Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!mhuxt!mhuxr!mfs
From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (Damballah Wedo)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion.jewish,net.nlang.africa
Subject: Re: The definition of terrorism is NOT flexible!
Message-ID: <492@mhuxr.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Dec-85 09:29:42 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxr.492
Posted: Tue Dec 10 09:29:42 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Dec-85 04:29:58 EST
References: <4188@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> <360@ubvax.UUCP>
Organization: The Poto Mitan in the Houmfor
Lines: 48
Xref: watmath net.politics:12411 net.religion.jewish:2842 net.nlang.africa:177

> J. Abeles
> > Me
> > Thedefinition of terrorism, and justification for supporting it, is highly
> > flexible. Those who are on our side are democratic freedom fighters. Those
> > who are not are bloodthirsty murderers.
> 
> THE DEFINITION OF TERRORISM IS NOT FLEXIBLE.
> 
> [ Multiple lines of high intensity flames ]

Mr. Abeles must have misunderstood, misread, or not read what I wrote.
I did not equate Israeli behavior with that of any terrorist, or freedom
fighting, group. I did point out that justification for US support
of contras and others is exactly the same as justification for Arab support
of the PLO. GOOD and EVIL have very little place in geopolitics.
They are just words, to be used in advancing a point of view.
In any conflict, the winner gets to write the official version
of history, and claim that his side was right, good, democratic, etc.

From the Palestinian point of view, they had their land forcibly taken
from them. Yes, the Jews also have claims to that land. However,
if someone came to yoour house and handed you an eviction notice,
claiming that the house had been in his family a couple of thousand
years ago, that he had been unfairly evicted by a third party,
that he had now come back to reclaim his property, and that intended to
keep you out, by force if necessary, would you not defend yourself,
by force if necessary? 

NOTE: the above paragraph does not represent approval of terrorist
tactics, but attempts to state a world view. That world view is
that of the vanquished, hence carries little weight. That does not
reduce its validity.

> For the Jews, the establishment of Israel was a positive thing,
> a step forward.  For the other Palestinian inhabitants, mostly Arab,
> it need not have been a step backwards, but it undoubtedly has
> worked out to be one.  But I submit to you that it would not
> be a positive thing for Palestinian Arabs to become pre-occupied
> with taking revenge on the Jewish state.  For that is TERRORISM.

It is terrorism because it clashes with your view of the situation.
Consider the Stern gang, and other Jewish groups operating just prior
to the formation of Israel. Were their tactics terrorism, too?
-- 
Marcel-Franck Simon		ihnp4!{mhuxr, hl3b5b}!mfs

		" Krik."			"Krak."
		" Kapite`n anba kabann."	"Vaz."