Useful Idiots of the Day

[Melendwyr]

As usual when one takes hostages: in their list of demands. In this case, the demand is that the English will pressure israel to stop their bombing of Gaza or else they'll kill the hostages.

According to the article, the threat was that they would abduct more people if their demands were not met. Where did the killing come in, again?

But don't you let reality get in the way of your moral superiority. After all, you never have before...

 

[zenith-nadir]

Lemme see if I got this straight Melendwyr.

You claim:

Anyone who does not condemn the Palestinians as inhuman monsters and recognize the terrible injustices perpetuated upon the Israeli people is necessarily antisemitic. At least, in zenith's world.

...and...

Dressing oneself up in raggedly old clothes, and then proclaiming that everyone who attacks you is just beating a dead strawman, is not a valid tactic. Try again, zenith.

...are definitely two positions —or "straw men"— which are not held by me.....have a great New Year.

 

[Mephisto]

Well of course it is. So is the humor of Richard Pryor, Robin Williams the late great Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, etc, etc. It would be best if you avoid the Friars Club.

Good point, RF, but I really miss the old comedy teams who never resorted to offensive material - you know Dean & Lewis, Abbott & Costello, Hope & Crosby, Skeptic & Sheehan . . .

 

[webfusion]

You don't see where?

Where did they (the Mujahadeen Brigades) threaten to kill them (the Bristish hostages)?

Regarding the current Gaza kidnapping, the 'human rights worker', her mother and father were snatched at gunpoint and bundled into a white Mercedes in the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Wednesday.

At gunpoint, which is a kinda subtle way of saying, "come with us, or die here and now". ----- and what if their demands were not met? What was the point of the kidnapping, if not to threaten Israel to meet their demands, or else the hostages would die, and their blood would be on Israel's hands?
If you don't implicitly or indirectly threaten to kill hostages unless your demands are met, then you have very little chance of winning your demands, isn't that pretty much how the whole kidnapping thing works?

Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not an expert in hostage taking.

Militants (in Iraq) said they would kill an American and a Briton on Tuesday unless their demands were met, a day after they released footage showing them severing the head of another U.S. hostage.

 

[Mephisto]

Now, look at the yellow baseball hat he's wearing on top of the Keffiya, I don't get that at all. What's the deal? Does anyone have an explanation of this? Mycroft? Help me out here...

No mystery here, webfusion, you can't see the logo above the bill of her cap, but I believe it's Shell Oil.

 

[Zep]

And while you're at it, would you please apologize to Zep, I am getting tired of looking at his current signature...

I'm not expecting one, so the sig will stay.

Typical Skeptic style here once again though - slippery-slope argument in extremis, leading to a completely unrealistic and highly inflammatory conclusion. Also leaving him nowhere to go but apologize...but he won't do that because he is just too dang stiff-necked and proud to back off.

Has anyone considered that the girl in question may be sufficiently willing to assist ordinary Palestinian communities in Gaza that she is prepared to forgive her captors for a potentially dangerous transgression? The news here today is that she was well looked after during her captivity, and that she is intending to stay on and work in the area despite this event. That's fairly "Christian" of her, don't you think, Skep? Or do you consider all reconciliation "idiotic"...

Or does idealism, forgiveness and charity not enter into your thinking much, Skep?

 

[Mycroft]

Where did they threaten to kill them?

I believe the threat of death is inherent in every hostage situation. If you don't do what they want, you don't get your loved ones back, end of story.

 

[Zep]

A threat of harm is what is implied by hostage-taking. Once the hostage is actually dead and known to be dead, that major bargaining-chip is lost.

 

[RandFan]

A threat of harm is what is implied by hostage-taking. Once the hostage is actually dead and known to be dead, that major bargaining-chip is lost.

But if hostages are never harmed then the threat has no meaning. We all know however that threat does have meaning because hostages are harmed. I don't know so much about this area of the world but in other areas hostages have their heads cut off (see Daniel Pearl)

 

[Manny]

I'm not expecting one, so the sig will stay.

Can you at least do something about the fonts, boss? You're killing the rest of us over his slur. I feel like all of us are writing a sentence a thousand times even though the teacher knows exactly who threw the spitball.

 

[webfusion]

Mephisto -- is that a 'she'?

You think the photo I posted above of the Palestinian raising a hand in front of posters of Arafat is a woman? I do believe you are right!
And if so, that lends credence to the statement of Perforatu about the Kaffiya being a common garb, worn by females as well as men.
I'm checking into this further...
I'll get back to everyone with the details of my research.

=======================================

Zep says: "A threat of harm is what is implied by hostage-taking. Once the hostage is actually dead and known to be dead, that major bargaining-chip is lost."

Yeah, that's what I figured, the threat of harm or the threat of death, which is why I posted a picture of another hostage situation involving Britons. Of course, if you have multiple hostages, then killing one or two still leaves you with some bargaining leverage. I wonder if Kaffiya Kate would have felt differently had her dad been killed (or been caused some permanantly disfiguring injury) before the situation was resolved? Just a thought...

NOTE: It's a mystery how Zep got lumped into Skeptic's blanket condemnation, and a mystery it shall remain, apparently.

 

[Zep]

But if hostages are never harmed then the threat has no meaning. We all know however that threat does have meaning because hostages are harmed. I don't know so much about this area of the world but in other areas hostages have their heads cut off (see Daniel Pearl)

It's the unknown threat that carries the most impact. What you are talking about is a demonstration of intent to harm, really. Only the stupid hostage-takers kill ALL their hostages if they are genuinely interested in "trading" them.

The hostages themselves are not worth a plugged nickel individually, but much as a collective group. Therefore the demonstration of your intent to "harm" is to carry out some actual harm to one of your multiple hostages - videoed threats, a "free sample killing". It is an attempt to say "I'm serious, this is what we have done, and there's more where that came from!" It's the equivalent of sending back, say, just the finger cut from a single hostage.

Consequently, the threat of violence is (supposedly) heightened in the minds of those being targetted - they cannot really dismiss the "free sample" as bluff.

That's a theory anyway.

 

[Zep]

Can you at least do something about the fonts, boss? You're killing the rest of us over his slur. I feel like all of us are writing a sentence a thousand times even though the teacher knows exactly who threw the spitball.

Hey, talk to Skeptic! I'll revert to my 8-point black font inanities immediately I get a retraction from him.

Indeed, the whole class will suffer until the naughty boy is a bit contrite. (although I can find my posts REAL quick now!)

 

[Kopji]

The continued hostage taking in Gaza seems to have a different purpose than that in Iraq. Palestinians usually let hostages go.

The goal of the Gaza extremists is to embarrass the 'moderates' (I use the term 'moderate' very loosely for the Abbas). If they think that taking hostages is going to helpfully influence Israel's tactics, they are as dumb as rocks. So it makes much more sense that this serves factional infighting.

The kidnappings were probably more an indication that Palestinians kidnap by outward appearance rather than ideology, and were embarrassed by accidentally kidnapping an ally to their cause.

They do not think clearly enough to see that kidnappings destroy their own economy and future, biting various hands trying to feed them.

I can understand that there are people like Burton there to help, but it must be more than a little frustrating to witness first hand what doofuses they are.

 

[Kopji]

Zep, the entertainment value to Skeptic for pissing you off is probably much higher than an apology.

 

[webfusion]

Happy New Years! (Palestinian-Style)

I can understand that there are people like Burton there to help, but it must be more than a little frustrating to witness first hand what doofuses they (the palestinians) are.

The UN is also there to help (with a huge relief effort that provides jobs and $$$), and lo and behold, they get a little taste of Palestinian New Year's Eve Fireworks!

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/664571.html
Armed Palestinians briefly seized the United Nations club in Gaza City early Sunday, detonating two explosive devices that left the place in shambles.

 

[Euromutt]

Absolutely agree. It would also be a different statement if she wore a red one. Those are donned by bedouin men (primarily of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). The White ones are used in the Kingdoms elsewhere (House of Saud being a prime example).

Actually, in the Territories, a red keffiyeh indicates sympathy with the PFLP (or other Marxist-leaning organizations), while a black one indicates sympathy specifically with al-Fatah, and green indicates sympathy for Islamist groups like Hamas and PIJ.

 

[webfusion]

Euromutt, can you show us any pics of women wearing the kaffiya? I'm having a few second-thoughts now after I told Perforatu he was wrong about assuming that checkered headdress was common among the population in palestine, and I said the females don't wear them, but I'm looking around now in more detail to see if that is really the case...

No B/W or Red or Green Keffiyas anywhere in this picture --- I'll keep searching and see if something pops up elsewhere. Now I'm curious to see where this leads...

 

[Zep]

Zep, the entertainment value to Skeptic for pissing you off is probably much higher than an apology.

I expected as much initially. So it gave me a chance to use neon colours in my sig!

And how much do I care about Skep's "entertainment"?

 

[Zep]

White is the "usual" colour for women's keffiyas anyway.