infidel'. In order to gain and maintain their power, these barbaric criminals are ready to turn easily to any criminal force.

But unfortunately we must say that it was the government of the United States who supported Pakistani dictator Gen. Zia-ul Haq in creating thousands of religious schools from which the germs of Taliban emerged. In the similar way, as is clear to all, Osama Bin Laden has been the blue-eyed boy of CIA. But what is more painful is that American politicians have not drawn a lesson from their pro-fundamentalist policies in our country and are still supporting this or that fundamentalist band or leader. In our opinion any kind of support to the fundamentalist Taliban and Jehadies is actually trampling democratic, women's rights and human rights values.

If it is established that the suspects of the terrorist attacks are outside the US, our constant claim that fundamentalist terrorists would devour their creators, is proved once more.

The US government should consider the root cause of this terrible event, which has not been the first and will not be the last one too. The US should stop supporting Afghan terrorists and their supporters once and for all.

Now that the Taliban and Osama are the prime suspects by the US officials after the criminal attacks, will the US subject Afghanistan to a military attack similar to the one in 1998 and kill thousands of innocent Afghans for the crimes committed by the Taliban and Osama? Does the US think that through such attacks, with thousands of deprived, poor and innocent people of Afghanistan as its victims, will be able to wipe out the root-cause of terrorism, or will it spread terrorism even to a larger scale?

From our point of view a vast and indiscriminate military attacks on a country that has been facing permanent disasters for more than two decades will not be a matter of pride. We don't think such an attack would be the expression of the will of the American people.

The US government and people should know that there is a vast difference between the poor and devastated people of Afghanistan and the terrorist Jehadi and Taliban criminals.

While we once again announce our solidarity and deep sorrow with the people of the US, we also believe that attacking Afghanistan and killing its most ruined and destitute people will not in any way decrease the grief of the American people. We sincerely hope that the great American people could DIFFERENTIATE between the people of Afghanistan and a handful of fundamentalist terrorists. Our hearts go out to the people of the US.

Down with terrorism!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:30:22 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
Interesting but no surprise you liked it and no surprise I don't. Betcha Nigel and Dermot don't like it and John T either, and betcha Scott T, PatC and PatD do like it. Salaam won't like it but for vastly different reasons than any of the others. Sir Dave will remain ever-aloof citing some good points as well as weak. And most of the women will think we all have our heads stuck so far up our ass, it isn't even funny.

Even less surprising is that no one reading that article will budge an inch on their positions, nor be convinced of anything they aren't already. But then, I guess the real question is 'Will the events of Sept. 11 do anything to change what Fulford perceives as the habit of banality and euphemism?'

More likely, it will make those who already think like Fulford, more convinced they're right in believing that anti-racism is worse than the maladay it attempts to correct. And those who are anti-racist to feel the beginning of this century (not the 90's) is like the McCarthyism of the 50's. Until the terrorism situation is resolved or forgotten. Or those evil kids in the Muslim world grow up and decide they want BMW's more than religion.

And of course, the people like Sir Dave will refuse to be tarred by any brush, and be neither 'anti-euphemistic' or 'anti-racist'.

And naturally, I'll still be as curious about what makes some people think like Fulford and some people think like the people he criticizes.

I think some of Fulford's cynicism about anti-racism is true. It creates a world with it's own set of problems. Society imposes that, it seems, whichever way the pendulum is resting for the moment; it isn't peculiar to anti-racism or McCarthysm. But there's no way the constrictions of anti-racism or political correctness are worse than what it tries to correct. But then, I guess one sees that according to where they're sitting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 09:06:21 (EDT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
I don't know. Rick. Even though you didn't mention me (I'm deeply crushed, I'll have you know) I find myself less sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, and not just because of the events of September 11th. There just seems to be a pattern of irrationality in these fundamentalists that can't be breached. I also feel the same way about the sanctions. If Saddam Hussein wasn't in power, there'd be no need for sanctions, and what food and medical supplies we do deliver to help that nation, he sells on the black market. Yeah, we're the bad guys. If you ask me, all this talk about America's foreign policy in the Mideast is just bullshit bleeding heart liberalism trying to find a rational explanation for why these people hate us. I mean, we MUST have done SOMETHING. Right? It couldn't be that these people are just a bunch of religous fanatics who hate us simply because we're not Muslim, could it? Naw, that's CRAZY.

...The Qur'an tells us: 'not to make friendship with Jews and
Christians' (5:51), 'kill the disbelievers wherever we find them'
(2:191), 'murder them and treat them harshly' (9:123), 'fight and slay he Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem' (9:5). The Qur'an demands that we fight the
unbelievers, and promises 'If there are twenty amongst you, you will
vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of
them' (8:65).

Perfectly rational. But then, the Jews and Christians must have done something to deserve it. Right? Sure, nobody can be this crazy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:24:40 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
Sorry for not mentioning you, Jerry. I named people not to distinguish importance but to illustrate how Fulford's article was appealing for issues already settled in one's mind. To your credit, I didn't have a feel for how that article would have sat with you.

I agree with you that the basis of Islam isn't rational and that anti-American sentiment isn't based simply on misguided American actions in the Middle-East.

But Muslim radicals aren't attacking Sweden or Australia, because they pose no threat. Muslim radicals want to spread Islam with all its irrationality but so do Christian fundamentalists want to spread Christianity.

Muslim radicals want to attack America because we're in their face. Whether we 'should' be in their face is an issue worth determining. What being 'in their face' implies to the Muslim radicals is what it represents in terms of their interpretation of the Koran. No question they're crazy to believe any of that stuff, but no crazier than John Ashcroft is to believe what he believes.

I think it's valid to wonder and examine if this conflict can be avoided. If it can't, and couldn't have been, and it was inevitable from the start, then that should be established.

It doesn't take anything away from how irrational Muslim extremism is, to examine the policies of the U.S.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:08:54 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
seeing that you mentioned my name, my macho instincts says I have to say something.

Don't know what to say. I don't know who this character is or what his beaf. Sounds to me like a professional paper shuffler with a good job living in a nice neighborhood where people don't know the name of their neighbor and only talk to each other through lawyers.

Am not sure if his assumptions have any validity as he goes back and forth from being a Canadian to a supporter of the US then to other things.

I would have thought that maybe talking about the 250 million Dalits is more appropriate. Or maybe he sheds a light why Israil and the US walked out of the conference.

Nice to see that he quotes selectively.

I've allways tried to find an answer as to why does Israil take offence to being critisied. They started the mess in the mid-east. Anyone that says anything against them is immediatly labeled as anti this or anti that. I think it's time they take their dummy out of their mouth and say something meaningfull.

Oh shit, I forgot, Israil is the only beacon in a land where darkness lives. I thought Sharon described Bush as Hitler few days ago. I did not see any sanctions. But enough of this, am uncouth.

Anyway, I prefer to say 'fuck you' insted of having to pussy footing like this fellow.

Well, as they say, if it's not American then it's not important.

So how do you say 'fuck you' in a nice way?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:31:28 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Adventures of Herman Neuter & Happiness Stan.
Message:
I was sort of mystified by most of the Fulford article, as though I agreed with the tone but couldn't follow the analysis. I agree that the problem is some sort of knee-jerk anti-Americanism, defined simply as the willingness to believe almost anything evil of the US and the unwillingness to believe anything good. I had figured that this attitude had somehow sprung from the Civil Rights movement which sort of found itself without a mission after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. It is fed now by books like *Savage Inequalities* which is a poorly researched attempt to claim that we're right back in the same pot where Myrdal found us 40 years ago. But I'm not quite willing to conclude that this attitude is the problem, or that it adequately explains how we got to the point where such a large proportion of Americans have become so anti-American. I think it's part of the picture, but have a hunch it's not at the bottom of things.

I was in the peace movement of the early '80s, which opposed nuclear arms buildup, the cruise missile and such. I have to confess that I simply never dealt with the critical moral dilemma at the heart of the cold war and the arms race. The dilemma was that we were doing things that were distressing, but that the consequences of not doing those things might have been world totalitarianism. I just never came to grips with the depth of that evil, so I never even engaged in balancing the dilemma. I 'presumed' that Russians would respond to good intentions with a behavior that would make me smile, because as for as I could see everybody wanted to make me smile. I have the impression that today's peace movement is much the same. It's a sort of wishful thinking, or the conviction that if we 'think right' about the problem it will go away. It is, again, an odd version of magical thinking... and not quite grown up.

I think the ideology of anti-racism grew out of the same sense of unease that I have now, at this moment. It's the lurking suspicion that there's something really warped about the human spirit, and that if we can just put our finger on it we'll be able to 'nip it in the bud.' It may be that racism is, itself, motivated by that same dis-ease.

There was a famous Classical Liberal philosopher from Oxford named John Gray who underwent a kind of psychological and philosophical transformation when the fatwa on Salmon Rushdie was issued. (This is not the same John Gray who wrote the book about Venus and Mars.) Gray began to worry a great deal about whether liberalism would be able to evoke the same sort of passion as Islam or other systems of belief loaded up by a conviction that they had a monopoly on virtue. He figured Rushdie and his supporters would turn out to be moral weaklings and that liberalism would never find it's roots in the human soul. Now I see folks like (well, the usual suspects on the forum that I won't name) who only think they know what liberalism is, and I can see the concerns that turned Gray into a 'communitarian' (as the only philosophical contender available to him). He was grasping at something that he thought might have more substance than liberalism... that might be more 'human' and therefore more 'essential,' and able to weather the storm. However it's important to recognize that Rushdie, through extraordinary sacrifice and perseverance and the courageous support of others, prevailed. Liberalism was not as weak as Gray supposed. Indeed, it turned out to be stronger than a mere belief in moral and spiritual superiority. It had muscle and bone and a will to fight, and in the end had some sort of grasp, however tenuous, on objectivity.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:54:24 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Adventures of Herman Neuter & Happiness Stan.
Message:
I'm willing to believe that almost anyone can become evil, if only for a moment. I don't think much about the stability of 'human nature' (if that's the right phrase). I especially suspect people or groups when they've demonstrated they're capable of acting corruptly (like most governments). And I tend to become most suspicious when there's power/money involved (people/groups who have tons of it, or demonstrate they want it for it's own sake).

I think less about peace than justice or fairness. I'm not against violence in all cases, but most.

You mentioned in your post that there's a large proportion of Americans who have become anti-American, but I understood from your previous posts that you thought it was uncommon. Although I'm against many things America has done, I wouldn't label myself anti-American. And I don't see many people currently voicing views against America. I do see gobs of flags on cars and houses.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:28:33 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: The locus of responsible dissensus.
Message:
I'm willing to believe that almost anyone can become evil, if only for a moment. I don't think much about the stability of 'human nature' (if that's the right phrase). I especially suspect people or groups when they've demonstrated they're capable of acting corruptly (like most governments). And I tend to become most suspicious when there's power/money involved (people/groups who have tons of it, or demonstrate they want it for it's own sake).

So, you have the same unease, or shall we call it dis-ease, about human nature. Fine, but that isn't enough because having a basic caution doesn't give you the ability to balance your convictions (about justice and fairness for instance) against the real dangers. How do you assess a danger when it can come from your friends as easily as your enemies? The consequence is something Jerrold Post describes as 'political paranoia.' My basic rule of thumb is that nothing is equal to anything else... that every variable on the right side of the equation has a unique coefficient gauging its affect on the left side of the equation... and obtaining the most realistic balance (or estimate of the coefficient in an abstract sense) is the only way to have any chance of solving the problem. To put it succinctly, you have to know as much as possible, and what you don't know you have to find out.

I don't think any of the Americans who I'd call anti-American would see themselves as 'anti-American.' I think they're equation runs something like: 'I'm a good person. Americans are good people. I'm a good American.' And that gets expressed in some form equivalent to: 'We need to allow all opinions to be expressed freely, and free expression is as American as apple pie. I'm therefore as American as anyone.' There's nothing wrong with this aspect of Americanism. The problem is that they have a very difficult time expressing the other side... of balancing their convictions against the impending evil. They never actually come to grips with the dilemma. I call them anti-American because they only have a good grip on that *aspect* of Americanism that's convenient for them, and this enables them to avoid the sort of real dilemma that might arise if the threat were more immediate. That's why I feel that you have to 'earn' the right to dissent during a national crisis... that it's not a right that should be extended to everyone... because it's a vital function and should be performed by balanced, rigorous and mature people. To put a very practical tone on it, I came to feel during the 80s peace movement that a true peace advocate should not use drugs of any kind. I found that 95% of those involved were at least occasional drug users, which I felt was appalling. That's not the sole requirement, but it seemed so obvious to me at the time that I had to mention it.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:30:04 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: another question...
Message:
Why shouldn't peace advocates occasionally use drugs? What about war advocates? Should they also abstain? How about a few drinks occasionally? What's the difference between a congressman having a few drinks occasionally and a peace advocate smoking a joint now and then? I mean other than it's less likely you'll crash your car or smack your wife while on pot.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:37:34 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: another question...
Message:
Apparently the idea of responsibility is just plain anathema, huh? Now, why doesn't *that* surprise me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 10:26:35 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Where to start
Message:
So say we sorted out all these problems, say hopefully this coalition works, then what?

We're left with a planet that is disintegrating from global warming, and NOBODY is addressing the issue.
Even the Kyoto agreement would have been no more than 15-20% of the reductions required, and that leaves out our only solution of poverty health issues in the 'third world' to be through continued economic expansion and increasded speed of global warming. China, India, Brazil, Indonesia are all gearing up for massive economic expansions.

So what do we do, bury our heads in the sand and hope it goes away just so we can hang onto our comfortable cozy lifestyles.

On another topic I owe you an apology, I've been carrying this info about global warming for over ten years now, and get a bit despairy at times, valueing life etc, and for some reason the wtc attack just exacerbated that despair, so I couldn't see any hope of a coalition happening.
Thankfully there is some hope on that front, but re global warming I see just nothing happening. Even in the anti-globalization arena there isavoidance of the issue and loads of magical thinking.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:50:12 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re: Where to start
Message:
Suggest you check out Herman Daly. He used to work for the World Bank, and advocated an accounting method that would penalize pollution. Wrote quite a bit about a 'steady state' economy. He's not very popular with policy people because he pushes the envelope, and they're still thinking in terms of GDP. I think he should be appointed the head of a new 'Board of Economic Warfare.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:04:00 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: The locus of responsible dissensus.
Message:
When a danger comes from your friends you're pretty much screwed. Having the knowledge it's possible makes you not think of them as your friends, giving a little edge to assess the danger.

Using the same vernacular in your post depicting how anti-Americans think of themselves as good Americans, how would you depict them if they truly were good Americans?

And when you say people should have to earn the right to dissent, what do mean by dissent? Would thinking dissenting thoughts alone in the bathroom qualify? How about muttering those thoughts aloud? What if Aunt Betsy heard you in the hallway?

What about speaking your dissenting mind at the dinner table? Or carrying a picket sign at a shopping mall?

And how would one earn the right to dissent? Those who got out of WTC by the skin of their teeth were in immediate danger. Did they earn the right to dissent? What about someone on the west coast who feels in real danger?

Who's going to decide who is balanced, rigorous and responsible, and who's going to decide what it is? How does this differ from how this is now?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:32:56 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: The locus of responsible dissensus.
Message:
When a danger comes from your friends you're pretty much screwed. Having the knowledge it's possible makes you not think of them as your friends, giving a little edge to assess the danger.

Using the same vernacular in your post depicting how anti-Americans think of themselves as good Americans, how would you depict them if they truly were good Americans?

Look, you guys asked be to define anti-Americanism and now your asking me to define a 'good' American? That isn't relevant to the debate. Pat Moynihan is a 'good American' in addition to being a 'good person' and a 'good Senator,' along with a lot of other admirable qualities. Not fair to hold everyone to that standard. I guess I'd hope that Americans know and understand the founding values, and honor them. But that's sort of a baseline.

And when you say people should have to earn the right to dissent, what do mean by dissent? Would thinking dissenting thoughts alone in the bathroom qualify? How about muttering those thoughts aloud? What if Aunt Betsy heard you in the hallway? What about speaking your dissenting mind at the dinner table? Or carrying a picket sign at a shopping mall?

I'm almost tempted to call you a nitwit, to bait me like that. It's pitiful. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Start by avoiding drugs. That lets out 90% of the current 'peace' movement. As for the 'thought control' issue, those that I refer to as 'anti-American' are a lot more likely to impose those kinds of restrictions, since the very definition of being 'good' in that realm requires that you have the right beliefs, and little else. Apart from that, you can live like a pig and god will smile on you. Probably why people tolerated Ira Einhorn for so long.

But I'm chiefly talking about dissent that interferes with the US ability for to fight a war for it's survival, and to preserve civilization. Those that aren't aware of or honor the founding values naturally won't see anything worth preserving. Dissent can be a vital function, but it appears to be just *too much* to ask that dissenters embody something beyond their slogans with you folks. You start labeling people McCarthyites any time you're asked to pick up your socks.

And how would one earn the right to dissent? Those who got out of WTC by the skin of their teeth were in immediate danger. Did they earn the right to dissent? What about someone on the west coast who feels in real danger?

Who's going to decide who is balanced, rigorous and responsible, and who's going to decide what it is? How does this differ from how this is now?

Well, I don't know why I can't ask the peace movement itself to make that determination, unless they just don't have the capacity to recognize responsibility from irresponsibility (which it seems they may not).

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 20:30:03 (EDT)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Muslim kids and BMW's
Message:
40 miles north of where I live , Birmingham UK , there are a shitload of kids with beemers & an attitude of jihad to boot .

They slap down the bitches who don't cover their heads & they deal smack to pay for the BMW's. Their big hero is OBL but they're so fucking STUPID they don't understand that they're outnumbered by the native lowlifes who are just waiting for an excuse to ......

Thanks cq for those articles below : I shall print them out & pass them on to people who are in a position to influence the minds of (maybe)some of these people.

Hey Rick , don't put me in a fucking box.

All the best : Pat Dorrity

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 21:00:36 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: PatD
Subject: Re: Muslim kids and BMW's
Message:
Shit, BMW's and jihad and smack. Bad combination.

Box? Was I wrong? Did you mostly agree with Fulford's article? Did it change anything you already thought or believed?

Maybe I should have put you in Sir Dave's box... the box that is no box.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:14:21 (EDT)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Wait and pray Rick
Message:
& if you don't want to pray , then wait.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:01:50 (EDT)
From: Tim G
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
An interesting mixture of realism and sinister or smug intent.
Yes, it is vital to see the world and people accurately. Yes, there is evil and there are values that are more life-enhancing than others..e.g. give me American capitalism any day as opposed to Taliban fascism. Yes, we should stand up for the freedom to criticise and debate. BUT to maintain this position it is vital to continue to act ethically or we end up joining the totalitarians. The oppressed become the oppressors, sounds familiar eh?
At this moment the American nation is the oppressed.

To my way of looking it seems imperative to launch a fierce scrutiny of religion and especially of fundamentalist positions. I doubt very strongly the accepted idea of religous tolerance. Rather, I think there is a case for religous intolerance to the extent that the basis of 'revealed' religions should be held up to question and the whole notion of brain washing/conditioning/religous education should be challenged.

I detect a hint of vitriol in both Jim's postings and the aformentioned article for those that wish to maintain an ethical and peace loving approach. Calling us peace queers again? Mc Carthyism revisited.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:12:19 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: Re: From Delusions to Destruction (OT)
Message:
Tim:

BUT to maintain this position it is vital to continue to act ethically or we end up joining the totalitarians. The oppressed become the oppressors, sounds familiar eh?

Why is it necessary for the purity of intent to be the only defense against becoming completely evil? I mean, I definitely understand why you believe that, but is it true? Do you think FDR was always ethically beyond reproach? Churchill?

At this moment the American nation is the oppressed.

Really? I would not have called us oppressed. I don't feel oppressed, at all. I feel unjustly attacked.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:55:57 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: All
Subject: A call for Caution and Prudence
Message:
A Call for Caution and Prudence
A Personal Statement

by Paul Kurtz
Editor-in-Chief, Free Inquiry magazine
Professor Emeritus of Philosophy,
State University of New York at Buffalo

I wish to speak personally and not on behalf of the Council for Secular Humanism.

The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York on September 11th has shocked the
civilized world and has rightly brought forth expressions of regret and condemnation. What has
stunned everyone is the apparent willingness of nineteen terrorists to commit suicide by slamming
their aircraft into targets and their absolute insensitivity to the deaths of thousands of innocent
people. Some of the terrorists apparently are men in their late twenties and thirties who have taken
months or years to train for their deadly mission. A soldier sent into combat to inflict damage on his
enemies usually has some hope of coming out of the battle alive; but not in these cases, where
death was inevitable. How could they have acted in this way? What were their motives?

We know that the suicide bombers in Israel and Palestine who enter into crowds of innocent
people, including women and children, often yell 'Allahu akbar!' (God is great!) as they blow
themselves to kingdom come. In many cases families of the bombers when interviewed applaud
their sons or brothers, for their 'heroic deeds.' In one case, the father even hoped that his second
son would make the same sacrifice.

Obviously, the motives are religious. And they are based upon a deep faith that they are doing the
work of Allah and will be rewarded in heaven after death. According to the story, such a hero who
dies for Islam will have seventy or seventy-two virgins throughout eternity. All enemies of
Islam—as perceived by them—are considered evil and need to be destroyed. Their victims are
dehumanized. Here the jihad is considered righteous and just because it is done in the name of
God.

Contrast this with the faith of Christians and Jews who pray to God, implying that he is on their
side. They often claim that any retribution they may take is in the name of their God and religion.

As the United States in grief and fear responds to these terrorists, one should ponder the opposing
religious premises in this conflict. Are we about to enter a Holy War—in the name of God—as
viewed differently by the contending factions? Clearly the acts of the Islamic terrorists are
unconscionable. But what about self-righteous retribution done with the conviction that God 'is on
our side'? If He is, why did He allow more than 6,000 innocent people to die in the World Trade
Towers; and why will he allow the death of tens of thousands of innocent victims who will surely
die in retaliatory military strikes?

Unfortunately, the basic religious premises of this conflagration are not open to discussion. There is
all too little inquiry into the foundations of religious beliefs. It is considered in bad taste or
intolerable to do so. The age-old jihad is based in the Koran and Hadith (traditions), as the
Judćo-Christian response to it is often rooted in the Bible. These documents were spawned in
nomadic and rural societies in the infancy of the race and are not appropriate to the modern world.
We should seek to find common ground with other human beings -- by opening up discussion of
the grounds of revelation in the Old and New Testaments and the Koran -- and by refusing to
allow these ancient documents to dictate our policies.

The Koran is a good case in point, because if one studies the history of Islam, one finds that it
expanded its hegemony by the use of the sword. Mohammed himself raised an army of ten
thousand men and destroyed his enemies and he advanced Islam by ruthless methods. The jihad
has been practiced throughout history by the militant believers in Allah and Muhammad—by North
African Moors, in Spain, France, and the Mediterranean, by the Ottoman Empire of Turkey in the
Middle East and Eastern Europe, and by the Mongol invasions of Europe. The Crusades, seeking
to defend the Christian faith in the 11th and 12th centuries, were led by militant Christians who
attacked Islamic lands and seized the 'Holy Land' from Muslims, only to have it retaken. The Holy
Inquisition sought to expel Jews and Muslims from the Iberian peninsula in the 15th century. The
jihad was halted two centuries ago when the European colonial powers, especially France and
Great Britain, conquered many Islamic countries in North Africa and the Middle East. It was
resumed again after the Second World War when these countries were liberated and established
their own feudal theocracies. And it has continued to grow as the fundamentalists gain ground and
terrorize governments and impede any measures against them.

The battle for Palestine in part is between Jews who believe the Old Testament and Muslims who
revere the Koran. Today significant peace-loving and democratic Moslem minorities exist in all the
countries of the West—especially the United States, Germany, France, England. But what is not
discussed and needs to be discussed, urgently and critically, are the foundations of the claims for
the jihad. One can argue that Islam will continue, of course, as the creed of a great civilization. But
there is a difference between a liberal reading of the Koran with an emphasis on symbolic
pronouncements, and the literal reading of the Koran and the Hadith which justifies jihad. The
literal tradition condemns to death those who seek to break away from Islam; those who
blaspheme it are considered foes. The jihad needs to be interpreted in light of the fact that these
revelations have doubtful foundations. We need Koranic criticism and we need to discuss the
Koran carefully, without any condemnation in doing so. If the Koran and Hadith are used to
repress others or to unleash a holy war, then we need a clear discussion of how and why and to
show the fragmentary and questionable grounds of this faith which so inspires many Muslims to die
in the name of Allah. A similar kind of free inquiry should apply to the Bible.

Free Inquiry magazine was founded in 1980 in response to the emergence of the Religious Right
and their use of the Bible to justify repression in the United States and to bridge the separation of
church and state. If the Koran and Bible are used to justify wars of aggression or retaliation, then
they have to be read critically. Alas, they are still not in most parts of the world.

Fundamentalist Muslims hate the modern Western world, its devotion to democracy, civil liberties,
moral freedom, reason, and science. In its place they would establish a medieval and barbaric
patriarchy, which suppresses women and freedom of inquiry. Modern Muslims realize that Islamic
culture will not advance until it enters into the modern world and accepts democracy, secularism,
and rational scientific inquiry. They are intimidated by fundamentalist mobs.

In the current situation we advocate caution and prudence; and we hope that the hysteria and
frenzy on all sides will abate. Those who commit heinous crimes of terror must be brought to the
bar of justice. But the terrorists are an international problem, not the exclusive problem of the
United States, and we need an international convention of all civilized nations of the world --
Moslem and Western, Christian, Jewish, and secularist—as President Mubarak of Egypt has
advised. Unilateral actions by the United States is imprudent. We need all civilized nations of our
planetary community to act in concert against terrorism.

We realize that the American people are seeking justice; and they wish to punish those who would
commit such foul deeds. President Bush has called for an all-out war against terrorism, but had
unfortunately used the term crusade to describe that war. He is to be commended for recognizing
the threat and asking Americans and others in the world to deal with it. However, I would urge a
reflective response. Any action that we take should be in concert with all our allies in the
democratic world and also with the support of moderate Muslim nations. The United Nations
should be involved and an international peace-keeping force needs to be created. All terrorists
should be brought to the World Court in the Hague for a trial.

A cloud of fear overlays America. People are afraid to travel. There is apprehension of spies in our
midst. And there are calls for a limitation of our civil liberties. There are fears that a police state will
in time result. We should not turn against our Muslim neighbors, the vast majority of whom are not
committed to holy jihad. What is essential is that although we need to defend ourselves, clearly, we
also need to protect our cherished civil liberties and our constitutional guarantees and guard against
their erosion and abrogation. The United States has been in existence for over two centuries, and
our Constitution has safeguarded this great democracy. We should not, in a fit of fear and anger,
be willing to suppress our precious liberties.

A Call for Caution and Prudence

* We need free inquiry of the religious premises of the growing conflagration.

* We need rational debate of the questionable premises of a 'holy war' or jihad.

* We need a rational debate of the biblical call for retribution.

* We call upon the United States not to act unilaterally and to petition the United Nations to
establish a peace-keeping force.

* All terrorists when apprehended should be brought to the World Court at the Hague and put on
trial.

* The basic constitutional civil liberties of America should not be abrogated.

The magnitude of the terrorist attack on America has forced Muslims to take a critical look at
themselves. Why have we repeatedly turned a blind eye to the evil within our societies? Why have
we allowed the sacred terms of Islam, such as fatwa and jihad, to be hijacked by obscurantist,
fanatic extremists?

Muslims are quick to note the double standards of America - its support for despotic regimes, its
partiality towards Israel, and the covert operations that have undermined democratic movements in
the Muslim world. But we seldom question our own double standards. For example, Muslims are
proud that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the West.

Evangelical Muslims, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, happily spread their constricted
interpretations of Islam. But Christian missionaries in Muslim countries are another matter. They
have to be banned or imprisoned. Those who burn effigies of President Bush will be first in the
queue for an American visa.

The psychotic young men, members of such extremist organisations as Al-Muhajiroun and
'Supporters of Sharia', shouting fascist pbscenities outside the Pakistan Embassy, are enjoying the
fruits of Western freedom of expression. Their declared aim is to establish 'Islamic states'. But in
any self-proclaimed Islamic state, they would be ruthlessly silenced.

This is not the first time concerned Muslims have raised such questions. But we have been forced
to ignore them for two main reasons. In a world where it is always open season for prejudice and
discrimination on Muslims and Islam, our main task has seemed to be to defend Islam. The other
reason concerns Ummah, the global Muslim community. We have to highlight, the argument goes,
the despair and suffering of the Muslim people - their poverty and plight as refugees and the horror
of war-torn societies.

So, all good and concerned Muslims are implicated in the unchecked rise of fanaticism in Muslim
societies. We have given free reign to fascism within our midst, and failed to denounce fanatics
who distort the most sacred concepts of our faith. We have been silent as they proclaim
themselves martyrs, mangling beyond recognition the most sacred meaning of what it is to be a
Muslim.

But the events of 11 September have freed us from any further obligation to this misapplied
conscience. The insistence by the Muslim Council of Britain that the Islamic cause is best served
by the Taliban handing over Osama bin Laden, is indicative of this shift. The devotion with which
so many Muslims, young and old, in Europe and America, are organising meetings and
conferences to discuss how to unleash the best intentions, the essential values of Islam, from the
rhetoric of jihad, hatred and insularity, is another.

But we have to go further. Muslims are in the best position to take the lead in the common cause
against terrorism. The terrorists are among us, the Muslim communities of the world. They are part
of our body politic. And it is our duty to stand up against them. We must also reclaim a more
balanced view of Islamic terms like fatwa. A fatwa is simply a legal opinion based on religious
reasoning. It is the opinion of one individual and is binding on only the person who gives it. But,
since the Rushdie affair, it has come to be associated in the West solely with a death sentence.
Now that Islam has become beset with the fatwa culture, it becomes necessary for moderate
voices to issue their own fatwas.

So, let me take the first step. To Muslims everywhere I issue this fatwa: any Muslim involved in the
planning, financing, training, recruiting, support or harbouring of those who commit acts of
indiscriminate violence against persons or the apparatus or infrastructure of states is guilty of terror
and no part of the Ummah. It is the duty of every Muslim to spare no effort in hunting down,
apprehending and bringing such criminals to justice.

If you see something reprehensible, said the Prophet Muhammad then change it with your hand; if
you are not capable of that then use your tongue (speak out against it); and if you are not capable
of that then detest it in your heart. The silent Muslim majority must now become vocal. The rest of
the world could help by adopting a more balanced tone. The rhetoric that paints America as a
personification of innocence and goodness, a god-like power that can do no wrong, not only
undermines the new shift but threatens to foreclose all our futures.

From http://www.secularislam.org/wtc2.htm#A Call for Caution and Prudence

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 07:26:17 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: A call for Caution and Prudence - reformatted
Message:
Apologies for the illegibility of the article in the post above (couldn't access the 'edit message' facility for some reason). (Scott and others - I intend to reply to the points you raised when time permits - probably after 6pm GMT)

Here's the piece:

A Call for Caution and Prudence

A Personal Statement

by Paul Kurtz
Editor-in-Chief, Free Inquiry magazine
Professor Emeritus of Philosophy,
State University of New York at Buffalo

I wish to speak personally and not on behalf of the Council for
Secular Humanism.

The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York on
September 11th has shocked the civilized world and has rightly
brought forth expressions of regret and condemnation. What has
stunned everyone is the apparent willingness of nineteen
terrorists to commit suicide by slamming their aircraft into targets
and their absolute insensitivity to the deaths of thousands of
innocent people. Some of the terrorists apparently are men in
their late twenties and thirties who have taken months or years to
train for their deadly mission. A soldier sent into combat to inflict
damage on his enemies usually has some hope of coming out of
the battle alive; but not in these cases, where death was
inevitable. How could they have acted in this way? What were
their motives?

We know that the suicide bombers in Israel and Palestine who
enter into crowds of innocent people, including women and
children, often yell 'Allahu akbar!' (God is great!) as they blow
themselves to kingdom come. In many cases families of the
bombers when interviewed applaud their sons or brothers, for
their 'heroic deeds.' In one case, the father even hoped that his
second son would make the same sacrifice.

Obviously, the motives are religious. And they are based upon a
deep faith that they are doing the work of Allah and will be
rewarded in heaven after death. According to the story, such a
hero who dies for Islam will have seventy or seventy-two virgins
throughout eternity. All enemies of Islam-as perceived by
them-are considered evil and need to be destroyed. Their
victims are dehumanized. Here the jihad is considered righteous
and just because it is done in the name of God.

Contrast this with the faith of Christians and Jews who pray to
God, implying that he is on their side. They often claim that any
retribution they may take is in the name of their God and religion.

As the United States in grief and fear responds to these
terrorists, one should ponder the opposing religious premises in
this conflict. Are we about to enter a Holy War-in the name of
God-as viewed differently by the contending factions? Clearly
the acts of the Islamic terrorists are unconscionable. But what
about self-righteous retribution done with the conviction that
God 'is on our side'? If He is, why did He allow more than
6,000 innocent people to die in the World Trade Towers; and
why will he allow the death of tens of thousands of innocent
victims who will surely die in retaliatory military strikes?

Unfortunately, the basic religious premises of this conflagration
are not open to discussion. There is all too little inquiry into the
foundations of religious beliefs. It is considered in bad taste or
intolerable to do so. The age-old jihad is based in the Koran and
Hadith (traditions), as the Judćo-Christian response to it is often
rooted in the Bible. These documents were spawned in nomadic
and rural societies in the infancy of the race and are not
appropriate to the modern world. We should seek to find
common ground with other human beings -- by opening up
discussion of the grounds of revelation in the Old and New
Testaments and the Koran -- and by refusing to allow these
ancient documents to dictate our policies.

The Koran is a good case in point, because if one studies the
history of Islam, one finds that it expanded its hegemony by the
use of the sword. Mohammed himself raised an army of ten
thousand men and destroyed his enemies and he advanced Islam
by ruthless methods. The jihad has been practiced throughout
history by the militant believers in Allah and Muhammad-by
North African Moors, in Spain, France, and the Mediterranean,
by the Ottoman Empire of Turkey in the Middle East and
Eastern Europe, and by the Mongol invasions of Europe. The
Crusades, seeking to defend the Christian faith in the 11th and
12th centuries, were led by militant Christians who attacked
Islamic lands and seized the 'Holy Land' from Muslims, only to
have it retaken. The Holy Inquisition sought to expel Jews and
Muslims from the Iberian peninsula in the 15th century. The jihad
was halted two centuries ago when the European colonial
powers, especially France and Great Britain, conquered many
Islamic countries in North Africa and the Middle East. It was
resumed again after the Second World War when these
countries were liberated and established their own feudal
theocracies. And it has continued to grow as the fundamentalists
gain ground and terrorize governments and impede any
measures against them.

The battle for Palestine in part is between Jews who believe the
Old Testament and Muslims who revere the Koran. Today
significant peace-loving and democratic Moslem minorities exist
in all the countries of the West-especially the United States,
Germany, France, England. But what is not discussed and needs
to be discussed, urgently and critically, are the foundations of the
claims for the jihad. One can argue that Islam will continue, of
course, as the creed of a great civilization. But there is a
difference between a liberal reading of the Koran with an
emphasis on symbolic pronouncements, and the literal reading of
the Koran and the Hadith which justifies jihad. The literal
tradition condemns to death those who seek to break away from
Islam; those who blaspheme it are considered foes. The jihad
needs to be interpreted in light of the fact that these revelations
have doubtful foundations. We need Koranic criticism and we
need to discuss the Koran carefully, without any condemnation
in doing so. If the Koran and Hadith are used to repress others
or to unleash a holy war, then we need a clear discussion of how
and why and to show the fragmentary and questionable grounds
of this faith which so inspires many Muslims to die in the name of
Allah. A similar kind of free inquiry should apply to the Bible.

Free Inquiry magazine was founded in 1980 in response to the
emergence of the Religious Right and their use of the Bible to
justify repression in the United States and to bridge the
separation of church and state. If the Koran and Bible are used
to justify wars of aggression or retaliation, then they have to be
read critically. Alas, they are still not in most parts of the world.

Fundamentalist Muslims hate the modern Western world, its
devotion to democracy, civil liberties, moral freedom, reason,
and science. In its place they would establish a medieval and
barbaric patriarchy, which suppresses women and freedom of
inquiry. Modern Muslims realize that Islamic culture will not
advance until it enters into the modern world and accepts
democracy, secularism, and rational scientific inquiry. They are
intimidated by fundamentalist mobs.

In the current situation we advocate caution and prudence; and
we hope that the hysteria and frenzy on all sides will abate.
Those who commit heinous crimes of terror must be brought to
the bar of justice. But the terrorists are an international problem,
not the exclusive problem of the United States, and we need an
international convention of all civilized nations of the world --
Moslem and Western, Christian, Jewish, and secularist-as
President Mubarak of Egypt has advised. Unilateral actions by
the United States is imprudent. We need all civilized nations of
our planetary community to act in concert against terrorism.

We realize that the American people are seeking justice; and
they wish to punish those who would commit such foul deeds.
President Bush has called for an all-out war against terrorism,
but had unfortunately used the term crusade to describe that
war. He is to be commended for recognizing the threat and
asking Americans and others in the world to deal with it.
However, I would urge a reflective response. Any action that we
take should be in concert with all our allies in the democratic
world and also with the support of moderate Muslim nations.
The United Nations should be involved and an international
peace-keeping force needs to be created. All terrorists should
be brought to the World Court in the Hague for a trial.

A cloud of fear overlays America. People are afraid to travel.
There is apprehension of spies in our midst. And there are calls
for a limitation of our civil liberties. There are fears that a police
state will in time result. We should not turn against our Muslim
neighbors, the vast majority of whom are not committed to holy
jihad. What is essential is that although we need to defend
ourselves, clearly, we also need to protect our cherished civil
liberties and our constitutional guarantees and guard against their
erosion and abrogation. The United States has been in existence
for over two centuries, and our Constitution has safeguarded this
great democracy. We should not, in a fit of fear and anger, be
willing to suppress our precious liberties.

A Call for Caution and Prudence

* We need free inquiry of the religious premises of the growing
conflagration.

* We need rational debate of the questionable premises of a
'holy war' or jihad.

* We need a rational debate of the biblical call for retribution.

* We call upon the United States not to act unilaterally and to
petition the United Nations to establish a peace-keeping force.

* All terrorists when apprehended should be brought to the
World Court at the Hague and put on trial.

* The basic constitutional civil liberties of America should not be
abrogated.

From http://www.secularislam.org/wtc2.htm#A Call for Caution and Prudence

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 23:37:40 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Re: A call for Caution and Prudence
Message:
Are we about to enter a Holy War—in the name of God—as
viewed differently by the contending factions? Clearly the acts of the Islamic terrorists are
unconscionable. But what about self-righteous retribution done with the conviction that God 'is on
our side'?

I don't think this is shaping up to be a holy war. I don't know where he gets that idea, and he presents no evidence for it.

In the current situation we advocate caution and prudence; and we hope that the hysteria and
frenzy on all sides will abate.

What frenzy and hysteria?

I don't see any way that the 'criminal justice' model he outlines for dealing with terrorism can work. To take one very simple example, suppose someone known to be a terrorist is able to avoid conviction on some sort of technicality, or by playing off the national interests of one party against another? Do we just let them walk? We can afford this sort of rule when all that's involved is ordinary crime or murder, but do we have that luxury here? Then there's the matter of national sovereignty. Suppose Sudan hauls up George Bush, Jr. on charges of killing half a million babies in Iraq? Who makes the rules? Will the US surrender it's president, or even so much as a popular congressman or well-known banker?

I agree with what he says about the role of mainstream Islam.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 16:03:48 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: A call for Caution and Prudence
Message:
'Holy War' is an idea that, hopefully, Christianity seems to have grown out of, at last. Or should I say at least as far as the likes of the Crusades and Inquisition are concerned. Let's just hope that, in the light(?) of recent events, today's fundy Xtians aren't pushed so far as to consider the re-playing of such scenarios as a valid response.

Though, no doubt, there's some that would.

Of course, just because one side in this conflict (i.e. the coalition) isn't yet using religion in an attempt to add credence to its cause, doesn't make it any less of a 'jihad' in the eyes of your average pro-Bin Ladenite.

'They came out to fight Islam with the name of fighting terrorism ... I say these events have split the whole world into two camps: the camp of belief and the
Disbelief.'

'...those who live in America will never taste security and safety unless we feel security and safety in our land and in Palestine.'

Bin Laden.

Well, Bin Laden seems to have got the war he wanted. And the rest of the world the war they always dreaded.

There's no doubt that Bin Laden's using and abusing religion in the furtherance of his aims, just as countless others have done in centuries gone by. Does that make it a 'Holy War'. Personally, I don't want to believe in a God who is impotent in preventing war. What kind of heaven could 'He' live in?

And personally, I'm glad to see that Bush hasn't tried to use his 'born-again' Christian beliefs to tie church and state together in the face of a common adversary. At least he and his advisers can credit themselves with having got that part of it right. So far. I just hope he can continue to resist the temptation of using the word 'religion' in the same breath as he's recently used the words 'freedom', 'democracy' and 'good vs evil'. When religion enters the equation, you know we're in for BIG trouble.

But you, Scott, you don't see this as a 'holy war', even though Bush has unequivoqually called as war of 'good against evil'. Maybe you're right. Calling it 'evil against good' doesn't make it any holier. It's still about people, not gods. People with ideals, ideals they've been conditioned with. Ideals that they equate with goodness, with morality, with respect, with revenge, with God. A 'vengeful' God, that is.

You, Scott, don't even see any frenzy or hysteria. Well, OK, let's all keep calm and pretend we're not denying the underlying fears and bad dreams that this whole trip has triggered.

As the editorial of today's edition of the UK tabloid newspaper The Sun says (quoting Roosevelt) 'The only thing to fear is fear itself' - right? And if US stores have sold out of gas masks, hell - that's just a coincidence. Hysteria, frenzy, in other words FEAR - that's got nothing to do with it, has it?

If so, then one can only presume the people buying the gas masks are doing so out of logical preparedness for ... for what??? Is that idea itself not frightening?

And when we face fear in ourselves, and we've been told that we should fear our own fear - what kind of recipe for denial is that?

And when our 'last poor rag of babyhood' is gone, and we see the citizens of Afghanistan only as 'poor beasts, having only pain to lose', is it then that we'll declare that 'We must be protected against history
By the cool smell of petrol, and the metal
Of cars' walls, the accuracy of instruments'.

(last three quotes from Frederick Turner).

And would he describe himself as you do, Scott, as a political sociologist?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 00:04:48 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Turner and other things.
Message:
But you, Scott, you don't see this as a 'holy war', even though Bush has unequivoqually called as war of 'good against evil'. Maybe you're right. Calling it 'evil against good' doesn't make it any holier. It's still about people, not gods. People with ideals, ideals they've been conditioned with. Ideals that they equate with goodness, with morality, with respect, with revenge, with God. A 'vengeful' God, that is.

I believe it *is* a war of good vs. evil, or more precisely a war between the principles of a liberal society and those of an atavistic 'Umma.' In that sense it's virtually the same sort of conflict as WWII. It doesn't parallel WWII in other ways, of course.

If so, then one can only presume the people buying the gas masks are doing so out of logical preparedness for ... for what??? Is that idea itself not frightening?

I think this is an understandable desire to want to control something about the situation, although I don't know one single person who has bought a gas mask, or even wants one. I wouldn't necessarily consider this a 'rational' desire in the sense that it's a proper or effective response, though.

Glad to see you're reading Frederick Turner, but where is that quote from and what is the context? Another thing to be aware of is that there are *two* Frederick Turners. The sociologist isn't particularly bright. It's the pragmatist philosopher that's brilliant. I'm not saying he didn't write what you quoted, but his general thesis is that we are too steeped in rationalism, by default, because we have nothing other than that to help us make the right choices. He feels that we also ought to be guided by beauty. I find this a very hard sell to people in my profession, though I think he's right on. Bear in mind though that what he refers to as 'beauty' is rather intense. It's not some sort of 'feel good' experience.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 08:15:45 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: international sovereignty
Message:
then there's the matter of national sovereignty. Suppose Sudan hauls up George Bush, Jr. on charges of killing half a million babies in Iraq? Who makes the rules? Will the US surrender it's president, or even so much as a popular congressman or well-known banker?

Well, Serbia 'surrendered' its President to International Justice; and there's the case of Libya and the Lockerbie suspects; not to mention Pinochet's arrest. So why should not the U.S. have Mr Oliver North's conduct (to name just one case) examined by properly appointed International Jurists?

One would proceed by first obtaining an indictment and then obtaining arrest (by force if necessary) for the purpose of bringing the accused to trial, so the procedures and protocols of the International Court would be available to filter frivolous applications, if that is what bothers you.

But you are indeed right to identify American intransigence as an obstacle to bringing International Criminal Law to bear on the situation, and for just the reasons you sketch.

Sooner or later it will happen, if only because a state of anarchy between the nations of a technologically sophisticated world is untenable. Sabotage becomes ever easier, and the consequences ever more horrendous.

Truman supported the use of an International Court after WWII (instead of supporting Churchill's call to hunt down the Nazis and kill them on sight). Truman's reasoning then applies even more strongly now, even if it gives rise to some misgivings in some parts of the American security apparatus.

Get used to it, I say. National sovereignty should not be used as a cloak for terror.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:01:22 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Fine, but .......
Message:
Chris,

If you're gonna cut and paste something like this can you do it properly by fixing the text so it's readable?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:48:51 (EDT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Islam - does it really preach peace?
Message:
From the Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society:

'We deplore the use of the Holy Koran to justify violence against the innocent. Religion must be interpreted in terms of our common humanity'.

A Call to the Muslims of the World
from a Group of Freethinkers and
Humanists of Muslim Origins

A Call to the Muslims of the World from a Group of Freethinkers and
Humanists of Muslim Origins

Dear friends,

The tragic incidents of September 11 have shocked the world. It is
unthinkable that anyone could be so full of hate as to commit such
heinous acts and kill so many innocent people. We people of Muslim
origin are as much shaken as the rest of the world and yet we find
ourselves looked upon with suspicion and distrust by our neighbours and
fellow citizens. We want to cry out and tell the world that we are not
terrorists, and that those who perpetrate such despicable acts are
murderers and not part of us. But, in reality, because of our Muslim
origins we just cannot erase the 'stigma of Islamic Terrorism' from our
identity!

What most Muslims will say:

'Islam would never support the killing of innocent people. Allah of the
Holy Qur'an never advocated killings. This is all the work of a few
misguided individuals at the fringes of society. The real Islam is
sanctified from violence. We denounce all violence. Islam means peace.
Islam means tolerance.'

What knowledgeable Muslims should say:

That is what most Muslims think, but is it true? Does Islam really
preach peace, tolerance and non-violence? The Muslims who perpetrate
these crimes think differently. They believe that what they do is Jihad
(holy war). They say that killing unbelievers is mandatory for every
Muslim. They do not kill because they wish to break the laws of Islam
but because they think this is what true Muslims should do. Those who
blow-up their own bodies to kill more innocent people do so because
they think they will be rewarded in Paradise. They hope to be blessed
by Allah, eat celestial food, drink pure wine and enjoy the company of
divine consorts... But are they really extremists or are they
following what the holy book, the Qur'an tells them to do? What does
the Qur'an teach? Have we read the Qur'an? Do we know what kind of
teachings are there? Let us go through some of them and take a closer
look at what Allah says.

What the Qur'an Teaches Us:

...The Qur'an tells us: 'not to make friendship with Jews and
Christians' (5:51), 'kill the disbelievers wherever we find them'
(2:191), 'murder them and treat them harshly' (9:123), 'fight and slay
the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in
every stratagem' (9:5). The Qur'an demands that we fight the
unbelievers, and promises 'If there are twenty amongst you, you will
vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of
them' (8:65).

Allah and his messenger want us to fight the Christians and the Jews
'until they pay the Jizya [a penalty tax for the non-Muslims living
under Islamic rules] with willing submission, and feel themselves
subdued' (9:29). Allah and his messenger announce that it is
acceptable to go back on our promises (treaties) and obligations with
Pagans and make war on them whenever we find ourselves strong enough to
do so (9:3). Our God tells us to 'fight the unbelievers' and 'He will
punish them by our hands, cover them with shame and help us (to
victory) over them' (9:14).

The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and
relegates those who disbelieve in Islam to hell (5:10), calls them
najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), and orders its followers to
fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left
(2:193). It says that the 'non-believers will go to hell and will drink
boiling water' (14:17). It asks the Muslims to 'slay or crucify or cut
the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the
land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world
hereafter' (5:34). And tells us that 'for them (the unbelievers)
garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their
heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall
be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods'
(22:19-22) and that they not only will have 'disgrace in this life, but
on the Day of Judgment He shall make them taste the Penalty of burning
(Fire)' (22:9)... Our holy book asks us to be disobedient towards the
disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers
with great endeavour' (25:52) and be stern with them because they
belong to Hell (66:9). The holy Prophet prescribes fighting for us and
tells us that 'it is good for us even if we dislike it' (2:216). Then
he advises us to 'strike off the heads of the disbelievers'; and after
making a 'wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining
captives' (47:4).

Our God has promised to 'instill terror into the hearts of the
unbelievers' and has ordered us to 'smite above their necks and smite
all their finger-tips off them' (8:12). He also assures us that when we
kill in his name 'it is not us who slay them but Allah, in order that
He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself' (8:17).
He orders us 'to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies' (8:60).
He has made the Jihad mandatory and warns us that 'Unless we go forth,
(for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others
in our place' (9:39). Allah speaks to our Holy Prophet and says 'O
Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be
stern against them. Their abode is Hell - an evil refuge indeed'
(9:73). He promises us that in the fight for His cause whether we slay
or are slain we return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise
he will 'wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones'
(56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline
on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There we are promised to eat and
drink pleasantly for what we did (56:19). He also promises 'boys like
hidden pearls' (56:24) and 'youth never altering in age like scattered
pearls' (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you
see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited
sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. We will be admitted
to Paradise where we shall find 'goodly things, beautiful ones, pure
ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor
jinni' (56:67-71)....

As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and
their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found
disobedient (4:34). It advises to 'take a green branch and beat your
wife', because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44).
It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their
husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the
women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their
inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees
that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This
means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can
produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four
wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many
'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already
married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army
subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to
rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000
Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians
when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic.
This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women
that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they
believe a virgin will not go to Hell.

... Dear conscientious Muslims, please question yourselves. Isn't this compulsive following of a man
who lived 1400 years ago leading us to doom in a changing world? Do the followers of any other
religion follow one man in such an all-encompassing way? Who are we deceiving, them or
ourselves? Dear brothers and sisters, see how our Umma (people) has sunk into poverty and how
it lags behind the rest of the world. Isn't it because we are following a religion that is outdated and
impractical? In this crucial moment of history, when a great catastrophe has befallen us and a much
bigger one is lying ahead, should not we wake up from our 1400 years of slumber and see where
things have gone wrong?

Hatred has filled the air and the world is bracing itself for its doomsday. Should we not ask
ourselves whether we have contributed, wittingly or unwittingly, to this tragedy and whether we
can stop the great disaster from happening?

Unfortunately the answer to the first question is yes. Yes we have contributed to the rise of
fundamentalism by merely claiming Islam is a religion of peace, by simply being a Muslim and by
saying our shahada (testimony that Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his messenger). By our
shahada we have recognized Muhammad as a true messenger of God and his book as the words
of God. But as you saw above those words are anything but from God. They call for killing, they
are prescriptions for hate and they foment intolerance. And when the ignorant among us read those
hate-laden verses, they act on them and the result is the infamous September 11, human bombs in
Israel, massacres in East Timor and Bangladesh, kidnappings and killings in the Philippines, slavery
in the Sudan, honour killings in Pakistan and Jordan, torture in Iran, stoning and maiming in
Afghanistan and Iran, violence in Algeria, terrorism in Palestine and misery and death in every
Islamic country. We are responsible because we endorse Islam and hail it as a religion of God.
And we are as guilty as those who put into practice what the Qur'an preaches - and ironically we
are the main victims too. If we are not terrorists, if we love peace, if we cried with the rest of the
word for what happened in New York, then why are we supporting the Qur'an that preaches
killing, that advocates holy war, that calls for the murder of non-Muslims? It is not the extremists
who have misunderstood Islam. They do literally what the Qur'an asks them to do. It is we who
misunderstand Islam. We are the ones who are confused. We are the ones who wrongly assume
that Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is not a religion of peace. In its so-called 'pure' form it can
very well be interpreted as a doctrine of hate. Terrorists are doing just that and we the intellectual
apologists of Islam are justifying it. We can stop this madness. Yes, we can avert the disaster that
is hovering over our heads. Yes, we can denounce the doctrines that promote hate. Yes, we can
embrace the rest of humanity with love. Yes, we can become part of a united world, members of
one human family, flowers of one garden. We can dump the claim of infallibility of our Book, and
the questionable legacy of our Prophet.

Dear friends, there is no time to waste. Let us put an end to this lie. Let us not fool ourselves. Islam
is not a religion of peace, of tolerance, of equality or of unity of humankind. Let us read the Qur'an.
Let us face the truth even if it is painful. As long as we keep this lie alive, as long as we hide our
head in the sands of Arabia we are feeding terrorism. As long as you and I keep calling Qur'an the
unchangeable book of God, we cannot blame those who follow the teachings therein. As long as
we pay our Khums and Zakat our money goes to promote Islamic expansionism and that means
terrorism, Jihad and war. Islam divides the world in two. Darul Harb (land of war) and Darul Islam
(land of Islam). Darul Harb is the land of the infidels, Muslims are required to infiltrate those lands,
proselytise and procreate until their numbers increase and then start the war and fight and kill the
people and impose the religion of Islam on them and convert that land into Darul Islam. In all
fairness we denounce this betrayal. This is abuse of the trust. How can we make war in the
countries that have sheltered us? How can we kill those who have befriended us? Yet willingly or
unwillingly we have become pawns in this Islamic Imperialism.

Full article at: http://www.secularislam.org/call.htm

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 13:48:51 (EDT)
From: Vera
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: actions louder than words
Message:
Fair comment on the Koran. And Islam has often been violent enough in practice too.

But actions are the litmus test of a civilization, and ever since the taking of Jerusalem from the Muslims 1000 years ago, when:

'The Crusaders went on a rampage, killing everyone they met. They went into houses and dragged out the inhabitants to kill them. They stole everything they found. The princes lost all control.

'Muslim refugees had taken refuge in the Dome of the Rock, the mosque of al-Aqsa, the one Tancred had taken. Despite his banner flying above, on the morning of the 16th a group of Crusaders broke in and slaughtered everyone inside.'

(to quote one text), the West has had the edge in cruelty and mass-murder. Thesedays the West is led by the US, whose slaughters are behind those of Stalin, but arguably parallel to those of Hitler's - in sheer numbers of dead. From memory the Christmas bombing of Hanoi - which would have been the seat of a democratic Vietnam had the US not cancelled the elections - killed half a millon people alone.

I do not suggest that the US has a mortgage on cruelty: the British starved 7 million Indians to death in Bengal to provide its troops with grain in WW2: a number equal to the Holocaust, not that anyone's ever heard of it. My own forebears committed genocide against an entire race of Australian Aboriginals.

But we would be wise before we criticize other civililisations for killing people en masse. Just because we are not told about our governments' actions by our media - and that is particularly true in the US, where an entire population appears to thrive in blithe ignorance of its government's role in the world - does not mean those actions do not happen, and enrage the people who are their victims.

Sept 11 was surely a wake-up call to that reality. If it wasn't, tell your children to prepare their children for a lifetime of flying bombs, anthrax, biological weapons and suitcase nukes. Islamic outrage is 1000 years old, and won't go away till we cease to earn it.

I shouldn't have to say this again, but none of this is to condone Sept 11: as I've said, I hope bin Laden and his accomplices are removed from the face of the Earth. I would merely point out that this will not be a long-term solution: destroying the plant is not destroying the seed-bed.

Vera

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:30:49 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Vera
Subject: Re: actions louder than words
Message:
I honestly don't think the Crusades are very relevant to a modern Christian world composed mostly of democracies, and by and large Christianity does not seem to produce the suicide martyrs that Islam produces. This isn't an accident. I agree that we have to destroy the seedbed, but would argue that that's exactly what we are doing though it will take time. It's called 'integrated war,' and it's a new kind of warfare that incorporates economic devolopment and public opinion influence in the Middle East, banking measures, as well as the conventional things we think of as war, including psychological warfare. Very few believe this will end with Bin Laden and the Taliban, either. The long range institutionalized effort will probably go on until there is a genuine World Government in 50 to 100 years though the outright fighting may be over in a year or two.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:32:16 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: 'integrated War' how lovely
Message:
I honestly don't think the Crusades are very relevant to a modern Christian world composed mostly of democracies, and by and large Christianity does not seem to produce the suicide martyrs that Islam produces. This isn't an accident. I agree that we have to destroy the seedbed, but would argue that that's exactly what we are doing though it will take time. It's called 'integrated war,' and it's a new kind of warfare that incorporates economic devolopment and public opinion influence in the Middle East, banking measures, as well as the conventional things we think of as war, including psychological warfare. Very few believe this will end with Bin Laden and the Taliban, either. The long range institutionalized effort will probably go on until there is a genuine World Government in 50 to 100 years though the outright fighting may be over in a year or two.

--Scott


---

All leading up to One World Government brought to you by the same assholes who got us into this predicament in the first place. Oh Joy !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 02:00:50 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Re: 'integrated War' how lovely
Message:
Gerry, I don't even understand what you're driving at, besides a general antagonism toward any authority. If you're going to conduct a war then it's best to do is as effectively as possible, amid the sort of complexity that characterizes nation state relationships in the wake of the cold war. As for world government, I don't know which set of assholes will be responsible for that. It's far from decided yet. But you basically have two camps: the liberal democracies, and the atavistic belly bangers. I'm throwing my lot in with the former.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 09, 2001 at 09:15:46 (EDT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Fear not, Scott
Message:
You can rest assured that it won't be the 'atavistic belly bangers.'

Too bad you don't realize this 'war' is all about oil and opium. You know, the Bush Crime family sphere of influence: narcotics, energy, armaments. Fuckin' killer crook mobsters.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:56:25 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: WELL, IT'S ABOUT TIME!
Message:
Thanks, Chris for finding and posting this and thanks indeed to the muslims who hd the guts to finally say this.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:17:36 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Right. It's about time.
Message:
Jim:

Not that it will do very much. Fortunately, culture nearly always trumps religion; but what that means in practical terms is that any significant change will take a very long time. The static condition of Islam has been altered by the West's mostly secular influence, but you can't just replace the culture of the Middle East with a western one. The Middle Eastern world even has a *name* for a charismatic soociety: the Umma. Unfortunately you don't have to be a clerical society to be in an Umma. There are secular Ummas as well. A culture that is predisposed to an Umma as opposed to a legal/rational society would simply replace a clerical Umma with a secular one, which might end up being worse. This is basically what has happened in Iraq. Finally, even if a legal/rational society evolves out of the charismatic societies of the Middle East it may look quite different from ours, for a long time. We might not be very comfortable with it. But we'll know the process is well under way when there's a robust tradition of skepticism. Well, maybe *we* won't know that, but our grandchildren or great grandchildren might.

-Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:22:03 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: WELL, IT'S ABOUT TIME!
Message:
they are no muslims, they have closed ranks with the infidels
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:10:59 (EDT)
From: Magnolia
Email: None
To: All
Subject: M's 'special message' and cancellations
Message:
i missed a week of postings, so this may be old news and already discussed into oblivion, but i saw on the elan vital website that m. had cancelled a pair of overseas events and that ev is already announcing that no westerners will be allowed at hans jayanti this year. how do y'all think that all the traveling/war issues are going to affect m.'s plane lust, his finances, et cetera?
now, my premie hasn't been able to afford to go abroad to an event in about twenty years, although he has paid some primo prices for souvenirs/trinkets brought back by others. we should be okay, except that he is threatening to go to the first u.s. event that he can get off work for.
also, did you see the 'special message' that m. provided for everyone affected by sept. 11? am i just cynical, or shouldn't one expect a little more guiliani and a little less bush-level comfort from the lord? 'generic' is the word that came to me when i read it. there were so many words of passion and real emotion and endless stories of true courage and heroism in the last few weeks, and i would just think that this guru, this man who is a damn pilot, for god's sake, would say something immediate that could comfort, honor, bring perspective to those who trust him, and he can only give a garden variety devotional from a junior high school assembly.

magnolia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:14:23 (EDT)
From: Magnolia
Email: None
To: Magnolia
Subject: The Special Message
Message:
by the way, i'm referring to this web page:

http://www.maharaji.org/sp_message.htm

Magnolia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:03:19 (EDT)
From: Old Ex
Email: None
To: Magnolia
Subject: Re: The Special Message / Dalai Lama Quote
Message:
Perhaps I'm posting this a bit late, but today I happened to come across a quote from the Dalai Lama, apparently from 9/11. You may draw your own conclusions as to how it compares to Maharaji's prayer.

'The events of this day cause every thinking person to stop their daily lives, whatever is going on in them, and to ponder deeply the larger questions of life. We search again for not only the meaning of life, but the purpose of our individual and collective experience as we have created it--and we look earnestly for ways in which we might recreate ourselves as a human species, so that we will never treat each other this way again.
The hour has come for us to demonstrate at the highest level our most extraordinary thought about Who We Really Are.

There are two possible responses to what has occurred today. The first comes from love, the second from fear.

If we come from fear we may panic and do things--as individuals and as nations--that could only cause further damage. If we come from love we will find refuge and strength, even as we provide it to others.

This is the moment of your ministry. This is the time of teaching. What you teach at this time, through your every word and action right now, will remain as indelible lessons in the hearts and minds of those whose lives you touch, both now, and for years to come.

We will set the course for tomorrow, today. At this hour, in this moment. Let us seek not to pinpoint blame, but to pinpoint cause. Unless we take this time to look at the cause of our experience, we will never remove ourselves from the experiences it creates. Instead, we will forever live in fear of retribution from those within the human family who feel aggrieved, and, likewise, seek retribution from them.
To us [Buddhist thinkers] the reasons are clear. We have not learned the most basic human lessons. We have not remembered the most basic human truths. We have not understood the most basic spiritual wisdom. In short, we have not been listening to God, and because we have not, we watch ourselves do ungodly things.

The message we hear from all sources of truth is clear: We are all one.
That is a message the human race has largely ignored. Forgetting this truth is the only cause of hatred and war, and the way to remember is simple: Love, [in] this and every moment.
If we could love even those who have attacked us, and seek to understand why they have done so, what then would be our response? Yet if we meet negativity with negativity, rage with rage, attack with attack, what then will be the outcome?

These are the questions that are placed before the human race today. They are questions that we have failed to answer for thousands of years. Failure to answer them now could eliminate the need to answer them at all.
If we want the beauty of the world that we have co-created to be experienced by our children and our children's children, we will have to become spiritual activists right here, right now, and cause that to happen. We must choose to be a cause in the matter.
So, talk with God today. Ask God for help, for counsel and advice, for insight and for strength and for inner peace and for deep wisdom. Ask God on this day to show us how to show up in the world in a way that will cause the world itself to change. And join all those people around the world who are praying right now, adding your Light to the Light that dispels all fear.
That is the challenge that is placed before every thinking person today.
Today the human soul asks the question: What can I do to preserve the beauty and the wonder of our world and to eliminate the anger and hatred--and the disparity that inevitably causes it--in that part of the world which I touch? Please seek to answer that question today, with all the magnificence that is You. What can you do TODAY...[at] this very moment?

A central teaching in most spiritual traditions is: What you wish to experience, provide for another. Look to see, now, what it is you wish to experience--in your own life, and in the world. Then see if there is another for whom you may be the source of that.
If you wish to experience peace, provide peace for another. If you wish to know that you are safe, cause [others] to know that they are safe.
If you wish to better understand seemingly incomprehensible things, help another to better understand.
If you wish to heal your own sadness or anger, seek to heal the sadness or anger of another.
Those others are waiting for you now. They are looking to you for guidance, for help, for courage, for strength, for understanding, and for assurance at this hour. Most of all, they are looking to you for love.

My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness.'

- Dalai Lama

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 11:58:31 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Magnolia
Subject: Re: The Special Message
Message:
bugger the guru and his website and his fucking plane trip to some dumb ass cult Indian festival. It's time he learns how to somke cigars from his behind.

As to the meaning of westreners not going, very interesting indeed. Hum, don't they like infidels in India?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:35:15 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: All
Subject: New Jouneys Entry - Bryn Davies
Message:
Bryn has posted his journey where he tells us how the internet gave him the necessary language to formulate his view on Maharaji and enabled him to leave.
[ Bryn's Journey ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 14:09:11 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Thank you, John and Bryn [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 19:10:02 (EDT)
From: Tim G
Email: timgitti@indigo.ie
To: JHB
Subject: Re: New Jouneys Entry - Bryn Davies
Message:
Thanks Bryn, and welcome to the world of 'one less burden to carry'. Yipeee!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:07:03 (EDT)
From: Brian S
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Bryn Davies - Great story, a must read
Message:
my compliments to Bryn, this is a very well written and intelligent account of one's personal journey through the years and the evolving resolution of those experiences many of us share here.

You have inspired me to get on with my journey entry and contribute it
soon.

Thank you for such an honest, insightful and articulate contribution Bryn, you certainly make good use of the necessary language to share your views on maharaji today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:28:24 (EDT)
From: Marianne
Email: MarianneDB@aol.com
To: Brian S
Subject: I agree- great story, Bryn
Message:
Hi Bryn. Thanks for posting your journey. You wrote so succinctly about how your concerns about Captain Rawat came to fruition. I forget sometimes that there was never any way, before we had the net and EPO was created, to sort out one's feelings about M and the cult.

I hope you're doing well.

Much love, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 15:38:05 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Brian S
Subject: yep [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 20:04:53 (EDT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: such
Subject: B-r-r-r-raaaavoO-O!! ; )))))!! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:32:07 (EDT)
From: Tim Matheson
Email: None
To: All
Subject: ashamed of LORD MAHARAJI??-Why?
Message:
LORD MAHARAJI did tell us not to anesthesize ourselves more than once in HIS DIVINE SATSANG in the 90's...so I submitted this to the gang. They are obviously very embarassed by their LORD MAHARAJI....I am not(read my submission and the response of these Judas like premies--

SpeakUp! Submission Confirmation

Thank you for submitting a SpeakUp! response for possible inclusion on the Please Consider This website.

One of us will be in touch with you shortly.

Submission by: Tim Matheson
Topic: 'What negative allegations being made about Maharaji and Knowledge do you most disagree with and why?'
Response: I find it impossible to believe Maharaji is an alcoholic. Why would he want to drink and anesthesize himself from this beauty within? He told us not to do it. This advise was not for spiritual but for practical reasons. Why would anyone who has this precious K want to artificially alter his/her consciousness?
__________________________________________________

Tim,

Thanks for your recent SpeakUp post. However, we don't feel it's a
good fit
for posting on the site. First, because finding something 'impossible
to
believe' doesn't constitute a reasoned case. Also, we don't know of
any
situation since the ashrams closed in '82 where Maharaji has asked
people
not to drink, so we wouldn't be comfortable to include the statement
'He
told us not to do do it.'

Warm regards,

Erika, David, Mitch and Bob

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:02:47 (EDT)
From: DEVOTEE #1
Email: None
To: Tim Matheson
Subject: Bihari ())
Message:
After a Washington DC program few premies gathered to have a drink and Bihari sat with them and preached that just because maharalashi does something doesn't mean you can do it, and yes, he was refering at drinking. Somebody brought the fact that our LORD drinks to Bihari. Bihari is a follower of mahalarishi but he received the HOLY knowledge from HIS dad, the other LORD. So? He can drink all he wants. And who are you to drink? Nobody. In his world some are somebody and some are not. And so what? We have the most beautiful plumpy LORD of all! He is are GOLDEN LORD. We can kiss his feet. As a premie friend said to me: Mahalardish is so, so pure that he doesn't think, he doesn't have a mind. Isn't that wonderful? Imagine the nations of the world with no minds at work, all hearts.

I'm volunteering to go show Sadam Hussein and Bin Laden videos. They need K. They are in their minds! Omar Kadafhi too.

EVERYONE NEEDS K! THE LORD IS HERe TO SAVE EVERYBODY. DON'T BE SHY. GO SCREAM IN THE STREETS. TELL EVERYBODY THE LORD, GOD INCARNATED IS HERE. Bin should know Alha is here ASAP!

ALLELUYA!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:07:24 (EDT)
From: from me
Email: None
To: DEVOTEE #1
Subject: You're nicely bonkers!! nt
Message:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 13:53:54 (EDT)
From: DEVOTEE #1
Email: None
To: from me
Subject: You're nicely bonker?
Message:
You don't think our LORDY is the plumpiest of all?

OHHHHHHHHHHH())

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:29:09 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: All
Subject: sea below
Message:

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

MORE RESOURCES

America's agony

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

All right-thinking people are deeply shocked by the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We are appalled by the event and the unbelievable death toll, and send our deepest sympathy to the American people.
One positive thing to come out of it is that Maitreya has decided to come forward even sooner than planned to try to prevent precipitate action of revenge.

One other positive thing that may come out of it is that the mass of ordinary Americans might have a more realistic view of the world than their media has allowed them in the past, feeding them 'soft' instead of 'hard' news.
It is a change but in the long run it might be a change for the better, and prepare them for Maitreya's ideas.

For Share International, Benjamin Creme 14/9/2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

A spiritual view of the attack on America

The following is an excerpt from the Share International magazine Questions and Answers column by Benjamin Creme, the chief editor. Share International brings together the two major directions of New Age thinking -- the political and the spiritual. It shows the synthesis underlying the political, social, economic and spiritual changes now occurring on a global scale, and seeks to stimulate practical action to rebuild our world along more just and compassionate lines.

Q. Was there no way the Masters could have prevented the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?
A. No, not directly. That would have necessitated an infringement of our free will. Nevertheless, the Masters did warn the American authorities three months ago that some such attack was planned.

Q. Did the Masters have a part in mitigating the effects in any way?
A. As always, the Masters worked ceaselessly to save lives where possible, and otherwise to overcome the fear and suffering. There was, as a result, apparently, almost no suffering at all. (The passengers in the planes, for example, were surrounded by an energy from Maitreya which, as it were, cocooned them from the terror of the event, which they were able to watch with an extraordinary detachment. A very similar action by Maitreya at Tiannamen Square occurred when the students were massacred, yet they showed no sign of terror on their faces.)

Q. What might America and the West have to learn from these events?
A. - That the world is interdependent and belongs to everyone.
- That there is no true freedom (and security) for anyone without justice for everyone.
- That there are reasons for the hatred which much of the world (not only the Muslim world) feels towards the Western world.
- That the domination of the world's economy through globalization by the Western powers is divisive and deeply resented.
- That the automatic support of Israel in every situation, by America in particular, is driving the Arab world to frustration and despair. In despair, extreme measures, even self-destruction by suicide bombing, seems the only way to retaliate.

Q. Do the Masters have a view on how the West should react?
A. Yes, but in a way very different from that which America and her allies appear to be taking: certainly by showing no fear, no appeasement of terrorism, but certainly not by bellicose calls for war and retaliation. Rather, by a detached understanding of the events which have led to the tragedy of September 11 to come to grips with the forces of division and separation (therefore breeding hate) in the Western world. To understand that the call for retaliation only deepens the crisis and leads to further unnecessary suffering.
The Western nations must be seen to obey the rule of law in bringing the perpetrators of this terrible crime to the International Court of Justice. Otherwise, they will simply duplicate the crime in their desire for revenge.

Q. Was the Master's article on Detachment in the September issue of Share International a reference to the impending disaster?
A. Yes.

Top of Page
HOME | INTRODUCTION | MAITREYA | BACKGROUND| E-NEWSLETTER | EVENTS | FOR NEWS MEDIA | LANGUAGES | SEARCH | FEEDBACK | ARCHIVES

First published April 1999, Last modified: 03-Oct-2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

MORE RESOURCES

America's agony

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

All right-thinking people are deeply shocked by the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We are appalled by the event and the unbelievable death toll, and send our deepest sympathy to the American people.
One positive thing to come out of it is that Maitreya has decided to come forward even sooner than planned to try to prevent precipitate action of revenge.

One other positive thing that may come out of it is that the mass of ordinary Americans might have a more realistic view of the world than their media has allowed them in the past, feeding them 'soft' instead of 'hard' news.
It is a change but in the long run it might be a change for the better, and prepare them for Maitreya's ideas.

For Share International, Benjamin Creme 14/9/2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

A spiritual view of the attack on America

The following is an excerpt from the Share International magazine Questions and Answers column by Benjamin Creme, the chief editor. Share International brings together the two major directions of New Age thinking -- the political and the spiritual. It shows the synthesis underlying the political, social, economic and spiritual changes now occurring on a global scale, and seeks to stimulate practical action to rebuild our world along more just and compassionate lines.

Q. Was there no way the Masters could have prevented the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?
A. No, not directly. That would have necessitated an infringement of our free will. Nevertheless, the Masters did warn the American authorities three months ago that some such attack was planned.

Q. Did the Masters have a part in mitigating the effects in any way?
A. As always, the Masters worked ceaselessly to save lives where possible, and otherwise to overcome the fear and suffering. There was, as a result, apparently, almost no suffering at all. (The passengers in the planes, for example, were surrounded by an energy from Maitreya which, as it were, cocooned them from the terror of the event, which they were able to watch with an extraordinary detachment. A very similar action by Maitreya at Tiannamen Square occurred when the students were massacred, yet they showed no sign of terror on their faces.)

Q. What might America and the West have to learn from these events?
A. - That the world is interdependent and belongs to everyone.
- That there is no true freedom (and security) for anyone without justice for everyone.
- That there are reasons for the hatred which much of the world (not only the Muslim world) feels towards the Western world.
- That the domination of the world's economy through globalization by the Western powers is divisive and deeply resented.
- That the automatic support of Israel in every situation, by America in particular, is driving the Arab world to frustration and despair. In despair, extreme measures, even self-destruction by suicide bombing, seems the only way to retaliate.

Q. Do the Masters have a view on how the West should react?
A. Yes, but in a way very different from that which America and her allies appear to be taking: certainly by showing no fear, no appeasement of terrorism, but certainly not by bellicose calls for war and retaliation. Rather, by a detached understanding of the events which have led to the tragedy of September 11 to come to grips with the forces of division and separation (therefore breeding hate) in the Western world. To understand that the call for retaliation only deepens the crisis and leads to further unnecessary suffering.
The Western nations must be seen to obey the rule of law in bringing the perpetrators of this terrible crime to the International Court of Justice. Otherwise, they will simply duplicate the crime in their desire for revenge.

Q. Was the Master's article on Detachment in the September issue of Share International a reference to the impending disaster?
A. Yes.

Top of Page
HOME | INTRODUCTION | MAITREYA | BACKGROUND| E-NEWSLETTER | EVENTS | FOR NEWS MEDIA | LANGUAGES | SEARCH | FEEDBACK | ARCHIVES

First published April 1999, Last modified: 03-Oct-2001

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 16:59:01 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: don
Subject: sea below, sky above
Message:
It must be - it must be love!

Roses are red and violets are blue.
Sugar is sweet and you haven't got a clue.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:23:35 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: Re: sea below, sky above
Message:
glad YOU have glue
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:27:22 (EDT)
From: don
Email: None
To: All
Subject:
Message:

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

MORE RESOURCES

America's agony

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

All right-thinking people are deeply shocked by the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We are appalled by the event and the unbelievable death toll, and send our deepest sympathy to the American people.
One positive thing to come out of it is that Maitreya has decided to come forward even sooner than planned to try to prevent precipitate action of revenge.

One other positive thing that may come out of it is that the mass of ordinary Americans might have a more realistic view of the world than their media has allowed them in the past, feeding them 'soft' instead of 'hard' news.
It is a change but in the long run it might be a change for the better, and prepare them for Maitreya's ideas.

For Share International, Benjamin Creme 14/9/2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

A spiritual view of the attack on America

The following is an excerpt from the Share International magazine Questions and Answers column by Benjamin Creme, the chief editor. Share International brings together the two major directions of New Age thinking -- the political and the spiritual. It shows the synthesis underlying the political, social, economic and spiritual changes now occurring on a global scale, and seeks to stimulate practical action to rebuild our world along more just and compassionate lines.

Q. Was there no way the Masters could have prevented the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?
A. No, not directly. That would have necessitated an infringement of our free will. Nevertheless, the Masters did warn the American authorities three months ago that some such attack was planned.

Q. Did the Masters have a part in mitigating the effects in any way?
A. As always, the Masters worked ceaselessly to save lives where possible, and otherwise to overcome the fear and suffering. There was, as a result, apparently, almost no suffering at all. (The passengers in the planes, for example, were surrounded by an energy from Maitreya which, as it were, cocooned them from the terror of the event, which they were able to watch with an extraordinary detachment. A very similar action by Maitreya at Tiannamen Square occurred when the students were massacred, yet they showed no sign of terror on their faces.)

Q. What might America and the West have to learn from these events?
A. - That the world is interdependent and belongs to everyone.
- That there is no true freedom (and security) for anyone without justice for everyone.
- That there are reasons for the hatred which much of the world (not only the Muslim world) feels towards the Western world.
- That the domination of the world's economy through globalization by the Western powers is divisive and deeply resented.
- That the automatic support of Israel in every situation, by America in particular, is driving the Arab world to frustration and despair. In despair, extreme measures, even self-destruction by suicide bombing, seems the only way to retaliate.

Q. Do the Masters have a view on how the West should react?
A. Yes, but in a way very different from that which America and her allies appear to be taking: certainly by showing no fear, no appeasement of terrorism, but certainly not by bellicose calls for war and retaliation. Rather, by a detached understanding of the events which have led to the tragedy of September 11 to come to grips with the forces of division and separation (therefore breeding hate) in the Western world. To understand that the call for retaliation only deepens the crisis and leads to further unnecessary suffering.
The Western nations must be seen to obey the rule of law in bringing the perpetrators of this terrible crime to the International Court of Justice. Otherwise, they will simply duplicate the crime in their desire for revenge.

Q. Was the Master's article on Detachment in the September issue of Share International a reference to the impending disaster?
A. Yes.

Top of Page
HOME | INTRODUCTION | MAITREYA | BACKGROUND| E-NEWSLETTER | EVENTS | FOR NEWS MEDIA | LANGUAGES | SEARCH | FEEDBACK | ARCHIVES

First published April 1999, Last modified: 03-Oct-2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

MORE RESOURCES

America's agony

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

All right-thinking people are deeply shocked by the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We are appalled by the event and the unbelievable death toll, and send our deepest sympathy to the American people.
One positive thing to come out of it is that Maitreya has decided to come forward even sooner than planned to try to prevent precipitate action of revenge.

One other positive thing that may come out of it is that the mass of ordinary Americans might have a more realistic view of the world than their media has allowed them in the past, feeding them 'soft' instead of 'hard' news.
It is a change but in the long run it might be a change for the better, and prepare them for Maitreya's ideas.

For Share International, Benjamin Creme 14/9/2001


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--

A spiritual view of the attack on America

The following is an excerpt from the Share International magazine Questions and Answers column by Benjamin Creme, the chief editor. Share International brings together the two major directions of New Age thinking -- the political and the spiritual. It shows the synthesis underlying the political, social, economic and spiritual changes now occurring on a global scale, and seeks to stimulate practical action to rebuild our world along more just and compassionate lines.

Q. Was there no way the Masters could have prevented the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?
A. No, not directly. That would have necessitated an infringement of our free will. Nevertheless, the Masters did warn the American authorities three months ago that some such attack was planned.

Q. Did the Masters have a part in mitigating the effects in any way?
A. As always, the Masters worked ceaselessly to save lives where possible, and otherwise to overcome the fear and suffering. There was, as a result, apparently, almost no suffering at all. (The passengers in the planes, for example, were surrounded by an energy from Maitreya which, as it were, cocooned them from the terror of the event, which they were able to watch with an extraordinary detachment. A very similar action by Maitreya at Tiannamen Square occurred when the students were massacred, yet they showed no sign of terror on their faces.)

Q. What might America and the West have to learn from these events?
A. - That the world is interdependent and belongs to everyone.
- That there is no true freedom (and security) for anyone without justice for everyone.
- That there are reasons for the hatred which much of the world (not only the Muslim world) feels towards the Western world.
- That the domination of the world's economy through globalization by the Western powers is divisive and deeply resented.
- That the automatic support of Israel in every situation, by America in particular, is driving the Arab world to frustration and despair. In despair, extreme measures, even self-destruction by suicide bombing, seems the only way to retaliate.

Q. Do the Masters have a view on how the West should react?
A. Yes, but in a way very different from that which America and her allies appear to be taking: certainly by showing no fear, no appeasement of terrorism, but certainly not by bellicose calls for war and retaliation. Rather, by a detached understanding of the events which have led to the tragedy of September 11 to come to grips with the forces of division and separation (therefore breeding hate) in the Western world. To understand that the call for retaliation only deepens the crisis and leads to further unnecessary suffering.
The Western nations must be seen to obey the rule of law in bringing the perpetrators of this terrible crime to the International Court of Justice. Otherwise, they will simply duplicate the crime in their desire for revenge.

Q. Was the Master's article on Detachment in the September issue of Share International a reference to the impending disaster?
A. Yes.

Top of Page
HOME | INTRODUCTION | MAITREYA | BACKGROUND| E-NEWSLETTER | EVENTS | FOR NEWS MEDIA | LANGUAGES | SEARCH | FEEDBACK | ARCHIVES

First published April 1999, Last modified: 03-Oct-2001

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 00:26:30 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Political Question OT
Message:
I watched the weekly airing of the American political talk show, The McLauglin Group, tonight. It's five conservative politcal analysts bouncing around political questions posed by the host, John McLauglin (who's an old fiesty reptile). They reckon they're half conservatives and half liberals but it's really a case of some are just more conservative than others (Pat Buchanan is one of the participants).

I doubt anyone outside the U.S. has seen this show, but the reason I bring it up is that McLauglin posed two interesting questions I'd be interested in hearing your all's comments.

Question 1: When the U.S./British forces corner Bin Laden, if he comes out with his hands up, should they shoot him or take him into custody?

All of the show's participants thought bin Laden should be shot. First, because his arrest would result in Americans being taken hostage around the world to secure bin Laden's release. And second, because he deserves to be shot.

2. How long till bin Laden's caught?

All of the participants responded to the question by saying 'He'll be dead in... '. One said in three months, one said in six months, two said by the New Year, and McLaughlin said in one month.

I guess being conservative, they'd lean towards his capture being imminent, but I think there's good reason to consider they may never catch him.

What do you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 09:29:39 (EDT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Such A Stupid Question/Show
Message:
It's true that the number of people who watch that stupid television program is too small to measure, and that's just as it should be. McLaughlin claims the show is 'spontaneous,' but an expose a couple of years ago revealed that all the questions and subjects are revealed and reviewed with the participants in advance. Jack Germond broke the code on this and hasn't been on the show since, but no matter, since he was considered a liberal.

The show is extremely to the right of things (Eleanor Clift is at best a Bill Clinton/Al Gore centrist, while on the conservative side were for years Bob Novack and Pat Buchanan, both of whom considered Bush sr. a liberal.) Morton Kondracke was on the show as the other 'liberal' for years, and he was a supporter of Reagan, supported the contras in Central America, among other things. So that's from the moderately centrist/conservative to Pat Buchanan. That's the tilt of the show.

And what a stupid question. The implication that catching 'him' will solve the problems (except internal political ones) is silly.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 00:47:08 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Re: Political Question OT
Message:
Rick:

Well, if Eleanor Clift is your idea of conservative then you're probably on the left tail of the political distribution in the US. BTW, she does not have a college degree and was a secretary at Newsweek when Jimmy Carter decided to run for office. Since no one else wanted to cover this obscure peanut farmer she volunteered for the job, and the rest is history. She was also married to Montgomery Clift's alcoholic brother. I see her quite often on Saturdays running in Rock Creek Park.

To the questions:

1. I don't know. It might be useful to have him in custody to try some cult busting tactics on him. And it also might be useful to gain some intelligence. But the problem with democracies, as Plato observed in the 4th Century BC, is that they let their condemned criminals shoot their mouths off (paraphrasing). And we also probably couldn't commit to using cult busting techniques since we'd view that as 'cruel and unusual,' and we certainly wouldn't use any *real* cruel and unusual to extract information. I say, give him to the Northern Alliance. They'll know what to do with him.

2. I don't think we'll catch him 'til next Spring after the snows in the Hindu Kush recede.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 10:44:59 (EDT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: interesting about Clift (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 03:16:20 (EDT)
From: Barbara
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Political Question OT
Message:
I heard from a friend that bin Laden told his followers (if that's the correct term) to shoot him if he's about to be captured.

Here's one solution another friend proffered:

Killing bin Laden will only create a martyr. Holding him prisoner will inspire his comrades to take hostages to demand his release. Therefore, I suggest we do neither.

Let the SAS, Seals or whatever covertly capture him, fly him to an undisclosed hospital and have surgeons quickly perform a complete sex change operation. Then we return 'her' to Afghanistan to live as a woman under the Taliban.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 22:41:25 (EDT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Barbara
Subject: I love that idea!
Message:
Except that it would require leaving the Taliban in power.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 05:28:56 (EDT)
From: YES
Email: None
To: Barbara
Subject: ****BEST OF FORUM**** ;) nt
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 03:52:42 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: Barbara
Subject: Bin laden - snip - Fatima
Message:
I wonder if the lady formerly known as bin Laden would be welcome in the RAWA?

Definitely the best suggestion yet but it is too commonsensical for politicians to understand.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:52:26 (EDT)
From: Desperate Dan
Email: None
To: All
Subject: If you're well fucked
Message:

[ then come in here ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 11:31:21 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: To anyone who's emailed me this week
Message:
Sorry I haven't gotten back to you. I'm busy as hell with a trial up island I've been commuting to. That, prep and other stuff has made for a busy week. I'll try to get back to you, though, this weekend.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 18:15:35 (EDT)
From: Barry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Good!
Message:
Jim! I've been talking and doing some stuff with Lee lately etc... I would really like to inspire him to complete the CD (X-Flies). Let's not just let all our hard work go in vain? I'll talk with him, and maybe when your not so busy you and Laurie could get on his back too? It would be really cool to finish that up. I'll work on a cover etc..Maybe you could send me the Titles of the songs, in what order you want them in, other player info, any thank you's,and all other rellivent info, and I can get started. Be cool hope alls well. Hope to hear from you soon. Bar
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:25:52 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Barry
Subject: My favorite financial analyst
Message:
He IS a bit of a worry wart, so keep in mind that there are lots of big boys at work determined to keep the financial superstructure
operating.
However, this is a truly great analyst.

The Credit Bubble Bulletin - by Doug Noland

Printer Friendly Version

An Exceedingly Troubling Circumstance
October 5, 2001

U.S. stocks rallied broadly this week, with the Dow and S&P500 adding 3%. The Utilities jumped 6%, while the Transports gained 1%. The Morgan Stanley Cyclical index rose 3%, as the Morgan Stanley Consumer index gained 2%. The small cap Russell 2000 and S&P400 Mid-Cap indices added better than 2%. The Biotechs also gained about 2%. Technology stocks generally rallied sharply, with the NASDAQ100 and Semiconductors jumping 9% and the Morgan Stanley High Tech index 10%. The Street.com Internet index surged 13%. Simply atrocious fundamentals kept the telecom sector from participating, as the NASDAQ Telecommunications index declined 2%. The financial stocks are also battling fundamentals, as deteriorating earnings prospects were behind a 2% decline in the S&P Banking index. The AMEX Securities Broker/Dealer index added 2%. Bullion declined $1.50 and the HUI Gold index declined about 1%.

The spectacular Treasury market melt-up continued this week, as the 2-year saw its yield sink another 14 basis points to 2.70%. Five-year Treasury yields declined 7 basis points to 3.72% and the 10-year yield dropped 9 basis points to 4.50%. The long-bond saw its yield sink 11 basis points to 5.31%. Mortgage-back and agency yields continue to decline as well, with the benchmark Fannie Mae mortgage-back yield dropping 10 basis points and agency yields generally declining 9 basis points. The benchmark 10-year dollar swap spread widened one to 68. Spreads continue to diverge between sectors, with lower-rated telecom and industrial debt underperforming.

Broad money supply (M3) increased $8.7 billion last week, failing to reverse any of the nearly $166 billion increase from the previous week. While extraordinary bank and thrift deposits expansions were somewhat reversed with about a $94 billion decline from the previous week, money market fund assets surged an astonishing $100 billion (institutional funds $80.6 billion, retail funds $19.7 billion). Broad money supply has increased $229 billion during the past five weeks, $609 billion over 28 weeks (15.5% annualized), and $960 billion (13.9%) during the past 52 weeks. Almost 40% of 12-month broad money supply expansion is explained by one component, institutional money market fund assets. During the past year institutional money funds have surged $360 billion, or about 50%. It is also worth noting that outstanding asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) has increased $28.8 billion over the past two weeks to $696.5 billion, with year-to-date growth at 11%. There was less than $51 billion of ABCP issued as of the end of May 1994.

From Bloomberg: 'Japan bought about $24.8 billion of U.S. dollars and euros last month to reverse a rise in the yen…(Japan’s) foreign reserves, the biggest in the world, have risen about $173 billion since July 1999 (to $397 billion).' The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that applications to purchase homes jumped 9%, while applications to refinance surged 27% to the highest level since the peak of the refi boom in October 1998.

The Wall Street Journal reported (Thomson Financial Service data) that third-quarter U.S. stock and bond issuance jumped 21% to $609 billion, 'the fourth busiest quarter ever…' Year-to-date, total combined U.S. debt and equity issuance surpassed $2 trillion, up 31% from last year. Thomson Financial services reported that straight long-term debt issuance surged 60% to $930.5 billion, while convertible bond issuance was up 97% to $70.1 billion. Equity issuance sunk 46% to $79.8 billion.

August construction spending, at an annualized rate of $845.5 billion, was up 5.5% from year ago levels. Total August construction spending was up 51% from August 1995. Spending on new housing was up 7.7% year over year, led by a 15.4% increase in multi-family units. Private non-residential construction was down 7.8%, with spending on industrial projects down 5.5%, hotels/motels 11.3%, and office construction sinking 15.5%. Notably, the public sector construction boom runs unabated, with a record $21 billion spent during August. This was up 8% from July, the previous record, and 16% above year ago levels (and up 53% from August 1995!). Spending on education-related construction surged 26% (y-o-y), water supply projects 25%, and sewer systems 12%. Public construction has been driven by state and local governments that increased spending to $19.7 billion during August, up 17% from last year. It is also worth noting that state and local construction spending jumped 30% between 1996 and last year, driven by a 52% increase in education projects and 32% expended on highways and streets.

As one would expect, the public-sector construction boom is being driven by surging municipal debt issuance. According to CFSB, third-quarter muni issues jumped to $55.1 billion, up 13.4% year over year. The comparison would have been even greater had it not been tempered by a 19% decline in September issuance as the market came to a standstill post September 11th. Year-to-date, municipal issuance of $187 billion is up 29% from last year. New money (issuance less muni refinancings) raised of $136.9 billion is running up 15% from last year. It is worth noting that almost one-half of muni issuance is insured by one of the credit insurers.

The Argentine 'death spiral' continues, with the government reporting a 14% decline in September tax revenues. Having committed a balanced budget to the IMF, previous planned spending cuts are to be doubled. September auto sales were down 47% from a year ago, as a 16% unemployment rate and draconian wage cuts take their toll. For good reason, the market is increasingly fearful of currency devaluation and default on $132 billion of Argentine government debt. There are now market unfriendly calls for economic minister Domingo Cavallo to step aside. And with a sinking currency and collapsing foreign direct investment, the Brazilian financial system and economy become more fragile by the week. The government’s ability to service dollar-linked debt becomes more suspect with each weakening of the Brazilian real. The region is once again at the brink.

There are numerous other trouble spots – countries, companies, industries, and states - that were festering long before September 11th, with recent events only pushing them further toward the edge. With $55 billion of total assets, it is worth following the continuing saga at Conseco. 'Fitch has placed all ratings of Conseco, Inc. and its insurance subsidiaries, as well as the ratings of Conseco Finance Corp., on Rating Watch Negative. The rating action follows an announcement by Conseco that it will incur after-tax charges of $475 million in the third quarter of 2001. Such charges equate to approximately 9% of shareholders’ equity as reported at June 30, 2001, and fall outside of previous ratings expecations…The financial profile of Conseco Finance remains weak given its undercapitalized balance sheet and the significance of secured funding facilities and wholesale borrowings. The secured facilities effectively encumber most of the company’s asset base at the present time.'

This quarter’s write-offs, including charges for junk bond, CDO, and mortgage security losses, make for a total of $2.1 billion 'one-time' charges since 1999. The company is also going to take a $40 million charge related to loan guarantees. From a recent company 10-Q: 'We have guaranteed bank loans totaling $548.7 million to approximately 160 current and former directors, officers and key employees. The funds were used by the participants to purchase approximately 18.3 million shares of Conseco stock…' Also from the 'Q': 'On April 28, 2000, Conseco and Stephen C. Hilbert, the Company’s former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, entered into an agreement pursuant to which Mr. Hilbert’s employment was terminated. As contemplated by the terms of his employment agreement, Mr. Hilbert received: (i) $72.5 million (prior to required withholdings for taxes), an amount equal to five times his salary and the non-discretionary bonus…'

The global telecom debt meltdown runs unabated, with particularly negative ramifications for the CDO, credit derivative and credit insurance markets. From Moody’s: Oct. 03 – 'Moody’s Investors Service has lowered the ratings on long term debt issued or guaranteed by Nortel Networks Limited (senior unsecured to Baa2 from Baa1, subordinated to Baa3 from Baa2 and preferred stock to Ba1 from Baa3) and has placed both the long term ratings and the Prime-2 short term ratings on review for possible further downgrade. The rating actions are in response to the dramatic fall off in revenues and our belief that revenue levels for the foreseeable future will be below our previous expectations.' Oct. 04 – 'Moody’s Investors Service downgraded the ratings of Nortel Networks Lease Pass-Through Trust, Pass-Through Trust Certificates, Series 2001-1 to Baa2 from Baa1 and has placed the Certificates on review for possible further downgrade. The Certificates were downgraded to Baa2 based on the support of the triple net leases guaranteed by Nortel Networks Limited, which was downgraded to Baa2 by Moody’s on October 3, 2001 and placed on review for possible further downgrade.'

While off the headlines, the stunning deterioration of California’s fiscal position calls for close monitoring. We will admit to having a bad feeling about prospective Golden State finances and the State’s economy generally. Last week California executed a $5.7 billion bond offering, the largest ever U.S. muni bond issue, helping to fund what is now estimated to be a $9.3 billion fiscal year deficit. This week the Sacramento Bee ran an editorial 'Wreck Ahead – Sell the Power Bonds, or Face Fiscal Chaos - If war and recession weren’t enough, an inept Public Utilities Commission and a greedy Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are threatening to plunge California into a fiscal abyss.' The Los Angeles Times quoted California Assembly Budget Committee vice chair George Runner: 'There’s an Armageddon approaching.' Last week State Treasurer Phil Angelides warned, 'People do not see the freight train of fiscal chaos coming.' Some of this is likely politics but there is no denying the State will be hit very hard by unfolding circumstances. Today, Moody’s placed the rating of the State’s $31.6 billion of general obligation bonds on its Watchlist for what would be the second downgrade this year. The State’s 'heavily economically-sensitive revenues,' including forecasts of 'stock market-related tax revenues' totaling $12.5 billion (16% of total general revenues) 'now appears risky.'

From Wednesday’s San Francisco Chronicle: 'More than a quarter of San Francisco’s pricey Financial District office space could be sitting empty by the middle of next year if the economy keeps sliding downhill, according to a hot-off-the-presses Grubb & Ellis Research report. In layman’s terms, that’s the equivalent of 23 empty Transamerica Pyramids.' 'According to the firm’s third-quarter report, downtown San Francisco office space – now at 15.2% vacancy – is also experiencing rent declines of 46 % to 56%…' It is little wonder the commercial mortgage-backed securities market has cooled markedly, with it seemingly only a matter of time until a period of problematic defaults commences.

It is a central facet of Credit Bubble analysis that future financial and economic problems can be accurately anticipated through the recognition and careful analysis of previous credit and speculative excesses. Since their popularity is relatively recent and reporting scant, it is difficult to assess the size and degree of risk inherent in the complex markets for credit derivatives. Previous articles do, however, confirm that it has been the 'hot' area, disconcertingly similar to the boom in complex derivative trading preceding the Asian crisis and Russian collapse.

From Bloomberg, April 6 – 'The credit default swaps market will expand this year as global economic growth slows, boosting demand for insurance against bankruptcies and bond defaults, derivatives bankers said. A credit default swap is a contract to pay if a company defaults on its bonds, goes bankrupt, or some other similar ‘trigger event’ occurs. It works like insurance, with the seller of the swap only paying the swap’s buyer after a trigger event.' The article quoted an industry specialist: 'It depends on the severity of the downturn we’re in, or about to enter. It’s tough to see credit derivatives not being a very important product over the next few years because of what we’re seeing economically and due to regulatory changes.' Quoting a former Wall Street CFO ('former chief financial officer at J.P. Morgan, who’s setting up a derivatives venture with Warren Buffett’s General Re Corp)': 'The reinsurance industry has been a massive buyer of credit derivatives. Whatever company you are, these are powerful tools, although coming with that power is the potential to make mistakes which could be costly.' From the article: 'The British Bankers Association, one of the only organizations to track statistics, last year estimated the global credit derivative market would expand to $1.58 trillion by 2002, compared with $586 billion in 1999. That would be a nine-fold increase between 1997 and 2002…‘Credit derivatives and equity derivatives are the fastest growing areas…'

From Bloomberg, May 2 – 'Global revenue from credit derivatives may grow to an annual $9 billion in coming years from about $2 billion currently, said Goldman Sachs…‘Given that credit derivatives tend to provide better margins than the cash business for corporate bonds, these products will gain a much higher profile,’ Goldman said… ‘The rocky credit markets -- the first quarter set a record for corporate defaults -- only serve to increase demand for protection.’ Credit derivatives allow banks and companies to transfer credit risk. They’re securities whose prices are based on underlying assets. The most popular are credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, and total return swaps. As they become more popular, the derivatives are becoming increasingly important to fixed income businesses because they’re so profitable, Goldman said. ‘Over the next five to seven years, if notionals can grow to $10 trillion, revenues could conceivably reach $9 billion.’ While credit derivatives only account for about 1 percent of the global derivatives market currently, they’re the fastest-growing part of the market. They may show the same growth trajectory as interest-rate swaps, Goldman said. CDOs, a cross between derivatives and asset-backed securities, have the potential to be the most lucrative credit derivative, used by fund managers to leverage themselves and buy high-risk assets, and banks to off-load loan credit exposure. The market has grown at 55 percent a year for the past five years, Goldman said.'

From Bloomberg, June 25 – 'The market for credit derivatives, used to transfer the risk of a borrower defaulting, has increased to about $1 trillion, the Bank of England said. Expansion of the market suggests investors are increasingly concerned about the risk of default from companies, particularly in the phone industry. Royal KPN NV, British Telecommunications Plc, and other phone operators have had their credit ratings cut in recent months, as they increased borrowing to buy other companies and mobile phone licenses. That has boosted their borrowing costs. ‘Large increases in debt to finance acquisitions and (mobile phone) licenses’ is partly responsible for expansion in the market for credit derivatives, the central bank said…Growth in the market will lead to the transfer of more information about the companies, helping banks to price loans. Banks can bundle together loans and bonds and sell them as a package, transferring the risk of default, or spreading it among a wider group of lenders… ‘The range of new credit (derivatives) has the potential to increase the robustness of the global financial system,’ the central bank said.'

June 21 – 'The average volume of trading done by European institutional fixed-income investors in credit derivatives nearly tripled in 2000, while the proportion of product users in the market nearly doubled. A recent study by Greenwich Associates reveals galloping momentum toward broader and more robust use of credit derivatives in the near future… Liquidity is also improving. ‘It s a classic virtuous circle’…as usage grows, the products become increasingly useful, more institutions use them, and usage continues its growth. The development of the credit derivatives market…is becoming increasingly comparable to the interest-rate derivatives market, which grew from virtually nothing in the early 1990s to trillions of dollars today… A chief reason for the growing popularity of credit derivatives is that investors see them as nearly as useful for seeking incremental returns…and investing, behind only hedging bond credit risk… Until recently, credit derivatives were very esoteric products… In the last couple of years, credit derivatives have been marketed more actively and purchased by investors nearly as much for profit as for hedging purposes.'

It is again worth highlighting a few of this week’s ratings actions: 'October 3 – Moody’s placed the ratings of fifteen lodging and leisure related companies on review for possible downgrade. At the same time, Moody’s placed the ratings of four gaming related issuers on review for possible downgrade, and revised the rating outlook on three gaming-related issuers to negative from stable. Moody’s action is in response to the expected deterioration in credit quality resulting from the tragic events of September 11, 2001, and signals a change in Moody’s overall outlook for the lodging, leisure and gaming related industry sectors to negative from stable. This rating action follows Moody’s decision last week to place five lodging and four gaming companies on review for possible downgrade.'

From Bloomberg: 'Bonds backed by Hawaii and Disneyland’s home, Anaheim, California, may face downgrades because of reduced tourism, Standard & Poor’s said.'

From Bloomberg: 'Oct. 4 -- Ratings on $934 million of bonds sold to build the international arrivals terminal at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport were cut by Moody’s Investors Service, which cited a drop in air travel. The rating company said it lowered the bonds’ underlying credit grade to ‘Baa3,’ to one notch above junk, from ‘Baa2.’ Insurance from MBIA Corp. gives the securities a ‘Aaa’ rating… Some of the JFK terminal’s biggest tenants, including El Al Israel Airlines Ltd. and Swissair Group, in recent weeks ‘have either reduced operations or have gone out of business,’ Moody’s said. Moody’s also noted that the terminal lost its insurance against acts of war and terrorism after the attacks. ‘In the event such an act was perpetrated in the terminal, the terminal operator could become bankrupt as a result of liability claims,’ Moody’s said.'

From Fitch: Oct. 3 -- 'Massachusetts Port Authority’s $955 million in revenue bonds’ are placed on Rating Watch Negative and the ‘AA’ rating is affirmed. The Rating Watch Negative reflects the uncertainty surrounding operating margins at Boston-Logan International Airport (Logan) and potential liability resulting from the events on Sept. 11, 2001. The bonds are secured by the net revenues generated from the Authority’s assets…Fitch also put approximately $240 million of Massachusetts Port Authority passenger facility charge (PFC) revenue bonds on Rating Watch Negative and affirmed the ‘A’ rating… Fitch has underlying ratings on approximately $42 billion of debt for 64 U.S. airports, including 28 of the 30 largest airports in the U.S. Fitch is individually evaluating the impact of the attacks on each of the 64 Fitch-rated airports.'

From Fitch: Oct. 4 -- 'Fitch has placed the following emerging market airline ticket receivable transactions on Rating Watch Negative: AeroMexico Receivables US Trust, rated ‘AA’ Rating Watch Negative. Mexicana Receivables US Trust, rated ‘AA’ Rating Watch Negative. Pelican Series 1999-1, rated ‘AA’ Rating Watch Negative. Each of these transactions are guaranteed by a surety bond provided by Centre Solutions (Centre). The ratings of the transactions are tied to the financial strength and claims paying ability of Centre Solutions. Though Fitch does not publish an insurer financial strength rating on Centre Solutions, Fitch closely monitors Centre’s financial strength and maintains an internal credit opinion on Centre for use in structured transactions. The Rating Watch on these transactions is thus linked to Fitch’s concerns that losses from the Sept. 11 attacks for both Centre and the worldwide Zurich Insurance organization could prove to be higher than is consistent with current expectations supporting Fitch’s credit opinion on Centre. Centre is ultimately a wholly owned subsidiary of the Zurich Financial Services Group of Zurich, Switzerland. The Rating Watch also acknowledges certain unfavorable operational trends within the Zurich organization as a whole.'

From Fitch: Oct. 2 -- 'Fitch has downgraded two classes of notes issued by BAC Synthetic CLO 2000-1 Limited, a synthetic cash flow CDO established by Bank of America to provide credit protection on a $10 billion portfolio of investment grade, corporate debt obligations… Fitch’s rating action reflects higher than expected defaults in

the underlying assets. This has resulted in higher than expected credit protection payments under the credit default swap agreement with Bank of America CLO Corporation II, and a diminished level of credit enhancement for the class D and E

notes.'

From PRNewswire: Oct. 1 -- 'Standard & Poor’s today placed its ratings on the class B-1, B-2, C-1, C-2, and D notes issued by Triumph Capital CBO I Ltd., and co-issued by Triumph Capital CBO I Inc. on CreditWatch with negative implications. The triple-‘A’ ratings on the class A-1A, A-1B, and A-2 notes, based on a financial guarantee insurance policy issued by Financial Security Assurance Inc. were unaffected by the action. The CreditWatch placements reflect the significant deterioration in the collateral pool’s credit quality, and an additional $41.5 million of new defaults since July 16, 2001 when ratings were lowered… According to the Sept. 14, 2001 trustee report, a total of $25.5 million, or approximately 4.9% of the total collateral pool is listed as defaulted. In addition, the issuer’s credit ratings on four bonds ($27.05 million), listed as performing assets on the trustee report, have been lowered to ‘D’ by Standard & Poor’s within the last two months. Also, obligors with ratings in the triple-‘C’ and double-‘C’ range comprise more than 12.87% of the total collateral portfolio. Furthermore, approximately 20.8% of the obligors in the collateral pool are currently on CreditWatch with negative implications… The weighted average recovery rate associated with the $57 million of defaulted securities sold to date is approximately 8%, well below the recovery rate assumed at the transaction’s closing.'

And extracted from an excellent global insurance conference call sponsored by Nomura’s office in London, Matthew Maxwell, credit analyst, Nomura International: 'Estimates for the total cost for the eleventh of September terrorist attacks for the global insurance industry have been revised upward from an initial estimate of $14 billion. One of the most recent estimates we see comes from Berkshire Hathaway which thinks that its own losses of $2.2 billion are about 3 to 5% of the total industry loss, which implies losses of between $44 and $73 billion for the whole industry…invariably, experience has shown that initial assessments of the costs of large catastrophes tend to be inaccurate due to the range of (inaudible) costs and the time it takes to apportion them. For example, the final costs of the Northridge earthquake in California in 1994 were more than six times the initial estimate, and moreover it took seven years to resolve…given that the terrorists attacks on the eleventh of September were a series of events in different places rather than a single event, the final costs will be even more difficult to estimate. Apart from P&C (property and casualty) insurance and the reinsurance, other related insurance exposure will include workers’ compensation policies for deaths and injuries, and claims under travel and accident insurance may be made against AMR corporation and UAL corporation by the families of those on their aircraft if it can be proven that the airlines were negligent in their security arrangements. There could also be claims by companies under general liability cover and cover for contingent business interruption. For example, New York hotels, restaurants, and stores are estimated to have lost up to $500 million per day when much of lower Manhattan was closed down.

Quite clearly though, the eventual losses will exceed any of the other major losses insured by the global insurance industry to date, including the near $20 billion cost of hurricane Andrew. In fact, estimates will rise not just as more information becomes available but also for more technical reasons. For example, insurers tend to assess their losses on a net basis if they see the insurance they have ceded will be collectable. But for some reinsurers now placed under pressure, as evidence by the insured’s financial strength ratings, these assumptions may not hold in all cases. So, initial insurers of relevant risk and the reinsurers who were subsequently under-rated, may well be drafted into protracted legal disputes about their respective liabilities. One complicating factor which we think may arise will be whether claims are classified as being the result of a separate incident, therefore a new claim against a principal insurer, or part of the initial claim and part to reinsurance (inaudible). A major example of this problem has emerged today with news that the lessor of the World Trade Center has asked insurers to pay up on part of the policy that covers the Twin Towers. The Insurers claim that the terrorist attacks are one event; the lessor claims they are two events. Moving on, there is also some debate over whether insurers may attempt to avoid payout of P&C claims by invoking contractual clauses that exclude acts terrorism or war. For acts of war, the exact definition required is unclear. For example, do acts of war require formal declaration of war and can war only exist between states rather than between states and terrorist organizations.'

As to another issue, it is quite disappointing to listen to the current dialogue regarding monetary and fiscal stimulus. From my vantage point, a strong consensus has developed that is cautious on fiscal stimulus, while quite favorably viewing lower interest rates as without cost or risk. Additionally, there is the view that monetary stimulus can be 'easily reversed down the road when necessary.' I view the consensus as having it wrong. I actually have no problem with a $70 billion spending appropriation under the circumstance of a national catastrophe. Besides, this amount of increased government borrowing corresponds to about one month’s net increase in mortgage debt in the context of the current lending boom. I do, however, have a big problem with the Fed throwing additional gas on the mortgage finance bonfire. There are some very smart people cheerleading the Fed’s aggressive rate cuts that should be very well aware of the dire future consequences of feeding this real estate Bubble.

Under the circumstances, it is just very frustrating that there is not some recognition that the acute credit and financial problems afflicting the U.S. and global financial systems (and, increasingly, economies) - especially those emanating from the telecom/Internet/tech sector - are directly associated with the ultra-easy money and global systemic reliquefication following the 1998 crisis. The considerable negative consequences of previous credit and speculative excess are today palpable, and to conveniently ignore the momentous future costs of exacerbating the historic mortgage Credit Bubble is most unfortunate. Much more of the same is clearly not the way to go. And not 'mincing words,' I am left pondering if a desperate Fed sees no other option, or if this is simply the continuation of truly inept monetary management.

Returning to the misconception that lower interest rates are 'costless' and 'easily reversed,' it is as well worth highlighting how only a slight tempering of 'easy money' was sufficient to pierce what had become an increasingly vulnerable telecom/Internet/tech Bubble. The key to appreciating the fragility of such Bubbles is to recognize how significantly credit and speculative excess have distorted the underlying structure of demand and monetary processes. Throughout the technology sector, extreme excess led to extraordinary self-reinforcing financial flows throughout the industry. These monetary processes financed excessive industry demand and, thus, fostered additional investment, greater speculative financial flows, and only more demand and a spectacular industry spending Bubble. Credit excess begets only greater excess, with financial flows (and risk) expanding exponentially over the life of the boom. And while the technology Bubble had been expanding steadily for several years, by far the greatest financial and economic damage was inflicted during the 18-month 'terminal stage' of excess fueled directly by post-1998 crisis reliquefication. After such a dynamic Bubble is accommodated over a protracted period, any move that tightens financial conditions and leads to any reduction of outsized financial flows is immediately problematic. Reduced investment, faltering demand, a destabilizing reversal of speculative flows - a piercing of the spending and speculative Bubble - sees the seeming 'virtuous' abruptly transformed into 'vicious cycle.' Depending on the extent of the Bubble, only a marginal reversal of flows can set in motion catastrophic consequences. It should be obvious to central bankers that such precarious dynamics are to be avoided like the plague.

But with the collapse of the NASDAQ/tech Bubble necessitating another 1998-style reliquefication, extreme efforts by the Federal Reserve and GSEs have ushered in the 'terminal stage' of credit and speculative excess throughout the enormous mortgage and consumer finance superstructure. Not coincidently, this was the remaining sector offering the requisite dimensions with the potential for the enormous credit creation to sustain the greater systemic Credit Bubble. Here, self-reinforcing Bubble dynamics have witnessed massive speculative financial flows (particularly from the global leveraged speculating community) into agency debt, mortgage securities and related conduits, with corresponding collapsing interest rates inciting unprecedented mortgage refinancing and other borrowings. In this case, massive credit inflation has manifested into self-reinforcing real estate inflation, sustaining boom-time consumption excess with concomitant huge and endemic trade deficits. Like the tech Bubble, the focal point of the analysis is to appreciate the degree that financial Bubble dynamics have altered and accentuated the underlying structure of demand and cemented dysfunctional monetary processes. In the case of the mortgage finance Bubble, it is critical to recognize the degree to which mortgage borrowings have increasingly altered consumption patterns, and consequent over/malinvestment in consumption-based production and structures (domestically and internationally).

We also see protracted asset inflation as having played a key role in what will prove the most profound (and difficult to rectify) maladjustment, the structural shift of the U.S. away from production and into a 'service sector' economy. It is also inarguable at this point that mortgage credit excess, particularly through the extraction of equity during refinancings and home-equity borrowings, has significantly accentuated and distorted financial flows, again both domestically and internationally.

We will have more to say on the issue in the future, but a central aspect of current U.S. structural vulnerability also lies with the ongoing disproportional increase in luxury and discretionary spending that has gone to particularly dangerous extremes over the past few years. As we have seen post-WTC attack, spending on travel, hotels, casinos, leisure and entertainment, luxury goods and such have potential to drop precipitously with any break in confidence. Fragility becomes a critical issue for a maladjusted Bubble economy/financial sector to the extent that spending distortions have been exacerbated by protracted (and self-reinforcing) credit excess and asset inflation (particularly equity and real estate), and the consequent investment excesses into related industries. As such, and importantly, it is of no coincidence that the airlines, hotel, gaming, and auto sectors were at the same time acutely vulnerable to both faltering (discretionary) demand and excessive (Bubble-induced) overleveraging/financial fragility. It appears an unappreciated characteristic of the contemporary U.S. credit system that credit and speculative excess tend to impart inflationary manifestations within sector booms and busts rather than put pressure on general prices.

So today, with scores of companies, various sectors, and many countries in desperate straits having basically lost access to new borrowings with their respective busts, credit could not be more easily and cheaply thrown at the U.S. consumer. Eighteen months ago the liquidity spigot was flooding the U.S. and global technology sector, today it drowns the U.S. homeowner/consumer. As we have argued repeatedly, the situation could not be more dysfunctional and, hence, unsustainable. Current debate seems to naturally fall back into 'inflation versus deflation.' Yet, at least as long as we are in the midst of historic U.S. mortgage credit excess, I tend to view the critical consequence of such a distorted financial and economic environment as a continuation of extreme and unstable divergences in relative prices. Or, said differently, an out of control U.S. credit system is locked in a hopeless cycle of fueling recurring booms and subsequent unavoidable busts. I am not willing today, with the ongoing explosion of mortgage credit and money supply, to label the subsequent busts 'deflation.'

We have, of course, argued strongly for some time that a frantic Fed was only digging deeper into a pit of failed policy. This has never appeared as conspicuous as it does today. The analogy would be a person caught in a lie later forced to concoct increasingly far-fetched tales desperately hoping somehow the mess will fade away before it is all exposed. Unfortunately, this huge mess will not be resolved with only more preposterous monetary fudging. The insurmountable dilemma really boils down to the fact that the extremely maladjusted U.S. Bubble economy and financial system require enormous new credit creation basically just to keep from imploding. At the same time, a maladjusted economy and faltering credit system are providing increasingly limited avenues to expand credit, with bursting Bubbles not at all conducive to credit expansion. It’s not an interest rate issue outside of the powerful impact lower rates have in prolonging the great mortgage-lending Bubble.

Quite ominously, we have witnessed unprecedented mortgage credit creation and monetary expansion over the past year succeed only to the point of keeping the U.S. economy sputtering along and financial system from buckling. Furthermore, we have for three years watched (in disbelief) unrelenting and extreme liquefication from the GSEs. Seeing such powerful monetary fuel increasingly lose its potency has signaled to us that the U.S. Bubble is approaching the end of its rope. As everyone knows, the Fed, GSEs and global central bankers have mastered the art of sustaining an overliquefied U.S. financial system and dollar Bubble. What people don’t seem to appreciate is the degree of damage being imparted on financial systems and economies in the process. In the end, there is grossly insufficient real economic wealth to support the continuing unprecedented inflation of financial claims, particularly problematic with respect to ballooning foreign claims on U.S. assets. There are as well unmistakable signs of acute stress emanating from the global financial system, and at home from the equity to CDO to Repo markets. It sure looks to us today like an awfully thin line is being drawn between the continuing massive increase in financial claims necessary to keep this sordid game going and the maintenance of confidence in the sustainability of the system. This is An Exceedingly Troubling Circumstance.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:35:57 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: you gotta love religion
Message:
It was no surprise that the United States and Israel walked out of a United Nations conference on racism as soon as Israel came in for criticism. It is, however, a disgrace. Israel certainly is a racist state. Its own human-rights advocates call it that. The claim that Israel doesn't discriminate against non-Jews is absurd on its face.

Suppose, for example, the U.S. Congress passed a law that said the United States is a Christian, Anglo-Saxon nation and that any Christian, Anglo-Saxon person anywhere in the world is automatically eligible to become a citizen. Do you seriously think the Anti-Defamation League would not have a conniption fit and scream racism?

Well, Israel has such a law for Jews. Thus a Russian Jew, for example, can become a citizen, but a Palestinian driven out of his own country in 1948 cannot return.

Suppose, for another example, a group of wealthy people established the Christian National Fund. This fund would be used to purchase property. Once purchased, the property could never be sold to, rented to or leased to a non-Christian. Would that not be called discrimination? Well, there is such a fund called the Jewish National Fund, which has all of those restrictions on the property it owns. It played a great part in establishing Israel.

And, of course, if American officials routinely issued building permits to Christian Anglo-Saxons while denying them to Jews or other groups, that would be considered racist. And neighborhoods that denied non-Christians an opportunity to buy or rent would likewise be considered racist. All of these forms of discrimination are practiced in Israel against Palestinians.

The language that caused the United States to leave the conference was in a resolution passed by 3,000 non-governmental organizations in 44 regional and interest-based caucuses, according to the Indian Express. Some American news reports have made it seem like it was an Arab-only move. I'd say the United States is definitely in a minority, as it usually is when it defends Israel -- not on the basis of facts, but on the basis of the power of the Zionist lobby in the United States.

Fortunately, a growing number of American Jews are beginning to defy the slanders of the Zionist lobby and speak out against the human-rights abuses Israel inflicts on the Palestinians.

That indeed is the duty of all people of conscience. Acts that would be unacceptable in the United States cannot be condoned simply because they are done by Israelis to Palestinians. That in itself is a racist attitude.

In the meantime, much of the American press is allowing the Israeli government to dictate its language for propaganda purposes. If the Israelis wish to refer to assassinations as 'targeted killing,' that's their business, but American journalism should call them what they are -- assassinations. Assassination of political opponents, collective punishments inflicted on innocent people, confiscation of property, restriction of movements and employing military engines of destruction against an unarmed population are all considered crimes against humanity. Employing tanks against unarmed demonstrators in the West Bank and Gaza is no different than employing tanks against unarmed demonstrators in Tiananmen Square.

You might want to meditate on why the American reaction is different even though the circumstances are similar.

It is also useful to keep George Washington's warning constantly in mind: 'Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence -- I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens -- the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.'

Zionism is foreign influence.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 06:42:48 (EDT)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Re: you gotta love religion
Message:
'Thus a Russian Jew, for example, can become a citizen, but a Palestinian driven out of his own country in 1948 cannot return'

This should read
'Thus a Russian Jew, for example, can become a citizen, but a Palestinian who left hid home in order that his Arab brothers can come and 'drive the Jews into the sea' cannot return'

The 'Law of Return' has saved counless lives including nearly 1000000 Jews from Arab countries {and the first country to give homes to the Vietnamese boat people). These people are conventiently ignored
because Israel dealt with the Arab-Jewish refugees.

'Zionism is foreign influence. '

Wow, I just love that statement.

(I don't know that much about America's internal politics but I do remember seeing footage of the Mcarthy trials.)

Take care and watch out for hidden zionists.
I can see that I can't hide anything from you, you've read all of the details in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:40:11 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: April and May 1948
Message:
a Palestinian who left hid home in order that his Arab brothers can come and 'drive the Jews into the sea' cannot return'

This account would seem to indicate that the motivation of most of the fleeing civilians was fear and a desire for self preservation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:08:59 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Jethro
Message:
Hi Jethro,
Didnt mean too much more than -see how religion seperates people-
the 'protocols' were false as I bet you know.
I dont really want a religious war to cause me to tick you off, I have
read too many thousands of your sentences and plan to read more.
It is wierd how the god issue screws things up so continually.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 16:24:38 (EDT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: To Bill & John T from Jethro
Message:
He's away for a week in the wilds of west wales and probably won't get internet access, so he asked me to say that he will respond when he's back.
I've kept the posts for him.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 18:14:41 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: thanks, and lucky him! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 20:39:09 (EDT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: There's a big difference
Message:
between the present government of Israel and the ordinary Israelis who live there. Tarring the people with the same brush that one tars the government with is a mistake that's often made with tragic results.

Most Israelis are not Orthodox Jews and the ones you see at the Wailing Wall on TV are just a handful of the population and mainly tourists anyway.

All the world over, it's fanatical, vocal minorities who cause trouble for the rest. Most people just want to get on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 07:03:39 (EDT)
From: berni
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I like to think that's true
Message:
'All the world over, it's fanatical, vocal minorities who cause trouble for the rest. Most people just want to get on'
Well said Dave, and above is my email that I think you asked for a whi
le ago.
berni
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 07:05:22 (EDT)
From: dimwit
Email: bernee@flashmail.com
To: berni
Subject: Re: I like to think that's true
Message:
Oops :/
I forgot to enter the email.
berni
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:37:28 (EDT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: I didnt write that^ [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 19:50:34 (EDT)
From: Pat:C)
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: You didnt write that^ ?
Message:
Dear bill-nt, do you mean that another bill posted it or that you posted a quote written by someone else? Who? Curious.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 11:04:32 (EDT)
From: bill-:)
Email: None
To: Pat:C)
Subject: I left off the authors name by accident [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 08:06:05 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: All
Subject: RAWA
Message:
RAWA is a political/social organization of Afghan women struggling for peace, freedom, democracy and women's rights in fundamentalism-blighted Afghanistan.

Please support RAWA.
[ RAWA ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 10:29:08 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Re: RAWA
Message:
nice to see that u r keeping abrest of events, yes? ()):)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 12:37:00 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: The women's war
Message:
Amazing america hasn't shot anyone yet. Good tho -- there's all the help we need in Afghanistan, and people who need our help really badly.

This is part of a poem by Sue Silvermarie, an American supporter of RAWA.

    In the summer of 96 we laughed. I can't remember the sound.
    Before that September when the Taliban came
    we were no different than you
    Now we are the ghosts of Afghanistan
    The women and the girls of a whole country
    under house arrest.
    For leaving her home alone, my neighbor was tortured
    For showing her ankle as she rode behind her husband on a bike
    my girlfriend was shot dead on the street.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 22:18:32 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Re: The women's war
Message:
I hate poems, but I did read this one. Nice to see there are Americans that are involved.

Recently the australian goverment stop a human cargo from entering the goverment. Some of the claims that was made that some of them are terrorist. well imagine a terrorist risking his live on a mission that has a chance of landing in the bottom of the ocean. The suffuring and endurance of some of those people is unimaginable. On Journalist while interviewing some of the Iraqui refugees was trying to explain to that it's not as good as they think it is. He had some stern looks and was told '...are you trying to scare us. Saddam couldn't do it...'.

can you believe that $12 dollar a year will pay for one child education?

life sucks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 04, 2001 at 20:54:15 (EDT)
From: Suedoula
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Bravo, John, Well Said
Message:
John,

I just read your response to Bjorn's rambling post on LG. Bravo, well put and well said. Isn't anyone over there just a little embarrassed by the fact that one of the most vocal critics of the EPO site is obviously not the most articulate?

Again, great post.

Best,
Susan

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 02:56:30 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Suedoula
Subject: Thanks, Sue
Message:
I'm actually quite serious in my challenge over there. I recently took over as EPO webmaster and I have to be able to stand behind everything there. If the fiercest critics of EPO can't find any factual errors then I guess we're safe:-)

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 00:52:37 (EDT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Suedoula
Subject: hello Sue Doula
Message:
Dear Sue Doula,

I saw your first post and want to say hi. We have a lot in common besides our names. I would post my email but I always get something weird from someone I didn't want to hear from when I do. But I am a mom with a child your childs age, plus 2 much older ones. I am a labor and delivery RN who began with aspirations of midwifery and then discovered my physiology is incompatable with staying up all night! We knew some of the same people in Miami too. Fairly well. Anyway...I am not posting much....I am pretty...very...stressed these days and the former guru is on the back burner. But I wanted to say hello. Maybe if you have a yahoo mail or something I can write you there. I was a Miami premie from 1975( at age 13 ) -1979 about....but sort of in the network of premie till the early eighties.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 16:45:35 (EDT)
From: Suedoula
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Re: hello Sue Doula
Message:
Susan,

Would love to share more -- you can email me at suesadoula@hotmail.com --

Best,
Sue

Return to Index -:- Top of Index