Ok, everybody, a group HUG!

First of all it is a pleasure having the opportunity to "meet" all of you, Oso, Mikey, Ignacio, Gazpacho, Wolf, el Cid, et al. It is wonderful to have a forum where we can each bring and share the polarity of our ideas.

Yes, the topic of this thread is a very important and because it is so important it can be intense. But we learn more about ourselves and others during these intense discussions. I know that on the last ETA thread where our friends Ignacio and Fernando explained the polarity of their positions, the thread was most illuminating for me. The complexity of the issues became clearer for me as a member.

These types of threads and the persuant discussions offer breakthroughs for many of us.

Ignacio writes me:
Bueno, Ignacio, I usually spend my time finding, what in my opinion are thought-filled articles. At times the article may exemplefy my perspective, but not necessarily so, at times it makes the case for the opposing view point more clear to me at least. But mainly an article that focuses on the ideas we are discussing. It does take a lot of work though, sifting and searching for an appropriate piece. The Internet is full of garbage and missinformation.

I try hard and strive to learn from others. I do despise above all being labelled epistemologically arrogant. If I may have sounded so, I humbly apologize. I do try and hope that I give you, Ignacio, the impression that while we may not agree on cetain issues,like this one, that I respect your perspective and I admire your efforts to communicate in English, which you do very well, btw. I have enjoyed your friendship this past year, and hope that we can continue to discuss these important issues as friends who disagree.

Epistemologically arrogant? I don't believe so. You bring a good source of information for which I personally appreciate.

Thank you Oso, it means a lot to me coming from you!
Castos Besos!

Gracias y merced ha usted!

Booklady, while I am not pretty sure of what epistemologically arrogant exactly means, I want to explain that I didn't mean you don't take any effort when writing. I know by my own experience it takes a lot of work to surf the Net in search of good articles and texts among the garbage.

What I mean is that doing that, and also doing 45 minutes of writing is just too much. I only do this when I get very very involved, and later I regret having spend so much time. It is more intelligent to post an article that support one's point of view or write a couple of paragraphs than longer posts, but the debate often takes me (and others) to longer and longer posts.

There was a smiley also, to show complicity, in my previous post.

It´s very nice of you to speak like that. Considering the tone of the responses of both of us, I thought you probably were hurt, and I somehow was too. See, how this matters can weaken e-friendship ties? At least, I was rather wary. Glad we mantain our friendship, in spite of ocasional sarcasm.

According to my new policy , a text from yesterday's newspaper: El Mundo:

Resulta que un día dijeron por la tele: «¡Tres minutos de silencio por los muertos del 11-S!» Y fui, y los hice. Pero más tarde pensé: «Si las seis mil víctimas de las Torres Gemelas merecen tres minutos de silencio, el millón y medio de iraquíes muertos por culpa del embargo estadounidense merecerían más de doce horas. ¿No?» Y fui, y las hice. Pero luego pensé: «Y a los trescientos mil muertos de Hiroshima y Nagasaki, víctimas del primer atentado terrorista nuclear, les corresponderían dos horas y media. ¿No?» Y fui, y las hice. Bueno, en realidad, hice seis, más que nada por las secuelas radiactivas... Pero pensé: «Hombre, y las víctimas del bombardeo de Clinton que destruyó los recursos farmacéuticos de Sudán, merecerían al menos media horita. ¿No?» ¡Y fui, y la hice! Y, bueno, ya me puse a sumar: los 35.000 civiles de la anterior Guerra del Golfo, los de Bosnia, los de Afganistán... Los palestinos, los libaneses, los chilenos, los nicaragüenses, los guatemaltecos, los colombianos, los cubanos, los vietnamitas... Total, que me fui metiendo, me dejé llevar... Y estuve, a lo pijo, dos años en silencio, sin hablar. De verdad... Me daba vueltas la cabeza, sólo veía muertos, desaparecidos, injusticias... Uf, tenía la mente teñida de sangre, era incapaz de pronunciar palabra. ¡No tenía palabras! Era como si, de pronto, se me hubiera olvidado articular, modular, verbalizar algo lógico, ¡comunicar! Nada. Había perdido mi propio idioma, la lengua materna, ese acento de Mieres tan familiar...

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundolibro/2003/10/09/no_ficcion/1065694480.html

Ignacio,

For the life of me, I can't understand why anyone would lend credence to a person who writes an article that starts off by referring to Nagasaki & Hiroshima during WWII as being a "terrorist attack." The person obviously has no honest recollection of history, or as to why those bombs were dropped. Another possibility? They don't care, it's just another stake to drive into the heart of America because they hate us.

I don't know how many times even the Japanese people have to tell the story of how they would have lost millions of women and children had the U.S. and their Allies had to invade Japan. Obviously the writer doesn't want to become confused by facts since the only reason the article was written was to "chastise" America.

As soon as credibility is lost, and obviously it was by that arrogant pronouncement against the U.S., and nothing is left but the remnants of a fool's words.

Where in that article did it speak of the terrors visited on the people of Afghanistan by their ruthless leadership that fostered and protected Al Qaeda? Where in that article did it say that they had no right to do that? Where in that article did it talk about the human rights violations against the people of Iraq, who didn't happen to be Bathhists? It didn't because it wasn't intended to tell about those indignations. The article was written solely to attack the U.S.

No! The article was written strictly with an "anti-American" theme. Of course that's popular, isn't it? Continually bash the U.S., and hold us responsible for the failure of other nations to hold dear the rights of individuals.

What disturbs me most is when people attack the U.S., and everything about us, then say we have no right to say the same about the structure of their own governments, and the way they treat people.

Strangely enough, most of us respect the sovereignty of Spain enough that we don't go off half cocked with half baked articles written by less than credible journalists who have an ax to grind against Spain. Yet, we're supposed to sit back and accept all the unfair criticism or our nation and people because it's someone else's right?

Sorry! It don't work that way, and whether you put an article like that on this page in English or Spanish, it's the same anti-American crap we've heard before.

I wonder where Europe and the elitist attitude we're seeing now would be if Hitler was allowed to run his course, or if the Russians could have had their way with the entire continent.

Of course none of that matters, because America is the "Great Satan of the World."

Nothing personal in my response, just against the writer whom I believe is a moron.

Wolf

Wolf...he forgot to give a moment of silence to the myriads of indigent peoples of the Americas that died at the hands of the conquistadores and Spanish colonists (as well as from other European powers) by means of enslavement, torture, slave labor, and old world diseases and STILL suffer neglect! Who remembered them?

Maybe a moment of silence for the future intelligence of Europe?