Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon

    Sabah excuse me for posting this on the Pakistan Politics section, but this is related to a topic many of us discussed at length called, 'Muslim World versus Indo-Israeli nexus on CTBT'.

    But, I wanted to counter some distorted (and probably untrue)anti-Muslim propoganda put forward by one of the participants NYAhmadi, when he mentioned Professor Edward Said, a USA based Christian-Palestinian. Ahmadi said the following about Edward Said (posted May 25)

    "I have read every book ever written by Ed Said. I often run into him on Sundays as we pick our “Jewish” bagels from the same place, he lives only a few blocks away from me. He is a professor of comparative lit at Columbia Jewniversity (and loves living in Jew York City). I admire his intellect, and most recently he wrote an article advocating creation of a greater Israel (encompassing all of the occupied territories). Although he is an expert on Middle East affairs, his views are more of an intellectual substance, and have very little practical significance"

    - THIS GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS HIGHLY NOTED PALESTINIAN PROFESSOR IS ADVOCATING JEWISH RULE OVER THE PALESTINIANS? Well then how does Ahmadi square this up with an article that Professor Said has written in the 'Dawn'. I have pasted it in full as follows:-

    Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon

    By Edward W. Said

    Israel's defeat in South Lebanon, its hasty withdrawal, and the still turbulent situation created after almost twenty years of a wasteful, incredibly destructive and, in the end, useless display of military power requires sober analysis free of the distortions imposed by the US media. The Israeli military presence in Lebanon was never really about the "defence" of Israel's northern border, but about political objectives designed originally to defeat the PLO, then to change Lebanon's political structure to its advantage, and finally to pressure Syria into accepting its diktats.

    The first of these succeeded partially, and in 1993 ended up delivering an exiled and sidelined Yasser Arafat as a docile partner with Israel in ending the intifada, policing the still occupied Palestinian territories, and attempting (so far unsuccessfully) to conclude the Palestinian quest for self-determination to Israel's advantage.

    The other two policy objectives were abject failures, as witness the crumbling of Israel's mercenary South Lebanese Army (routinely described by the media as "Christian" whereas it was equally if not predominantly Shiite), the emergence of Hezballah with a successful policy of resistance and aggressive counterattack, and the continued refusal of Syria to accept Israel's terms on less than complete withdrawal before making any peace deals.

    The stranglehold on US media perspectives maintained by the supporters of Israel has produced an astonishingly reductive view of reality. Consider the use of the word "defence" to describe Israeli tactics, when it has the Middle East's only offensive air force, nuclear option and military-political apparatus totally supported by the world's only superpower. How can it be "defence" when for 22 years Israel has defied the international community by persisting in its various military occupations, bombing Arab capital cities at will, destroying civilian infrastructures and in Lebanon alone causing at least 20,000 deaths and uncounted thousands of wounded, 95 per cent of them civilian?

    Or take the word "peace" and its cognate "peace process." Israel has tried to force "peace" on subjugated leaderships in the Arab world, and at the same time has continued aggressive policies of colonization and annexation that have earned it opprobrium everywhere - except in the US media, where its ethnic cleansing and systematic discrimination against non-Jews are either overlooked or justified cynically by exploiting Holocaust memories.

    There is a wider and wider gap in fact between US supporters of Israel and Israeli citizens, a sizable majority of whom know that in the end Israel must acknowledge a realistic view of its own history and actuality before it can even nominally be accepted in the Arab and Islamic world. No matter how many times deflating phrases like "Iranian-backed" or "terrorist" are affixed by Israel and its media allies to the militias that beat the fabled IDF in Lebanon, there is no way to explain away that entirely local campaign which Israel so conclusively lost.

    In reality therefore, Israel's retreat from Lebanon was clearly the result of a determined popular resistance willing to take punishment and make sacrifices. Hezballah was mobile where Israel's huge armoured and air preponderance were both cumbersome and ineffective (despite the damage they caused), braver and far more resourceful than the disillusioned and frightened foreign troops they faced alongside their treacherous local allies. Since the US media concentrated so one-sidedly on Israeli travails in Lebanon, it was forgotten that Israel had for over 20 years defied the UN resolution enjoining it to leave, and had for years and years imposed a dreadful regime of torture, collaboration and pillage on the long-suffering Lebanese citizens who were there. Rid of this reign of terror at last, liberated South Lebanon is the first challenge to the region's future that neither Israel nor the Arab regimes are likely to meet successfully.

    The notion that the Arab-Israeli conflict might be ended has so far been based exclusively on what Anwar Sadat openly expressed and embodied, the idea that charismatic official leaders could negotiate a new peace between old enemies. This has been disproved by the examples of Egypt, Jordan, and the PLO whose leaders have gone all the way without in fact persuading their populations to follow suit. With only a tiny and insignificant number of exceptions, no cultural or political figure of independent national stature, no popular, syndical or really autonomous non-governmental organization among those Arabs whose leaders have made peace with Israel has in any serious way accepted the peace.

    Israel has remained "unnormalized," and basically isolated at the only level that counts in the long run. Resistance to its presence (not to its existence: the difference is important to remark) is still strenuously, not to say vociferously displayed, which is why the scenes of triumphal jubilation from South Lebanon have been played unendingly on Arab TV screens. Certainly Arab and Israeli businessmen continue their rather limited association, and there seems to be no sign of arresting globalization, but that is all.

    In other words, the conventional wisdom about peace-making in the Middle East has essentially been disproved, which is not to say that it will now cease or that the present peace tracks will be abandoned. They won't. But an unexpectedly prominent landscape of opposition and resilience has been revealed and will not now quickly be re-submerged.

    We mustn't forget, secondly, that the present structures of power in Israel and the Arab countries are the oldest in the post-World War Two period, they are still extremely militarized (in Egypt, the army is the country's largest employer and undertakes all the major infrastructure work), are largely oligarchical in kind, and therefore unresponsive to change of the sort the Hizballah victory represents.

    The United States has historically done business with obvious interlocutors and counterparts in the Middle East, despite occasional attempts either to co-opt the Islamic opposition (as in Afghanistan) or to promote an American-style civil society (through foundations, business school programmes, and academic exchange). A vast sector of life sits just beyond the view offered by the regimes and the US, and for the first time since the PLO emerged and was defeated in Jordan in 1970, this unofficial aspect of life geopolitically threatens the old, mostly frozen structures.

    Islamic movements are part of this unofficial sector, of course, and what they offer is one intellectual and cultural alternative to the conventional one now in power. Many of these Islamic currents contradict each other but they all speak of resistance to US-style cultural conformity and consumerism, they oppose what Israel represents as an arrogantly alien force which must be de-Zionised and defeated or stopped rather than negotiated with supinely (e.g. the Oslo model), they all claim various kinds of connection to "authentic" popular forms of cultural and civil tradition.

    But there is a healthy secular opposition as well, fighting on several fronts see, for instance, journalistic opposition to repressive press laws all across the Arab world; the human rights movement against torture and politicized judiciary branches; the women's rights and burgeoning environmental associations - these exist in every Arab society today. This is not to mention academic, labour union, writers' and artists' organizations that are both vocal and active. All told, these secular forces provide stiff competition to their religious counterparts.

    The situation is especially heated up now not only because Hezballah liberated South Lebanon without official state support, but because all the front-line regimes face huge succession problems. Think of most Arab countries, and the first thing that comes to mind is how the old order cannot easily hand itself on past a new, and ever-changing re-alignment of forces galvanized into opposition by the failure of what most people regard as unpopular, isolated, and aging leaderships.

    For the first time since independence, Middle Eastern politics will be more influenced by how these seething internal currents play out than by outside powers or prominent figureheads. Whatever peace arrangements are made will therefore be subject not to what Barak and his various Arab partners decide between themselves, but to what in the Arab world and in Israel (to say nothing of Iran and Turkey) will come out on top, as political parties like Shas, Hezballah, Hamas, plus a whole slew of secular opponents battle for a larger say in what has so far been off limits to them.

    It may seem odd to say so now, but I am convinced that the secular opposition will ultimately win out over its religious opponents. The Middle East is far too heterogeneous, politically aroused and modernized a region to submit to what are in effect backward-looking, absurdly anachronistic visions that aim at establishing Muslim and Jewish theocracies. A rigorous contest over such matters as citizenship, identity, and political authority is the one that counts, and it is this that will determine the future in the long run. Meanwhile, we can expect volatile times ahead.
    http://www.dawn.com/2000/06/12/op.htm

    AN EXCELLENT ARTICLE - DETAILED AND BALANCED, AND TRULY EXPOSES THE JEWISH CONTROL OF US MEDIA AND POLITICS!

    AHMADI - WERE YOU LYING?OR DID YOU MISQUOTE BY MISTAKE? OR DID YOU THINK NOBODY WOULD CATCH OUT YOUR LIES?


    [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 12, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 12, 2000).]

    #2
    No Kmailik, I don’t have time looking for all the articles that I have read. About a year ago, he wrote an op-ed piece in the NYTimes suggesting that creating a country encompassing both Jews and Arabs might be an alternative. The term “alternative’ is often an intellectual toil.

    Everyone knows who Ed Said is and what he stands for and believes in. If, as you suggest, that he exposes Jewish and American conspiracy to keep Palestinians oppressed, then what is he doing at Columbia?

    By the way, his new autobio is being carefully scrutinized particularly his claims that he was a little boy and lived in a certain house in Jerusalem. Independent historians of the area could not verify all of his claims.

    Here is a quote from his writings for you. You can see how much he is in love with Arafat.

    >>>>>The real task, I think, is to be planning a real alternative to the nonsense at present being put about, that by declaring a state - somehow - we will actually get one - somehow. Typically, this silly slogan conceals the real difficulties in actually establishing a state, difficulties that can only be overcome by real work, real thought, the real unity and, above all, real representation of all (as opposed to a part) of the Palestinian people. Not unilateral, empty, repetitious slogans. It is an insult to the integrity of our people to keep on making up such make-believe "realities" and trying to pass them off as political substance. Arafat and his advisers should be ashamed of themselves for such banal tricks. They should stand aside so that a more serious and credible political process can replace their disastrous fumbling once and for all. <<<<< Source: http://leb.net/tesa/articles/apartheid+oslo.html

    within the same article there are other areas where he argues that creation of Palestine in two geographically separated parts will be a huge mistake. You can draw your own conclusions.

    If you want his most recent op-ed essay, you can do some research for yourself. And by the way, he is pretty respected in his profession (professor of literature) but people don’t take his political views that seriously.

    I personally think, you have no clue what he is talking about in the Dawn Article. You wouldn’t have posted it if you did. Read the concluding remarks in the article you posted. Read it a few times to really get the sense of it.

    Comment


      #3
      Oh Yes I have finally marked out Ahmadi out as liar!

      - Ahmadi - you gave the impression that your "friend" Edward Said was pro-Israeli and not for the Palestinian cause - and I like a lot of informed people on this forum know that that is a big white lie on your part!

      * Yes, Edward Said is anti-Arafat, and so am I !, because we both believe in the one-sided suffering of the Palestinian people in the last 50 years and that the Jews in the USA have so far successfully covered this up! - as Said says:-

      -"The stranglehold on US media perspectives maintained by the supporters of Israel has produced an astonishingly reductive view of reality"

      ** I, like Edward Said believe that ALL 5 million Palestinian refugees living outside Israel/the territories SHOULD RETURN TO Israel proper, AND then ALL people (Jews and Arabs) sould live in ONE TERRITORIAL STATE - WHICH WOULD BY MERE POPULATION COUNT HAVE A 67% ARAB MAJORITY!

      *** AND YES I HAVE READ THE FULL ARTICLE IN THE DAWN, AND YES I AGREE WITH EDWARD SAID WHEN HE SAYS THAT ISLAMIC MOVEMENTS HAVE A LEGITIMATE RIGHT TO FIGHT THE USA - HE SAYS:-

      "Islamic movements are part of this unofficial sector, of course, and what they offer is one intellectual and cultural alternative to the conventional one now in power. Many of these Islamic currents contradict each other but they all speak of resistance to US-style cultural conformity and consumerism, they oppose what Israel represents as an arrogantly alien force which must be de-Zionised and defeated or stopped rather than negotiated with supinely (e.g. the Oslo model), they all claim various kinds of connection to "authentic" popular forms of cultural and civil tradition."

      - BANG ON EDWARD!!!

      **** AND WHEN EDWARD SAYS:-

      " It may seem odd to say so now, but I am convinced that the secular opposition will ultimately win out over its religious opponents. The Middle East is far too heterogeneous, politically aroused and modernized a region to submit to what are in effect backward-looking, absurdly anachronistic visions that aim at establishing Muslim and Jewish theocracies. A rigorous contest over such matters as citizenship, identity, and political authority is the one that counts, and it is this that will determine the future in the long run. Meanwhile, we can expect volatile times ahead"

      HE IS TALKING ABOUT MUSLIM AND JEWISH THEOCRATS - AND FRANKLY AHMADI MY FRIEND I AGREE TOTALLY WITH THIS SUMMARISATION!

      ***** THANKS FOR POSTING THE SECOND ARTICLE - IT FURTHER PROVES YOUR MISGUIDED QUOTES (IN THTE ORIGINAL STRING) WERE WRONG AND BLATANT LIES. I quote from your article (which is nearly two years old - while mine is only two days old!):-

      " Arafat is a prisoner of both the Israelis and the United States. He has
      no place to go, no corridor he can escape into, no excuse he can rely on.
      I fear that, under pressure, he will concede and accept the Israeli deal,
      using the declaration of a state as a way of compensating (as well as
      trying to fool) his people. Watch him carefully."

      AND:-

      " Another disadvantage that seems just as significant is that the Israeli
      idea of getting rid of the Palestinians by separation will be achieved
      not by Israel but by the Palestinian leadership. This would be the final
      triumph of the desire for the Palestinian people's disappearance by
      dispossession, for which a century of Zionist planning and belligerence
      has always plotted."

      AND:-

      " The Zionists consider it to be the Land of Israel, reserved exclusively
      for Jews. On the other hand, we should remember that every idea of
      Palestinian self-determination since the ascendancy of the present PLO
      has embodied an idea of non-discriminatory equality and sharing inPalestine."

      AND:-

      " This was the notion of a secular democratic state and, later, the idea of
      two states living side by side in neighborly harmony. These ideas were
      never accepted by the Israeli ruling majority, and Oslo, in my view, was
      a clever way for the Labor Party to create a series of Bantustans in
      which the Palestinians would be confined and dominated by Israel, at the
      same time hinting that a quasi-state for Palestinians would come intobeing."

      AND:-

      " To Israelis, Rabin and Peres spoke openly about separation, not as
      providing Palestinians with the right to self-determination but as a way
      of marginalizing and diminishing them, leaving the land basically to the
      more powerful Israelis. Separation in this perspective then becomes
      synonymous with apartheid, not with liberation. To declare a Palestinian
      state under such circumstances is essentially to accept the idea of
      separation as apartheid, not equality, and certainly not as
      self-determination. "Self-rule" is Netanyahu's euphemism for it."

      ******TELL US ALL AHMADI IF EDWARD SAID IS PRO-ISRAELI (LIKE YOU), PRO-ARAFAT (LIKE ISRAEL) OR PRO-PALESTINIAN (LIKE ME)????
      You say in you last post about Edward Said:-

      "And by the way, he is pretty respected in his profession (professor of literature) but people don’t take his political views that seriously."

      WELL OBVIOUSLY YOU DID? WHEN YOU LIED ABOUT HIM IN THE LAST STRING WHEN YOU SAID (I'LL REMIND YOU IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MEMORY):-

      *******Ahmadi did say before********

      "I have read every book ever written by Ed Said. I often run into him on Sundays as we pick our “Jewish” bagels from the same place, he lives only a few blocks away from me. He is a professor of comparative lit at Columbia Jewniversity (and loves living in Jew York City). I admire his intellect, and most recently he wrote an article advocating creation of a greater Israel (encompassing all of the occupied territories). Although he is an expert on Middle East affairs, his views are more of an intellectual substance, and have very little practical significance"

      ***AHMADI..WHAT LIES AND HYPOCRISY??? ARE YOU BRAVE ENOUGH TO APOLOGISE FOR MISLEADING US??***

      Fact - Pofessor Said is anti-Zionist, anti-Arafat AND Pro-Arab/Pro-Palestinian like me! I agree with 100% of what he says in both articles - unlike you who picks out selective quotes ?


      K Malik

      P.S. Apologies in advance if you are offended by the truth?

      P.S.S. - after insulting me, CM, ZZ and others who have disagreed with you on this forum, now you are having a dig at Professor Said when you say:-

      "...his new autobio is being carefully scrutinized particularly his claims that he was a little boy and lived in a certain house in Jerusalem. Independent historians of the area could not verify all of his claims"

      MY GOD YOU ARE A VERY ANGRY AND VINDICTIVE PERSON!






      [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 12, 2000).]

      [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 12, 2000).]

      Comment


        #4
        >>>Fact - Pofessor Said is anti-Zionist, anti-Arafat AND Pro-Arab/Pro-Palestinian like me! <<<

        Kamilik, isn’t this a little too ambitious on your part, liking yourself to be like him? Don’t pump yourself up that much.

        I am still waiting for your explanation about Ahmadis.

        And don’t worry about me, I don’t have any ambitions to impress dimwits like you. You, on the other hand are not noticing how people (including ZZ) don’t take you seriously. Good luck next time.

        Comment


          #5
          Ahmadi said:-

          " >>>Fact - Pofessor Said is anti-Zionist, anti-Arafat AND Pro-Arab/Pro-Palestinian like me! <<<
          Kamilik, isn’t this a little too ambitious on your part, liking yourself to be like him? Don’t pump yourself up that much."

          (and earlier you had said - "Everyone knows who Ed Said is and what he stands for and believes in. If, as you suggest, that he exposes Jewish and American conspiracy to keep Palestinians oppressed, then what is he doing at Columbia?")


          Well here are a few quotes (that will answer both your questions and assertions) from Mr Said:-

          1) "Israel's defeat in South Lebanon...requires sober analysis free of the distortions imposed by the US media"

          2) "The stranglehold on US media perspectives maintained by the supporters of Israel has produced an astonishingly reductive view of reality..."

          3) " There is a wider and wider gap in fact between US supporters of Israel and Israeli citizens, a sizable majority of whom know that in the end Israel must acknowledge a realistic view of its own history and actuality before it can even nominally be accepted in the Arab and Islamic world..."

          4) "Or take the word "peace" and its cognate "peace process." Israel has tried to force "peace" on subjugated leaderships in the Arab world, and at the same time has continued aggressive policies of colonization and annexation that have earned it opprobrium everywhere - except in the US media, where its ethnic cleansing and systematic discrimination against non-Jews are either overlooked or justified cynically by exploiting Holocaust memories."

          5) " Since the US media concentrated so one-sidedly on Israeli travails in Lebanon, it was forgotten that Israel had for over 20 years defied the UN resolution enjoining it to leave, and had for years and years imposed a dreadful regime of torture, collaboration and pillage on the long-suffering Lebanese citizens who were there..."

          THAT'S 5 QUTES PROVING THAT PROFESSOR SAID (LIKE ME AND MANY OTHER IN THE WORLD)IS CRTICAL OF THE JEWISH CONTROL OF THE US MEDIA!

          NOW HIS ANTI-ZIONIST/ISRAELI (AND PRO-ARAB) QUOTES:-

          6) " The first of these succeeded partially, and in 1993 ended up delivering an exiled and sidelined Yasser Arafat as a docile partner with Israel in ending the intifada, policing the still occupied Palestinian territories, and attempting (so far unsuccessfully) to conclude the Palestinian quest for self-determination to Israel's advantage"


          7) "...for 22 years Israel has defied the international community by persisting in its various military occupations, bombing Arab capital cities at will, destroying civilian infrastructures and in Lebanon alone causing at least 20,000 deaths and uncounted thousands of wounded, 95 per cent of them civilian?"

          8) " Or take the word "peace" and its cognate "peace process." Israel has tried to force "peace" on subjugated leaderships in the Arab world, and at the same time has continued aggressive policies of colonization and annexation that have earned it opprobrium everywhere - except in the US media, where its ethnic cleansing and systematic discrimination against non-Jews are either overlooked or justified cynically by exploiting Holocaust memories."

          9) "...no cultural or political figure of independent national stature, no popular, syndical or really autonomous non-governmental organization among those Arabs whose leaders have made peace with Israel has in any serious way accepted the peace. "

          10) " Israel has remained "unnormalized," and basically isolated at the only level that counts in the long run..."

          11) " Islamic movements are part of this unofficial sector, of course, and what they offer is one intellectual and cultural alternative to the conventional one now in power. Many of these Islamic currents contradict each other but they all speak of resistance to US-style cultural conformity and consumerism, they oppose what Israel represents as an arrogantly alien force which must be de-Zionised and defeated or stopped rather than negotiated with supinely (e.g. the Oslo model), they all claim various kinds of connection to "authentic" popular forms of cultural and civil tradition. "

          PLUS ANTI-ZIONIST/ISRAELI (AND PRO-ARAB) QUOTES FROM YOUR ARTICLE:-

          12) "Arafat is a prisoner of both the Israelis and the United States..."

          13) " Another disadvantage that seems just as significant is that the Israeli
          idea of getting rid of the Palestinians by separation will be achieved
          not by Israel but by the Palestinian leadership. This would be the final
          triumph of the desire for the Palestinian people's disappearance by
          dispossession, for which a century of Zionist planning and belligerence
          has always plotted."

          * NOTICE THE TERM HE USES " Zionist planning and belligerence..." *

          14) " The Zionists consider it to be the Land of Israel, reserved exclusively
          for Jews. On the other hand, we should remember that every idea of
          Palestinian self-determination since the ascendancy of the present PLO
          has embodied an idea of non-discriminatory equality and sharing inPalestine."

          15) " This was the notion of a secular democratic state and, later, the idea of
          two states living side by side in neighborly harmony. These ideas were
          never accepted by the Israeli ruling majority, and Oslo, in my view, was
          a clever way for the Labor Party to create a series of Bantustans in
          which the Palestinians would be confined and dominated by Israel, at the
          same time hinting that a quasi-state for Palestinians would come intobeing."

          16) " To Israelis, Rabin and Peres spoke openly about separation, not as
          providing Palestinians with the right to self-determination but as a way
          of marginalizing and diminishing them, leaving the land basically to the
          more powerful Israelis. Separation in this perspective then becomes
          synonymous with apartheid, not with liberation. To declare a Palestinian
          state under such circumstances is essentially to accept the idea of
          separation as apartheid, not equality, and certainly not as
          self-determination. "Self-rule" is Netanyahu's euphemism for it."

          *AND I REMIND PEOPLE OF THE ORIGINAL LIE YOU TOLD*

          ***"I have read every book ever written by Ed Said. I often run into him on Sundays as we pick our “Jewish” bagels from the same place, he lives only a few blocks away from me. He is a professor of comparative lit at Columbia Jewniversity (and loves living in Jew York City). I admire his intellect, and most recently he wrote an article advocating creation of a greater Israel (encompassing all of the occupied territories). Although he is an expert on Middle East affairs, his views are more of an intellectual substance, and have very little practical significance"***

          And I remind everybody who Edward Said is - he is a Christian-Palestinian, professor of literature at Columbia University in New York and a leading Arab intellectual.

          AND I ASK YOU AGAIN AHMADI WHERE IN THE ABOVE 16 QUOTES FROM PROFESSOR SAID DO YOU GET THE IDEA TO BACK UP YOUR ORIGINAL LIE?

          AND HOW CAN YOU THEN POSSIBLY DISAGREE WITH MY NOTION THAT PROFESSOR SAID IS ANTI ZIONIST/ISRAELI AND PRO-ARAB/PALESTINIAN??

          - HONEST ANSWERS PLEASE?
          - AND YOUR APOLOGIES FOR MISLEADING FELLOW GUPPIES?

          And I remind everybody who Edward Said is - he is a Christian-Palestinian, professor of literature at Columbia University in New York and a leading Arab intellectual.

          P.S. You said "I am still waiting for your explanation about Ahmadis."

          - I never said one thing against those people (give me any quote to prove it or apologise?) BUT I did question your motives. But to answer your question - first tell me " are you Pakistani or American or otherwise???"

          P.S.. - Judging by your very questionable knowledge of Professor Said, and many of your 'textbook' answers I am beginning to suspect you are not who you claim to be and probably not a New Yorker????

          I THINK I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF OTHERS ON THIS FORUM, WHEN I SAY WE REQUIRE HONEST ANSWERS FROM YOU!!
          *********************************************

          P.S.. And finally some Ahmadi insults (during the previous discussion on the Indo-Israeli axis and this follow-up discussion) :

          1)To me he said - "And don’t worry about me, I don’t have any ambitions to impress dimwits like you"

          2) To Mr Extreme he said - " Let me try to correct only a few of your misconception (honestly, I don’t blame you for that, because ignorance is a global problem)."

          3) To CM he said -

          - "CM, what does my national affiliation has to do with anything, only dumbheads like you think that it is..."

          - "CM, perhaps it is wise to not say anything than to expose your pea-sized brains...Your mentioning about your 3 year old nephew, all I can say is that cursing is not one is his problems, his biggest problem is having an uncle who is a racist bigot..."

          - " CM, what questions are you talking about? What would you like to know from me? Ain’t there enough bigoted hatred-filled responses above from your self proclaimed knowitall brethren up there that you need my answers?...You may be a racist, but don’t assume that everyone else is."

          To both Mr Extreme and CM, Ahmadi said:-

          - " Dear Xtreme and small brains CM,...Xtreme, can you keep this Bozo under control? He is an insult to Pakistan."

          AHMADI - you are very much a angry man! - anyone who disagrees with you you insult with such foul language, and put-downs! I have successfully exposed you as a very questionable debater, lier, hypocrite and imposter?






          [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 13, 2000).]

          [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 13, 2000).]

          [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 13, 2000).]

          Comment


            #6
            Hey Kmailik, if i ever get on your bad side give me 24 hours to make it up to you.
            You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

            Comment


              #7
              CM Bhai I'll give you all the time you like..., at least you tell the truth all the time mate, unlike some people we know!

              [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 13, 2000).]

              Comment


                #8
                Kmailik, quite honestly, I don’t have time to go through your nonsense. Just a couple of things. You ask where have you insulted Ahmadis in your posts:

                >>>I never said one thing against those people (give me any quote to prove it or apologise?)<<<

                You said:

                >>>CM Buddy -
                I share your feelings regarding Ahmadi, and I think you are perfectly justified in reacting to his anti-Islam and anti-Pakistan lies. But you have got to feel a little sorry for people like him? - they are very much a stateless or non-people?...they will always being distrusted in their birth country AND their adopted country!<<<<

                Now what exactly do you mean that they will never be trusted? Non-people? Do you suffer from mental indisposition? Is that not an insult in your books?

                No one is questioning how much you can cut and paste, I only question the limit of stupidity in one individual, you don’t seem to show any.

                The other point you want to know:

                >>>I am beginning to suspect you are not who you claim to be and probably not a New Yorker????<<<

                I never expect anyone to go down so low that one questions where one lives. Would it matter if lived in China or Tel Aviv? Get a life! Nothing personal, but I think you need to consult for some psychological counseling.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by NYAhmadi:


                  >>>CM Buddy -
                  I share your feelings regarding Ahmadi, and I think you are perfectly justified in reacting to his anti-Islam and anti-Pakistan lies. But you have got to feel a little sorry for people like him? - they are very much a stateless or non-people?...they will always being distrusted in their birth country AND their adopted country!
                  Ok, now ahmadi, i have to go beat someone up - be back in a minute.

                  Ok now your quote:
                  Kmailik was discussing you as an individual - those people who sell out their country and not your religion.
                  You will always be a stateless person as you don't care for your birth nation, and within your resident nation you are seen as an immigratant and not a national citzen.
                  So you are effectively stateless.
                  That should explain his quote.
                  He was talking about your personality as a person as an individual and did not say anything about your race religion or creed.
                  Understand or am i going to have to draw it in crayon for you.
                  You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Ahmadi - I could spend all my time replying to your insults, but I won't stoop as low as you...

                    You did not answer even ONE of my questions regarding your great big white lie? So I take it from your refusal to answer, YOU ADMIT YOU ARE A LIER ? Well at least you're honest in admtting you are a lier? Just don't try to spread such blatant lies again, as I am on the watch out for you...and now others also know of your lies?

                    P.S. your question about my questioning your loyalty etc is answered 100% by buddy CM - Merci Mon Amie!

                    All the best in your ongoing 'journey of life' "NY Ahmadi" ????

                    [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 14, 2000).]

                    [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 14, 2000).]

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Now we have a pair of idiots sucking up to one another. Good going.

                      Kmailik, what level you are educated to?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Hi guys,

                        If we are about to discuss forum members perhaps we should open a thread on Meeting New Ppl, and I can close this thread, or else try and stick with the topic, thanks.

                        Saba

                        Comment


                          #13
                          "NYAhmadi" ? said:-

                          " Kmailik, quite honestly, I don’t have time to go through your nonsense..."

                          BUT HE HAS TIME TO FLING INSULTS LIKE:-

                          - " Kamilik, isn’t this a little too ambitious on your part, liking yourself to be like him? Don’t pump yourself up that much. "

                          - " And don’t worry about me, I don’t have any ambitions to impress dimwits like you..."

                          - " Do you suffer from mental indisposition?"

                          - "Now we have a pair of idiots sucking up to one another. Good going."

                          " AHMADI" ? IF YOU HAVE TIME TO WRITE INSULT AFTER INSULT THEN SURELY YOU CAN ANSWER THE ORIGINAL QUESTIONS I PUT - I'LL SUMMARISE THEM FOR YOU? PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING 3 QUESTIONS?

                          *** "Ahmadi said the following about Edward Said (posted May 25):-

                          "I have read every book ever written by Ed Said. I often run into him on Sundays as we pick our “Jewish” bagels from the same place, he lives only a few blocks away from me. He is a professor of comparative lit at Columbia Jewniversity (and loves living in Jew York City). I admire his intellect, and most recently he wrote an article advocating creation of a greater Israel (encompassing all of the occupied territories). Although he is an expert on Middle East affairs, his views are more of an intellectual substance, and have very little practical significance"

                          *** NOW PEOPLE DOES THIS NOT GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS HIGHLY NOTED PALESTINIAN PROFESSOR IS ADVOCATING JEWISH RULE OVER THE PALESTINIANS? (AND IS [PRO-SRAELI ETC)***

                          "Ahmadi" ? Following questions:-

                          ***Question 1 - How does your original assertion square up with an article that Professor Said has written in the 'Dawn' (see original post above)?

                          *** Question 2 - Does Professor Said not expose the Jewish (Zionist)and American conspiracy to keep Palestinians oppressed?(which you deny)? I give you the following 5 quotes from Professor Said to back my assertion up:-

                          i) "Arafat is a prisoner of both the Israelis and the United States..."

                          ii)" Another disadvantage that seems just as significant is that the Israeli idea of getting rid of the Palestinians by separation will be achievednot by Israel but by the Palestinian leadership. This would be the final triumph of the desire for the Palestinian people's disappearance by dispossession, for which a century of Zionist planning and belligerencehas always plotted."

                          * NOTICE THE TERM HE USES " Zionist planning and belligerence..." *

                          iii)" The Zionists consider it to be the Land of Israel, reserved exclusively for Jews. On the other hand, we should remember that every idea of Palestinian self-determination since the ascendancy of the present PLO has embodied an idea of non-discriminatory equality and sharing inPalestine."

                          iv) " This was the notion of a secular democratic state and, later, the idea of
                          two states living side by side in neighborly harmony. These ideas were never accepted by the Israeli ruling majority, and Oslo, in my view, was a clever way for the Labor Party to create a series of Bantustans in which the Palestinians would be confined and dominated by Israel, at the same time hinting that a quasi-state for Palestinians would come in to being."

                          v)" To Israelis, Rabin and Peres spoke openly about separation, not as providing Palestinians with the right to self-determination but as a way of marginalizing and diminishing them, leaving the land basically to the more powerful Israelis. Separation in this perspective then becomes synonymous with apartheid, not with liberation. To declare a Palestinian state under such circumstances is essentially to accept the idea of separation as apartheid, not equality, and certainly not asself-determination..."

                          ***QUESTION 3 - Does Profesor Said not expose Jewish control of the US Media? (which you deny). Another 5 quotes from Profeesor Said to back up my claim:-

                          i) Israel's defeat in South Lebanon...requires sober analysis free of the distortions imposed by the US media"

                          ii)"The stranglehold on US media perspectives maintained by the supporters of Israel has produced an astonishingly reductive view of reality..."

                          iii) " There is a wider and wider gap in fact between US supporters of Israel and Israeli citizens, a sizable majority of whom know that in the end Israel must acknowledge a realistic view of its own history and actuality before it can even nominally be accepted in the Arab and Islamic world..."

                          iv)"Or take the word "peace" and its cognate "peace process." Israel has tried to force "peace" on subjugated leaderships in the Arab world, and at the same time has continued aggressive policies of colonization and annexation that have earned it opprobrium everywhere - except in the US media, where its ethnic cleansing and systematic discrimination against non-Jews are either overlooked or justified cynically by exploiting Holocaust memories."

                          v)" Since the US media concentrated so one-sidedly on Israeli travails in Lebanon, it was forgotten that Israel had for over 20 years defied the UN resolution enjoining it to leave, and had for years and years imposed a dreadful regime of torture, collaboration and pillage on the long-suffering Lebanese citizens who were there..."


                          PLEASE ANSWER THE ABOVE 3 QUESTIONS? AND THIS WILL CLEAR UP YOUR ORIGINAL BIG WHITE LIE? MANY THANKS IN ADVANCE...

                          Sabah - I want to just discuss just the topic at hand, and want answers to why "Ahmadi"? originally told a lie and tried to mislead us all? Thanks...



                          [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 14, 2000).]

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Kmailik,

                            If that is the purpose of your life to investigate people, what a pathetic life must that be.

                            Silly kid, if Ed Said says “US media being biased”, it is his “editorial comment". He is entitled to say that. He writes frequently in “US Media” himself. That is only his assertion and there is very little truth to that.

                            When I mentioned his article, I said that it was an intellectual exercise, which he is very good at doing, and far above your capability to understand.

                            Now tell me what level you are educated until? I am really curious.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              PHD in IR
                              You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X