8/26/2002 extra: Palestinian youth
 

LGF reports that the Palestinian Journalists Union has put up a new rule for journalists in their region: it is now prohibited to take any pictures of Palestinian children carrying weapons or taking part in activities by militant groups. The blue text is from an Israeli newspaper:

Tawfik Abu Khousa, deputy chairman of the syndicate, said such pictures harmed the image of the Palestinian people and the credibility of Palestinian journalists.

"We have decided to forbid taking any footage of armed children, because we consider that as a clear violation of the rights of children and for negative effects these pictures have on the Palestinian people," he said.

In the statement issued by the syndicate it said footage of armed served "the interests of Israel and its propaganda against the Palestinian people."

Reporters were also banned from photographing masked men.

For a while I was posting any image of kids with guns that I found, but there were too many and it no longer made sense. Well now it does.

http://cellar.org/2002/palyouth.jpg

This demonstration was organized by Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement, in support of Saddam Hussein.

UT, are you protecting your sources?

That one was taken before the ban. I would credit it but I don't remember where I got it. Probably also from that LGF.

I was asking about the source of the quote, rather than the credit for the photographer.

It's all mapped out at the link I provided.

UT was also kind enough to provide some of his own words. Thanks, UT!

Hunh?

Oh, now I get it Nic... no, referring to the text below the photo, I don't have the details.

You know.. you put the story in your own words.

ummm ... made it up. ;)

I read it on the IDF website.
 

I found a source for UT's explanation of the demonstration.

Thanks man. I found my source for the pic which was also LGF:

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=3773

But they didn't list their own source.

I don't know whether it's true or not that this was organized by Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement, or that it was in support of Saddam Hussein. It might be true. It might be propaganda.

Call me a cynic, but I just don't believe everything I read from the LGF or the IDF. I don't believe everything any government agency says. Weblogs do tend to be a bit more accurate, though.

Debateable. Look at slashdot ;) Read the comments on the site too, somehow i don't think its the most unbiased source of infomation.

http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/s_basics.jpg
How cute! Matching guns.
I thought kids wielding automatic weapons was a human right?
unless its overseas, in which case its child abuse.

OMG, Slashdot has just gotten terrible! One headline today reads: "Is Red Hat the Microsoft of Linux?" I feel dirty every time I go there.

No offense Jag, but you're deliberately taking one argument and twisting it into another. For all the time you spend bitching about how Maggie does this to you, you seem to do it enough yourself.

Yea i know but the irony of them both having the same gun and being the same age, yet one is a poster boy and the other one is a victim of child abuse was just too much.

It is pretty funny.

posterboy vs. abused
 

Perhaps we should just interpret the pictures as product endorsements?

also, the poor palestine kid wasn't given a magazine.

I guess it's abuse if you send a 9 year old into battle with an unloaded weapon?

oops!
 

Sorry, just saw its magazine now.

stupid black plastic magazines!

time to adjust gamma.

The difference, jag, is that one is being taught *how* to shoot, while the other is being indoctrinated in *who* to shoot. (Check out the other pic of the kids shooting at a toy town flying Israeli flags.) I doubt the camo kid has baby pix with explosives strapped to his waist.

In support of MaggieL's statement, a little known fact about the fighting going on in the Middle East is that 70% of the Al-Qaida fighters in Afghanistan were under the age of 18. Where do I get this information from? Im enlisted into the United States Navy part of the Rosevelt fleet. Onboard we had Marines who recalled skirmishes in which numerious teenagers fired live rounds with intent to do harm (meaning aimed at the Marines).

Who's the other one aiming at then? Its not exactly something you'd use for deer hunting. I'm sure they taught him how to shoot too, they wouldn't give such an expensive weapon to a kid without training afterall.

Welcome Double T
 

I'm also a Navy man...recently retired and wishing I weren't.

I was Tin Can Navy though.

Brian

We do. I'm guessing that's is why the Palestinian media machine (?!) has nixed the marketing campaign. Selling the young warrior-martyr to all sides needs a new, fresh spin. Less, how shall we say,...aggressor...Lets see..

The Israeli media machine thinks it is a good idea to use these images, though.

Palestinian Children Call Iraq to Attack Israel

http://www.idf.il/newsite/english/kids.stm

I would imagine he's aiming at a paper target, that being what people who are training usually shoot at. Unless they're martyrs-in-training, in which case the targets are a bit more...shall we say "representational"? As we see in the other photo?
He surely hasn't had what I would consider *good* training; his finger's on the trigger without him being set up on a target.

Not to worry, if he accidently blows away one of his friends, instant martyr, and they'll say an Israeli soldier did it. When you get them by stealing them from the Israelis, M-16's aren't all that expensive. Most of his buddies do seem to have AK-47s, though. Maybe after the photo he had to give it back.

They didn't have to steal the F-16s. The US provided them as a part of Oslo, to establish a Palestinian security force.

F-16
 

M, F, what's the difference.

*sniff* hmm something stinks round here...oh that's right, its the pile of fud above this.

Yeah, we need more schoolboys learning how to handle guns. If the bad kids are bringing guns to schools, isn't the answer to arm the good kids? After all, who's gonna fuck wit ya if you might be carrying at school?

'zactly Nic. I'm glad you're not damning yourself to hell and supporting genocide by suggesting that kids don't have the right to carry military hardware in school ;)

I'm no fan of the imperialist TR but you guys may not realize how common it was for American kids to bring rifles to school up through the sixties. Rifle teams were very common, yet shootings were not. A couple years ago a girl from our neighboring school district was the national target shooting champion for her age group. Like kids in other activities she wanted to appear in her yearbook doing her thing. There was a shitstorm between the victim disarmament crowd and the right wing nuts,...not pretty. I don't think its a good idea to carry at school anymore but thats more about Americas public school culture than firearms.

"The great body of our citizens shoot less as times goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among schoolboys, and indeed among all classes, as well as in the military services by every means in our power. Thus, and not otherwise, may we be able to assist in preserving peace inthe world... The first step -- in the direction of preparation to avert war if possible, and to be fit for war if it should come -- is to teach MEN to shoot!"

President Theodore Roosevelt's last message to Congress

If your going to use a quote to support your point of veiw, use it right. Read that last line, now read it again, now one last time to prove my point. Teach MEN (Im sure if TR was live he would also include Women) how to shoot. He isnt talking about kiddies with a chip on their shoulder who havent been taught how to handel their anger OR how to handel properlly a firearm. Personally I believe the U.S. needs to speak softly and carry a big stick at times like now.

Well, I read it again and he was clearly advocating teaching MEN to shoot when they are SCHOOLBOYS.

But Theodore Roosevelt hasn't seen what we've seen. Times change. For many people, Colombine and the other high school massacres changed everything.

Some things, like philosophical and moral principles, are timeless. In these cases, quotes from dead men are appropriate. Technology, though, is not timeless. Why not pull up quotes from Charles Babbage to defend the quality of Mac OS X?

I'm not advocating one position or the other, though. I honestly haven't made up my mind.

Columbine and other massacres certainly made up <b>my</b> mind.

If the rest of those students were carrying, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris wouldn't have stood a chance.

I hereby endorse dh for President! :)

Nah. Somehow I think it would have only made Dylan and Eric revise their initial destructive plan into a more covert strategy, bigger, and explosive perhaps...when you want to kill, you rise to the challenge presented, eh?

The <b>students</b>? How about a just teacher or two? It's not legal for high school kids to carry most places in the US. But almost all schools and many universities are currently victim disarmament zones.

When Nigerian student Peter Odighizuwa killed the dean of the Appalachian School of Law (which he'd just flunked out of), along with another professor and a student, Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges had to go fetch their handguns from their cars before they could apprehend him.

Of 280 news stories found in a Nexus-Lexis search, exactly <b>four</b> mentioned the role of legal firearms in stopping Odighizuwa.

http://www.i-depth.com/P/r/rq00484.f...ct.msg/11.html

Why, Mr. Toad...vive la difference!
Oh, dear...in retrospect not a very clever thing to have done.
Now <i>that's</i> an insightful response. What's the matter, Jag, got a paper due or something?

Your theory was that an M-16 was too expensive to give to a child without proper training...I pointed out that the picture made clear that the kid had no training (worthy of the name) in safe firearems handling, and that it was almost certain that the M-16 wasn't purchased by the Palestinians. If *I* wanted an M-16, I'd have to plunk down something in excess of a kilobuck for one, properly neutered for civilian use. But the mini-martyr in the picture apparently got his because I helped pay for it, in the hopes of fostering Middle-East peace through Palestinian empowerment.

How nice.

The photos also made clear that his training consisted mostly of indoctrination. The picture from "a-human-right" that you've been waving around as evidence of sick American culture <b>advocated</b> firearms training. You'd <b>just</b> finished spreading your <i>own</i> brand of FUD proclaiming your fear that if the people around you were armed, that they probably <i>wouldn't</i> have proper training.

Don't you get dizzy chasing your tail like that? Maybe <i>that's</i> where that smell is coming from, you're crossing your own wake turbulance.

I don't give a fuck whether they're trained or not! I"m nto going to trust them much more if they are. I'm not inclined to trust people full stop and certainly not people brandishing firearms. Whether they know how to peoprly handle it and accurately shoot things with it is utterly irrelavent to that. Care to attempt to twist any more of my words?

Lines like

and
Do not warrant my time and i've got a feeling the rest of this thread won't either.

As for kids carrying guns, or even some teachers for that matter. Spend a day in an average high school then think about it for a bit. Schooyard fights are all in fun till someone has a 15cm wide hole in their chest.

OK. B'bye. Come back if you calm down. I see you're still having trouble with the difference between "carrying" and "brandishing". Interesting that one of those sentences that "isn't worth your time" you've now quoted twice, without actually saying anything substantive about it.

As I pointed out, I don't advocate "arming schoolchildren"; they're not old enough to carry legally, or even posess except under adult supervision.

Adult teachers is another matter entirely.

High school students are old enough to learn the fundamentals of firearms safety, which used to be taught routinely in many schools as an elective, back in the days when Driver Ed was an elective too. My college had a range and a rifle team; I think the prohibitionists have managed to get it shut down by now.

And schoolyard fights are *not* "all in fun". I spent three years in an American inner-city high school during the late 1960's. The idea that fights among schoolkids can be dismissed and trivialized is one of the attitudes that <i>fosters</i> sudden outbreaks of violence.

I was making a parody of the line 'its all fun and games till someone loses an eye' Clearly we are currantly flying at 30,000 feet above Maggies head. Some things, like the what you just pointed out, i take as the blindly obvious, clearly others don't.

I'm in a deabte, of course i'm going to use emotive language, geez neextill be pulled up for supporting my own point. It doesn't warrant anything substancial, its unsupported, hyperbolic bullshit designed to incite, what do you expect? Its a perfect example of FUD, silly FUD at that, oof course i'm going to quote it.

Because of legalities of because its mindnumbingly stupid? I woudl have thought since you're so worked up about schoolyard fights in the 60's you see why it was not such a wise idea.

Because of legalities of because its mindnumbingly stupid? I woudl have thought since you're so worked up about schoolyard fights in the 60's you see why it was not such a wise idea.

Jag, you are missing the entire point. It isn't about kids carrying guns, it's about kids being taught responsibility and how to make wise decisions. The modern education system seeks to shelter children to the point of suffocation and so it falls to the parents for their complete upbringing. Unfortunately, most parents rely on the Federal Daycare System (read: public education) to do their job of raising those children. Hmmm.

The only role models most kids have is whoever is playing in the CD player. Great, now we have Ludicras (or whatever he calls himself) and various other artists teaching our kids what is right and wrong. So why are we suprised when we have incidents like Columbine?

It's a vicious f'in cycle where everyone blames someone else and the only people getting hurt are the kids.

Because I know what levels of responsibility kids are capable of, and at what ages, having raised a few myself.

"We"? You have a tapeworm now?:-)

Look, this is another case of your "firearmed" coinage. You harbor this illusion that firearms as weapons represents something radically different in kind rather than in degree from other weapons and sorts of violence.

Violence and abuse between children is a very serious issue...and one reason there are incidents like Columbine is ignoring the issue until something dramatic happens, such as the use of firearms.

Violent emotion can kill with or without firearms, and fomenting violence and countenancing hatred, whether in an American (or Australian) schoolyard or in a Palestinian camp is the core. You allow yourself to be distracted by the "evil" of one instrumentality of violence, and thus you miss the true point.

I'm not "all worked up about it", Mr. Pot...so don't call that kerttle "black". After all...Oh, sorry. Thought you wanted to have a discussion. I can find "hyperbolic bullshit" anywhere. Talk is cheap, and garbled, incoherent flamage is even less valuable.

It's really a shame that you have grown up to this point beliving that debate consists of incitement and bullshit.. That's one reason I've been anticipating hopefully the first time you actually get formal instruction in debate, because true debate very different from simply dispensing flamage in a blog.

It seems you see no difference between another generation of Palastinian children being groomed to throw themsleves into the Intafadah meat grinder and the boy in the "a-human-rights" poster, being shown how to use a firearm without a pile of propaganda being shoved down his throat along with it--assuming the Palestinian boy *was* shown anything about his weapon besides where the bullets go in and which end to point at the Israelis, a proposition that the photo itself makes highly doubtful.

Again, there's a world of difference between being taught *how* to shoot and being indoctrinated in *who* to shoot, and how to make a human bomb of yourself, from the cradle onwards. The photos Tony's been posting make a point about this practice, and now clearly the Palestinians have finally realized that when photos of this stuff hit the world press, it makes them look, very, very bad, just as the street celebrations after 9/11 did. "Hyperbolic bullshit" just doesn't play well, it seems.

That's not a difficult distinction to make, unless you're peddling ideas that won't stand unless supported by "hyperbolic bullshit". You may not "give a f*ck" about training...but raising kids, and learning, *after* kids aren't kids anymore (a line you're only just about to cross yourself) is very, very importnant.

The values a kid absorbs early in life shapes them profoundly as a person. If you don't disinguish between being taught self-reliance and responsibility and the institutionalized inculcation of violent race hatred, we do indeed have little common ground for discussion, and might as well fling "hyperbolic bullshit" back and forth. That's clearly not worth your time nor mine.

My comments about the likely outcome of a negligent discharge in the case of the Palastinian boy are supported by the past behavior of the Palestinians: every child is a weapon, and every death a propaganda opportunity. You can dismiss that as "FUD" if you like; but that's not the meaning of the term as I use it.

But if all you can do when you have no point to make is bluster, I suppose you might as well. After all, it may be true that "Violent *language* is the last resort of the incompetant" too. :-)

There are better ways to do that IMHO than firearms training, without suffocating people. I'll deal with this further down.

Nice attempt to misquote me there, I'm going to ignore it. I'm also going to also ignore the obvious crap you pointed out, the verbal equalivant of trying to look someone down over horn-rimmed glasses. As well as that ill ignore all the wonderful tangents you lace your posts with, the not-particularly-subtle personal attacks on me and deal with the issue of this thread, the comparison I made between those two pictures.

I'm left with a much shorter post to deal with now I've sheared off the shit I must say.

Firstly, I don't believe firearms training is a good form of self reliance training and while it can be a way to train responsibility, I don't think it’s the best one. Self reliance? How about some useful skills (I don't think being about to hit a paper target in the head at 200m is a useful skill unless you're planning on becoming a merc), and independence instead. Pratical things oddly enough are far more useful.

This is getting dangerously close to in Isreali/Palastinian thread, what a nice way to whip up a shitstorm, combine gun control and that. Anyway....

While my original post was just a shot of light irony at them both having the same gun since its been taken so seriously and seems to virtually have become an extension of the other thread on this I may as well see it out now.

You seem to be saying that indoctrination into hatred is the enemy, not firearms. Fair enough. I assume therefore that the 'child abuse' heading this was originally posted with refers to this, not children having firearms in a training with military weaponry situation, as that is clearly ok according to you.

Glad we narrowed that down. Living in a country where the Attorney General is afraid of the female form I can understand you dislike of indoctrination, religious or otherwise. In that I agree, it’s not a good thing, I don't think indoctrinating kids into an insular culture of hate is a good thing, shock horror. I think that is about all I agree with you on.

Ciao

You two are never going to agree on this.

You're kidding me. :rolleyes: :p

Henceforth, I wish to be known as Juju, Bringer of Insight.

No, you will be known as Mr. Fucking Obvious. ;)

Question for Mr. F. Obvious:
Which "two of us" are you talking about? Jag and who else? He's been taking on all comers in this thread lately, then using an apparently editorial "we". Is it possible you don't think he'll agree with himself?

Is this a rhetorical question?

Is that a rhetorical question? ;)

Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
 

<img src="http://www.cellar.org/attachment.php?postid=20823">

Hehehe. I started a long rant, answering everything you posted. Then deleted it, because I'm not going to be drawn into the quagmire you try to create to muddy any issue with as may personal asides as possible, my time is too valuable to reply to your crud anymore, back on the ignore list you go. That way i won't have to listen to a long personal assult including links to dictionary definitions of obscure usenet terms, types of arguement, styles of writing and the time of day.

Ah! The Fermat defense!

Whatever gets you through the day. I hadn't realized "garbled" was a style.

Look!
 

Is it a pipe or isn't it?

Just tell me. This is really just pissing me off here.