Should the U.S. act to stop Genocide?

[Kay]

Kay,

 

If you still have my complete post (I don't) - then I request that you post it - since you want to leave everything out there - it will be easier for me to "take responsibility for the things" I said - if I can remember them. I have been so emotional this evening that I don't even remember exactly what I did say.

 

Thanks,

 

-Dennis

 

P.S. I apologize for referring to you as "Kate" - again, a sign of my emotions getting the better of my intellect (that is - if I have I ever had any to get the better of).

 

If you do not wish to contend that I have selectively quoted you in my above post, I'll leave it at that - because honestly, what ever gave you the preposterous idea I would have an entire copy of your post stored in my hard-drive?

 

In the famous words of someone I don't know - come back when you're sober.

 

Or

 

Come back when you don't have more excuses about the volatility of your emotion than you have issues and arguments with respect to the subject matter of this thread.

 

Post #82 was nothing but self-flattering whinging, which was easily reduced down to, "OMG - I care, you don't, therefore I'm so much better!" - I have a nagging suspicion that this is what your original proposition was all about.....

[Totallyatpeace]

Everyone is entitled to a bad day and a little understanding.......

[♦ nivek ♦]

Dennis:

 

From JPFO, a pro-RKBA/2A group that is usually right on top of things dealing with Firearms and Freedom issues..

 

I cannot under any circumstances forbid any Free man or woman the use of the firearm of their choice. Period.

 

Full auto, single shot, rubberband driven, airshot, I don't care. what a Person, a Human, wants to carry to defend itself and property is what I want them to have..

 

Goobers have z e r o requirement to protect you and yours.

 

Goobers and the UN sorts in uniform (sorry dustmouse) are the *mop up squad* and do nothing to protect the individual person.

 

Either we take on self preservation and protection as a wa of life, or we end up as roadside fly feeding devices..

 

As for daFatman and His? Fuck the Goobers and the bad actors..

 

kL

*******************************

 

 

 

ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP

America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

 

June 27, 2005

 

JPFO ALERT: Warnings in Chapter 15 of Death by "Gun Control"

Proved Correct

 

Remember Chapter 15 of our book, Death by "Gun Control,"

entitled: "Zimbabwe: None So Blind"?

 

In 2001, when Death by "Gun Control" was published, the

Zimbabwe government's program of disarming farmers and

taking their land was underway. Some people had already

been killed, and we predicted that the Zimbabweans were

facing a national persecution at the hands of their

government.

 

We wrote: "The lesson of Zimbabwe: Minorities who fail to

prepare for self-defense against their own government are

easy targets of the Genocide Formula. A good government

will never try to render its citizens defenseless -- an

evil government always will." (Pp. 194-195)

 

Zimbabwe in 2005 is a hell hole of horrific human suffering

and government decreed death. Like the Soviet Terror

Famine and several of the Red Chinese economic programs

that killed thousands and millions, the Zimbabwean

government has begun a national campaign of destroying

homes and businesses.

 

Cathy Buckle, a resident of Zimbabwe and author of two

books about its government-designed self-destruction, wrote

last week:

 

"I am in deep shock at the situation in Marondera as the

government's 'Operation Restore Order' to cleanse the town

has gone into its third week. Everywhere you look you see

only desperation, fear and shock on people's faces.

Everyone is saying the same thing: 'But why are they doing

this to us, what are we going to do, where can we go, we

are going to die.'

 

"On a short drive around Marondera town the aftermath is

there for all who care to see. There are mounds of rubble

on street corners, stacks of timber, tin and asbestos piled

on road sides, dismantled pre-fabricated houses leaning

against trees and people staring in shock at what was there

one day and gone the next."

 

We at JPFO urge you to visit two websites and read what is

currently happening to the Zimbabwean people.

 

http://africantears.netfirms.com

 

http://www.swradioafrica.com/

 

You need to see exactly what is happening there, because it

is exactly what happens when evil governments reign in

disarmed countries.

 

The Zimbabwean government is committing atrocities against

its own people of the exact same sort as what the British

did to the American colonists -- and worse. The American

colonists rose up against the British government and

overthrew its rule by force of arms.

 

In Zimbabwe, however, the people are victims of horrors

against which they cannot now effectively fight. The

people are disarmed in fact and in spirit.

 

If you dismiss the Terror Famine and the Red Chinese

horrors and the Cambodian genocide as ancient history, then

you need to read about Zimbabwe *now* !

 

Take 15 minutes and see how disarmament and deliberate

government economic and "law and order" policies are

endangering millions and killing thousands -- *right now."

 

Click on:

 

http://africantears.netfirms.com

 

and visit the articles archived on the left column under

"Cathy's Letters." Cathy Buckle is on-site, a life-long

Zimbabwe resident, and she has seen and heard it all. Years

ago Cathy Buckle warned about the house-to-house

disarmament, she described the thousands of farm

confiscations, and she has continuously reported the

resulting national famine. Now she reports the

government's destruction of homes and property that aims to

force people to submit, relocate and die.

 

Click also on:

 

http://www.swradioafrica.com/

 

and read the articles posted there. These articles are

written by Zimbabwean journalists and observers on-site.

 

===

 

To understand the mechanisms of genocide, like the

mechanisms currently taking operating in Zimbabwe, get and

read Death by "Gun Control."

 

http://www.jpfo.org/deathgc.htm

 

 

With the insights you gain from that book, you will be able

to understand how man's inhumanity to man can become

government policy that kills millions.

 

With the cold facts of history and today, you can unmask

the advocates of "gun control" and big government, and

expose them for what they are: the carriers of killer

ideology.

 

Click on these websites and get educated -- for the sake of

the victims of the looming genocide in Zimbabwe. As pro-

liberty activists, you owe it to them to care enough to

know how they suffered and died. Perhaps their plight can

help save others ... through you.

 

Q: "What happens when the protectors become the predators?"

 

A: Zimbabwe.

 

- The Liberty Crew

[♦ nivek ♦]

Everyone is entitled to a bad day and a little understanding.......

 

 

Indeed TAP that could be true..

 

However you and I should have the ability to do so sans an armed Goober trying to take our lives because of gov dot org edict or someone elses bad day causing a few thousand more persons to be killed..

 

Genocide is *not* a "bad day"...

 

kL

[SOIL]

Kay - I honestly don't know who cares more for those 800,000 folks who are all now too dead to care about who cares - I reckon - (or, if we all have immortal souls maybe not?).

 

I don't know if I was (subconsciously?) trying to do what you suggest - maybe so - if so, I apologize.

 

I do know that I didn't do anything to stop it - so I guess I must not have cared enough to even keep up with the news back when it was happening (waay back in 1994).

 

Also, what I gather, from reading some books and articles on the net, neither President Clinton nor Kofi Annan seemed to care enough to do anything significant to stop it.

 

Maybe we should all go and ask Randen - I'm pretty sure he was keeping up with the news at that time - maybe he will shed some light on who cared (if anyone who does not have black skin color) then (at least) - I did read some of a very interesting article about a key military guy from Canada who was serving with the U.N. in Rwanda at that time (I think I may have included a link in some post) - if I remember correctly, he had a nervous breakdown after returning from Rwanda - and after recovering, he has written a book (including a lot of details) about the whole tragedy.

 

(Chef - feel free to chime in - when you read this)

 

 

-Dennis

 

Kay - I know that I don't know how to write effectively (especially when I am either emotional or taking anti-depressant drugs) - I keep hoping Reach will give me some pointers (as I have requested before) - actually, now that I think about it - if you would like to rewrite some of my badly written posts - to show me how I might be able to better express myself - I would very much appreciate that, as I am trying to learn more in that regard.

[SOIL]

I just used the search engine on the "Old Forum" and found that post (in a thread started by Tex), regarding someone who cared - "Lt. Gen. Roméo A. Dallaire."

 

For inquiring minds

 

-Dennis

[Totallyatpeace]

Indeed TAP that  could be true..

 

However you and I should have the ability to do so sans an armed Goober trying to take our lives because of gov dot org edict or someone elses bad day causing a few thousand more persons to be killed..

 

Genocide is *not* a "bad day"...

 

kL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Aaaah, Nivek. I was talking about Soil.

[Kay]

Everyone is entitled to a bad day and a little understanding.......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was quite explicit in my post. Dennis can vent and moan about his bad day in a new thread under the appropriate forum.

 

I don't quite see it as "having a bad day" and deserving of understanding when you suddenly raise it up in the middle of a debate/discussion that bears no relevance whatsoever to the miseries that plague Dennis.

 

I don't know if I was (subconsciously?) trying to do what you suggest - maybe so - if so, I apologize.

 

Why apologize? You're just being who you are. The reason I said that was because I didn't think there was much to discuss in terms of the issues raised by this topic. Evidently, the issue of foreign policy and what a government does in power leads to heated debates that some would prefer not to see.

 

Also, what I gather, from reading some books and articles on the net, neither President Clinton nor Kofi Annan seemed to care enough to do anything significant to stop it.

 

The implicit follow-on from that would be: "They are not Christians, therefore they are not good people because they didn't care like the guys at IJM did?"

 

It's infantile to the extreme. I cannot even begin to fathom the complexity of issues and concerns that these people have to weigh up with each decision they make. Until you can, I suggest you keep these ridiculous implications to yourself.

 

Kay - I know that I don't know how to write effectively (especially when I am either emotional or taking anti-depressant drugs)

 

Prime example - why don't you drop the pretense along with the parenthesis in this sentence?

 

I can't order your thoughts for you Dennis. Most of your sentences evidence your enthusiasm to add in commentary to your own commentary. Perhaps first refrain from making personal remarks about your own post in the same post? I hate to sound like a linguistic elitist when I say this, because I'm far from it, but what the hell happened to your basic highschool English?!

[SOIL]

Also, what I gather, from reading some books and articles on the net, neither President Clinton nor Kofi Annan seemed to care enough to do anything significant to stop it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The implicit follow-on from that would be: "They are not Christians, therefore they are not good people because they didn't care like the guys at IJM did?"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(I added the Bold for emphasis)

 

Kay,

 

It is my understanding, that former President Clinton claims to be a Christian. I don't know about secretary general Kofi Annan. As far as one of the "guys at IJM" goes - yes he did claim to be a Christian - at that time as well as now - but you can read for yourself (from Amazon's few pages in it's 'excerpt' from the book: Good News About Injustice: A Witness of Courage in a Hurting World) about how much he cared:

...

I remember very well what I was doing in the spring of 1994. I was trying to assemble cribs for twin girls who were coming into our home, ready or not. I was trying to match wits, and losing, with the class clown in my sixth-grade boys' Sunday School class. ....

...

(I encourage anyone to read all of the 6 or so pages from the excerpt from the chapter entitled The Rage in Rwanda, A suburban Christian Confronts Genocide at Amazon.com. I think you may find that Mr. Haugen is not describing how much he "cared" at that time).

 

In contrast :

...regarding  someone who cared - "Lt. Gen. Roméo A. Dallaire." ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of Lt. Gen. Dallaire's religious convictions, I am currently able to know only what is recorded in the transcript Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda which I provided the link to (on the this page from the old forum containing the post I provided the link to).

 

I don't recall reading anything in that transcript about Lt. Gen. Dallair being a Christian - do you? - however, I have referred to him as one who "cared".

 

So why did you assume what you did when you spoke of "implicit follow-on"?

 

Also I have mentioned about the lack of "caring" shown even by the Christian churches in Rwanda. (Again - please read those pages at Amazon.com which I provided the link to - in an earlier post, and as well as now.)

 

-Dennis

[SOIL]

Perhaps another way to state the question I am wanting to discuss in this thread - has already been posed in scripture (by one of the "bad guys") - I think it is still a good question that we need to consider in today's world:

Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is Abel your brother?" He said, "I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?"

(I added the Bold emphasis)

 

(click here if you are interested in more context)

 

-Dennis

[SOIL]

If I don't make it back here for quite some time - it's been interesting talking with you folks - you have taught me a lot! (though I still haven't stopped using so many parenthesis ... tisk).

 

I'll probably keep checking the email address I specified when registering here - I normally look at it maybe twice a week or so.

 

-Dennis

[♦ nivek ♦]

Little more up to date gov dot org made mayhem...

 

kL

**************

 

 

http://www.swradioafrica.com/news27-06-05/...ences270605.htm

 

Government withdraws gun licences without explanation

 

SW Radio Africa Zimbabwe news

 

 

By Tichaona Sibanda

27 June 2005

 

The government has withdrawn firearm licences with immediate effect,

raising suspicion that it is already working on countering an armed revolt.

 

 

Police spokesman Wayne Bvudzijena on Sunday urged people with automatic

weapons at their homes to surrender them at the nearest police stations.

 

 

These weapons include all types of rifles and an assortment of pistols.

Tension has been high in Zimbabwe since the start of operation

Murambatsvina, which has seen over a million people being made homeless by

a senseless exercise orchestrated by Zanu (PF).

 

But retired army Colonel Bernard Matongo said although government has a

right to withdraw the licences, the timing of the exercise raises suspicion

that there is a threat to national security in the country.

 

 

Police have recently been fighting running battles with residents who were

resisting the forced evictions and demolition of their homes. War veteran

and singer Dick Chingaira, otherwise known as Cde Chinx, recently fired

shots into the air to try and scare off police details who had gone to

demolish his mansion.

 

This did not deter the police who reportedly asked the singer to put down

the weapon before giving him a thorough beating. A source said such

incidents where residents can pull out guns against the police can lead to

a full-scale revolt against the armed forces.

[♦ nivek ♦]

If I don't make it back here for quite some time - it's been interesting talking with you folks - you have taught me a lot!  (though I still haven't stopped using so many parenthesis ... tisk).

 

I'll probably keep checking the email address I specified when registering here - I normally look at it maybe twice a week or so.

 

-Dennis

 

Dennis,

 

Understand that you are having a rough time right at momert..

 

Won't offer to pray for you, nor do I think that happy thoughts do for shit, other than make thinker believe that doing so fixes problems..

 

What I will offer is my e.mail address and IM contacts, should you need, my landline number..

 

I may be an asshole, but one thats been in the deep before, had the help of others outreached arms to take a lift up..

 

Hang on buds, shit always wshes off..

 

kL

[Kay]

It seems almost coincidental that every time I begin to question your motives in starting a thread, I get a "I'll be back in a couple of weeks, which by then you will have completely forgotten about this topic altogether".

 

But this feeling could be premature. I'll wait for the third time lucky.

 

So why did you assume what you did when you spoke of "implicit follow-on"?

 

I had your previous IJM thread in mind. And we all know what you were trying to get at in that thread. When you bring up another case file from this organization, it was all too natural to think back to the previous topic, and what you sought to achieve there.

 

Perhaps another way to state the question I am wanting to discuss in this thread - has already been posed in scripture (by one of the "bad guys") - I think it is still a good question that we need to consider in today's world:

 

Err...no shit, sherlock? I've said that since my first post in this topic. When does one have the right to interfere with another? When should one interfere? Why should one interfere? This is all encapsulated in something commonly known as foreign policy - and I believe I've also said in one of the posts above.

 

Don't parrot the same ideas back to me, Dennis. Elaborate on them. What I can piece together from your emotive incoherence is that we should send in the tanks and machine guns whenever we can compose a florid piece of writing that includes blood and body parts. Well gee, with the rising death toll of Iraq civilians, maybe we should send in more tanks and machine guns to....

 

You haven't even defined the parameters of your argument and you expect others to be able to respond. I have asked you more than once on what basis you believe we should interfere with the internal affairs of another country. Your reply has been: graphic description of an anonymous girl having her head bashed in, and some theatric wailing for people to be saved. Honestly, that tells me nothing of what your stance on foreign policy is or should be.

 

We know you are a good person and you care, Dennis, or are you insecure enough in this belief that you had to start a thread just to show you are a sentimental and compassionate person? But what I found most interesting was your implicit assumption that there is something questionable in the characters of people who don't care and didn't act, for reasons you are not privy to nor had the dedication to research, to stop a genocide.

 

Judgemental as always? The world consists only of good/bad people?

 

Then and again, I'm not surprised.

[Dhampir]

It seems almost coincidental that every time I begin to question your motives in starting a thread, I get a "I'll be back in a couple of weeks, which by then you will have completely forgotten about this topic altogether".

 

But this feeling could be premature. I'll wait for the third time lucky.

I had your previous IJM thread in mind. And we all know what you were trying to get at in that thread. When you bring up another case file from this organization, it was all too natural to think back to the previous topic, and what you sought to achieve there.

Err...no shit, sherlock? I've said that since my first post in this topic. When does one have the right to interfere with another? When should one interfere? Why should one interfere? This is all encapsulated in something commonly known as foreign policy - and I believe I've also said in one of the posts above.

 

Don't parrot the same ideas back to me, Dennis. Elaborate on them. What I can piece together from your emotive incoherence is that we should send in the tanks and machine guns whenever we can compose a florid piece of writing that includes blood and body parts. Well gee, with the rising death toll of Iraq civilians, maybe we should send in more tanks and machine guns to....

 

You haven't even defined the parameters of your argument and you expect others to be able to respond. I have asked you more than once on what basis you believe we should interfere with the internal affairs of another country. Your reply has been: graphic description of an anonymous girl having her head bashed in, and some theatric wailing for people to be saved. Honestly, that tells me nothing of what your stance on foreign policy is or should be.

 

We know you are a good person and you care, Dennis, or are you insecure enough in this belief that you had to start a thread just to show you are a sentimental and compassionate person? But what I found most interesting was your implicit assumption that there is something questionable in the characters of people who don't care and didn't act, for reasons you are not privy to nor had the dedication to research, to stop a genocide.

 

Judgemental as always? The world consists only of good/bad people?

 

Then and again, I'm not surprised.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow... vociferous attacks... assumptions about SOIL's motives...Self righteous refutations that will, if answered only lead further down the line of self-righteousness... me from a year or so ago. Looks like someone has taken my spot at the SOIL woodshed.

[Kay]

I did disclaim that my assumptions were premature. If a thread topic and the subsequent posts by the topic-starter are shallow and pretentious, I'll call it as I see it.

 

I'm only asking that Dennis provide something more than "omg!bloodtearsgush* in response to his own proposition. That's self-righteous?

 

The only self-righteous postulating I've seen is from Dennis waving his bleeding heart around at people involved in an issue he doesn't really understand. I personally am disgusted at what's being implied by Dennis between the lines. The precedent he established in the previous thread doesn't help either.

 

[chefranden]

I did disclaim that my assumptions were premature. If a thread topic and the subsequent posts by the topic-starter are shallow and pretentious, I'll call it as I see it.

 

I'm only asking that Dennis provide something more than "omg!bloodtearsgush* in response to his own proposition. That's self-righteous?

 

The only self-righteous postulating I've seen is from Dennis waving his bleeding heart around at people involved in an issue he doesn't really understand. I personally am disgusted at what's being implied by Dennis between the lines. The precedent he established in the previous thread doesn't help either.

 

I've known Dennis a long time now, both on the forums and as a pen pal. Dennis does not write between the lines. What you see is what you get. He does wear his heart on his sleeve, thinking it best to be up front about his motivation. He does not do that as a tool of manipulation.

[Kay]

Whoever said we were aware of the expressions of our subconscious? More often than not, we have other people tell us what we are really trying to say.

 

He does wear his heart on his sleeve, thinking it best to be up front about his motivation.

 

You are better acquainted with Dennis, but nothing in this thread or the previous IJM thread supports your opinion.

 

He does not do that as a tool of manipulation.

 

Forgive me if I find this irrelevant. I wasn't accusing Dennis of manipulation. I think the furtherst I would go would be to accuse him of starting a thread that begs the question without inviting serious debate. What I have seen is Dennis putting up some competition as to who can sob the loudest amongst us all to prove who's of 'good character'. Perhaps it would have been more tactful of me if I had just expressed how unimpressed I was with his melodrama motivated by elaborate pieces of writing designed to compel emotion.

 

If Dennis is aspiring to politics and wants a voice in determining the direction of foreign policy, he should set out a list on what factors we should take into account and weigh up before we take action - so we can further the discussion. I have asked very similar questions a number of times in my posts but Dennis appears more interested in reiterating about his churning stomach and painful headaches.

 

Are you serious I am not reasonably entitled to draw any conclusions from that?

[SOIL]

I am just another person (like each person here) who struggles with some of the tough things in life.

 

The fact that I am a Christian talking with folks who have chosen to say they are not anymore (and I dare to "share", in a discussion forum containing the word 'debate' in it's title), most likely is associated with some suspicions concerning what motivates me (and/or whether I may imply things which I don't come right out and say explicitly). I both can (and do) understand and respect that.

 

Kay, I am not irritated at you as much as I am irritated at myself (for the post that I erased fairly soon after I first entered it). I am irritated not so much at the content of the post (as I remember it vaguely now) - but rather that it would appear as if I was trying to question your character with it - since I used something in an earlier post you made as a springboard into the content.

 

I don't like it when Christians question either the motive or the character of anyone (including exchristians) - and I am ashamed that I made that post - when I should have known that it would look like I was doing the very same thing that I say I don't approve of.

 

Eventually, I hope to reenter some of the points I wanted to make in that post - but I may let the waters calm a bit first.

 

I am struggling within myself - I ask questions of Christians (to help me in my struggles) and I ask questions of ex-christians. Sometimes I might even ask a tree a question or two (see Derick Jensens works).

 

I have contacted the IJM organization in the past to see if I can quote some pages from each of the 2 books Gary Haugen has written (in a manner that does not violoate copyrights) - I may wait till I get an OK from them - because some of what he says in those books expresses what is in my heart better than I know how to write these feelings.

 

When I try to express things myself - I often receive appropriate criticism - so sometimes I try to find quotes from people who can write better than I.

 

-Dennis

[SOIL]

...

If Dennis is aspiring to politics and wants a voice in determining the direction of foreign policy, he should set out a list on what factors we should take into account and weigh up before we take action - so we can further the discussion. I have asked very similar questions a number of times in my posts but Dennis appears more interested in reiterating about his churning stomach and painful headaches.

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(I added the bold emphasis)

 

Yes Kay, you nailed it! I am planning on running for president next time around, shoot, the way I figure it, I should have very strong support - especially among the exchristian community (as that's where I've spent most of my time recently) <wink!>

 

OK, maybe not! (but one can always hope!)

 

....

 

I think I will copy (once again) into this thread a portion of the content at one of the links which I included an earlier post

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

- this time, I will use some various highlighting (bold, underlines, colors etc...), in an attempt to draw emphasis specifically to some of things I was thinking might have already been pressed onto our minds:

 

Here again from: FRONTLINE: "The Triumph of Evil" :

... NARRATOR: In March 1998, as the Monica Lewinsky scandal was consuming his presidency, Bill Clinton escaped to Africa, to make his long-planned tour of the continent. He had come to offer hope, to strengthen America's commitment to Africa, and on this afternoon in Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, he had come to apologize.

 

Pres. BILL CLINTON: I have come today to pay the respects of my nation to all who suffered and all who perished in the Rwandan genocide.

 

NARRATOR: The genocide five years ago in Rwanda was meticulously planned and brutally executed, the methodical slaughter of over 800,000 Tutsis and their sympathizers.

 

PHILIP GOUREVITCH, "The New Yorker": There have been cases of mass political murder, but never a country and a society so completely and totally convulsed by an effort at pure, unambiguous genocide since the end of World War II, and the world left the Rwandans to it.

 

NARRATOR: The killing lasted 100 days, sometimes over 10,000 killed each day. All the while America - and the world - did almost nothing to stop it.

 

JAMES WOODS, Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense, 1986-94: People didn't want to really grasp and admit that they knew and understood what was happening because they didn't want to bear the consequences then of dealing with it. They did not want an intervention.

 

Pres. BILL CLINTON: It may seem strange to you here, especially the many of you who lost members of your family, but all over the world there were people like me sitting in offices, day after day after day, who did not fully appreciate the depth and the speed with which you were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror.

 

NARRATOR: The story behind President Clinton's dramatic apology for the world's failure in Rwanda is a story about the triumph of evil, which the philosopher Edmund Burke observed happens when good men do nothing.

 

MICHAEL BARNETT, U.S. Mission to the U.N., 1994: What really haunts me was that I and others could have been so cavalier, so complacent.

 

INTERVIEWER: Do you believe that you were a bystander to genocide?

 

MICHAEL BARNETT: Yeah. We all were.

 

NARRATOR: In April, 1993, during the first months of his new administration, President Clinton officially dedicated the new Holocaust Museum in Washington.

 

Pres. BILL CLINTON: To preserve this shared history of anguish, to keep it vivid and real so that evil can be combated and contained, we are here to consecrate this memorial and to contemplate its meaning for us.

 

The evil represented in this museum is incontestable, but as we are its witness, so must we remain its adversary in the world in which we live.

 

NARRATOR: The discovery of the Nazi death camps 50 years earlier had shocked the world into bold new promises, a universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations genocide convention that pledged the world would never again tolerate attempts to exterminate whole groups of people.

 

Pres. BILL CLINTON: Our task, with God's blessing upon our souls and the memories of the fallen in our hearts and minds, is to the ceaseless struggle to preserve human rights and dignity. I pray that we shall prevail.

 

NARRATOR: As the President added his voice to the ritual chorus of "never again," his new administration was formulating its foreign policy and making hard-nosed decisions about where America's interests really lay.

 

JAMES WOODS, Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense, 1986-94: In the Spring of '93, when the Clinton administration came in, we were asked to develop lists of what we thought would be serious crises this administration might face and forward that to the new secretary of defense, Mr. Aspin. I put Rwanda-Burundi on the list.

 

I won't go into personalities, but I received guidance from higher authorities, "Look, if something happens in Rwanda-Burundi, we don't care. Take it off the list. It's not- U.S. national interest is not involved and," you know, "we can't put all these silly humanitarian issues on lists like important problems like the Middle East and North Korea and so on."...

...

](see, there is absolutely no foundation to the spurious charge that I sometimes use too much formatting and emphasis!)

 

I am still trying to make up my mind about some questions:(That's probably one of the reasons why I am not really planning on running for president ... "next time around") <wink>

 

-- Was it inappropriate for president Clinton to "apologize" to the Rwandan people ???

 

-- Has the United Nations really said that someone is supposed to "act to stop Genocide" (to steal a phrase out of this thread's title). ???

 

-- Did president Clinton have his hand behind his back and his fingers crossed when he spoke concerning "our task" at the dedication ceremony for the Holocaust Museum in Washington ??? (I don't think so ... but .... ???) What did he mean when he (supposedly) used the word "our" ???

 

-- Does anyone here agree with James Woods said was told him by the "higher authorities" ???

 

I could go on and on with other questions that were prompted in my mind not only by the transcript I quoted from above - but also the Shake hands with the Devil transcript. (Tisk - I wish I could justify spending more time - just now - to do the bold, underline, and coloring thingy using excerpts parts from that one).

 

Kay, you are correct, that I need to go do more research - I think I especially need to read as much as I can about that "United Nations genocide convention".

 

I should be more clear about what I am trying to accomplish when I start a new thread.

 

In this case - one of my less insidious purposes was simply that I wanted to hear the opinions of people who I suspected might 'chime in'. There are many intelligent people who post regularly at this board - so I like to hear what you folks have to say about many of the things that I am interested about. I amhearing such things. So, in most regards, this thread is progressing pretty much in the direction I hoped it would!

 

<detours are always expected, especially in any thread I start>

 

-Dennis

 

P.S. To me I think two of the phrases (from that transcript I quoted from above) which hit me the hardest were: "who lost members of your family" and "silly humanitarian issues ".

 

P.P.S. oops, I forgot to mention that one other phrase which James Woods attributed to "higher authorities" : "we don't care".

 

I'm not trying either say or imply anything about whether that words apply to the position of anyone who reads or posts here at this site - I am pointing out that James Woods once thought that was the opinion of "higher authorites" in this government - I guess it just strikes me as being different than what I sometimes hear in speaches given by leaders of this government (like for instance in that talk at the dedicateion of the Holocaust Museum).

 

I just wanted to "speak" about something that is important to me. To some listening ears:

 

Thanks for Listening!

[SOIL]

I weary of the practice of always considering the group associated with a person when listening to what that person says. (I have done that with ex-christians a lot - sorry Dhampir, etc..!)

 

For instance - former president Clinton was a Democrat and he was also coming more from a perspective which we fundamental conservitive Christians see as "liberal, easy believe-ism". I used to just mock most anything he said (in my subconscious anyway ... see how I am getting so well acquainted with that now!).

 

Sometimes I have forgotten that even though he doesn't act like I want him to all the time ... at times I don't act the way I want me to either! I think he is still a person though, and so am I. Maybe I will start cutting him a bit more slack?

 

.... then again .... maybe not!

<insert my best sinister "nya nya na nya nyaa, I'm better-than-you-are" grin here>

 

.... well, at least Clinton apologized (sort of) to those Rwandans who lived through that terrible time.

 

-Dennis

[Kay]

Pres. BILL CLINTON: To preserve this shared history of anguish, to keep it vivid and real so that evil can be combated and contained, we are here to consecrate this memorial and to contemplate its meaning for us.

 

The word "evil" almost becomes meaningless when employed by a politician. Bush named Iraq, Iran and Korea the "Axis of Evil" but I see nothing in those countries that would make it any more evil than Pakistan, Indonesia or Bangladesh.

 

What evil do you speak of? Could you be a bit more specific. The death toll is a tragedy, not the evil. Are you trying to say the people who committed the genocide are evil or the people who ordered it? Or are the people who saw parts of it and did nothing about it evil?

 

You're obviously of the opinion the world, or at least the US, should have stepped into Rwanda. Why? There are many border disputes, repulsive cultural practices, mini despots and countries imploding in civil war all the time racking up pretty much the same statistics. How much resources should your country dedicate to stopping the bloodshed? Where will you get the resources from? How do you determine which country is more deserving of intervention and aid if they bear similar statistics in casualties?

 

If we want to talk about the death toll, what of the AIDS epidemic? Why are there still countries voting against bombing Africa with several tons of condoms? Are they evil because of this too?

 

I never intended to put much of an argument against intervention in genocide, but I was wondering if you had any reason to think this way other than because you were hopelessly swept away by sensationalist articles.

 

And I'm still waiting.

 

As for all your personal inner tensions and whatnot - I'm not interested, nor is it relevant.

 

I don't like it when Christians question either the motive or the character of anyone (including exchristians) - and I am ashamed that I made that post - when I should have known that it would look like I was doing the very same thing that I say I don't approve of.

 

What's interesting is not what you said, but why you said it anyway. If you don't question your own motive and character, how do you expect to change your behaviour for the better?

[SOIL]

,,,

What's interesting is not what you said, but why you said it anyway. If you don't question your own motive and character, how do you expect to change your behaviour for the better?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow,

 

Kay, how did you know what I would be reading this morning?

 

Amazing!

 

-Dennis

[SOIL]

Actually, perhaps I should be more clear, the question in my immediately preceding post was actually rhetorical in nature. As I am not trying to say something "between the lines" to the effect that I am of the opinion that Kay did in fact know I would be reading that page this morning. I guess I was just trying to point out that some of us Bible believing Christians do in fact agree with the excellent advice she offered me.

 

My oldest daughter often emails me a link pointing to the current article at Our Daily Bread's website.

 

This morning, after reading today's short article, I clicked on the 10 Reasons To Believe Real Christians Can Look Like They're Not link (at the bottom of today's page), because the reason I have recently sort of "separated" (I have chosen to temporarily live at my work-house - a short distance down the dirt road from our home-house), because in many ways recently I have sort of fit the description associated with the content of what the material at that link is addressing. I have been way to negative especially in my contact with the women who I love (my wife and daughters) and I think they simply need a break from me - and I need to learn to be better able to control my temper - so here I am.

 

Sorry Kay, but if you don't want to hear personal (off topic) type of drivel from me - then it might be best for you to ignore the threads which I begin - cause I have a hard time being focused on only one central topic - I seem to bring all of who I am into whatever discussion I happen to be involved with (and to tell you the truth, in a setting like this anyway - I enjoy it when others do the same), if I tire of it, I can always say so and then if I chose - just put them on ignore-mode.

 

Plus, I reckon (in this case) - I started this thread - and I will say what I want to say - in the posts I enter in it. (So there! <wink>) Of course, I understand in a short time, I may be the only one who posts in threads started by me!

 

BTW, I have noticed some folks (like Lokmer, Pitchu, AUB and others) - don't seem to be posting much in threads like this one. Is that by design? (yet again). I do like to hear from any and everyone - but maybe because of my weirdness - and/or continued lack of skill in appropriately using the typed English language, some just simply may not be willing to put themselves through the mental anguish of trying to read through my tortured paragraphs? .... tisk.

 

-Dennis

[SOIL]

OK, sorry to all for those "brief interruption" posts, now I'll try to get back a bit more on-topic.

 

Nivek, (btw - thanks for hanging in here with me, buddy) - I started following some links when I was reading at one of the sites you mentioned about Zimbabwe, and I ended up at this page:

 

From Amnesty International Canada - Recent Reports

Burundi: Refugee Rights at Risk : Human Rights Abuses in Returns to and from Burundi

 

It is a time of fragile hopefulness in Burundi. The country has emerged from several decades of devastating civil war and massive human rights violations and begun a peace process. The Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement for Burundi was signed in August 2000. All but one of the armed opposition groups have agreed to those accords. (1) The United Nations has a significant presence in Burundi through the mandate(2) of the United Nations Operations in Burundi (ONUB), which includes a peacekeeping force of close to 5,500 soldiers now widely deployed throughout the country and acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. A constitutional referendum, held on 28 February 2005, led to the adoption of a new constitution for the post transition period. After several delays, local, legislative and presidential elections are due to be held in various phases by 19 August 2005. All of these developments offer reason for hope. AFR 16/006/2005

27 June 2005 

(I added the bold emphasis)

 

I have noticed a couple of things after my rather stupid request to Chef that he provide a link to where he extracted that Chapter VII stuff from the U.N. Charter (actually I think he included the entire contents in the quote box!).

 

I guess what I am trying to say with this post is this: it looks to me as if the U.N could have stepped into the Rwandan situation based on the same Chapter VII which is being used to justify the "5,500 soldiers" currently in Burundi.

 

Am I missing something here folks?

 

(Please correct me if you see where I am going astray).

 

-Dennis