From rah@bash.sh Wed Jan 24 17:15:00 2007 Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] an relevant link about Vista From: Bob Ham To: Wayne Myers Cc: Marc-Olivier Barre In-Reply-To: <20070124133230.36b99026@localhost.localdomain> References: <45AB8DB1.1050307@woh.rr.com> <20070115223056.123ebe08@localhost> <20070116031322.0c33c628@localhost.localdomain> <1169582504.2232.27.camel@orchid.arb.net> <20070123234401.1f02da9f@localhost.localdomain> <1169634084.2232.96.camel@orchid.arb.net> <20070124133230.36b99026@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-klz46MmMqSmC9iUaYHqU" Message-Id: <1169658900.2232.262.camel@orchid.arb.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2.1 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:15:00 +0000 X-Evolution-Format: text/plain X-Evolution-Account: 1145234978.20844.16@orchid X-Evolution-Transport: smtp://rah@smtp/;use_ssl=never X-Evolution-Fcc: imap://rah@teasel/INBOX/sent X-Evolution-Source: imap://rah@teasel/ --=-klz46MmMqSmC9iUaYHqU Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 13:32 +0000, Wayne Myers wrote: > Dear Bob, >=20 > > In effect, you are claiming your post had an impact on a non-existent > > potential for discussion. This is nonsense. >=20 > The Middle East. 'Non-existent potential for discussion'. >=20 > Nonsense indeed, Bob. The issue isn't whether there is a potential for discussion, but whether there was a potential for that discussion to take place on the LAD list. And indeed, that is pretty much nonsense. > > > and I am not going to tell you. > >=20 > > This, in itself, is very telling. (And very childish, as well.) >=20 > Why should I enter into discussion with you when all you have done is in > essence to attack me for being Jewish I didn't even know you were Jewish until you said right there. I know many Zionists who aren't Jewish. Most of them are Christian. Anglo-Saxon Christians, no less. I actually expected that was what you were; a Zionist Christian and probably, given your .co.uk domain, an Anglo-Saxon. > , and therefore, like the vast bulk > of us, a Zionist? I concluded you were a Zionist not because I thought you were Jewish, but because of the way you came out against criticism of Israel. I couldn't have concluded that you were a Zionist due to being Jewish because, as noted, I thought you explicitly weren't Jewish. > You don't even realise that this is what you have > done, but believe me, it is. Erm.. ok.. if you say so. > I am spelling it out clearly so that you > understand this. You haven't spelled anything out. How is Anti-Zionism an attack on the Jewish? > > Also, to say that I am racist because I express anti-Zionist views is > > completely irrational. Proposing that a race should not be treated > > specially is not proposing it should be treated badly. Anti-Zionism > is > > the former; racism is the latter. >=20 > It seems you understand neither 'anti-Zionism' nor 'racism'. More reason > not to enter into discussion with you, since you are ignorant of the > basic meaning and impact of the terms which are central to the debate. Calling people ignorant isn't a particularly good way to debate, either. > > Ye, let us quote from the book of The Guardian, February 2006: > >=20 > > 'Desmond Tutu, the former archbishop of Cape Town and chairman of > South > > Africa's truth and reconciliation commission, visited the occupied > > territories three years ago and described what he found as "much like > > what happened to us black people in South Africa". >=20 > That is Tutu's view. He did not, you will note, stoop so low as to call > it 'apartheid'.=20 Well, I think here, the issue is that what's going on around Israel is not *exactly* the same as what went on in South Africa. For example, Israel doesn't rule over a majority as it oppresses them. The issue, really, is not the precise state of affairs that gives rise to the human suffering, but the suffering itself. It is the suffering of the Palestinian people which bears comparison to apartheid South Africa. This is why the ex-American president, Jimmy Carter, used the word in the title of his book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. The issue, you see, is THE SUFFERING. I lived with two South Africans for a time and they told me tales of how, in the "good old days" of apartheid, they would just walk up to blacks and punch them in the face. I direct you to the following photo, depicting similarly degrading behaviour from Israelis: http://teasel.6gnip.net/~rah/israeli-apartheid.jpg Comparing the plight of Palestinians to the plight of South African blacks seems, to me, like a no-brainer. In my experience, it is only when Zionist bias enters into it that the comparison becomes an issue. And again, the Zionism here is to do with the blind support of a state, not who gives that support, or what race they are. > Not only that, but the West Bank and Gaza are not Israel and never have > been. I would agree strongly that the situation there is wholly > unacceptable, that Israel must withdraw and an independent Palestinian > state be established as soon as possible. I would agree strongly that > Israel's management of the territories has been a disaster both morally > and politically. >=20 > That doesn't make Israel an apartheid state. I *see*, so what you're saying is that it's the people in the occupied territories that are being oppressed, not the people in Israel itself. Fair enough. I conceed, Israel itself is not an apartheid state; it simply opposes an apartheid state on Palestinians in the occupied territories. > > As far back as 1961, Hendrik Verwoerd, the South African prime > minister > > and architect of the "grand apartheid" vision of the bantustans, saw a > > parallel. "The Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had > lived > > there for a thousand years. Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid > > state," he said. It is a view that horrifies and infuriates many > > Israelis.' >=20 > Quoting arch-racist Verwoerd to further your argument is peculiar, don't > you think? I'd imagine he would be pretty good at pointing out other racist states. The peculiar thing is that he'd probably think they were a good thing. > > I especially note the last words, "It is a view that horrifies and > > infuriates many Israelis." In fact, I've seen that it is a view that > > horrifies and infuriates many Zionists, regardless of whether they > live > > in Israel. >=20 > Yes it does. It horrifies and infuriates because it is wrong. It also > horrifies and infuriates Jews when Zionism is compared to Nazism, which > is another popular anti-Zionist antisemitic trope well attested in the > literature. Ye gods man. I'm not anti-Jewish; I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE JEWISH. I care about the people being hurt by Israel. I also care about the LAD community. There is a difference between people who are against Jews, and people who are against a nation state being created for one race at the expense of another. The former is racism; the latter is, in the case of Israel, anti-Zionism. They are different concepts. I am not racist. > How does that contribute to peace in the Middle East? >=20 > > Combined with the following page > >=20 > > http://www.waz.easynet.co.uk/aby/ > >=20 > > I think it's quite reasonable to conclude that your primary motivation > > does not lie in the correct usage of the LAD mailing list, but > somewhere > > in the Middle East. >=20 > Well spotted. I am Jewish and I speak Hebrew well enough to have > translated a Hebrew poet into English. Do you have a point there or am I > supposed to detect the not-so-subtle antisemitic undertone for myself? I thought my point was pretty damned clear: you misrepresented yourself. At heart, your issue with Dominique's statement was to do with your support for Israel, not support for the LAD list or the LAD community. You could detect all the anti-Semitic undertones you like, but you'd be hallucinating. > It's quite reasonable to conclude that like many who oppose Israel and > Zionism unconditionally and uncritically that your motivation is based > more on antisemitism than anything else. I don't oppose Israel unconditionally and uncritically. Nor do I oppose Zionism unconditionally and uncritically. Indeed, I've critically evaluated the Zionist view point, the creation of the State of Israel, and the continued support by Britain and the US and come to the conclusion that it was, and still is, wrong. This is based on my opinion of WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG. If you think it's because I hate Jews, then that's up to you; if you can't separate anti-Zionism from racism, then there's nothing I can say that will convince you. > There's no point trying to explain it to you though, as you are > incapable of distinguishing between Zionism and apartheid and in denial > with regard to the racist undertone of your own statements on the > subject. There are no racist undertones. There's quite explicit overtones of me thinking you're arrogant, not particularly bright, and most importantly to me, having misrepresented yourself to the LAD community. The issue is *you*, not your race. > I admit that I do take criticism of Israel motivated by unacknowledged > antisemitism, such as yours would appear to be, rather badly and > personally. This is both because it is a personal attack on myself as a > Jew and also because it detracts from the important valid and genuine > criticism of Israel. Based on what the rest of your email, I suggest you should re-evaluate your ability to detect anti-Semitism. To be frank, you really do seem to have major issues about the subject. I don't dislike Jews. I've known Jews, I've gotten drunk with Jews, I've spoken with Jews. The fact that they were Jewish was never an issue for me but it seems to be a major issue for you. I don't care if you're Jewish, but you do. Moreover, you seem to be overly concerned about how other people feel about you being Jewish. > Finally, why did you copy Marc-Olivier into your last mail? What does > your desire to have a personal and pointless flame war with me have to > do with him? The issue is your behaviour on the LAD list and towards the LAD community, and still is. This is why I've CC'd him into this email, as well (hi, Marc-Olivier.) My concern is that Marc-Olivier would give you the power to moderate the LAD list, and potentially curtail any posts you might deem as anti-Semitic. As noted above, that could be a major issue given your preoccupation with your own Jewishness and propensity to take any criticism as anti-Semitic. I CC him in so that he can make an informed decision about whether to give you such power. Kind regards, Bob Ham --=20 Bob Ham --=-klz46MmMqSmC9iUaYHqU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFt5QU7whsMRnFexQRAqWGAJ91/JQGxiLfY4M1FVMqRFZUPdTfyACfbjbY SReoO3tet4plcZSgIqDNGCY= =Xms9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-klz46MmMqSmC9iUaYHqU--