Keith,

Thanks for writing. I still don't understand how you came to find my site. I
know it was
roundabout, but I'm always interested in how people come. Did you find it on
internet
searches? If so, what were you searching for? Information like that helps me
plan.

As to your question, I must admit that I'm not up on the activities that Clear
Channel and
others are engaging in. I remember as a kid that the Dead were smart to allow
"bootlegging" of concerts. It spread their fame around. I guess it took a while
but now
even the establishment is joining in on this. I think it is good to spread tapes
around of
your music. If you can make money off of that, all the better. Especially if the
money
goes to the musicians and not their record companies.

In what way are you involved with a jam band? Von Cello has always been involved
with
jamming and is becoming more and more of a jam band. When our next  CD comes
out, in the
next few months, that will become clear to everyone. Then we want to network
with other
jam bands and get on the road!

Von Cello

Mr Oh Yeah wrote:

>  I came across this site in a roundabout fashion, i'm completely
> unfamiliar with the music of Von Cello, but am looking to change that
> soon.. i've just started reading a few of the threads and i look
> forward to reading more... i found the "musicians only" page very
> helpful, and though i am not a musician, my wife and i are involved
> with a "jamband", some really great folks that deserve to be heard..
> which brings me to my question for Aaron, what do you think of the
> tape trading community that, imho can be a great tool to get music
> out?.. but it seems to be crossing over to becoming commercialized
> with the advent of these companies that are selling live shows right
> at the show (don't get me started on clearchannel)
> i look forward to hearing your thoughts
> keith
>
>
>              ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>    * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voncello_offtopicgroup/
>
>    * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I came across this site in a roundabout fashion, i'm completely
unfamiliar with the music of Von Cello, but am looking to change that
soon.. i've just started reading a few of the threads and i look
forward to reading more... i found the "musicians only" page very
helpful, and though i am not a musician, my wife and i are involved
with a "jamband", some really great folks that deserve to be heard..
which brings me to my question for Aaron, what do you think of the
tape trading community that, imho can be a great tool to get music
out?.. but it seems to be crossing over to becoming commercialized
with the advent of these companies that are selling live shows right
at the show (don't get me started on clearchannel)
i look forward to hearing your thoughts
keith

Tor, you are wacked! ;-)

Von Cello

Tor Hershman wrote:

>  Iconoclastic & Quite ƒunny
> http://www.ic-musicmedia.com/TOR
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                         ADVERTISEMENT


>
>              ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>    * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voncello_offtopicgroup/
>
>    * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Iconoclastic & Quite ƒunny
http://www.ic-musicmedia.com/TOR

What Can We Learn From Janet Jackson’s Breast?
By Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)

Recently, in a performance during half time at the Super Bowl, one of Janet
Jackson’s
breasts was released on national television. That is a simple fact, but it has
caused a
massive controversy from coast to coast. You may wonder what is the big deal,
but Janet
Jackson’s breast is a very big deal!

I don’t wish to comment on the morality of her display of nudity. The fact that
there were
children watching at that moment, is not my concern. I’ll leave that debate to
the
spiritual leaders and the politicians. What concerns me, are the musical
implications of
her few seconds of infamy. What does Ms. Jackson’s breast say about the state of
music in
America in 2004?

There was a time when being an expert at playing an instrument would lead to
fame. This
was particularly true if you could compose and play your own compositions. In
this
category we think of Chopin, Liszt and Paganinni. In more modern times,
musicians who
could not compose but who were great instrumentalists became famous world wide.
The names
Casals, Heifitz, and Horowitz come to mind. In the field of jazz, one had to be
an expert
improviser, and a good tunesmith, to win fame. In this category, we think of
Dizzy
Guillespie, Miles Davis, and John Coltrane.

With the birth of rock n’ roll, all that changed. To be fair, for the most part,
in the
early days of rock, to get noticed you had to be a decent instrumentalist and
have some
kind of a distinctive sound. But very early on, a man rose to prominence in rock
who
became so influential he was dubbed “the king”. That man was Elvis Presley, yet
Elvis
could barely play the guitar! What Elvis did was not so much about being a
trained
musician as it was about being a performer, creating an image, and stirring up
controversy. The main buzz about Elvis was the way he shook his pelvis. Though
he was
quite a good singer, it was his sensual persona that brought him his fame. In
this, he set
the pattern for many who would follow in his footsteps, people who were not
really
musicians, but musical entertainers, or performance artists, commonly known
simply as
“artists”.

A decade after Elvis hit it big, the rock “artist” was still looking for a way
to be
noticed. In the sixties, the way to be noticed was to do drugs and get wild on
stage. A
good example of this was Jim Morrison. He happened to be an excellent singer,
but his
image, that of an out of control drunk, liable to do anything, helped earn him
his fame.
In fact, Morrison was arrested for indecent exposure. His antics created a
constant stream
of publicity, but it also took a toll. The attacks on him by the police and the
press, not
to mention the law suits and court appearances, became overwhelming. It was not
long
before Morrison was found dead of an overdose of drugs. A disease that also
afflicted
Elvis and many other artists.

Around the time of Morrison, rock had matured to the point where there were some
excellent
musicians on the scene. Jimi Hendrix was considered the greatest rock guitarist
of the
time, yet even Hendrix had to do more than ply his craft to get noticed. Hendrix
used to
set his guitars on fire as he kneeled sensuously over the flames. Other rock
groups would
break their guitars, smash amplifiers and keyboards and commit other acts of
violence to
get noticed. Ozzy Osborne distinguished himself by biting off the head of a
bird, and
routinely biting the heads off of rubber bats on stage. This trend, of the
violent
musician, reached its zenith with the Plasmatics, a band that I actually played
with for a
short while. (They added a string quartet to their madness for some reason.)
Admittedly
marginal musicians, they became known for chain sawing guitars and chairs,
smashing
televisions with sledge hammers, and ultimately blowing up whole cars on stage!

Back on the solo artist side, performers kept trying to push the envelope. In
the 1980’s,
Madonna burst upon the scene. Like a female Elvis, she was a decent singer, but
became
known for her sexuality. In concert, Madonna would hump on a bed or on the floor
as if she
were masturbating. She also brought in a heavy S & M presence to her stage act,
including
spankings, whips and chains, and the treating of her dancers as sex slaves. With
each CD
she pushed further, attacking sexual taboos involving race and religion. She
also included
nudity in videos and in a coffee table book that bordered on pornography.

She seemed to spawn the next generation of female artists who were even more
determined to
use sexuality to the fullest. Artists like Brittney Spears and others played on
taboos
such as the naughty schoolgirl, and the wild girl. They showed as much skin as
they could
without actually becoming naked, and they made a practice of using the most
suggestive
dance moves imaginable. On the Hip Hop side of the track, images of guys with
multiple
girlfriends in hot tubs or in expensive cars or homes became popular. Grinding
dance moves
with girls in skimpy outfits became standard video fare. One artist, Snoop Dogg,
actually
crossed over to porn, becoming a player in the “Girls Gone Wild” videos of late
night TV
fame.

Which brings us back to Janet Jackson’s breast. The whole nation was treated to
a view of
Janet’s large round breast, with her nipple surrounded by some type of jewelry
piece that
looked like a star. With the removal of a little swatch of material, in a matter
of
seconds, Ms. Jackson crossed a line that no one dared cross before. She was
naked on
national television on prime time during a family entertainment event! No longer
can
hinting at sex be considered pushing the envelope: the envelope is open!

Is what she did pornography? Perhaps one could argue that one breast is
performance art,
but two breasts would be porn. Perhaps one could argue that even two breasts are
performance art, but exposure underneath would be porn. Perhaps one could argue
that full
frontal nudity is where this is all going. Maybe we are going back the the days
of
vaudeville, the days of Gypsy Rose Lee, when an “act” consisted of a woman
singing while
stripping. Janet certainly opened the door to this possibility. Of course, Gypsy
did not
strip on television during prime time, but maybe that is what is needed to
finally bring
this trend to its conclusion.

Breasts and other parts of the female anatomy will always be a source of
fascination, but
I would like to know one thing: where’s the music?! What happened to practicing
hours a
day, studying music theory, harmony, counterpoint, performance practice? What
happened to
spirituality, to expressing deep, meaningful ideas through sound? What happened
to
becoming famous because you are a really great musician…even if you don’t shake
your
pelvis, smash your guitar, or show your bosom?

It is possible that, with Ms. Jackson’s highly public performance, we are
beginning to
reach the end of sexuality replacing musicianship? Perhaps the pendulum will
swing back to
the time when a highly trained, dedicated musician can become famous just for
being a
great musician. It is with this hope and with this dream that I have been
promoting my
cello fronted rock band, Von Cello.

If you agree that the trend toward performance “art” has gone far enough, and it
is time
to reintroduce musicianship to the world of popular music, please support those
bands and
soloists who are out there trying to make it happen. I am not saying that there
is no room
in the musical world for Janet Jackson’s breast, or any other body parts that
she may
choose to show us in the future. What I am saying, is that there should also be
room in
the musical world for those who choose to excel at playing their instruments and
singing
their hearts out!

- Von Cello (Aaron Minsky) started out in music as a rock guitarist, but later
became a
cellist, graduating with a Master of Music degree from the Manhattan School of
Music. He
has since published thirteen music books with Oxford University Press. He is a
Yamaha
Artist, a D’Addario Artist, in Who’s Who in America, and the International Who’s
Who. You
can find out more about his background and his music at his website:
http://www.voncello.com/

Hey Max,

Thanks! I forgot you were even on here. Same to you!

Aaron

P.S. And a Chappy Chanukah and Cherry Christmas to all!

Max Niederle wrote:

>  Congratulations, and have a happy holiday season!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <voncello_offtopicgroup@yahoogroups.com>
> To: <voncello_offtopicgroup@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 3:18 AM
> Subject: [voncello_offtopicgroup] Digest Number 38
>
>
> There is 1 message in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
>       1. Minsky's Judaic Concert Suite Published!
>            From: "Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)" <voncello@...>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
>    Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:30:56 -0500
>    From: "Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)" <voncello@...>
> Subject: Minsky's Judaic Concert Suite Published!
>
> On the heels of his acceptance into the International Who's Who, Von
> Cello
> has just received more good news. Oxford University Press has just
> released
> his Judaic Concert Suite! Under his given name, Aaron Minsky, this is his
>
> seventh title and thirteenth book published by Oxford. (Some titles were
> published in multi book form for several instruments.) This publication
> is
> just the latest example of how Von Cello is blazing a new path in the
> history of music.
>
> Check out the press release: http://mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=60710
>
> Happy Holidays!
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voncello_offtopicgroup/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>      ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>    * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voncello_offtopicgroup/
>
>    * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Congratulations, and have a happy holiday season!
----- Original Message -----
From: <voncello_offtopicgroup@yahoogroups.com>
To: <voncello_offtopicgroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 3:18 AM
Subject: [voncello_offtopicgroup] Digest Number 38


There is 1 message in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

       1. Minsky's Judaic Concert Suite Published!
            From: "Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)" <voncello@...>


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
    Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:30:56 -0500
    From: "Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)" <voncello@...>
Subject: Minsky's Judaic Concert Suite Published!

On the heels of his acceptance into the International Who's Who, Von Cello
has just received more good news. Oxford University Press has just released
his Judaic Concert Suite! Under his given name, Aaron Minsky, this is his
seventh title and thirteenth book published by Oxford. (Some titles were
published in multi book form for several instruments.) This publication is
just the latest example of how Von Cello is blazing a new path in the
history of music.

Check out the press release: http://mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=60710

Happy Holidays!



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________




------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voncello_offtopicgroup/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the heels of his acceptance into the International Who’s Who, Von Cello
has just received more good news. Oxford University Press has just released
his Judaic Concert Suite! Under his given name, Aaron Minsky, this is his
seventh title and thirteenth book published by Oxford. (Some titles were
published in multi book form for several instruments.) This publication is
just the latest example of how Von Cello is blazing a new path in the
history of music.

Check out the press release: http://mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=60710

Happy Holidays!

Is this rabbi Minskys webpage.?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/levihello/    i got a page also for
fotos   steve

im steve and i wanna send you a file movie me family to this
page .its bloked.

RADIO LIGHTNING STRIKES TWICE FOR VON CELLO!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 7/9/03
Von Cello, the famous rock cellist, just had his second hour long radio
interview on WRPI, Troy, New York! The first interview, back in March, was done
as an introduction to Von Cello’s music and his background as a rock guitarist
turned classical cellist turned rock cellist. This second interview, which
happened just a few days ago, dealt with the spiritual side of the “Von Cello
Experience”.

Many artists shy away from discussing spiritual matters, but Von Cello has many
songs which deal with the subject. “We Go Onward” starts the show. It is a song
about, how in life, we always move forward, never back. It also observes that
“we go onward, never to return”. So it deals with the concept of moving forward
even unto death.

“Were You Ever Really Here?” is a song that deals with spiritual
disillusionment. “You Say So” is a song about keeping an open mind, despite
whatever you are told about a particular religion or philosophy. Other songs are
spiritual in their sound, such as “Larchmont Jam”, an amazing musical journey
that “just happened”. In the course of the show, it becomes clear that Von
Cello’s music is deep and meaningful.

You can now hear the interview, in it’s entirety, on the Von Cello website. To
hear it, go here: http://www.voncello.com/recordings_radiointerviews.html

This is a great way to get acquainted with Von Cello. After listening you can
find hours of enjoyment at the site. You can hear other audio clips, view video
clips, see photos, read articles, sign the guestbook, and join the email list.

One may well wonder what a rock cellist could have to add to the centuries old
debate about religion and spirituality. Tune in. You may be surprised!
***

You can see this press release posted with a photo here:

http://mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=54112

The release is also posted on the Warner Bros. site here:

http://www.flypaper.biz/php/news.php?articleID=9676

Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)

its time 4 a post here.  If one post is followed by another then
another It would be a post serial.  lol       spainj

Von Cello will be interviewed on the radio TODAY, March 6th, at 3:00!
The station is WRPI, from Troy, N.Y. This will be an hour long show that
will include the playing of several Von Cello audio clips mixed in with
interviews. The show is called *In The Spirit* and it is hosted by Gary
Goldberg.

This will be a very exciting and interesting occasion. I hope you will
listen. You can access WRPI on the internet, so everyone can listen! So
at 3:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, click here:

http://www.wrpi.org/realaudio/index.html

Then click on the upper WRPI logo, on the left. Von Cello should be on
by 3:05.

Below is a letter that Suzanne sent to Loraine, and was kind enough to forward
to me. I will post it here and make some comments as I think it pertains to what
just transpired here.

CambiataGN@... wrote:

> Loraine:
>
> Thank you for pointing out my own lack of sensitivity to your unknown
> situation - a dose of my own medicine, as it were .I hope that you and your
> husband are healing from the pain caused by that conflict and I meant no
> personal slander to either of you or to his fellow military personnel (or
> those in the present) - as a rule, our veterans served their country
> honorably and it is not their performance, but rather the policies behind the
> wars that are being criticized.
>
> My ex-husband was a Navy veteran (9 1/2 years, including time in Vietnam),
> and we worked together to educate young people about the horrors of war and
> the danger of complacency regarding the possibility of revival of the draft.
> Veterans and their families, like all other groups, are not a monolithic
> whole and have varying attitudes about this conflict. This country's stength
> is in its diversity of cultures, races, and thought. Without that, we become
> a mockery of a democracy.
>
> Suzanne

I wish we could have had such a well spoken dialogue on the Off Topic List! Here
we see Loraine and Suzanne sharing valuable personal information that lets us
know where they are both coming from. Gone are the accusations, gone are the
twists and turns, what we see are calm, logical presentations of thought.

Sometimes people start a dialogue with anger because, from where they are coming
from, they have reason to be angry. I have found that if people are willing to
keep talking, that anger usually dissipates and finally the true thoughts
emerge. If each person is willing to first try to understand what the other is
saying, and then tries to see things from that other point of view, real
progress can be made.

In the end people may agree to disagree, but that should only come when they
have established what they are actually disagreeing about. I find it sad that we
were not able to accomplish this with this set of people at this time in this
location. I can only hope that we will be able to have some very interesting,
respectful and helpful debates here on the Off Topic List in the future.

Who knows how long it will be before someone else starts a debate here. All I
can do is wait and have faith that through communicating in a deep and
meaningful way, we can actually do some good in this world. (Actually, I think
maybe we already did!) :-)

Once again, kudos to Loraine and Suzanne for their participation in this forum
and for the reasoned and sympathetic way they settled their debate!

Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"

Hi Aaron, just letting you know that I'm signing off, too, not with bad feelings
but because I do disagree with confrontational statements such as having to
prove every opinion with a fact to back it up.  Everyone has opinions that they
don't have all the facts for, and many facts people have may not actually be
true. Sometimes, people who do actually know truths can not tell them for a very
good reason and so the common "truth" takes hold, whether or not it's right.  I
do freely give my opinion about things, maybe too freely, but I also realize I
could be wrong. I know people who think they know "truths" about me that I know
for a fact are very wrong. It happens. There aren't always real truths to back
things up, because real truth is a very hard thing to come by.

Yes, it is a truth that we were attacked viciously and need to defend ourselves.
And yes, it is a fact that Iraq is backing them.  However, there are many valid
opinions about the best way to defend ourselves.  Attacking each other isn't one
of them.

I have extremely strong feelings against anti-war protests, as my husband served
in Desert Storm and every mention of those protesting the military being there
hurt me personally, including a relative who did the same. That's what people
don't think about who haven't been in that position. They are hurting other
Americans with their protests. I feel that is worse than what other countries
can do to us.  As President Lincoln said, United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

Debating is great - it's healthy.  Personal confrontations are not.

I have already signed off of most everything else because I'm so busy and behind
I can hardly sleep as it is. So, I'm signing off here, too, and using the time
in my psychology classes so hopefully in the future, I'll have a better forum to
try to actually help others.  I'm for peace. I'm for self-defense. I'm for
helping each other instead of attacking each other. I'm for educating ourselves
enough to see many sides of the coin, not just two. That's who I am, despite
whatever "truths" people think they know.

Loraine

http://www.Elucidations.com --> For Lovers of the Arts

If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears
a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured
or far away.
Henry David Thoreau
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Von Cello (Aaron Minsky)
   To: voncello_offtopicgroup@yahoogroups.com ; cambiatagn@...
   Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 7:06 PM
   Subject: Re: [voncello_offtopicgroup] Give peace a chance!


   cambiatagn@... wrote:

   >
   > In a message dated 2/21/03 2:52:00 PM, voncello@... writes:
   >
   > << Now perhaps some peace will come back to this blessed email group.
   > :--) >>
   >
   > I'm sorry you feel that way, Aaron. I will gladly withdraw from your
   > group
   > since I am obviously not welcome.

   You are totally welcome!

   Everyone is welcome!

   This is the off topic group!

   Anyone can post anything!

   You just have to realize that if you make posts that are offensive,
   other people might post back and challenge your assertions.

   When you call our President a madman...

   When you compare Israel to Iraq...

   What do you expect?



   >
   >
   > You are obviously a supporter of the Israeli government. I am equally
   > obviously not.

   Nothing is obvious to me because you have refused to explain yourself.
   You haven't explained why you don't support Israel, or why you have no
   sympathy for people who are suffering under constant terror attacks. You
   also never bothered to ask me why I support Israel, or why I would take
   offense at your comments trying to equate Israel with Iraq.

   You didn't even get into discussing the pros and cons about making war
   with Iraq. All you did was attack and run.


   > I began by simply sharing an open e-mail with the group, w/
   > which people were free to agree or disagree (or forward a copy to the
   > President saying, "She's an idiot - don't pay any attention to her).
   > Aftert a
   > couple of exchanges in which our perspectives were made clear,

   Not at all. Are you so shallow that you consider those exchanges a
   clarifying of perspectives? I have absolutely no idea why you don't
   support Israel. I have absolutely no idea why you are so negative about
   the U.S. government. You have absolutely no idea why I support those
   governments. We saw that we don't agree on some things, but there was no
   exchange of ideas. There was no clarification.

   Personally, what bothered me most was not your opinions, but the angry
   and negative way you express yourself, and the fact that you refused to
   clarify your thoughts. I am happy to go into depth on any subject and
   explore any opinion. That is what I was hoping this list would be about.
   But I don't see the point in using it as a billboard for one's
   positions.



   > I decided that
   > it made the most sense to "agree to diagree" and leave it at that.
   > That's
   > what I'm doing now, and I suggest you do the same. I am not willing to
   >
   > continue to engage in what has just devolved into an exchange of
   > personal
   > attacks.

   You keep perpetuating this lie that there are "personal attacks" going
   on here. I reread every post I made and have not found one personal
   attack that I have made. You don't seem to know the difference between
   strongly defending a position and name calling.


   >
   >
   > By the way,  thank you for your empathy - if you've been in my
   > position, I
   > would have expected better from a sensitive person.

   I have been in a worse position than you. My sister has survived two
   attacks of cancer, and she has three children! You are lucky, you only
   had a false alarm. Yes, I cried plenty when my sister was suffering, but
   I did not use it as an excuse to attack people and then cut off the
   dialogue.

   I also find it ironic that you are so concerned about YOUR sister, but
   you don't seem to care about the sisters in Saddam's torture chambers,
   or the sisters who are maimed for life, or dead, thanks to Palestinian
   suicide/homicide bombers. From your comments, I would bet that you
   support such activities. But of course, we will never know what you
   really think about anything because you prefer to hit and run.



   > You will not hear from me
   > or from people asking me for cello references any further.

   That's your decision. I noticed that you unsubscribed from the group. I
   think that is unfortunate. My dream in setting up this group was to
   create a place where people could share ideas without fear of being
   kicked out of the group. I did not kick you out. You are the one who is
   running away.

   I do not know you. I know you play the cello, that's about it. All I
   know is what I have seen. I have seen you make aggressive, hurtful
   attacks on some things that are dear to me. I have seen you refuse to
   explain yourself. Now I have seen you run away. I really don't
   understand you at all.

   I said a few emails back that this will be an interesting study in human
   communication. I guess that's the best that can be said for it. You
   presented yourself as someone who wants "peace" and yet all you did here
   was cause a lot of bad feelings. I kept trying to get you to explain
   where you are coming from but you refused. Now you say you are not a
   supporter of the Israeli government. Why? What is the point of saying
   you don't support something and then just running away?

   The bottom line is this: you chose to cut off our conversation, not I.
   Just because I said good riddance, that did not mean I wanted you to
   leave the group. I meant good riddance if all you are going to do is
   attack and not engage in dialogue. Anyway you try to spin it, the fact
   is that you are the one who has cut off the dialogue. That is not a way
   of creating peace. Peace can only happen when people of different
   backgrounds and beliefs are willing to share ideas and honestly tell
   each other what they think. That is what we ask our leaders to do. We
   should be willing to do the same.

   That is what the off topic list is all about. I'm sorry you don't have
   the ability to participate in such an open forum. But if you get a
   change of heart, you are always welcome back! :-)

   As for our professional relationship as cellists, I don't let politics
   get in the way of recommending people for music jobs. Many of the
   musicians I work with have similar beliefs to you. I think part of being
   a professional is the ability to work with people of all kinds of
   backgrounds and beliefs. Perhaps one day you will learn to do the same.

   I am forwarding this to your personal email, since you unsubscribed.
   Don't worry, I won't correspond again if you don't.

   Despite our differences, I wish you, and your sister good health.

   Von Cello
   http://www.voncello.com/

   "Moral equivalency is not moral!"


   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT




   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

cambiatagn@... wrote:

>
> In a message dated 2/21/03 2:52:00 PM, voncello@... writes:
>
> << Now perhaps some peace will come back to this blessed email group.
> :--) >>
>
> I'm sorry you feel that way, Aaron. I will gladly withdraw from your
> group
> since I am obviously not welcome.

You are totally welcome!

Everyone is welcome!

This is the off topic group!

Anyone can post anything!

You just have to realize that if you make posts that are offensive,
other people might post back and challenge your assertions.

When you call our President a madman...

When you compare Israel to Iraq...

What do you expect?



>
>
> You are obviously a supporter of the Israeli government. I am equally
> obviously not.

Nothing is obvious to me because you have refused to explain yourself.
You haven't explained why you don't support Israel, or why you have no
sympathy for people who are suffering under constant terror attacks. You
also never bothered to ask me why I support Israel, or why I would take
offense at your comments trying to equate Israel with Iraq.

You didn't even get into discussing the pros and cons about making war
with Iraq. All you did was attack and run.


> I began by simply sharing an open e-mail with the group, w/
> which people were free to agree or disagree (or forward a copy to the
> President saying, "She's an idiot - don't pay any attention to her).
> Aftert a
> couple of exchanges in which our perspectives were made clear,

Not at all. Are you so shallow that you consider those exchanges a
clarifying of perspectives? I have absolutely no idea why you don't
support Israel. I have absolutely no idea why you are so negative about
the U.S. government. You have absolutely no idea why I support those
governments. We saw that we don't agree on some things, but there was no
exchange of ideas. There was no clarification.

Personally, what bothered me most was not your opinions, but the angry
and negative way you express yourself, and the fact that you refused to
clarify your thoughts. I am happy to go into depth on any subject and
explore any opinion. That is what I was hoping this list would be about.
But I don't see the point in using it as a billboard for one's
positions.



> I decided that
> it made the most sense to "agree to diagree" and leave it at that.
> That's
> what I'm doing now, and I suggest you do the same. I am not willing to
>
> continue to engage in what has just devolved into an exchange of
> personal
> attacks.

You keep perpetuating this lie that there are "personal attacks" going
on here. I reread every post I made and have not found one personal
attack that I have made. You don't seem to know the difference between
strongly defending a position and name calling.


>
>
> By the way,  thank you for your empathy - if you've been in my
> position, I
> would have expected better from a sensitive person.

I have been in a worse position than you. My sister has survived two
attacks of cancer, and she has three children! You are lucky, you only
had a false alarm. Yes, I cried plenty when my sister was suffering, but
I did not use it as an excuse to attack people and then cut off the
dialogue.

I also find it ironic that you are so concerned about YOUR sister, but
you don't seem to care about the sisters in Saddam's torture chambers,
or the sisters who are maimed for life, or dead, thanks to Palestinian
suicide/homicide bombers. From your comments, I would bet that you
support such activities. But of course, we will never know what you
really think about anything because you prefer to hit and run.



> You will not hear from me
> or from people asking me for cello references any further.

That's your decision. I noticed that you unsubscribed from the group. I
think that is unfortunate. My dream in setting up this group was to
create a place where people could share ideas without fear of being
kicked out of the group. I did not kick you out. You are the one who is
running away.

I do not know you. I know you play the cello, that's about it. All I
know is what I have seen. I have seen you make aggressive, hurtful
attacks on some things that are dear to me. I have seen you refuse to
explain yourself. Now I have seen you run away. I really don't
understand you at all.

I said a few emails back that this will be an interesting study in human
communication. I guess that's the best that can be said for it. You
presented yourself as someone who wants "peace" and yet all you did here
was cause a lot of bad feelings. I kept trying to get you to explain
where you are coming from but you refused. Now you say you are not a
supporter of the Israeli government. Why? What is the point of saying
you don't support something and then just running away?

The bottom line is this: you chose to cut off our conversation, not I.
Just because I said good riddance, that did not mean I wanted you to
leave the group. I meant good riddance if all you are going to do is
attack and not engage in dialogue. Anyway you try to spin it, the fact
is that you are the one who has cut off the dialogue. That is not a way
of creating peace. Peace can only happen when people of different
backgrounds and beliefs are willing to share ideas and honestly tell
each other what they think. That is what we ask our leaders to do. We
should be willing to do the same.

That is what the off topic list is all about. I'm sorry you don't have
the ability to participate in such an open forum. But if you get a
change of heart, you are always welcome back! :-)

As for our professional relationship as cellists, I don't let politics
get in the way of recommending people for music jobs. Many of the
musicians I work with have similar beliefs to you. I think part of being
a professional is the ability to work with people of all kinds of
backgrounds and beliefs. Perhaps one day you will learn to do the same.

I am forwarding this to your personal email, since you unsubscribed.
Don't worry, I won't correspond again if you don't.

Despite our differences, I wish you, and your sister good health.

Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 2/21/03 2:52:00 PM, voncello@... writes:

<<
I notice you still haven't responded to my comments about you equating
Israel to the regime in Baghdad. It is very easy to make up an excuse to
run away from a debate. My sister has been in and out of the hospital
several times and I didn't use that as an excuse to stop communicating
with people on important issues. Obviously you are a person who throws
out negative attacks and then when questioned finds a way to run and
hide.

Good riddance!

Now perhaps some peace will come back to this blessed email group. :--) >>

I'm sorry you feel that way, Aaron. I will gladly withdraw from your group
since I am obviously not welcome.

You are obviously a supporter of the Israeli government. I am equally
obviously not. I began by simply sharing an open e-mail with the group, w/
which people were free to agree or disagree (or forward a copy to the
President saying, "She's an idiot - don't pay any attention to her). Aftert a
couple of exchanges in which our perspectives were made clear, I decided that
it made the most sense to "agree to diagree" and leave it at that. That's
what I'm doing now, and I suggest you do the same. I am not willing to
continue to engage in what has just devolved into an exchange of personal
attacks.

By the way,  thank you for your empathy - if you've been in my position, I
would have expected better from a sensitive person. You will not hear from me
or from people asking me for cello references any further.

Have a good life.

Suzanne

Thanks for the kind words andthe much-needed smile. My sister was released
this evening and it doesn't seem to have been anything life-threatening (for
q while there, we were afraid that she'd either had a stroke or was suffering
from a delayed metastasis from breast cancer.

I loved that joke.

Suzanne
In a message dated 2/21/03 4:07:17 PM, lkhunsaker@... writes:

<<   I hope your sister is okay. I think we all have more immediate concerns
and honestly, what we do to each other in this country is much more harmful
than what any other country in the world has done to us.

   Just for fun now:

   A woman was walking along the beach when she stumbled upon a bottle.
   She picked it up and rubbed it, and lo-and-behold a Genie appeared.

   The amazed woman asked if she got three wishes.

   The Genie said,  "Nope, sorry three-wish genies are a story-tale myth.
   I'm a one-wish genie.  So ... what'll it be?"

   The woman didn't hesitate. She said, "I want peace in the Middle East.
   See this map? I want these countries to stop  fighting with each other
   and I want all the Arabs to love Jews and Americans and vice-versa. It
   will bring about world peace and harmony."

   The Genie looked at the map and exclaimed, "Lady, be reasonable. These
   countries have been at war for thousands of years. I'm out of shape
   after being in a bottle for five hundred years. I'm good but not THAT
   good! Don't think it can be done. Make another wish and please make it a
   bit more reasonable."

   The woman thought for a minute and said, "Well, I've never been able to
   find the right man. You know, one that's considerate and fun, likes to
   cook and helps with the housecleaning, is great in bed and gets along
   with my family, doesn't watch sports all the time, and is faithful.
   That's what I wish for ... a good mate."

   The Genie let out a long sigh, shook his head and said ..

   "Let me see that map again."  >>



Suzanne

<<of us think our country is being run by a simple-minded madman, who was no
elected by the popular vite, but rather put into power by a most UNdemocratic
abuse of power by the Supreme Court.>>
   Not true. It was won by the absentee ballots that came in from those serving
in the US military. Many people would rather not count those votes, but really,
who has more right to be counted???  About "simple-minded"... LOL!  Not hardly.
Do more research.  Mad?  Yeah, and he should be, as we all should be.  Name
calling is unnecessary.  If you start attacking or insulting someone or
something other people support, be assured you will get a reaction.  I will
defend your right to your opinion, but not to the extent that it limits my right
to an opinion.

   <<Anyway, my sister was taken to the hospital this morning, so I have to admit
that my head and heart are not into continuing this debate - I have more
immediate concerns.>>

   I hope your sister is okay. I think we all have more immediate concerns and
honestly, what we do to each other in this country is much more harmful than
what any other country in the world has done to us.

   Just for fun now:

   A woman was walking along the beach when she stumbled upon a bottle.
   She picked it up and rubbed it, and lo-and-behold a Genie appeared.

   The amazed woman asked if she got three wishes.

   The Genie said,  "Nope, sorry three-wish genies are a story-tale myth.
   I'm a one-wish genie.  So ... what'll it be?"

   The woman didn't hesitate. She said, "I want peace in the Middle East.
   See this map? I want these countries to stop  fighting with each other
   and I want all the Arabs to love Jews and Americans and vice-versa. It
   will bring about world peace and harmony."

   The Genie looked at the map and exclaimed, "Lady, be reasonable. These
   countries have been at war for thousands of years. I'm out of shape
   after being in a bottle for five hundred years. I'm good but not THAT
   good! Don't think it can be done. Make another wish and please make it a
   bit more reasonable."

   The woman thought for a minute and said, "Well, I've never been able to
   find the right man. You know, one that's considerate and fun, likes to
   cook and helps with the housecleaning, is great in bed and gets along
   with my family, doesn't watch sports all the time, and is faithful.
   That's what I wish for ... a good mate."

   The Genie let out a long sigh, shook his head and said ..

   "Let me see that map again."




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

cambiatagn@... wrote:

>  of us think our country is being run by a simple-minded madman, who
> was no elected by the popular vite, but rather put into power by a
> most UNdemocratic abuse of power by the Supreme Court.

Our country is a democracy. It is run by many people in several sections
of the government with checks and balances. I disagreed with the Supreme
Court. I voted for Al Gore. But you constantly make nasty remarks about
our leaders and our system of government that are not true.

Bush is not a simple minded person nor is he mad. Those are just nasty
personal attacks. Also, the Supreme Court acted within the law. What
they did was not undemocratic or an abuse of power. If it was, Gore
would have challenged them. You don't seem to understand our system of
government and you seem to be an enemy of it, by your insulting
comments.


>
> If we get rid of Saddam, the enemy we know, there is a very good
> chance that he will be replaced by one of several potentially worse
> individuals or, worse still, by Somalia like factional fighting.

There is much more of a chance that he will be replaced by someone much
better. You could have used that same argument to avoid toppling HItler.
Saddam is a madman, evidenced by the tortures he inflicts on his own
people. It is immoral to allow him to stay in power. As for the
fractionalization of Iraq, why does that bother you? Are you against the
right to self determination for the Kurds and the Shiites in Iraq?


>
>
> My comment about your not being open to honest debate without resort
> to name-calling or denigration is based on your own words.

You are the one who is ending the debate, not I. And I am not calling
you names.


>
>
> Anyway, my sister was taken to the hospital this morning, so I have to
> admit that my head and heart are not into continuing this debate - I
> have more immediate concerns.

I hope your sister gets better.

I notice you still haven't responded to my comments about you equating
Israel to the regime in Baghdad. It is very easy to make up an excuse to
run away from a debate. My sister has been in and out of the hospital
several times and I didn't use that as an excuse to stop communicating
with people on important issues. Obviously you are a person who throws
out negative attacks and then when questioned finds a way to run and
hide.

Good riddance!

Now perhaps some peace will come back to this blessed email group. :--)

Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

of us think our country is being run by a simple-minded madman, who was no
elected by the popular vite, but rather put into power by a most UNdemocratic
abuse of power by the Supreme Court.

If we get rid of Saddam, the enemy we know, there is a very good chance that he
will be replaced by one of several potentially worse individuals or, worse
still, by Somalia like factional fighting.

My comment about your not being open to honest debate without resort to
name-calling or denigration is based on your own words.

Anyway, my sister was taken to the hospital this morning, so I have to admit
that my head and heart are not into continuing this debate - I have more
immediate concerns.

be well and keep on playing.

Suzanne

Here is just one more example of how people jump on Israel. Here we find
the United States arresting a terror ring, but there are those who use
this as another opportunity to attack U.S. support for Israel. Wouldn't
the moral thing to do be to applaud the U.S. for stopping a cell that
supports the killing and maiming of innocent civilians whether they be
Americans or not?

This is from today's news:

Today's breaking news includes the arrest of Sami
Al-Arian, whose involvement in raising funds for Islamic
Jihad terrorists was first exposed by Steve Emerson in
1994.    [For a detailed look at Emerson's investigation
of Al-Arian, see Emerson's statement before the Senate
Subcommittee on Terrorism:
http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/6453/emerson.html  ]

As reported by Fox News, Attorney General John
Ashcroft announced today that Al-Arian "and seven
other men were charged Thursday in a 50-count
indictment with operating a criminal racketeering
enterprise since 1984 that supported Palestinian
Islamic Jihad. They are also charged with conspiracy
to kill and maim people abroad; conspiracy to provide
material support to the group; extortion; perjury; mail
and wire fraud; obstruction of justice; and attempt to
procure citizenship or naturalization unlawfully to help
terrorists.  All eight could get life in prison if convicted.
'Our message to them and others like them is clear,'
Ashcroft said. 'We make no distinction between those who
carry out terror attacks and those who finance and
manage [them].' "

While several Fox News reports and commentaries today
provided information about Islamic Jihad, many other news
organizations are reporting the arrest of Al-Arian with little context. 

Some reporters at the Ashcroft press
conference asked questions
that appeared to suggest that since Palestinian Islamic
Jihad focuses its attacks on Israelis, the United States should
not get involved in dismantling its operations here.  A reporter
asked if the arrests would simply encourage Palestinian Islamic
Jihad to spread its terrorism from Israel to the United States. 
Another asked if there was any connection between Al Qaeda and Islamic
Jihad,
as if that link was necessary to
make Islamic Jihad a concern to the U.S.

MSNBC's Pat Buchanan used news of the arrests
to launch an anti-Israel tirade. On today's "Buchanan and Press"
show, Buchanan accused Ashcroft and a number of
Bush's advisers of simply doing Israel's bidding, and not
working for America's interests. 

cambiatagn@... wrote:

>  <<You say that if we are going to attack Iraq because it tortures
> people we should also attack Israel and Morocco. What about every
> other Muslim country? What about Russia? What about Guatemala? etc.>>
>
> You could also include China, while you're at it. You're actually
> making my point for me - once we start, where do we stop? And why are
> we singling out htis one country - why is it top priority?

No, my point is that you singled out Israel and Morocco to make your
point, not much worse offenders like many Arab countries, Russia, etc.
Why is Israel the first country that gets picked on by people who claim
to be for "peace"?  Why can't you answer that?

Israel has done more to try to make peace than any country on earth.
Israel has suffered 100 days like 9/11. Why is there no sympathy from
you? How can you claim to be so concerned about peace when you seem so
unconcerned about victims of torture and terrorism?

As to your point, the fighting stops when we feel that we have weakened
the terrorists who are committed to our destruction to the point that
they are no longer a threat. Why is Iraq the top priority? That is a
good question, but you could ask that about any country. If we chose
Iran or Syria you would probably have asked the same question. You have
to start somewhere. Meanwhile, Iraq is being run by a madman, and that
makes it a particularly dangerous state. Also, the people there really
hate their leader, and are more secular than some other countries, so
they may be good candidates to embrace democracy. Did you ever consider
that?


>
>
> <<Why is Israel always the primary target of people who try to deflect
> criticism away from dictators and terrorists?>>
>
> I refuse to get into a debate about Israel - especially since anyone
> who disagrees with you about it is in your worldview themself evil and
> ignorant and whatever other perjoratives you care to come up with.

That is a cowardly way to act. You don't know my world view, and to
characterize me as one who throws around pejoritives is insulting. You
are the one who tried to equate the regime in Iraq to the one in Israel.
That is the insult. If you are going to make such inflammatory and
incorrect statements then you should be willing to back up your
positions. I assume that in your circles it is common to denigrate
Israel without getting challenged. But that will not fly here. This is a
place to discuss things, not make speeches.



>
>
> One last comment, and then I will put this to bed: You keep referring
> to Spetember 1 in reference to Iraq.  Give it a rest or at least
> direct it at those truly responsible (El Quaeda, Saudi Arabia, Yemen,
> etc.). A

You are apparently ignorant of the movement among Muslims to bring about
a Muslim caliphate. Do you know what that is? You also seem ignorant of
the goal of militant Islam. If you want to have a serious debate here, I
can show you much information about what they believe. Saddam has made
speeches calling for the caliphate with him as it's head. That is what
was behind his invasion of Kuwait. So even though he may not have been
behind that one attack on 9/11, he is in league with Bin Laden and
others who have the same exact goal: first a Muslim caliphate and then
world domination. Are you not aware of this? Or do you willfully ignore
it? Furthermore, the Bush doctrine states that states that support or
harbor terrorists will be seen as our enemies. Clearly he does both. So
it doesn't matter whether or not he can be linked to that one attack.


>
>
> 'Nuff said. You continue with your worldview and pursue your agendas,
> I will do likewise and continue to try to learn.
>

What is my "agenda"? You obviously like to put people in little boxes of
your own choosing and then run away. Do you want to talk, to share
ideas, to learn? Or do you just want to attack, and hide behind your
preconceived notions?

You also conveniently didn't respond to my most of my questions. If you
want to have a dialogue you have to respond to the questions posed to
you. Otherwise you are just out to push your "agenda" and don't have a
desire to be challenged and possibly learn something new. I may defend
my positions with strongly, but I am always willing to talk, and am open
to new ideas if they are logical and well presented.

This off topic list is a place where people can really hash things out.
I never envisioned it as a place where people would make attacks and
then run for the hills. If you really believe that you have a moral
position you should not be afraid to explain it. If you are not willing
to debate, then I can only assume that my negative impressions of you
are correct and you are afraid to show us your true self.

How can people come together in peace if they refuse to explain
themselves? Give peace a chance, means, be willing to debate, be willing
to listen, be willing to change your point of view.


Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<< The military can NOT sue the government.  They can protest, but not in
uniform, or as representing the military.  >>

I agree that those who commit to military service - usually for educational
benefits - shouldn't have the right to refuse when they are called upon to
actually serve. Although that could start a whole new discussion of the social
conditions that have led some of them to take that route to get that education.

That said, members of the military and their families, along with some
congresspeople have indeed filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the
President's declaration of war without Congress's approval.

Once again, I'm at work, but do a Google search.

Suzanne
docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

<<You say that if we are going to attack Iraq because it tortures people we
should also attack Israel and Morocco. What about every other Muslim country?
What about Russia? What about Guatemala? etc.>>

You could also include China, while you're at it. You're actually making my
point for me - once we start, where do we stop? And why are we singling out htis
one country - why is it top priority?

<<Why is Israel always the primary target of people who try to deflect criticism
away from dictators and terrorists?>>

I refuse to get into a debate about Israel - especially since anyone who
disagrees with you about it is in your worldview themself evil and ignorant and
whatever other perjoratives you care to come up with.

One last comment, and then I will put this to bed: You keep referring to
Spetember 1 in reference to Iraq. I was one block from the World Trade Center
that day and had a pretty traumatic experience (though mild compared to all too
many), but I don't use that as the touchstone for every other negative in world
affairs. Give it a rest or at least direct it at those truly responsible (El
Quaeda, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc.). As I told toy, there are family members of
September 11 victims vehemently opposed to our wreaking destruction on Iraq.
Iraq is one issue; that is a separate one.

'Nuff said. You continue with your worldview and pursue your agendas, I will do
likewise and continue to try to learn.

Suzanne, with the thing you said here, I don't know where you are coming
from. I sent you a chilling report on torture in Iraq and instead of showing
any sympathy for the victims you just turned around and kicked Israel in the
teeth.

Why is it that whenever someone points out the immoral behavior of any
nation, someone else has to pick on Israel? It's another version of the old
anti Semitic tactic to "blame the Jews". Yes, you also mentioned Morocco,
but only because "we sent a suspected terrorist to be tortured" there. But
Israel comes up in a knee jerk reaction. Why Israel?"

Here is your comment and my response:


<By the way, in one of your personal responses, you mentioned Iraq's
engaging in torture as being one major cause for attacking. If that's the
case, we'd best attack Israel as well  - and Morocco, where we sent a
suspected terrorist to be tortured to circumvent our own law against such
conduct.>


You say that if we are going to attack Iraq because it tortures people we
should also attack Israel and Morocco. What about every other Muslim
country? What about Russia? What about Guatemala? etc. Why is Israel always
the primary target of people who try to deflect criticism away from
dictators and terrorists?

Second, you are trying to say that because there is torture in several
countries, we shouldn't rescue the victims of any country. That same
argument could have been used in WW II. Why rescue the Jews, when there are
Koreans and Filipinos being tortured by the Japanese, etc.? A disgraceful
argument. You help whoever you can whenever you can. You don't say let's not
help this one because we're not helping that one.

Also you are engaging in moral equivalency, and as I've said many times,
"Moral equivalency is not moral!" You compare the torture in Israel to the
torture in Iraq. Let's do a comparison. Here is a quote from the BBC about
Israel:

                The UN Committee Against Torture in Geneva said the
                methods violated international accords and should
                cease immediately.

                It listed methods such as sleep deprivation, deafening
                music, beatings, threats and covering prisoners' heads
                with hoods.

                The UN acknowledged Israel's claim that it needed
                tough tactics to counter the threat of terrorism but said
                this did not justify torture.


Now let's look at the report I sent you about Iraq:

According to former prisoners, torture techniques included branding,
electric shocks administered to the genitals and other areas,
beating, pulling out of fingernails, burning with hot
irons and blowtorches, suspension from rotating ceiling
fans, dripping acid on the skin, rape, breaking of
limbs, denial of food and water, extended solitary confinement
in dark and extremely small compartments, and threats to rape
or otherwise harm family members and relatives. Evidence of such
torture often was apparent when security forces returned the mutilated
bodies of torture victims to their families. There were persistent reports
that the families were made to pay for the cost of executions.

You equate "sleep deprivation, deafening music, beatings,
threats and covering prisoners' heads with hoods" to "branding,
electric shocks administered to the genitals, pulling out of fingernails,
burning with hot irons and blowtorches, suspension from rotating ceiling
fans, dripping acid on the skin, rape, breaking of limbs, etc."? You compare
what Israel does to mutilating people, poking eyes out, pulling tongues out,
and the mental torture of forcing families to pay for executions?  Don't you
have any sense of proportion?

How about the way athletes are beaten and tortured in Iraq for not winning?
Didn't you read this part of what I sent you:

n May Saad Keis Naoman, an Iraqi soccer player
who defected to Europe, reported that he and his
teammates were beaten and humiliated at the order
of Uday Saddam Hussein for poor performances. He
was flogged until his back was bloody, forcing
him to sleep on his stomach in the tiny cell in Al-Radwaniya
prison in which he was jailed. His account
supports allegations made by Sharar Haydar Mohamad
Al-Hadithi, a former Iraqi international soccer
player, who stated in August 1999 that he and his teammates
were tortured on Uday Hussein's orders for not
winning matches. In 2000 three soccer players who played
for a team that lost an October game in the Asian
Cup quarter finals, reportedly were whipped and
detained for 3 days. In 1997 members of the national
football team reportedly were beaten and tortured on Uday's
orders because of poor play in a World Cup
qualifying match.

Are you saying that Israel tortures it's athletes when they don't win their
matches? How can you possibly compare a country run by a totally sick madman
to a democracy that is surrounded by people who are like Al Qaeda and
sometimes has to resort to things it would never do were it not under
constant threat? Isn't our country "torturing" prisoners on Guantanemo? Are
we as evil as Saddam? How would you like it if George Bush had you whipped
and caned for losing a cello competition? Don't you see how sick this is?

What about Saddam's tongue amputations? When people criticize him he has
their tongues pulled out in public ceremonies. Are you suggesting that this
goes on in Israel? How can you compare the two! Here's what I sent you about
this sickening violation of all human decency:

n 2000 the authorities reportedly
introduced tongue amputation as a punishment for
persons who criticize Saddam Hussein or his family, and
on July 17, government authorities reportedly
amputated the tongue of a person who allegedly criticized
Saddam Hussein. Authorities reportedly performed
the amputation in front of a large crowd. Similar
tongue amputations also reportedly occurred in the city
of Hilla during the year.

What about the use of rape against other members of the government? Are you
saying that Israeli leaders rape their opponents? I sent you this too:

Security forces also reportedly
sexually assaulted both government officials and
opposition members in order to blackmail them into
compliance. Former Mukhabarat member Khalid
Al-Janabi reported that a Mukhabarat unit, the Technical
Operations Directorate, used rape and sexual
assault in a systematic and institutionalized manner for
political purposes. The unit reportedly also
videotaped the rape of female relatives of suspected
oppositionists and used the videotapes for
blackmail purposes and to ensure their future cooperation.

I don't know about you, but I never even heard of such sick, frightening
activities. It sounds like Nazi Germany. Don't you see it? Can you not tell
the difference between this and roughing up terrorists to get information
out of them so that innocent civilians won't be blown up or maimed for life?

If you compare what Israel does to the unbelievably sick things that Saddam
does routinely not to foreign combatants, but to his own citizens, to his
fellow legislators, to his own family members...then what does that say
about you? If you equate what Israel does to THIS, then you have no
credibility at all. You have to learn to see the differences of degrees, and
motivations. Israel is only acting in self defense, just like the United
States, in fact, even more than the United States. Saddam is a Hitlarian
monster that must be stopped!


                      <I am not saying that war against Iraq would never be
appropriate - I am merely saying that we are rushing to judgment.>


You are not "merely" saying anything. You are trying to equate the
struggling democracy of Israel to the immoral totalitarian dictatorship of
Iraq, you are trying to stop our president from rescuing people who are
being tortured by bringing up every other problem in the world, you are
spreading misinformation and ill will.

I can only hope that you will rethink your attitudes and be more careful
about the things you say. I can only hope that you really don't understand
how misleading and hurtful your words are.
*****

Just today I heard an interview with the spokesperson for a group that is
going over to Iraq to become human shields. I was actually somewhat
intrigued with what he had to say...until he said that if we are going to
attack Iraq we should attack another "terrorist regime": Israel! Time and
time again, I see the supposed "peace lobby" acting like a bunch of anti
Semites. Israel is anything but a terrorist regime. Israel had risked life
and limb for peace but it is surrounded by people with the same mentality as
Bin Laden. The PA and Hamas charters both STILL call for the destruction of
Israel and the killing of Jews! How come the "peace lobby" ignores this?

If anything, America and England, where this group originates, would fit the
terrorist description more than Israel. But they are not terrorist regimes.
People who compare Saddam's regime to Israel would have just as easily
compared Hitler's regime to Israel if there were an Israel back then. In
fact, many in the Arab press do just that!

I can't accept the "morality" of anyone who would spread hateful lies about
Israel. They can be human shields, they can slit their wrists, they can
starve themselves to death...but they are disgraceful anti Semites. I cannot
support the activities of anti Semites. In fact, I must oppose them.
Ultimately they seek the destruction of Israel and the genocide of the Jews.

History has made it abundantly clear that there must be a Jewish state in
the event of another genocidal attack on the Jews. Even America turned
Jewish ships back to Germany in WW II! The Muslims, a billion strong, and
rich in oil, have no such worries. I see the actions of many Europeans, and
the Americans who support them, as a continuation of the persecution of Jews
that was a glaring feature of their culture for centuries. Will there never
come a time when people will just leave the Jews alone and let them live in
peace in a country of their own?

Once again, you, like so many others bring the blame on Israel. I thought we
were talking about Iraq!

Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<<When was the last time you saw members of the military
suing to stop a war?>>

Where did you see or hear this?  The military can NOT sue the government.  They
can protest, but not in uniform, or as representing the military.  I do know
there were soldiers during the Gulf War who refused to fight because of personal
beliefs. My feeling about this is that they should not be in the military if
they refuse to follow their commander-in-chief.  The government was much too
lenient on them by allowing them to refuse without repercussion. But that is who
we are. We always try for fairness, sometimes to our detriment. There comes a
time when you have to put higher principles above individual needs.  The higher
principles here are the right to stand up for ourselves and keep our citizens
safe.  I live in an area where I have to worry about terrorists, including being
careful about what we wear when we go out so as not to attract attention. That's
ludicrous. It needs to be stopped.  This IS America and needs to remain America.

Loraine









       Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
             ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
voncello_offtopicgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Suzanne, I don't know what good it will do to argue over these issues. It
appears we are both strongly entrenched in our beliefs. I can only hope that
we can have some movement to understand each other. It will be an
interesting study in human communication.


                      <<Then we were attacked on 9/11 and Bush said that we
would
                      > fight a war on terrorism against terrorists and those
who support and harbor them. Saddam is a big supporter of terrorism and he
has harbored terrorists as well.>>

                      <Then we'd best attack Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon,
etc.>



Don't worry, we will deal with them in time. The Bush doctrine says: hand
over your terrorists or we'll come in an get them! Do you propose we do
nothing to stop terrorism?



<And, just as a point of reference, Saddam and Bin Ladin (we seem to have
forgotten him in this mess - wasn't he the Uber-terrorist behind 9/11?) are
enemies, and one of Saddam's transgressions is suppression of Bin Ladin's
sect of Islam.>


You really don't know what goes on in secret with these leaders. They may
appear to be enemies, but they are two heads of the same snake. They are
like the heads of two mafia families who hate each other, but will join
forces against a common enemy. Are you aware that Saddam gives money to the
families of kids who blow themselves up in order to kill innocent Israelis?
He is a supporter of the same type of murderous activities that Bin Laden
supports. Both are striving to create a new Muslim caliphate. Both see this
as a step towards Muslim world domination. Both have made speeches saying
so.



                      <<Bush is representing the majority opinion in the U.S.
The polls say 69% in favor of the war.>>

                      <First, that depends upon the poll. Also, the numbers
drop significantly when other factors are added to the questions. And most
do not support it absent the support of our allies.>


We have the support of our most important allies, England and Israel. We
also have the support of every European country save 3. As for Germany and
France, maybe it's time to look again at whether they are still true allies.



                      <<I fail to see the point of this argument. Are you
saying that if there are several gangsters living in a city, the police
should not arrest any one of them because the others are guilty of similar
crimes?>>

                      <I am saying that we are selecting a target which is
far from the worst. To use your analogy, isn't it better to go after the
Godfather than one of his bookies or street-level drug dealers (actually,
our war on drugs tyakes the same kind of indiscriminate, go-for the easiest
targets approach)? Iran is far closer to being an active threat to its
neighbors and beyond than Iraq, according to multiple intelligence reports.
And Bin-Ladin's organization is far from destroyed. Also, North Korea and
Pakistan, both known for harboring terrorists, also both have nuclear
weapons - they are far more immediate threats. We must triage our
attention.>


So you know better how to conduct the foreign policy of the United States
than the combined wisdom of our experienced elected leaders? I saw Colin
Powell asked how he can justify the administration's actions. He said (and I
paraphrase), "We had the top experts look at this problem from every angle.
We thought long and hard about this. And this is what we believe to be the
best course of action." Why don't you give him some credence?



                      <<First, we aren't the sole arbiter. England and
Australia are firm allies and we have around forty other countries on our
side, including most of Europe.>>

                      <But there are many countries, including traditional
ally Canada, as well as France and Germany, that are not with us. And quite
a few of the others were "strong-armed" into their support.>


How do you know? And how do you know that Germany and France are not "strong
arming" others?



<Also, among Middle Eastern countries - those most impacted by the Iraqui
threat - support is low, and Saudi Arabia and others are strongly
considering denying us future use of their countries for military bases and
staging sites because of this.>


They have been wanting us out of their land for a long time. They know that
it is against Islamic law to have "infidels" setting foot on the "holy soil"
of Saudi Arabia. What do you think about that? Do you consider yourself an
infidel?

The Saudis are playing both sides. They tell us they are our friends but
they are actively involved in supporting terrorists and Madrasas that teach
anti Western beliefs and promote terror. As for the other middle eastern
countries, our greatest ally, Israel, is supportive of this war. Many others
are too, but they don't want to say so now, in case the U.S. backs down,
like you want it too.


                      <<The United States is the only country that was
attacked on 9/11.>>

                      <NOT by Iraq or its allies. These are two entirely
different issues.>

Bin Laden is an ally of Saddam. Again, Saddam and Bin Laden both support the
creation of a Muslim caliphate brought together through violence if
necessary, and both support Muslim domination of the world. They are
certainly on the same side and America is their most important target. One
hit us this time, but the other will do anything he can to cause our
destruction in any way he can, probably covertly.



                      <<We are still called "the great Satan">>

                      <Actually, Bush's father used that first, referring to
Saddam.>



Wrong. I heard that term way back during the Iranian revolution. That is
what Ayatollah Komeni called us. Don't you remember that?


                      <<It's interesting who the allies are of the "peace"
lobby.>>

                      <Actually, what's interesting is the way opposition is
bringing together traditional foes - liberals and conservatives - united in
their opposition. When was the last time you saw members of the military
suing to stop a war?>


Good point, but I think both points are interesting. Don't you?


<Also, other allies of the movement include Bishop Desmond Tutu, the Pope,
Pete Seeger, and General Norman Schwartzkopf, as well as the head of the
original UN Inspection team (forgive me for not including his name - I'm at
work and can't take the time to look it up - but he was quoted quite
extensively in Newsday and other news sources last week). Oh, and let's not
forget the family members of some of the 9/11 victims who are in Iraq to
serve as voluntary human shields, so that Iraqui families don't have to go
through what they have.>


I'm not crazy about Tutu, Seeger or the Pope because of anti American or
anti Israeli things that they have said. But in any case, I agree that there
are some good people opposing the war, but the organizers of the protests
have often been groups that have anti Semitic and anti American agendas. If
the "peace movement" expects to be seen as legitimate, it must disassociate
itself from those groups. Do you know for instance that a famous left wing
rabbi was denied the right to speak at the San Francisco rally because he is
a Zionist? Do you support that?


                      >
                      << If there is a nuclear attack on our soil and
millions die instead of thousands, the peaceniks will all be terribly sorry
for what they are doing.>>

                      <Given Saddam's psychology, such an attack is made far
more likely if we attack.>



It's got nothing to do with Saddam's psychology. It's coming! If not from
him, then from one of his allies. That's what people like you don't seem to
get. We have to actively fight to stop it, defensively and offensively. We
must be unified and support our government. We may question some of their
tactics and the order of events, but we should not give our enemies the
feeling that we are a nation divided. That will only embolden them.


<Why do we believe N. Korea when it says that an attack on them will incite
an attack on S. Korea, but we don't expect Hussein and the terrorists to
take the same approach?>


We do, but we have to weaken them any way we can because the terrorists
believe it is the will of GOD that they kill us. They are suicidal. They
don't respect life, ours or their own. They will stop at nothing, 9/11 was
the tip of the iceberg. That is why they are the most dangerous people on
earth. The leader of N. Korea is a tyrant, but he doesn't believe that God
is commanding him to destroy the United States. Don't you see the
difference? You really seem to be blind to the level of danger that we face
from militant Islam. Unless you show understanding of this fact, and can
show me your comprehensive plan to battle those who seek our utter
destruction, then I can only see you as misguided, or possibly purposely
negative.

Von Cello
http://www.voncello.com/

"Moral equivalency is not moral!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<<They have continued because he never obeyed the agreements he signed in order
to save his regime at the end of the war.>>

There are many other countries in this position, most notably N. Korea, which
has just publicly and explicitly repudiated a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
We are not invading or threatening to invade there.

<<Then we were attacked on 9/11 and Bush said that we would
> fight a war on terrorism against terrorists and those who support and harbor
them. Saddam is a big supporter of terrorism and he has harbored terrorists as
well.>>

Then we'd best attack Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, etc. And, just as a point of
reference, Saddam and Bin Ladin (we seem to have forgotten him in this mess -
wasn't he the Uber-terrorist behind 9/11?) are enemies, and one of Saddam's
transgressions is suppression of Bin Ladin's sect of Islam.

<<Bush is representing the majority opinion in the U.S. The polls say 69% in
favor of the war.>>

First, that depends upon the poll. Also, the numbers drop significantly when
other factors are added to the questions. And most do not support it absent the
support of our allies.
<<I fail to see the point of this argument. Are you saying that if there are
several gangsters living in a city, the police should not arrest any one of them
because the others are guilty of similar crimes?>>

I am saying that we are selecting a target which is far from the worst. To use
your analogy, isn't it better to go after the Godfather than one of his bookies
or street-level drug dealers (actually, our war on drugs tyakes the same kind of
indiscriminate, go-for the easiest targets approach)? Iran is far closer to
being an active threat to its neighbors and beyond than Iraq, according to
multiple intelligence reports. And Bin-Ladin's organization is far from
destroyed. Also, North Korea and Pakistan, both known for harboring terrorists,
also both have nuclear weapons - they are far more immediate threats. We must
triage our attention.

The problem here is that we have begun this glorified staring contest and now
can't afford to blink first, lest we lose face.

<<First, we aren't the sole arbiter. England and Australia are firm allies and
we have around forty other countries on our side, including most of Europe.>>

But there are many countries, including traditional ally Canada, as well as
France and Germany, that are not with us. And quite a few of the others were
"strong-armed" into their support. Also, among Middle Eastern countries - those
most impacted by the Iraqui threat - support is low, and Saudi Arabia and others
are strongly considering denying us future use of their countries for military
bases and staging sites because of this.

<<The United States is the only country that was attacked on 9/11.>>

NOT by Iraq or its allies. These are two entirely different issues.

<<We are still called "the great Satan">>

Actually, Bush's father used that first, referring to Saddam.

<<It's interesting who the allies are of the "peace" lobby.>>

Actually, what's interesting is the way opposition is bringing together
traditional foes - liberals and conservatives - united in their opposition. When
was the last time you saw members of the military suing to stop a war? Also,
other allies of the movement include Bishop Desmond Tutu, the Pope, Pete Seeger,
and General Norman Schwartzkopf, as well as the head of the original UN
Inspection team (forgive me for not including his name - I'm at work and can't
take the time to look it up - but he was quoted quite extensively in Newsday and
other news sources last week). Oh, and let's not forget the family members of
some of the 9/11 victims who are in Iraq to serve as voluntary human shields, so
that Iraqui families don't have to go through what they have.
>
<<They have already voted to give Bush unfettered power to go to war.>>

Many of them don't think they did - that's why they're part of the
aforementioned suit, claiming that his declaring war unilaterally is
unconstitutional.
>
<< If there is a nuclear attack on our soil and millions die instead of
thousands, the peaceniks will all be terribly sorry for what they are doing.>>

Given Saddam's psychology, such an attack is made far more likely if we attack.
Why do we believe N. Korea when it says that an attack on them will incite an
attack on S. Korea, but we don't expect Hussein and the terrorists to take the
same approach?

By the way, in one of your personal responses, you mentioned Iraq's engaging in
torture as being one major cause for attacking. If that's the case, we'd best
attack Israel as well  - and Morocco, where we sent a suspected terrorist to be
tortured to circumvent our own law against such conduct.

I am not saying that war against Iraq would never be appropriate - I am merely
saying that we are rushing to judgment.