Papy on 16/1/2009 at 14:31
Quote Posted by Thirith
Oh, so it was those guys on the photo throwing stones who were killed? Ah well, in that case it's clearly absolutely justified to be all self-righteous about denying them sympathy.
Give assault riffles to those nice kids and I'm pretty sure they would happily use them to murder Jews instead of using some lame stones. I understand why does kids do this, and if I were in their situation there's a chance I would do the same thing (of course there's also a chance I would go the other way and try to kill Hamas leaders), but it doesn't change the fact that those kids are now completely fucked up and a lot of them will be fucked up for the rest of their lives. The situation is sad, the situation deserve sympathy, those kids as individuals do not. Don't confuse what those could have been with what they are now.
Thirith on 16/1/2009 at 14:41
Quote Posted by heywood
Thirith -
I think you're perverting my point. Innocents die in every war and sure they deserve sympathy. People who die in car accidents deserve sympathy. Etc. Nobody is saying that innocent people deserve to die. That is so obvious I don't know why I need to say it. :confused:
What I'm saying is that I no longer feel sympathy for the plight of the Israeli and Palestinian peoples (particularly the Gazans). And I think there are other peoples and other conflicts more deserving of the world's attention.
Perhaps I'm not making it clear enough or you're misunderstanding my point. But if you're trying to equate not having sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people to not ever having sympathy for any innocent Palestinian, then it is you making the reductionist argument, not me.
Okay, this does change things a bit. I would still argue that the distinction between "the plight of the Israeli and Palestinian peoples" and the individuals on the ground is a problematic one, but that's something that can be discussed.
Koki on 16/1/2009 at 15:16
You sure do have a lot of sympathy available heywood.
DDL on 16/1/2009 at 16:38
Those rock throwing "kids" look to be mid-20s at least.
Or do they age faster in Gaza or something?
sh0ck3r on 17/1/2009 at 16:47
Quote Posted by heywood
Thirith -
Perhaps I'm not making it clear enough or you're misunderstanding my point. But if you're trying to equate not having sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people to not ever having sympathy for any innocent Palestinian, then it is you making the reductionist argument, not me.
Well, you did make a rash, open-ended statement that could easily be understood as meaning you didn't give a damn about anyone in Palestine or Israel whatsoever.
Quote:
sh0ck3r -
I fail to see a moral equivalence between the genocides in Africa and the Israel-Palestine conflict. If you don't see the difference, fine, but I do. You were probably joking about the North Koreans, but I actually have a lot of sympathy for the North Korean people. They have no choice. They are living in a closed society ruled by a dictator and they're not even fully aware of their own plight.
Maybe there isn't perfect "moral equivalence" but what you said is that you don't sympathize with those whose troubles result from making the same mistakes repeatedly and arguably most of Africa's problems could be summarized this way.
Nicker on 18/1/2009 at 03:53
Quote Posted by heywood
Nicker -
Trying to get back on topic. Even if the flag violated the lease (not sure if it did), that still doesn't justify illegal entry and seizure. Leases specify how to deal with violations, typically written notice, then fines and/or eviction.
And the ethical choice for the police was to control the violent protesters. That is their duty. By breaking into this guy's apartment and taking his flag, they became agents of the mob instead of agents of the law.
My concern is that if you allow the police to throw out the law and violate people's rights whenever there's a perceived threat of violence, then it's not a free society anymore. It's worse when the law itself violates people's rights (ie. the USA Patriot Act). I'm just disappointed in general with how the supposedly "free world" has responded thus far to the spread of radical Islam.
By describing the police action as illegal you are making an unproved assertion. I'm willing to bet that their action was not illegal, at least in Germany. If you have proof otherwise...
If you believe that your lease prevents a similar situation in your country I'd suggest reading the fine print. My brother-in-law is a fire inspector and they are allowed considerable lattitude entering private suites when investigating and neutralising reported fire hazards (including disassembling an unatttended, candle-lit altar, decorated with rice paper prayers - I shit you not).
You can be certain that (with real and justifiable cause) a great variety of persons can enter your apartment, home or place of business without so much as a 'howdy do'.
This matter has nothing to do with kow-towing to 'radical islam'. As Musman put it, the police faced a decision on how to defuse an emergent situation - call in the riot squad or take down a piece of coloured cloth. Idealism aside, we are still waiting for a better solution to be put forth.
Tocky on 18/1/2009 at 04:35
And yet it is no less sad that people have to adjust thier free speech because a group of people will likely become violent.
Nicker on 18/1/2009 at 09:41
Yes.
Jason Moyer on 19/1/2009 at 17:33
Israel is withdrawing their troops from Gaza following their unilateral cease fire, and plan on being completely out of the territory before Obama's inauguration tomorrow. Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel, ignoring the Palestinian ceasefire. So basically the situation is exactly the same as every other time this shit happens.
Stitch on 19/1/2009 at 18:03
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel, ignoring the Palestinian ceasefire.
A link would be helpful here as I can't find news of it anywhere.
