Seems many in the U.S. are either unaware of the 35-year Israeli occupation of the Palestinian's home, or they are in denial. Follows a link to a U.N. map of the Jewish settlements established (and defended by U.S. backed military aid and hardware)since 1967. The decay of a political situation, as in cancer, takes time to become obvious.
What concerns me is that the term Zionism is virtually unknown by the average voting American.
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpal/maps/m3070r17.gif
Seems many on this forum are either unaware of the phenomenon of people of different ethnic backgrounds living together peacefully, or they are in denial that Jews have the same rights to live in the West Bank as Arabs have to live in Israel, or Chinese in Chicago, for that matter. Follows a link to a Chicago 1990 Census Map of the Asian settlements established in Chicago (and defended by U.S. backed legal aid and protection) in 1990. The double standard applied to Jews, as in cancer, takes time to become obvious. What concerns me is that the term Zionism becomes meaningless in the light of world-wide emigration of ethnic groups in general.
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/su/maps/chiethae.gif
"Jews have the same rights to live in the West Bank as Arabs have to live in Israel, or Chinese in Chicago, for that matter."
Now class, observe closely the mindless logic that follows when brains are on fire. One would believe this to simply be causally connected drivel when in fact we are witnessing studiously-placed words of diversion.
HPD maintains that Israel came into possession of that land as a result of a war fought in 1967 in much the same way that the United States came into possession of the entire Southwest as a result of the Mexican War. Should the southwestern United States be considered occupied territory as well?On 2002-04-16 19:11, WINDHO wrote:
Seems many in the U.S. are either unaware of the 35-year Israeli occupation of the Palestinian's home, or they are in denial. Follows a link to a U.N. map of the Jewish settlements established (and defended by U.S. backed military aid and hardware)since 1967.
Very interesting, Chin. So what Wind Ho is saying... By the way, Chin, is Wind any relation? What Wind Ho is saying that the claims of the "La Raza" organization are justified. If Israel should give up the land it conquered in the 1967 war, then we should give up the land we conquered in the Mexican War. By the same reasoning, the nations of the Indian tribes should be restored and most Americans should go back across the Atlantic. But then the Roman Empire would have to be restored over there and then... Where does it end?On 2002-04-16 20:34, Chin Ho wrote:
HPD maintains that Israel came into possession of that land as a result of a war fought in 1967 in much the same way that the United States came into possession of the entire Southwest as a result of the Mexican War. Should the southwestern United States be considered occupied territory as well?
Chin, could it be that the victors in wars retain the exclusive right to decide whether they should keep conquered territory or give it back? Something tells me that this has been the accepted rule throughout the history of civilization. What could possibly be different about this Israeli situation? Hmmmmm...
Mister McGarrett, if I may...On 2002-04-16 20:52, Steve McGarrett wrote:
Very interesting, Chin. So what Wind Ho is saying... By the way, Chin, is Wind any relation? What Wind Ho is saying that the claims of the "La Raza" organization are justified. If Israel should give up the land it conquered in the 1967 war, then we should give up the land we conquered in the Mexican War. By the same reasoning, the nations of the Indian tribes should be restored and most Americans should go back across the Atlantic. But then the Roman Empire would have to be restored over there and then... Where does it end?
Chin, could it be that the victors in wars retain the exclusive right to decide whether they should keep conquered territory or give it back? Something tells me that this has been the accepted rule throughout the history of civilization. What could possibly be different about this Israeli situation? Hmmmmm...
You are forgetting about the treatment of the people who reside in those conquered territories. Do they enjoy equal rights as citizens? Is there any requirement that they should?
Wo Fat, you are a brilliant if incomparably devious man. Yes, the treatment of those who reside in the conquered territories and their rights as to citizenship, etc., is a valid topic of discussion. However the whole argument about returning conquered land would appear to be bogus. Why does it keep coming up? And frankly why should the United States even be involved in this mess? Wouldn't it...On 2002-04-16 20:57, Wo Fat wrote:
Mister McGarrett, if I may...
You are forgetting about the treatment of the people who reside in those conquered territories. Do they enjoy equal rights as citizens? Is there any requirement that they should?
Where did he go? Where did he go? I had Wo Fat in my office a minute ago and now he is gone! Chin! Dano! Find him and bring him back! And if you find him...book him, Dano!
Cue the Ventures music...On 2002-04-16 21:04, Xer of Evil wrote:
What is up with all these names?
I'm going to change mine to "Fat Ho."
XoE
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Xer of Evil on 2002-04-16 21:06 ]</font>
Please don't encourage them, or we'll have Dano and Kono Kalakaua posting too... :smile:
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HopefulCynic68 on 2002-04-16 21:18 ]</font>
May I help you, sir?On 2002-04-16 21:10, HopefulCynic68 wrote:
Please don't encourage them, or we'll have Dano and Chin Ho Kelly posting too... :smile:
My apologies, I didn't see your posting until after I posted. Please give my regards to the governor and Mr. Kaye. :smile:On 2002-04-16 21:16, Chin Ho wrote:
May I help you, sir?On 2002-04-16 21:10, HopefulCynic68 wrote:
Please don't encourage them, or we'll have Dano and Chin Ho Kelly posting too... :smile:
The difference is ARAB ANTI-SEMITISM. If it were not for ARAB ANTI-SEMITISM, nobody would care if a small fraction of the population of the West Bank were Jewish.On 2002-04-16 20:13, WINDHO wrote:
Now class, observe closely the mindless logic that follows when brains are on fire. One would believe this to simply be causally connected drivel when in fact we are witnessing studiously-placed words of diversion.
Muslims live safely in Israel, but Jews in the West Bank are shot at. This is predjudice on the Arab's part.
Why deny it? The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a top seller in the Arab world. The Arabs proclaim in their media that Jews use Arab blood in their meals. The Arabs, in short, are heirs to the tradition passed on to them by the Nazis, that of virulant, irrational antisemitism.
My example is meant to jar your mind into realizing the truth. Chinese live safely in Chicago, and all over the world. Muslims live safely in Israel, and all over the world. Jews, however, are not accorded the same rights. The facts are twisted to make them the villians when they defend themselves.
When the Arabs renounce works such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, when they stop the infamous blood libel and all of the rest of their institutional antisemitism, then you may say I'm wrong. Until then, the point I raise is quite valid.
If, as seems to be increasingly the case, we are sliding back into 3T, after a few months of apparent 4T last fall, then could the long term effect of 9/11 be to immunize us against future potential catalysts, even if only partially? Could this mean we're locked in 3T for the forseeable future?
jds1958xg wrote:
On 2002-04-24 14:21,
If, as seems to be increasingly the case, we are sliding back into 3T, after a few months of apparent 4T last fall, then could the long term effect of 9/11 be to immunize us against future potential catalysts, even if only partially? Could this mean we're locked in 3T for the forseeable future?
Excellent question. It may time to hold one of the forum's famous polls. I'll go first:
<indent>IMHO, it will have a dampening effect, and could, oddly, make the 4T crisis less "drastic". Unfortunately, my alternate scenario is a crescendo of provocations, ignored or only partially addressed, followed by a final trigger (the infamous straw that nailed the camel, comes to mind) that ignites a take-no-prisoners war. I hope this scenario is wrong, or the war is economic rather than miltary. If it has to be military, let it be non-nuclear at the very least.</indent>
How about 911 and America's reaction to it as a rehearsal for the real thing? A 4T with training wheels.On 2002-04-24 14:21, jds1958xg wrote:
If, as seems to be increasingly the case, we are sliding back into 3T, after a few months of apparent 4T last fall, then could the long term effect of 9/11 be to immunize us against future potential catalysts, even if only partially? Could this mean we're locked in 3T for the forseeable future?
If it were not for ARAB ANTI-SEMITISM, nobody would care if a small fraction of the population of the West Bank were Jewish.
1. It is not a small fraction of the population.
2. The large and increasing fraction of the population is not only Jewish, but covertly (or sometimes overtly) supported by the Israeli government in an area where the Israeli government has no legitimate jurisdiction -- only authority by right of conquest.
3. The expansion of this fraction of the population comes at the expense of the Palestinians, who are forced from their homes and into refugee camps. (Yes, other Arab states are somewhat to blame for not taking them in. So was the U.S. to blame for not taking in Jewish refugees from Hitler. The primary blame for the Holocaust was nonetheless not ours, nor is the primary blame for the Palestinians' plight to be laid at the door of Jordan.)
And in short,
4. Without denying that Arab anti-Jewishness (it can't be "anti-semitism" as the Arabs themselves are Semites) exists, to say that without this prejudice there would be no objection to the Israeli settlers in the West Bank is utter nonsense.
In any event, one might reasonably question exactly why the Arab peoples have become anti-Jewish when Islam had a long history of tolerance for the Jews over ages when Christendom did not. While there is never a good reason for hatred based on race or religion, there is in this case an understandable one, and while that reason does not excuse the hatred, it does indicate that there is blame to share and the fault is hardly one-sided here.
Regarding, again, how to regard the 9/11 event:
You're all jumping the gun. We require at least a full two years of undisturbed peace before we can be said to have slid back into 3T mode. A further upheaval within that two year period will sustain the Crisis mood.
The speculation advanced might well hold, however, in the unlikely event we are given those two years of peace.
Doubt it. If one buys S&H's theory, as the generations age pressure will build for our leaders (Boomers, now) to DO SOMETHING to solve the problems that have been festering since the last Awakening, if not the High. A 4T Catalyst is a sort of last-straw, time to poop or get off the pot for leaders already in power, lest they be replaced with someone else who will act.On 2002-04-24 14:21, jds1958xg wrote:
If, as seems to be increasingly the case, we are sliding back into 3T, after a few months of apparent 4T last fall, then could the long term effect of 9/11 be to immunize us against future potential catalysts, even if only partially? Could this mean we're locked in 3T for the forseeable future?
My concern is that if 911 turns out NOT to have been the Catalyst, it might take an even greater calamity to snap us into Crisis mode-- something like a suicide bomber strolling into a nuke plant, or an equally monstrous individual infecting himself with smallpox and hanging out at O'Hare for an afternoon.
These are scenarios which would kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans -- quite possibly millions -- and would make 911 look like a minor train wreck by comparison. If 911 wasn't the Catalyst, an event such as I have described will almost surely be.
Kevin, the scenarios you have outlined above would confirm a suspicion I've had for a long time - that by the time the next (or current?) 4T has run it's course, global overpopulation will no longer be a problem - even if modernity and civilization *do* somehow manage to survive the massive population crash I'm hinting at.On 2002-04-24 19:40, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:
Doubt it. If one buys S&H's theory, as the generations age pressure will build for our leaders (Boomers, now) to DO SOMETHING to solve the problems that have been festering since the last Awakening, if not the High. A 4T Catalyst is a sort of last-straw, time to poop or get off the pot for leaders already in power, lest they be replaced with someone else who will act.
My concern is that if 911 turns out NOT to have been the Catalyst, it might take an even greater calamity to snap us into Crisis mode-- something like a suicide bomber strolling into a nuke plant, or an equally monstrous individual infecting himself with smallpox and hanging out at O'Hare for an afternoon.
These are scenarios which would kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans -- quite possibly millions -- and would make 911 look like a minor train wreck by comparison. If 911 wasn't the Catalyst, an event such as I have described will almost surely be.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: jds1958xg on 2002-04-25 07:44 ]</font>
Just looking at the past few years (if there's anything that fits that pattern before 4/99 I'd like to know) we get the following:
4/99: Columbine shootings. Mass hysteria, zero-tolerance, etc; no one cares after a few months.
12/99: Millennium bug. Mass hysteria; people are scared that the technological world will come to a halt; by 1/5/00 everyone's moved onto the next thing.
11/00: E2K. Mass hysteria; people fear that democracy is about to go up in shambles - when the situation is finally resolved in December nearly everyone just doesn't care; they basically 'get over it' and move onto the next thing.
9/11/01: 9/11 attack. Mass hysteria; people rally behind Bush and fear the werst; when several months pass and the worst does not happen, the world goes back to normal and nearly everyone is back onto the next thing (with the exception of token changes to airport security, what else has significantly changed in day to day life?)
So it looks like this late 3T will be marked by approximately annual mini-crises whose response is 3T-style hysteria for a while but people then simply move onto the next thing. It DOES look like the next crisis would require an ENORMOUS catalyst to provoke any response other than 3T hysteria...
The Asian meltdown and the Battle in Seattle were also suggested as 4T catalysts but turned out not to be. They were before 4/99. so was impeachment in 98.
2 years of relative peace is a relative term, Brian. Will another election fiasco like E2K count? Another Battle in Seattle? Or will it take an invasion of Iraq and a war response by the Arabs?
Personally, I think dress rehearsal is the right term, except I think the environment and economy will be the real catalyst and not an attack. I predicted this war and predicted it would not be the 4T catalyst. It will probably be largely over this year. It could be mostly resolved in the next couple of months, though relapses are possible. This next month will be crucial!
Again, I maintain that we should all hope -- indeed, PRAY -- that 911 was the Fourth Turning Catalyst. For if it is not, IOW, if people in 2020 look back to The Moment When Everything Changed and aren't thinking of 911, the odds are that they will be reflecting upon an event incredibly more devastating and far-reaching than was the attack on the World Trade Center.
This Real Catalyst could be my aforementioned nuclear meltdown or plague (possibly terrorist-induced, but not necessarily), a natural mega-disaster such as an asteroid strike or global crustal displacement, a sudden ecological collapse caused by the extinction of a lynchpin species like zooplankton....even an Independence Day-style extraterrestrial invasion. The possibilities are indeed endless.
Or it could be some final straw that broke the camel's back that is ridiculously minor, or it could last five years like the Civil War...On 2002-04-25 17:36, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:
Again, I maintain that we should all hope -- indeed, PRAY -- that 911 was the Fourth Turning Catalyst. For if it is not, IOW, if people in 2020 look back to The Moment When Everything Changed and aren't thinking of 911, the odds are that they will be reflecting upon an event incredibly more devastating and far-reaching than was the attack on the World Trade Center.
This Real Catalyst could be my aforementioned nuclear meltdown or plague (possibly terrorist-induced, but not necessarily), a natural mega-disaster such as an asteroid strike or global crustal displacement, a sudden ecological collapse caused by the extinction of a lynchpin species like zooplankton....even an Independence Day-style extraterrestrial invasion. The possibilities are indeed endless.
Did any of those events have anywhere near the mass hysteria as those I listed?On 2002-04-25 16:57, Eric A Meece wrote:
The Asian meltdown and the Battle in Seattle were also suggested as 4T catalysts but turned out not to be. They were before 4/99. so was impeachment in 98.
This is a real possible 4th Turning event.
http://news.mysanantonio.com/story.c...682286&xld=340
