HomeFAQSearchRegisterUsergroupsBlogLog inGolden Tom 2014 Thread!

Share | 
 

 A must see documentary

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Admin Tom
Admin
Admin


Posts : 2589
Trading Reputation : 12
Join date : 2007-08-25
Location : Vienna/Zurich

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Witch Hunters Witch Hunters
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: A must see documentary   Mon 14 Jan 2008 - 2:17

Hi guys!

Yesterday I watched a film that opened my eyes and moved me deeply. It is called Occupation 101 directed by Sufyan Omeish and Abdallah Omeish.

It is a documentary about the Israelian-Palestinian conflict, and it treats the subject with such lucidity and intelligence, that I would be hard pressed not to say that this is one of the best documentaries I've ever seen.

This movie made me realise how little I knew about the middle-eastern conflict. We all see the reports on television, read the articles in the newspapers and when we are done, we turn off the TV and put down the newspaper, walk away with a feeling of déjà-vu and forget about the whole thing over a cup of coffee or a Mordheim warband we paint. Well, we shouldn't!

The palestinian population cannot just walk away form the israeli army's shelling and shooting. And even though a large portion of the israeli jewish population is against the unecessary killing and land-stealing from the arabs (muslims and christians alike), the israeli autorithies keep conducting an agressive, expansionist politic with total disregard of palestinian (and israeli) lives. And why can the israeli army keep firing amour piercing ammunition at children? Because lobbies like the AIPAC (counting well-known members like Hilary Clinton and G.W. Bush in their ranks) lobbies the U.S. government into paying for them. Why? Because they are pro-isreal no matter what.

It all sounds like a very bad plot in a very bad movie, and to be honest, I think it is still very hard to get in its cruel simplicity. But it IS true.

You'll probably say "Yeah thanks for the big news Tom, but I already knew that". I know you did and so did I. But can you comprehend it? Does it really register?

I strongly suggest... no, I urge you all to watch this movie. Rent it, buy it, borrow it.

It shows how complex and out of control the situation is and leaves you haunted by one question: "Dear God, how can we fix this mess?".

Let me know about your impressions.

Thanks for your time.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://boringmordheimblog.blogspot.com
Erkwin
Venerable Ancient
Venerable Ancient


Posts : 653
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2007-08-30
Age : 24
Location : Germany

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Reiklanders Reiklanders
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Mon 14 Jan 2008 - 14:29

I think I know what you mean. Well, first it's hard for me to say all this in English.
I'll just post my thoughts about htis, exactly how htey come to mind, in no real order.

All these wars and problems around the world- floods in Eastern Asia, Forests burning in Spain and the USA, all the war in Africa, child-soldiers, the worth of live in an african township, this israeli-palestina conflict...

Can a human handle all this global issues and pay them the attention they deserve?

You hear war here, natural disaster there... and somehow, you're hapopy that this doesn't happen to you.
From now and then, you see a shoking movie like "lord of war", "blood diamant" etc...
But these can't focuse you're thoughts on these conflicts for long.

Now to talk about this specific problem:
The israeli and the palestinian.
Year after year now they fight each other, you see it on TV, hear it on the radio, and you just think:
"Who fucking cares?" Sorry for these harsh words, but I have to say this. For years now, they waste lives and destroy families for politic issues and power.
They, the Israeli politics and the palestininan leaders, let others die for their purposes, because they are not able to solve this conflict.
Because they are too stupid, too primitive, and they have to avenge every single attack with a counter attack, which leads to a counter- counter attack and so on.

How can a so called intelligent human beiing be so bloody studip?
Why the fuck are these idiots fighting anyway?
It seems like the reasons they tell the world are only alibis to go on with their fucking war, no matter what it costs.

They don't want to reache anything, they just want to continue this useless war.
It's very sad for all those families and people who suffer from it, but I don't, or better I can't really care for this issue, because I am not able to understand this waste of live.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin Tom
Admin
Admin


Posts : 2589
Trading Reputation : 12
Join date : 2007-08-25
Location : Vienna/Zurich

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Witch Hunters Witch Hunters
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Mon 14 Jan 2008 - 16:37

Erkwin wrote:

Can a human handle all this global issues and pay them the attention they deserve?
[...] can't focuse you're thoughts on these conflicts for long.

A very good point Erkwin. Can we focus our thoughts on these conflicts for long? No.
Can we keep them present in the back of our heads? Yes.
And i believe we should. I believe it is our duty as thinking human beings to make the effort of constantly returning to the problem, reading about it, re-reading about it, thinking about it over and over again. The least we can do is not "lose interest".

I believe it is the duty of every single person to cultivate an ever growing historical and political awareness.

Erkwin wrote:

Year after year now they fight each other, you see it on TV, hear it on the radio, and you just think: "Who fucking cares?"

Well, for starters, the palestinians and many jews inside and outside of Israel do.
In Europe, maybe too few care. That is exactly the problem. The public opinion shrugs off the issue: "they fight each other and have been doing so forever". And that is wrong.

1) Jews and muslims have been cohabitating peacefully in Palestine for hundreds of years. There is no congenital ennemity between jews an arabs. The idea of Zionism has been developed by european jews in the late 19th century and has ultimately led to colonisation by jewish settlers, claming that Palestine was a country without a people for a people without a country. Unfortunately that wasn't true. Palestine wasn't empty.

2) Fighting implies that two more or less equally strong foes struggle for dominance. The Palestinians do not fight a war, they fight for survival against an oppressor striving to drive them out of their land by violating their rights as human beings. They are prisoners in their own country. And the victims are not mainly found amongst the soldiers, but amongst the civilians on the palestinian side.

Erkwin wrote:
They, the Israeli politics and the palestininan leaders, let others die for their purposes, because they are not able to solve this conflict.
Because they are too stupid, too primitive, and they have to avenge every single attack with a counter attack, which leads to a counter- counter attack and so on.

Very true. The attitude of "an eye for an eye" is counter-productive. Unfortunately such a vicious circle can only be broken by an act of "forgiveness" from the stronger side. The israelis in this case.

Erkwin wrote:
How can a so called intelligent human beiing be so bloody studip?

Haha! Smile An excellent question Erk. Let me quote Albert Einstein on this one: "Nichts gibt einem so sehr das Gefühl der Unendlichkeit, wie die Dummheit der Menschen".

Erkwin wrote:
Why the fuck are these idiots fighting anyway?

The israeli leaders want a 100% jewish country at all costs, so they bulldoze arab (I said arab, not only muslim) homes and farmlands, build concrete walls between families and shoot civilans who throw stones. They justify it by saying "our people have suffered from the holocaust and need a place to be safe: the promised land". Only problem is that muslims are also living in that "promised land".

Do I really need to explain the palestinian motivations?

Erkwin wrote:

It seems like the reasons they tell the world are only alibis to go on with their fucking war, no matter what it costs. They don't want to reache anything, they just want to continue this useless war.

100% right. "They" being the israeli army. Not the israeli population.
And "no matter what it costs" because the US pay every single penny.
If the US stopped pumping money into Isreal today, the tanks would stop firing tomorrow and we would have a much more docile Ariel Sharon on TV.

Erkwin wrote:

It's very sad for all those families and people who suffer from it, but [...] I can't really care for this issue, because I am not able to understand this waste of lives.

Yes you can care for the issue Erk. Turning your back on the issue is not an answer. Imagine what would have happened if the US had turned their backs on Europe in 1941. I would be german now and our national flag would have more of a reddish-whitish-swastika-ish look.
And no, I can't understand this waste of lives either.

Thanks for your thoughts Erkwin, it was very interesting to read. I'd really be interested by what you have to say about the documentary.

Cheers!
Admin Tom

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://boringmordheimblog.blogspot.com
Tortiou
Warlord
Warlord


Posts : 221
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2007-08-26
Age : 31
Location : Strasbourg, France

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Reiklanders Reiklanders
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Sun 20 Jan 2008 - 6:53

Okay so I watched this documentary, "Occupation 101", yesterday, and as Tom opened this topic I find it interesting to add a few remarks.

First of all, I agree with Tom: this is a really well done documentary. The choice of images (sometimes really shocking), the choice of interviewees, the statistics they use, the music they add... all this makes it a very "watchable" and intense documentary, just like a normal film.

However, this is a very complex issue, and should be treated as such - both sides should be allowed to express their opinions. And this was not allowed in "Occupation 101". That's what shocked me the most: Occupation 101 is a 90 minutes propaganda film for the Palestinians. This documentary shows the Palestinians as blameless victims, and the Israeli army and settlers as colonizers and ethnic cleansers.
The guys they interview are all anti-Israeli. The directors, Sufyan Omeish and Abdallah Omeish, said they interviewed only jewish or israeli people who are not part of the government on the premise that it would seem more "credible" when they criticize Israel... but as they are not interviewing any Israeli government official to show us the arguments from both sides of the conflict, this documentary is biased and, therefore, manipulative.
Throughout the documentary, they just mention the terrorist suicide bombings on Israeli civilians at the end, for like 2 or 3 minutes. And they just say that these attacks are a "reaction" because of the violence of the Israeli army, thus trying to justify the extremism of Palestinian terrorists. Not really convincing IMHO...
Furthermore, "Occupation 101" shows only the suffering of the Palestinian population, and hides the suffering of the numerous Israeli families that have lost their relatives in terrorist attacks. Of course, there are a lot more Palestinians dying than Israeli civilians dying... but they are both dying, and suffering, and this should not be forgotten.
Many aspects of the conflict remain hidden in "Occupation 101": what about the success of the security barrier? The documentary only talks about it as the "shame wall", the "apartheid wall" or the "hate wall" - saying that this wall is a prison for the Palestinians. Even if I agree with that argument, I think we should hear what Israeli officials have to say about this wall. And recently, the Israeli ambassador in France came to visit us in my university in Strasbourg for a special conference about the topic "Israel-Palestine conflict". As the crowd of students were all quite pro-Palestinian, the ambassador (Daniel Shek) had a hard time answering all the angry questions about the situation of the Palestinian population. When it came to the question of this "hate wall", (I think the question was something like "how can you even consider building such a wall when you pretend you're looking for peace?"), the ambassador had a very pertinent answer: statistics.
"If you look at the facts", he replied, "the number of terrorist suicide bombings have dropped by more than 90 percent since the barrier's construction. This wall was constructed to stop Palestinian terrorists and to protect the Israeli civilian population, and was a total success."
What can you say against that? If you take the point of view of the Israeli population, living in the fear of being killed in the streets, building such a wall is good because it protects them against suicide bombers.
Another biased assumption of the documentary is the choice of images showing Palestinian villages being shot at by Israeli artillery or helicopters, and then images showing the ruins and the damage done to Palestinian buildings (with lots of Palestinian women and children crying afterwards). But does the documentary talk about the mortars and missiles fired by Palestinians from the Gaza strip on Israeli civilians? No. Not a single word. Does the documentary show the suffering of Israelis after a rocket from Gaza destroyed their home? Nope.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make here is: always try to consider stories and events from another point of view. "Occupation 101" is a well-done documentary but, unfortunately, it is a shame to see that it is so biased.
I'm a bit pro-Palestinian myself regarding this conflict, but I don't think a documentary should pretend that only Palestinians are victims. This is a much more complex issue and should be treated as such. But I don't think this will ever be the case, as Palestinians and Israeli are both so passionate about this conflict that you will never get a truly neutral opinion on this topic... I'm still looking for a good documentary, neutral and un-biased, about the Israel-Palestine conflict!

However, as Tom said, I really urge you all to watch this documentary... but keep in mind that it is clearly pro-Palestinian!

Take care
Tortiou
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin Tom
Admin
Admin


Posts : 2589
Trading Reputation : 12
Join date : 2007-08-25
Location : Vienna/Zurich

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Witch Hunters Witch Hunters
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Sun 20 Jan 2008 - 15:49

Great! Very Happy

I was hoping Tortiou would enter the debate, a man qualified for such a discussion much more than I am! Thanks Tortiou!

I talked about the documentary with a fellow student a few days back. He studies history, so I thought it'd be interesting to hear his opinion. And I wasn't wrong. He shares exaclty the same view as Tortiou, and I think there are very interesting and true elements in it.

Tortiou wrote:
this is a very complex issue, and should be treated as such - both sides should be allowed to express their opinions.

Absolutely true. The movie only shows the palestinian point of view and comments by israeli peace activists/ journalists and palestinian families.

Tortiou wrote:
they are not interviewing any Israeli government official to show us the arguments from both sides of the conflict, this documentary is biased and, therefore, manipulative.

One should bear in mind that the documentary tries to show a point of view that is NOT commonly shown and treated in the media.

I don't really think interviewing israeli government officials is absolutely necessary. In fact, neither palestinian nor israeli government officials are being interviewed, which makes it even. The only points of view considered are those of "civilians". And by that I mean, people from the israeli and palestinian population (journalists, religious leaders, families etc...).

Furthermore, the israeli point of view is well known. The israelis hold that they are defending themselves against an arab/muslim world that surrounds them and means to harm them. Which is not entirely false. Tortiou mentioned suicide bombers: a well known, terrible fact, that occurs on a daily basis. The israelis say further that the 6 days war against Egypt in 1967, which ended in the occupation of Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem (amongst others) was a preventive strike. That again, is not entirely untrue.

However, the point that I would like to make, is that the israelis are now the stronger military power in the middle east. Not only "stronger" but the only real military power, which gives them the power to end the conflict. How? By not expanding anymore, like they say they do, and trying to "freeze" the situation to finally allow for a real dialog. As long as Israeli leaders say they want peace, but order the construction of outposts, a credible dialog is impossible.

Tortiou wrote:
does the documentary talk about the mortars and missiles fired by Palestinians from the Gaza strip on Israeli civilians? No. Not a single word. Does the documentary show the suffering of Israelis after a rocket from Gaza destroyed their home? Nope.

Are the few palestinian mortar projectiles REALLY a military force to be reckoned with? Does an army that has tanks, planes, helicopters and superior training and weapon systems really have to be afraid of a few RPGs being fired from rooftops? Sure this causes israeli casualties, but in the face of "statistics" (as mentioned by Tortiou), can't we neglect this fact for the argumentation? There is a vast imbalance in the repartition of forces, in favour of Israel, and Isreal uses it to do more harm than good.
The documentary cannot treat every aspect in 1 hour and 30 minutes. They point out this difference, that's all they do. And I think that's enough.

But mentioning the israeli casualties or not is beside the point really.

The point is that the palestinian population lives in occupation. Without any civil rights, at the "mercy" of a stronger state that keeps expanding by force.

I would like to insert a little article by an Israeli Journalist who can explain this much better than I ever could:

The Hands of Esau

By Uri Avnery

15/01/08 "ICH" -- - Which of the two men is the leader of the greatest power on earth and which is the boss of a small client state?

A visitor from another planet, attending the press conference in Jerusalem, would find it hard not to answer: Olmert is the president of the great power, Bush is his vassal.

Olmert is taller. He talked endlessly, while Bush listened patiently. While Olmert anointed Bush with flattery that would have made a Byzantine emperor blush, it was quite clear that it is Olmert who decides policy, while Bush humbly accepts the Israeli diktat. And Bush's flattery of Olmert exceeded even Olmert's flattery of Bush.

Both, we learned, are "courageous". Both are "determined". Both have a "vision". The word "vision", once reserved for prophets, starred in every second sentence. (Bush could not know that in Israel, "vision" has long become a jocular appellation for highfaluting speeches, usually in combination with the word "Zionism".)

The President and the Prime Minister have something else in common: not a word of what they said at the press conference had any connection with the truth.

One OF the most moving dramas in the Bible tells about our old blind forefather, Isaac, who wanted to bless his eldest son, Esau, a reddish and hairy hunter. But the second son, the homebody (or rather tent-body) Jacob, exploited the absence of his brother and went to his father in order to steal the blessing. He wore Esau's clothes and covered his arms with hairy goat skins. The ruse nearly failed, when the father felt the arms of Jacob and his suspicion was aroused.

That's when he uttered the famous words: "The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau." (Genesis, 27: 22).

Yet Jacob, the impostor, did receive the blessing and became the father of the nation which was named after him (he was also called Israel). It seems that Ehud Olmert is a true successor: there is no connection between his voice and his hands.

Anyone who listens to him - not just at the press conference, but also on every other occasion - hears words of peace and reason: The Palestinians must have a state of their own. The "vision" must be realized while Bush is president, because Israel has never had and never will have a truer friend. The settlement outposts must be removed, as promised by us again and again. The settlements must be frozen. Etc. etc.

That is the voice of Jacob. But the hands, well, they are the hands of Esau.

* * *

BEFORE ANNAPOLIS, during Annapolis and after Annapolis, nothing at all was done to promote the Two-State Solution. The negotiations were about to begin - any moment now - a year ago, and now they are again about to begin - any moment now. Yes, the "core issues" - borders, Jerusalem, refugees - will be addressed. Sure. Any moment now.

But in the meantime, the hands of Esau are working feverishly. All over the occupied territories, the settlements are being enlarged. The existing outposts remain untouched, new ones spring up from time to time. Around them, a well choreographed dance has evolved, a kind of formal ballet executed by the settlers and the army. The settlers set up a new outpost, the army removes it, the settlers return and set it up again, the army dismantles, and so forth.

In the meantime the outpost gets bigger and bigger. The government connects it to the electricity and water systems and builds a road. And the army, of course, protects it day and night. We cannot leave good Jews at the mercy of the evil Palestinian terrorists, can we?

Bush knows all this and still continues to blabber that "the illegal outposts must be removed". And so it continues: the voice is Jacob's voice, the hands are the hands of Esau.

But one cannot fool all of the people all of the time, to quote another American President who was slightly more intelligent than the present incumbent.

And so, after Olmert and Bush repeated the mantra about removing the outposts and freezing the settlements, one of the journalists popped an innocent question: How does this fit together with the announcement about the building of a huge new housing project at Har Homa?

If anyone thought that this would embarrass Olmert, he was sadly mistaken. Olmert just cannot be embarrassed. He simply answered that this promise does not apply to Jerusalem, nor to the "Jewish population centers" beyond the Green Line.

"Jerusalem" - since the time of Levy Eshkol - is not only the Old City and the Holy Basin. It is the huge tract of land annexed to Israel after the Six-Day War, from the approaches to Bethlehem to the outskirts of Ramallah. This area includes the hill that was once forested and called Jebel Abu-Ghneim, now the site of the big and ugly Har Homa settlement. And the "population centers" are the big settlement blocs in the occupied Palestinian territories, which President Bush so generously presented to Ariel Sharon.

This means that almost all the extensive building activities that are now going on beyond the Green Line are not covered by the Israeli undertaking to freeze the settlements. And while Olmert publicly announced this, President Bush was standing at his side, smiling foolishly and painting on another layer of compliments.

The following day, Bush visited Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah and told the shocked Palestinians that the innumerable Israeli roadblocks in the West Bank, which turn the life of the Palestinians into hell, are necessary for the protection of Israel and must remain where they are - until after the establishment of the hoped-for democratic Palestinian state.

Condoleezza Rice was quick to remind him in private that this was not very wise, since he was about to visit half a dozen Arab countries. So Bush hastened to call another press conference in Jerusalem, talking about the "core issues": there would be a "contiguous" Palestinian state, but the 1949 borders (the Green Line) would not be restored. He would not speak about Jerusalem. Also, the refugee problem would be settled by an international fund - meaning that none at all would be allowed to return.

Altogether, much less than Bill Clinton's 2000 "parameters", and less than most Israelis are already prepared to accept. It amounts to 110% support for the official Israeli government line.

After that, Bush had dinner with Israeli cabinet ministers. He cordially shook the hand of Minister Rafael Eitan, the former spymaster who controlled the Israeli spy in Washington, Jonathan Pollard, whom Bush refuses to pardon. (Eitan would be arrested the moment he set foot on American soil.) He spoke cordially with the ultra-rightist Minister Avigdor Liberman, urging him to support Olmert. Throughout the dinner, he talked and talked, until Condi sent him a discreet note suggesting that he shut up. Bush, in high spirits, read the note out loud.

* * *

I HAVE mentioned more than once the British World War II poster which was pasted up on the walls in Palestine: "Is this trip really necessary?"

That is again the question now: Is this trip of Bush's really necessary?

The answer is: Of course. Necessary for Bush. Necessary for Olmert. Necessary for Abbas, too.

For Bush, because he is a lame duck, in the last year of his term, and therefore almost paralyzed. In the United States he is rapidly becoming irrelevant. His touted Middle East tour has been drowned out by the primary elections mayhem, which produces a new drama almost every day. While Hillary wrestles with Obama and the glib Bill competes with an impressive black grandma, who cares where the worst president in American history is traipsing around?

Olmert is well aware of the situation. When he declares that the last year of the term of his noble friend must be used, what he really means to say is: he cannot exert any pressure on us, he cannot even "nudge" us, as he promises. There is no need to remove even one single outpost for him. So let us squeeze the last drop of juice out of his presidency, before he is thrown onto the trash pile of history.

But Olmert needs the presence of Bush at his side, because his position is not much more secure than Bush's. Bush is bankrupt in a big way, after starting one of the most pointless and unsuccessful wars in US history. That is true for Olmert in a small way. He is bankrupt too, and he also started a pointless, failed war.

In two weeks time, the Winograd Commission will publish its final report on Lebanon War II, and everyone expects it to come down on Olmert like a 16 ton weight. He may survive, if only because there is now no credible substitute. But he needs all the help he can get - and what better help than the "Leader of the Free World" gazing at him with liquid eyes?

It's the old story about the lame and the blind.

* * *

THIS WAS NOT Bush's last presidential visit to Israel. He has already promised to return on the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state, which falls this year (in accordance with the Hebrew calendar) on May 8. What else can a president do in his last months in office, except star in ceremonies with kings, presidents and prime ministers?

Perhaps he had intended to finish with a big bang, a historic climax that would overshadow even his invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, such as a grand attack on Iran. But it seems that the US intelligence community, in a patriotic act that makes up for some of its earlier sins, has prevented this by publishing its sensational report.

True, this week something happened that put on a warning light. Some small Iranian boats were reported to have made a provocative gesture against the powerful American warships in the Strait of Hormuz.

That takes us right back to 1964 and to what has become known as the "Gulf of Tonkin incident". President Lyndon Johnson announced that Vietnamese vessels had attacked American warships. That was a lie, but it was enough for Congress to empower the president to widen the war that killed millions of people (and buried Johnson's career).

But this time the red light went out quickly. The US Congress is not what it was, it seems that the Americans have no stomach for another war, the historical parallel was too obvious. Bush has been left without an option for war. He has been left with nothing.

Apart from Olmert's flattery, of course.

Uri Avnery is an Israeli peace activist who has advocated the setting up of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. He served three terms in the Israeli parliament (Knesset), and is the founder of Gush Shalom (Peace Bloc)


Conclusively, let me reply to the following:

Tortiou wrote:
"If you look at the facts", he replied, "the number of terrorist suicide bombings have dropped by more than 90 percent since the barrier's construction. This wall was constructed to stop Palestinian terrorists and to protect the Israeli civilian population, and was a total success."
What can you say against that?

Well, I can say that although building a wall might prevent more suicide bombers from entering Israel, it is certainly not going to prevent suicide bombers from appearing all together.
"The bombings have dropped by 90%" he says. So? What about the 10% that still manage to get through? I personally would not feel any safer. So now I get blown up while having lunch in 1 out of 10 MacDonalds instead of 9 out ot of 10. Thanks a lot, I feel MUCH safer in a MacDonalds now. You cannot justify human suffering through statistics.

What I mean is that it is not a long term solution. Especially not when combined with an aggressive expansion politic that contradicts ones promises of peace and the perception by palestinians that it is in fact a "wall of hate".
Hate fuels hate. It's as simple as that. What should be aimed at is 0.0% bombings because there ARE NO SUICIDE BOMBERS anymore. And a concrete wall won't achieve that. In fact, it will achieve the contrary.

Thanks for your time.

_________________


Last edited by on Tue 19 Feb 2008 - 0:30; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://boringmordheimblog.blogspot.com
dougbass68
Warrior
Warrior


Posts : 20
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2008-02-02
Age : 48
Location : North Carolina, US

Personal Info
Primary Warband played:
Achievements earned: None

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Tue 12 Feb 2008 - 18:42

Just received my copy of the video and plan to watch it in the next day or two. I must admit that I'm not very well informed about the conflict; I'm sure this video will be very enlightening. I'm looking forward to it (insofar as I'm looking forward to learning more about it).

@Admin Tom: If you're not already familiar with him, I think you'd like the work of Norman Finkelstein. I haven't read very much of his stuff, but I know enough about him to know that you'd probably like him. His website has a whole section on the conflict and he's written a book on it. My wife loves him.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin Tom
Admin
Admin


Posts : 2589
Trading Reputation : 12
Join date : 2007-08-25
Location : Vienna/Zurich

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Witch Hunters Witch Hunters
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Wed 13 Feb 2008 - 5:28

Great! Thanks for the tip dougbass! Very Happy

I'm eager to hear your opinion on the documentary!

Cheers!

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://boringmordheimblog.blogspot.com
Lord Bane
Youngblood
Youngblood


Posts : 13
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2007-09-03

Personal Info
Primary Warband played:
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: >>   Mon 18 Feb 2008 - 19:39

We definitly need an Emperor to unify mankind, that's what I think! For men cannot cohabit peacefully and need to be remembered they are all part of the same specy.
Palestine is the heart of a conflict that makes us all remember of the second world war. Genocide, ethnic purge. I just cannot imagine what could have happened if there was no one to support the palestinian cause. They would have been obliterated from the surface of the earth.

I am a strong supporter of the Chaos, but we need unity in this mess, because it's a larger problem that extend to all countries with Christians, jewsh and muslims. That oppose them where they should help each others. Yeah, I'm the very naive kind...

I'll try to get that documentary, sure there are many things I'll learn from it!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: A must see documentary   Today at 18:13

Back to top Go down
 
A must see documentary
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Documentary on Coriolanus?
» Phantom Phan Documentary - created by Phans in 2000
» TV documentary suggestions on Stalin/20th century Russia please
» Documentary Heaven
» John Milius Documentary 2013

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Tom's Boring Mordheim Forum :: Shout it out! (free-for-all) :: General Shouting-
Jump to: