Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (22515)	1/2/2004 2:28:59 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793549

Egyptian press blasts Palestinians "American Thinker" January 2nd, 2004 The Egyptian press, subject to government control, has been savaging the Palestinian cause, in the wake of a mob attack on their foreign minister at the al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. The invaluable MEMRI website translates many examples. Here are just a few: In the Egyptian daily Al-Masaa, columnist Muhammad Foudah tried to stir a sense of shame among the Palestinians: "Did those Palestinians who attacked the Egyptian foreign minister... ask themselves why Maher agreed to take upon himself the suffering of going to Israel and meeting with Sharon and his cabinet? Did he go just to tour a country with which we have cut off relations and gotten into political crisis for the sake of Palestine...?! Do the Palestinians want Egypt to keep its hands off the Palestinian issue? This would be the easiest thing to do and has already been done by many Arab countries... You beat the man who came on your behalf, and it is Israel that takes him to the hospital for treatment. What shame and disgrace you have cast upon yourselves and on your cause?!..." The editor of Al-Akhbar, Galal Duweidar, wrote: "... The whole world, including the Palestinians, knows that there is no unresolved problem between Egypt and Israel after the [1973] October victory and the signing of the peace agreement... The only [remaining] reason [for problems between Egypt and Israel] is the defense of the rights of the Palestinians, and not the defense of any direct Egyptian interests... "Despite [Egypt's] ongoing sacrifice [for the Palestinians] which spoils Egypt's relations with Israel and with the Zionist lobby, and thus with the U.S., we were surprised by this rogue rebellious Palestinian group that carried out the barbaric and mean attack on the foreign minister of Egypt - which is the only base of support for the Palestinian people. How can we, the Egyptian columnists who every day defend the rights of this people by confronting the Israeli aggression, [how can we] explain this despicable act?... Also in Al-Akhbar, columnist Said Sunbul wrote: "... Accusing the Egyptian foreign minister of betrayal means accusing Egypt of betrayal. This is not the first time that Egypt has been accused of betrayal, despite all that it did and does for the Palestinians....The contemptible attack on the Egyptian foreign minister... causes many to ask whether the time has not come to focus on our domestic problems - many of which stem from the wars in which we participated for the sake of Palestine - instead of wasting efforts [in an attempt] to solve the problem of a people who are at odds among themselves and accuse each other, and others, of betrayal." The most scathing commentary came from Ibrahim Sa’dah, editor of the Akhbar Al-Youm weekly. [in the wake of] "the assassination attempt on the Egyptian foreign minister…The Egyptian people will also not forget that Yasser Arafat danced with joy when the assassination of President Sadat was announced... The time has come to tell the Palestinian Authority, 'No! A thousand times no!'... No more will we turn the right cheek to take the same slap that the left cheek has taken time and again. We are fed up, Your Excellency, sole spokesman of the Palestinian people, with your repeated statements [blaming] any anti-Egyptian act on the part of the Palestinians on a tiny, stupid minority... "Personally, I do not accept the apology of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat... I demand that Parliament convene for a special session, with the presence of the foreign minister, to be dedicated to examining our policy regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict..." Posted by Thomas 01 01 04 americanthinker.com

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (22515)	1/2/2004 1:27:33 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 793549

Cold Mountain certainly wasn't a Ken Burns "Civil War" type production, and it wasn't billed as such. Like any thinking person, I also came away with questions. Why didn't Inman take one of the three horses left after the incident at the widow's cabin to complete his journey? The meeting at the bedside of the dying young man in the opening scenes between Inman and Ruby's father was too coincidental......so Hollywood. I do think that the sudden fire and passion that developed quickly, if only for a brief moment in time, between Ada and Inman was very plausible. Sudden, loving relationships develop rapidly for men going off to war. The screen writer did a decent job of convincing me that life's challenges for the women left behind during that war were formidable. The total exaggeration of the cruelty towards the residents by the Home Guard was extreme, yet it's not difficult to believe that men could behave that way. I can't imagine any community tolerating such brutality either (unless we are talking about some hell hole in the ME) and in the end they got theirs didn't they. But this is Hollywood and I learned a long time ago that it really is all pretend. Some pretend happens to be done better than other pretend, and with this movie I came away with a better understanding of the hardships individuals suffered during the Civil War, including members of my own family, that didn't exist before I went in. Thanks for your thoughts. M