Mycoplasma: An Interesting Trail ?

The super powers still need to kill with landmines... Seems that those who do not want landmines, already have them littering their country. :(

Red Cross said:
Are Landmines Illegal?
Yes, if your country is one of the 153 members of the Ottawa Treaty, then the use, stockpiling, production and transfer (including selling) of landmines is illegal. In December 1997, 123 governments came to Ottawa at the invitation of the Canadian government to sign the Ottawa Treaty. Officially, the Ottawa Treaty is known as the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and their Destruction. The Ottawa Treaty provides a “Four-Step Solution” to ridding the world of the scourge of landmines.
See: _http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=1945&tid=110

Not surprising, look at the big shots who have not signed:
Canadian Landmine Foundation said:
As of April 2007 … Forty states, including the People's Republic of China, India, Russia and the United States, have not signed.
see: _http://www.canadianlandmine.org/Ottawa_Treaty.cfm
Does anyone know what other countries have not signed?

These have signed:
United Nations said:
Albania, Algeria, Andorra*, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia*, Austria*, Bahamas*, Bangladesh, Barbados*, Belgium*, Belize*, Benin*, Bolivia*, Bosnia and Herzegovina*, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria*, Burkina Faso*, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada*, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Cook Islands, Costa Rica*, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia*, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark*, Djibouti*, Dominica*, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador*, Equatorial Guinea*, Ethiopia, Fiji*, France*, Gabon, Gambia, Germany*, Ghana, Greece, Grenada*, Guatemala*, Guinea*, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Holy See*, Honduras*, Hungary*, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland*, Italy, Jamaica*, Japan*, Jordan*, Kenya, Lesotho*, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi*, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali*, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius*, Mexico*, Monaco*, Mozambique*, Namibia*, Netherlands*, New Zealand*, Nicaragua*, Niger*, Niue*, Norway*, Panama*, Paraguay*, Peru*, Philippines, Poland, Portugal*, Qatar*, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis*, Saint Lucia*, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa*, San Marino*, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal*, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia*, Slovenia*, Solomon Islands*, South Africa*, Spain*, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland*, Sweden*, Switzerland*, Thailand*, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia*, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago*, Tunisia, Turkmenistan*, Uganda*, Ukraine, United Kingdom*, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela*, Yemen*, Zambia, Zimbabwe*
see: _http://www.un.org/Depts/DPKO/maputo/2030.htm
 
anart said:
Idan, you have made enormous, and incorrect, assumptions about me and what I do or don't 'think about you'. This is not uncommon, but it is unwarranted, unnecessary and unfortunate in the context of this forum and how it operates.
then I apologise. Feel free to correct me on any point. Since I have been the subject of the same treatment, I know how it feels.

anart said:
You are also clearly not interested in the truth about the legality, or lack thereof, of Israel's actions. I have neither the time nor the inclination to try to speak logic to someone so emotionally invested in a lie. Your righteous indignation would be humorous if it weren't for what your country has done and is doing. As it stands, it is not humorous - it is repellent.
I don't think i quite got across to you my viewpoint, or you would not have used the term "your country". Is it not sufficiently clear that I am extremely critical of Israel's policies? I think I stressed that enough times.
In any case, if you don't have the time or inclination to speak logic, and yet spend time and effort to explain to me the error of my ways ( or rather, the error of my entire being) I can assume - deducing logically from the given premises - that you lack either the ability or the inclination to do so. I somehow suspect that this isn't the case, but since you give me no further information to work on, I am at a los to persue this trail of enquiry, and therefore my conclusion stands.
Should you choose to start a logical debate, I am eager to listen. I can read basic formalized notation, if it helps with the "time" problem.

anart said:
You have no idea about who I am or what I have done or what I do - that is fine, actually, considering who you are, I prefer it that way.
Fair enough; you have the right to remain anonymous. I have the right to judge you by what I know about you as you have the right to judge me by what you know about me. Since I have much less data, my judgements will statitically be wider of the mark. Logic, see.

anart said:
Oh, poor, poor, pitiful Idan - how terribly sad for you. Sorry - no dice - you have (as most people do) done what best serves you, this is clear from your posting here - the 'truth' is nothing other than what serves you best, your 'actions' are nothing other than what serve you best. You truly seem to believe the things that you say here - or you are so good at it that it just seems that way. That is fine.
Of course I've done what best serves me - as does everyone, each within his or her cirrcumstances - and that includes my conscience, which wasn't feeling very good in Israel. I pay the price for it, and consider the price quite fair, so I don't see the point of your commiseration.


anart said:
This, also, is not uncommon, but clearly this forum is not for you.
Yes, I see that now. For the subject of study to suddenly pipe up and express opinions would be an unnerving experience for any dissector.
 
name said:
Last month I read the patriotic rant of an Israeli living in Australia exhorting his compatriots to leave the land, in the 'risque' (accent on the e) fashion of people who say the opposite of what they mean, or mean the opposite of what they say. Pretty normal stuff these days, until I read that he had been stationed in Hebron. That woke me up, since for personal reasons I've become a bit of an expert in that place, w/o ever having been there.
Hi name, I'm sorry, I don't understand - perhaps idan can clarify? Is he encouraging people to leave Israel, or is he encouraging Jews to return to Israel. I'm sure there must be an answer and a reason for it, which might be interesting...

I found this article on Epidemiology and Pathogenisis of Influenza. It might be interesting for anyone who wants to find out more about this virus. I can save it and print it, but I can't copy and paste it (password protected). I'm not even sure if I can email it as an attachment. I guess there's only one way to find out.
 
Idan said:
Of course I've done what best serves me - as does everyone, each within his or her cirrcumstances -
No.

This is not true.

There is another way to live, another way to Be. You see, you wandered into this forum because someone mentioned your name. As far as I can tell, the initial post in this thread lacked merit in general - it was a theory that went nowhere - that happens quite a lot when a group of people are earnestly investigating the world around them.

Did you happen to notice that the initial post was made well over a year ago and received not ONE response, until you showed up?

It was dead - it was gone and archived away never to be seen again - there was no 'dissection' going on - not until you arrived FULL of self-importance and empty righteous indignation.

And, now, here we are since your self-importance appears to know no bounds. That would be fine, other than the fact that you have NO idea what this forum is about in general - other than how it applies to you - and, let me inform you, that, other than a fairly misguided post well over a year ago that no one would have ever looked at again - it has nothing to do with you.

The reason I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain these things to you, Sir Idan, is that all the information you need to understand everything about what I have previously written is explained - in great detail - on these forum pages and the associated web sites.

If you are sincerely interested, then do the WORK and read it. That is how it works here.

Enough time and energy has been spent on your ego. If you are interested in learning, feel free to stay and do that. If you are not, please move along - any further insulting, confrontational or derogatory posts will result in your being removed.
 
PepperFritz said:
I have read this thread with interest, and just wanted to try and explain to you why your posts are so out-of-place here, and leave such a ugly taste in the mouth. .
I'm sorry for that taste, but I don't think it should be my function to appease you. As you may recall, you (as a forum) started discussing me in a public forum. If my replies are reprehensible to you, well, that only serves to strengthen your point, right?

PepperFritz said:
See, this forum is dedicated to observing and discussing objective reality, and whenever possible we try to cut down on the kind of subjective noise and manipulation that tends to obscure that reality. The forum's moderators are especially well trained in slicing through the BS, but even to a regular forum member of myself the dishonesty of your posts (whether conscious or unconscious) is rather obvious.
Ah, objective reality. I see. Well, I don't know much about that - I'm a scientist, not a professional political pundit - but I would suggest that if you do try to discuss objective reality, pick your subject matters more carefully, restricting them to more objectifiable things - geology and mathematics, say, rather than individual ideological stances (although even purely scientific matters are not considered "objective" - see Kuhn, Lakatos and especially Feyeraband on this). As it is, any student of philosophy would tell you that "objective reality" is a highly contested term nowadays.
regarding honesty: well, it appears that everyone here knows me better than I know myself; to that I can have no answer of course, other than thanking my lucky stars for finally having stumbled upon the realm of the all-knowing wise beings who can now correct my erring ways.


PepperFritz said:
Your defence of your CHOICE to join the Israeli army as part of a combat unit, is self-serving in the extreme. An honest characterization of that choice would be to simply say "I wanted to serve the Israeli army in a combat unit because at the time I believed in the 'cause' my country was fighting for." Or "I did not believe in my country's 'cause', but at the time was not brave enough act in accordance with my beliefs/principles. I chose to become the potential killing tool of an genocidal occupying army rather than suffer the consequences (none of which were life-threatening) of doing otherwise." These statements any of us could have related to. But you do not provide an honest characterization. Instead you attempt to manipulate the facts and circumstances, and try to pull the wool over our (and maybe your own) eyes:
In order to minimize your responsibility for your own choice, you invent and/or exaggerate the "consequences" of making a different choice, to create the illusion that you really had NO CHOICE and are in fact a "victim":
well, officially the IDF doesn't allow one to decide, but yes, people find ways to get non-com status. As it was, I felt (along with, I believe, most of this forum's members) that there's no difference in terms of conscience once one is in uniform. Why would I be less a part of what the IDF is doing if I were behind a desk somewhere, in charge of distribtion of ammunition or fixing combat jets? Because I could then resort to the "not my hands" defense? that seems to me hypocritical in the extreme, and I don't like hypocrites.
As a part of a combat unit I was placed to act (in those very limited times where i had some freedom to decide) in accordance with my conscience. If i hadn't been there, someone else would have, and I chose to be where I could make some sort of a difference, however miniscule, instead of sitting back somewhere and saying "ME? Oh no, I was just at this desk, doing admin, I didn't know all this was happening". Again, that's a moral dilemma, and since you've never been faced with it, and your country's dirtiwork is being done by someone else (whether you approve of it or object to it vehemently, but fortunately never been forced to take part in), you're free to pass your untainted judgement on me.


PepperFritz said:
Please. Death? Suicide? I've yet to hear of an Israeli citizen being executed for refusing to join the army, or committing suicide due to a lack of options. Suicide is in fact much more prevalent among Israeli soldiers than those who choose not to serve. A life of jail terms? Only for those few determined to make a political statement by making an overt refusal while still hanging on to citizenship. The fact is there are many choices available before it ever has to come to that. Just as in the U.S. and other countries, under Israeli law one can apply for Conscientious Objector status. If that fails, one can request to serve in a non-combat position. In the unlikely event that were to fail, one can ask to be exempted from serving on the West Bank and Gaza. So what does that leave? Oh yeah. Social ostracism. So? Give up your Israeli citizenship (which shouldn't be hard, considering how much you supposedly despise what your country is doing), move to another country. Wait a minute. You eventually DID move to another country. And you're happy now, yes? So how hard would it have been to do the same back then? Turns out, there really wouldn't have been very much in the way of serious "consequences" if you had refused to be a tool of you country's occupation and genocide. See how much clearer the picture becomes after you peel away the lies, half-lies, half-truths, and general manipulation?
one by one:
- I was not suggesting that people commit suicide to avoid the draft. I said it was an option -albeit very extreme. Fortunately no-one takes it.
But other than that, your facts are not quite right: When one becomes a conscientous objector in Israel, he or she faces prison. This is precisely the "overt refusal" you referred to earlier - the two are not seperate in Israel. That is how it is, and you're welcome to check this statement with the Israeli refusnick organisations, in the papers or the lawbooks. It's very much a sticking point for any Israeli refusnick (I have some friends in that category, and I've heard their stories).
Furthermore, one cannot "ask to serve outside the territories" - or at least that was not an available option at the time I was drafted (1993). such a request would be flatly ignored, and if insisted upon - military jail, again.
Next: " If that fails, one can request to serve in a non-combat position." - see my comments above.
social ostracism:
- for an eighteen year old to give up his Israeli citizenship Is in fact quite hard, since there is no country in the world who would accept him. The immigration laws of the US, European countries , Australia, etc. are quite clear on that, - feel free to check them out. so"how hard would it have been to do the same back then?" - why, quite hard indeed! Now that I have acquired a profession, work experience etc., Australia has accepted me. Back then? 18 with no money or profession? no way. go to the immigration websites and see for yourself.

So you see, once you actually get your facts right, the situation becomes more complicated again. It's a shame, isn't it? that objective reality is so darn messy.

PepperFritz said:
Right. Like you don't know that "definitions" of "war crimes" and "genocide" are entirely dependent on who the perpetrator and victim are; who is doing the "defining"; and whose purpose the definition serves. But you're right. Let's not quibble, on that point we agree. Let's just call a war crime a war crime and an act of genocide an act of genocide, and stop pretending that what's going on in Israel/Palestine isn't really going on.
I wasn't pretending that nothing is happening, and I stressed that twice. I said "atrocities" and so on and on. How can that be construed as "pretending" I have no idea.

PepperFritz said:
In other words, Idan, if you hope to have meaningful discussions on this form -- on any subject -- you're going to have to get real, and fast.
Well, I'm trying, but whenever I try you keep springing up imaginary laws on me; it's very difficult to carry on a meaningful discussion this way.
 
Ruth said:
Hi name, I'm sorry, I don't understand - perhaps idan can clarify? Is he encouraging people to leave Israel, or is he encouraging Jews to return to Israel. I'm sure there must be an answer and a reason for it, which might be interesting...
I tought I was quite clear in my article - and indeed among the hundreds who have commented on this article in one way or another- Palestinians, europeans, American Jews, Palestinians, Egyptians etc. - "name"'s interpertation of the article as "saying the opposite of what he means" appears to stand alone. All the others understood me rightly to mean exactly what I said.

that;s the answer, and the reason is stated in the article itself, which you can read for yourself.

I hope that answers your question.
 
anart said:
There is another way to live, another way to Be. You see, you wandered into this forum because someone mentioned your name. As far as I can tell, the initial post in this thread lacked merit in general - it was a theory that went nowhere - that happens quite a lot when a group of people are earnestly investigating the world around them.
Did you happen to notice that the initial post was made well over a year ago and received not ONE response, until you showed up?
Yeah, I did notice that. I even mentioned it earlier.

anart said:
It was dead - it was gone and archived away never to be seen again - there was no 'dissection' going on - not until you arrived FULL of self-importance and empty righteous indignation.
Ah, my reply could also have gone untouched and the subject would've been dead again within a day (which would've suited me fine). But people commented further. these things happen on forums. If you consider me a troll in this forum, don't feed me. that's the established procedure. Simple.
(although trolls usually barge in from nowhere - I've never known of someone trolling a thread discussing himself)

anart said:
And, now, here we are since your self-importance appears to know no bounds. That would be fine, other than the fact that you have NO idea what this forum is about in general - other than how it applies to you - and, let me inform you, that, other than a fairly misguided post well over a year ago that no one would have ever looked at again - it has nothing to do with you...

...Enough time and energy has been spent on your ego. If you are interested in learning, feel free to stay and do that. If you are not, please move along - any further insulting, confrontational or derogatory posts will result in your being removed.
Well and good. Disregard my posts, or chuck out the whole thread if you want, as moderators do for wildly off-topic threads. you're the boss.
I will say this: all my life I have striven to be aware, awake, not sleepwalk through life, and to perceive reality in its fullness and wavering, bewildering complexity rather than as a set of rigid structures. I may have failed, and I may fail still; but I do not see around me in this forum any sign of a higher state of enlightenment or an encouregment or inspiration to acheive it. and that is sad.
 
idan said:
Well and good. Disregard my posts, or chuck out the whole thread if you want, as moderators do for wildly off-topic threads. you're the boss.
I will say this: all my life I have striven to be aware, awake, not sleepwalk through life, and to perceive reality in its fullness and wavering, bewildering complexity rather than as a set of rigid structures. I may have failed, and I may fail still; but I do not see around me in this forum any sign of a higher state of enlightenment or an encouregment or inspiration to acheive it. and that is sad.
These last three posts of Idan's being the most enormous pile of manipulative, self-important horse hockey I have ever personally stepped in, Idan has been removed.

I'm sure he'll be much happier elsewhere. Interesting that he suggested that we 'chuck the whole thread' ... I need a shower after this one... and not just for the 'muck' on my shoes.
 
Since I started this thread, I think that I'd also answer Idan's questions just in case he is still around reading. After re-reading my original posting, I see that some anger went into it, because I read about things (not war crimes, mind you, lest Idan becomes offended) on a daily basis being done by the IDF, which just make my blood boil, and that is the case since years.

Idan called my attention back then because I happen to have a quite futile interest. Just as Idan finds an interest in mycoplasma, I find it exceedingly interesting to follow the careers of IDF people after they (officially) leave the army. Idan is one among several similar examples of "ex-" hayalim who become involved in things which not many people would do, and who somehow manage to land in places and/or positions in faraway lands and where I have left asking myself a) how ? and b) with what qualification ? Even if my initial post was without merit, I think that these miracles are interesting to look at and try to understand, because, perhaps there is more to them than meets the eye. And what most confirms to me that there must be something to this all is that since about 2005 the internet has been systematically cleansed about information about (ex-)IDF personnel. Even the IDF itself redesigned their website last year and what has come out is as devoid of information as an ob-commercial.

One example of miraculous careers of other ex-hayalim would be the case of a guy who bragged in public and in writing in the 1980s about how he'd mistreated (pregnant) Palestinian women during his time in the IDF and who is currently at the head of one of the biggest govt-owned companies in the UK. Another examples which pop into mind is the guy about whom nothing is to be found out (or, my googling skills have left me) beyond some bland commendations of meritory service, and who became the head of a govt-appointed commission to set up a so-called "elite-university"in Austria. Never mind the many people who sit in political bodies of many countries either as elected representatives or (more often) as employees behind the scenes and whose *only* qualification for these positions seems to be that they have a past in the IDF and *obvious* intel training.

- you are a bit paranoid, yes. I did my stint at the army, was not involved in any crimes against humanity that I know of (unless you include that one time someone shot at me) and went away to study medical science, a subject that interests me a lot more than army crap. I then got hooked on microbiology because it's interesting. Mycoplasma are wonderous creatures (if you want to know more, check out their "antigenic variation" moves in google or wherever - sweet indeed).
Yes, I am a bit paranoid. Experience has shown me that it is appropriate to be more than just "a bit paranoid" when dealing with anybody or anything related to Israel.
Your claim that you was "not involved in any crimes against humanity that I know of ..." is abstruse. Legally speaking, your mere presence anywhere beyond the "green line" constitutes a crime against humanity, and if you had a rank beyond that of a conscript (as you claim), I suppose that they would have taught you about the Geneva Conventions and other relevant pieces of internaitonal law to which Israel has subscribed (in bad faith obviously) at officer school. And if we go beyond these merely technical legal considerations, it is IMO correct to say that "Israel" is in its totality a criminal enterprise, so, if you "contributed" to this criminal enterprise, to quote you "in a combat unit, I was a career officer for a while, I did reserve service, I carried loads, I was stationed at roadblocks, I guarded, I screened, I navigated, I greased, I planted landmines, I patrolled, I ambushed", then, which were the crimes against humanity which you did NOT commit ? And even supposing that you sat at office the whole day, you would still be a member of a criminal and terrorist organization (the so-called "State of Israel"), what is sanctioned in many places, including Australia. Your lack of understanding just about anything about the effects of your actions is astonishing.

I also have to ask about "that one time someone shot at me": somebody shot at you and you committed a crime against humanity ?! Is that not an admission of sorts ? And, why would somebody shoot at you if you had not done them harm ? Has that ever ocurred to you ?
- You'll be happy to know I'm not studying mycoplsma any more. Not that I understood what connection you make between army service in Israel and studies in Australia, but whatever. Have you considered the notion that going to australia and writing a book is something a person would actually do just because he'd like to, and not because of some shady conspiracy?
Actually I dont care what you study or what else you do, and this was also not the main point. The main point of my initial posting was the connection, and (back then) my astonishment that somebody with so obvious a past of crimes against humanity could get employment at a respectable institution, how somebody who the day of yesterday was by his own admission involved in crimes against humanity, the next day was allowed to teach kids in a faraway country. I cant imagine anybody among the people who I know to let somebody with a past like yours to be anywhere near their kids, but perhaps in down under people think differently about such matters. Personally, I also think that a position studying microbiology is incompatible with somebody with a past in the IDF, for very obvious (to me) security implications. And such precautions should apply to many other fields of study as well.

As for "a person would actually do just because he'd like to", I find it astonishing how most IDFers get out of service and become (on the surface) exemplary citizens speaking dovish words about peace and love for all. Just 2 weeks ago I sat at the table with one such guy, a retired officer of the reserve who became a professor of archeology and who has even published writings of a more realistic outlook regarding the biblical "historical" claims about the "promised land". The interesting thing is that when pressing him or his wife just a small bit, out come the claims of "we've done no wrong" and "we too have palestinian friends", and the the same disgusting logic and inability to own up to their deeds, for which you've been banned.

As for your claim that "it's not genocide", it sounds exactly like the reasoning presented by Josef Fritzl and his advocate regarding the 24 years during which he held his daughter confined in the cellar. First Fritzl adduced that he'd done them (his daughter and the children resulting from his incestuous relation with her) just good because he had kept them from taking drugs, and the other thing which he (the advocate) said, was that Fritzl should actually earn some confidence and respect because, after all, he had not killed them all and so actually contributed to his own capture, this of course out of concern for their well-being.

So it is not genocide because you kill them one by one instead of all of them together or because you steal their land acre by acre instead of evicting them all at once, it is not crimes against humanity because you have smarter lawyers than them, and, after all, they are just "drunk cocroaches in a bottle", and you just once committed a crime against humanity when somebody shot at you, and you even have Palestinian friends. You just make me want to puke, Idan you sick f*ck.

- "avian flu" is caused by a VIRUS. Mycoplasma are BACTERIA. If you don't know the difference I'll just tell you it's a bigger difference than between yourself and an oak tree. In short, there's no connection between my research and avian flu.
Thank you for that explanation. I had never compared myself to an oak tree. How novel :-)

Idan, you child of thunder, would you care to answer some questions I have, in order to help dispel my ignorance in matters which interest me more than mycoplasma and sick birds?
- Why do Israeli backpackers always travel in obvious military formations, in groups of between 5 and 9 people ?
- Why do they seek to hide this military formation in some geographies, but not in others ?
- Why do all these groups have 1 or (at most) 2 females among them ? I was told that this is so in order to avoid that the guys get in bed with goy women and spill the beans about whatever they are doing - is this true ?
- Why do all these groups have one guy who is the obvious leader (officer ?) who tells the others what to do and who holds all the money of the group, often a fat roll of cash ?
- Why and about what do these officers confer with each each time some of these groups encounter each other somewhere ?
- Why do these groups appear even in remote places with no obvious touristic value ? For example, such groups and individuals have been reported crossing from Canada to the US in remote regions of Montana, those reporting them describe them as having obvious military SF training in avoiding detection.
- All the integrants of such groups carry with them a gadget about the size of a match box and which has different forms and looking. For what is it and why do these people manipulate it all the time ?
- Some of these groups appear to carry (electronic ?) equipment or weapons concealed in their backpacks. What are they and for what are they used ?
- In which unit did you serve, when, and in which rank ? Who was your commanding officer in Hebron?
- Would you mind posting a picture of yourself where your face is clear ?

I am sure that you wont mind answering these questions, because you and the other "ex-" hayalim are beyond reproach, after all, for your actions. You may use the Email link at the left since you've been banned.
 
P.S.
@Anart and Mods: Would you please consider unbanning Idan, at least temporarily? I think that he is very interesting, not so much because of whatever content he might present, but exactly because of his twisted mindset. I wonder if he is just a case of brain-washing or of there is more to him than that ...

@Ruth: I went to read his whole rant again. I initially understood it as a plaintive piece to be understood by his fellow Israelis to keep steadfast. Now, and after reading it again, I understand it either way: as either a plaintive exhortation to keep steadfast, or, as an exhortation to "do the numbers, compare ..." - as in rats jumping ship. Either way, no sign of remorse for 6 decades of crime. That is what is called contumacy, I think, and I doubt that people with such values will be happily accepted anywhere.
 
name said:
Idan, you child of thunder, would you care to answer some questions I have, in order to help dispel my ignorance in matters which interest me more than mycoplasma and sick birds?
- Why do Israeli backpackers always travel in obvious military formations, in groups of between 5 and 9 people ?
- Why do they seek to hide this military formation in some geographies, but not in others ?
- Why do all these groups have 1 or (at most) 2 females among them ? I was told that this is so in order to avoid that the guys get in bed with goy women and spill the beans about whatever they are doing - is this true ?
- Why do all these groups have one guy who is the obvious leader (officer ?) who tells the others what to do and who holds all the money of the group, often a fat roll of cash ?
- Why and about what do these officers confer with each each time some of these groups encounter each other somewhere ?
- Why do these groups appear even in remote places with no obvious touristic value ? For example, such groups and individuals have been reported crossing from Canada to the US in remote regions of Montana, those reporting them describe them as having obvious military SF training in avoiding detection.
- All the integrants of such groups carry with them a gadget about the size of a match box and which has different forms and looking. For what is it and why do these people manipulate it all the time ?
- Some of these groups appear to carry (electronic ?) equipment or weapons concealed in their backpacks. What are they and for what are they used ?
- In which unit did you serve, when, and in which rank ? Who was your commanding officer in Hebron?
- Would you mind posting a picture of yourself where your face is clear ?

I am sure that you wont mind answering these questions, because you and the other "ex-" hayalim are beyond reproach, after all, for your actions. You may use the Email link at the left since you've been banned.
name, I find most, if not all of these questions extremely inappropriate. It appears that you have some sort of unhealthy obsession with 'ex-IDF' soldiers, bordering on hate, very deeply laced with paranoia.

Also, it strikes me that you didn't even notice that this thread was reactivated four days and just now responded to it - in case you were unaware, if a person is 'banned' they can no longer access the site to read or post.

As far as 'un-banning' Idan, no, that will not happen. First off, because this forum is not for Idan, but more importantly, after this post of yours, because you appear to be on a 'witch hunt' of some sort - and this forum will not be used for such purposes.

There are ways to investigate situations and asking rude, degrading questions as if one is a pathological interrogator is not the way to do it - at least not on this forum.
 
name said:
I find it exceedingly interesting to follow the careers of IDF people after they (officially) leave the army. Idan is one among several similar examples of "ex-" hayalim who become involved in things which not many people would do, and who somehow manage to land in places and/or positions in faraway lands and where I have left asking myself a) how ? and b) with what qualification ?
Rahm Emanuel, US Representive for Illinois 5th Congressional District, was a military volunteer in Israel during the first Iraq War. I checked
his bio on Wikipedia and will paste a few quotes which may yield some clues.
Wikipedia said:
Emanuel was born in Chicago, Illinois in 1959. His father, the Jerusalem-born Benjamin M. Emanuel, is a pediatrician and was a member of the Irgun, a Zionist paramilitary organization in the 1940s.
During the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in Israel, rust-proofing brakes on an army base in northern Israel.
Notice that Representive Emanuel's father was an Irgun terrorist, envolved in the war crimes leading up
to the establishment of Israel in occupied Palestine. Could this be a clue? The following quote is from _http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10242006.html.
John Walsh said:
But in some respects, Emanuel is a mysterious fellow, as evidenced by his biography, which is readily available on Wikipedia and in the piece in Fortune (3). But there are a few things missing or not fully explained. First, as is often pointed out, Emanuel's physician father was an Israeli émigré; but, according to Leon Hadar, he also worked during the 1940s with the notorious Irgun, which was labeled as a terrorist organization by the British authorities.(6) Perhaps Rahm's current interest in terrorism was first kindled at his father's Irgun knee.

Second, during the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in Israel, "rust-proofing brakes on an army base in northern Israel." (Wikipedia, New Republic). This is peculiar on two counts. Here the U.S. goes to war with Iraq, but Emanuel, a U.S. citizen, volunteers not for his country, but for Israel. Moreover, here is a well-connected Illinois political figure with a father who had been in the Irgun, but he is assigned to "rust-proof brakes" on "an army base." Maybe.

Third, immediately upon his return from his desert sojourn, Emanuel at once became a major figure in the Clinton campaign "who wowed the team from the start, opening a spigot on needed campaign funds."(3) How did he do that after being isolated overseas, and with no experience in national politics? Fourth, after leaving the Clinton White House, he decided that he needed some accumulated wealth and "security" if he were to stay in politics. So he went to work for Bruce Wasserstein, a major Democratic donor and Wall Street financier.

According to Easton, "Over a 2 1/2-year period he helped broker deals-often using political connections-for Wasserstein Perella. According to congressional financial disclosures, he earned more than $18 million during that period. His deals included Unicom's merger with Peco Energy and venture fund GTCR Golder Rauner's purchase of SBC subsidiary SecurityLink. But friends say his compensation also benefited from two sales of the Wasserstein firm itself, first to Dresdner Bank and then to Allianz AG." Again for a newcomer to haul in $18 million in two years is almost miraculous. How did he do it? Next Emanuel won a seat in Congress in 2002, and by 2006 he was chair of the DCCC. Another near miraculous rise.
Could a family history of terrorism in the service of Zionism be the ticket to a position of power and influence?
The following quote displays the "enforcer's" personal style. It may yield clues to psychological deviance_
_http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/8091986/the_enforcer/
Joshua Green said:
Friends and enemies agree that the key to Emanuel's success is his legendary intensity. There's the story about the time he sent a rotting fish to a pollster who had angered him. There's the story about how his right middle finger was blown off by a Syrian tank when he was in the Israeli army. And there's the story of how, the night after Clinton was elected, Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting "Dead! . . . Dead! . . . Dead!" and plunging the knife into the table after every name. "When he was done, the table looked like a lunar landscape," one campaign veteran recalls. "It was like something out of The Godfather. But that's Rahm for you."

Of the three stories, only the second is a myth -- Emanuel lost the finger to a meat slicer as a teenager and never served in the Israeli army. But it's a measure of his considerable reputation as the enforcer in Clinton's White House that so many people believe it to be true. You don't earn the nickname "Rahmbo" being timid.

In person, Emanuel projects the hyperactivity of an attack dog straining at the leash. Although he swims and works out several mornings each week before most of his colleagues are out of bed, the exercise evidently does little to drain his energy -- he is constantly fidgeting, gesturing, spinning, always on the move. He's notorious for driving those around him mercilessly: When he joined Clinton's campaign team, he reportedly introduced himself by standing on a table and yelling at the staff for forty-five minutes. "We joke that someone should open a special trauma ward in Washington for people who've worked for Rahm," says Jose Cerda, a veteran staffer. Emanuel, who was reared in the rough-and-tumble world of Chicago politics, makes no apologies for his style. "If I got worried about that, I'd sit beneath my desk all day," he says. "I don't."
Is Rahm Emanuel's deviant behavior also a clue? I pasted a paragraph from http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/political_ponerology_lobaczewski.htm
Andrew M. Lobczewski said:
Pathocracy is a disease of great social movements followed by entire societies, nations, and empires. In the course of human history, it has affected social, political, and religious movements as well as the accompanying ideologies… and turned them into caricatures of themselves…. This occurred as a result of the … participation of pathological agents in a pathodynamically similar process. That explains why all the pathocracies of the world are, and have been, so similar in their essential properties.
The following quote is from a position paper of The Jewish People Planning Institute(Established By The Jewish Agency for Israel)LTD. The paper is written by Yehezkel Dror and is entitled Global Leadership for the 21st Century-The New Ruler_
_http://www.jpppi.org.il/JPPPI/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=105&FID=452&PID=0&IID=842
Yehezkel Dror said:
Using his power to fulfill his mission and decide issues on their merits obliges the New Ruler from time to time to use stratagies which are immoral in themselves, such as not always telling the whole
truth and sometimes to lie, to present feelings which he does not really have and more...
Could this be another clue? I don't know the answers to these questions.

I just noticed anart's post. If my post is inappropriate, please delete it.
 
go2 said:
I just noticed anart's post. If my post is inappropriate, please delete it.
Your post actually has a different 'flavor' than name's. There is no question that pathology equals opportunities very high up the ladder, especially when one is connected. There is also no doubt that Zionists have, from all available evidence, more than their fair share of pathologies. There is also no doubt that pathology is not, in any way, shape or form, limited to Zionists, or the Jewish people - it knows no bounds, no race, no creed, no borders and those who are the most pathological, especially when they are 'well-connected' will rise to the top.

This is the connection worth pursuing, at least to my understanding.

The key is pathology - not 'Jews' - and as far as 'ex-IDF' soldiers, while most, if not all, are decidedly ponerized to a rather extreme degree, that does not mean all of them are, at base, pathological -there is a very fine line there, and a thread that should be worried out of the mass of rather disconcerting hatred that comes through in name's post.

The devil is in the details.
 
anart said:
The key is pathology - not 'Jews' - and as far as 'ex-IDF' soldiers, while most, if not all, are decidedly ponerized to a rather extreme degree, that does not mean all of them are, at base, pathological -there is a very fine line there, . . .
I have been pondering this issue for a very long time, that is, I've been wondering about the degree of responsibility an individual who is raised in a ponerized society has for his/her actions, and the psychic defense mechanism that the mind puts in place to protect the individual from fully comprehending the nature of his former actions.

During the natural course of daily events which take place in a ponorized society, the person who has the potential to be a decent human is conditioned to accept evil. How can such a person, living under the repressions that characterize such society. find an alternative example? Even if the example were found, where would he encounter the nurturing that would allow another world view to take root?

And supposing a person who has lived and acted under such a society is suddenly released from it, wouldn't it be natural for such a person to lie to himself about his past actions?

I'm raising this question in the context of the political conditions that are now found in the United States: the constant protrayals of violence that are marketed as entertainment, the stupifying dumbing down of the educational system, the substitution of confrontation for dialogue in political debate, the constant bread and circuses to distract attention, the blurring between church and state, the adulturation of the food sources, the downward spiral of the economy, the erosion of civil liberties, all of which are creating a certain type of person who, if given different circumstances, may have had different thoughts, held to different values, and chosen different actions.


Pepperfritz said:
[PepperFritz wrote:
Your defence of your CHOICE to join the Israeli army as part of a combat unit, is self-serving in the extreme. An honest characterization of that choice would be to simply say "I wanted to serve the Israeli army in a combat unit because at the time I believed in the 'cause' my country was fighting for." Or "I did not believe in my country's 'cause', but at the time was not brave enough act in accordance with my beliefs/principles. I chose to become the potential killing tool of an genocidal occupying army rather than suffer the consequences (none of which were life-threatening) of doing otherwise." These statements any of us could have related to. But you do not provide an honest characterization. Instead you attempt to manipulate the facts and circumstances, and try to pull the wool over our (and maybe your own) eyes:
In order to minimize your responsibility for your own choice, you invent and/or exaggerate the "consequences" of making a different choice, to create the illusion that you really had NO CHOICE and are in fact a "victim":
Pepperfritz, don't we all lie to ourselves until we're ready not to? Isn't it a gradual process?

I mean, isn't it really horrifying to face what we are, what we've believed, and what we've done after we've stripped the illusions from ourselves?

Isn't that what is meant by "The horror of the situation"?

Aren't we all pawns until we wake up and educate ourselves not to be?

Sometimes I find this forum to be somewhat harsh on people who stumble onto it for the first time.

I know that I'm a jerk a lot of the time, and I don't mind being called on it, until of course, someone strikes a nerve, (usually Anart), and I have to sit back and think about things more deeply. But I'm prepared to do that because I understand the intention behind the remark.

But if the purpose of the forum is to help people wake up, it may do the just the opposite if the response may be perceived of as an attack.

It really helps if someone has some knowledge of the WORK, but if one doesn't, the responses may really seem unjustifiably harsh.

That's just my humble opinion.
 
name said:
P.S.
@Ruth: I went to read his whole rant again. I initially understood it as a plaintive piece to be understood by his fellow Israelis to keep steadfast. Now, and after reading it again, I understand it either way: as either a plaintive exhortation to keep steadfast, or, as an exhortation to "do the numbers, compare ..." - as in rats jumping ship. Either way, no sign of remorse for 6 decades of crime. That is what is called contumacy, I think, and I doubt that people with such values will be happily accepted anywhere.
At least you read it before initially calling him a liar. I must admit I didn't know what I was looking at before posting a request for clarification. So, when idan said 'go read it for yourself', I thought that was a reasonable response.

Now, you seem to be saying that he is acting like a 'rat leaving a sinking ship' as well as a consciously participating in war crimes. That's kind of 'big'!

Personally, I'd be annoyed if somebody said that about me. Tarred with the same brush as a small minority. Especially if it was not true. Sometimes keeping an open mind is best. Otherwise you won't 'find' the real ones.
 
Back
Top Bottom