Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 07:07:35 +1000
Subject: Re: refugees and migrants UK


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_x5L48BN+Pw4VxZ11ZDSa4w)

Steve/Eric/All,

Ignore Perle, right or wrong, I never liked him.

Lately, I hear most of the 911 gang were Saudis, although Atta, supposedly the leader, was from a middle class Egyptian family.  And they are thought to have trained in Ben Laden's camps.  
 
On public TV, there was a documentary on Algerian-born terrorist who was captured before he could carry out his Millenium attack on L.A. airport.  He first came to Montreal, joining many Algerian refugees, and, later, trained in the Bin Laden camp in Afghanistan.

The Saudis are alleged to have chartered a special plane and brought Saudis back from the U.S.a day or so after the attack.

The sacrificial psychology is hard for us to understand.  Ben Bradlee, of the Wasington Post was a college student at the beginning oF WWII.  He described how eager he and his friends were to get into the War.  Of course each one expects to survive, but was there anything other than the ideology of  national defense for which they would have deliberately risked their lives?

It was unsettling, but believable, to read (recently) that Eisenhower wanted troops who had not been in battle to lead the attack the Normandy beaches.

regards,
Hugh











  Hugh 

  I would simply point out that the people who flew the planes into the WTC have been identified by the FBI as not being Islamic Fundamentalists - rather they were more modern - young well educated - vodka drinking youngish men from the middle east. I am slightly bemused about what this means... I had assumed a higher level of involvement of some repressive ideology/theology but it may be something else entirely. 

  Richard Perls said on the radio here that he wanted to bomb iraq, libya, yemen, sudan and some other places - civilised man.

  One more victory for truth over the spectacle...

  regards
  sdv

  hbone wrote:

Steve,1) The NYTimes reports that a significant percentage of New York Cityrecruits into the military services are immigrants with green cards.2) Anyone who has spent time at U.S. colleges or universities in the lastdecade knows there are a great many foreign students. About 10 years ago, ona visit to the Fogg Museum at Harvard, the campus was cluttered with groupsof new students whose orientation leaders were pointing out the sights andtelling ancecdotes.  One was a story of Gertrude Stein explaining to Wm.James why she hadn't submitted a certain assignment..There were a great many orientals in those groups.Despite the lamentable condition of city schools in the U.S.,  the best ofhigher education is still attractive to foreigners who can afford it.3) I think graduates who return to their native countries will be lesslikely candidates for sacrificial death by terroist acts against the U.S.
 orthe U.K. than their fellows who know us only through propaganda - theirsand ours.The same might apply to immigrants who have served in the U.S. military.If, on completion of enlistment, the government would give them financialassistance towards higher education,  it would benefit the U.S reputation intheir home countries, whether those concerned returned home or not.Scholarships might be more effective and far less expensive  than bombs andbullets in changing the minds of young Mulslims who are likely to becomedupes of Bin Laden and Hamas.regards,Hugh~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As part of the British Govenment's disgraceful and increasingly racistbehavior it has begun to think in terms of introducing policies that aimto integrate people who ask for 'citizenship' through givingintegration, cultural and language lessons on Britishness.The reason this sudden departure is the ongoing orchestration of theanti-refugee/migrant issue by the state/media nexus.The notion of a community and a collective, in this case British and theBritish people, is always, as in every case that attempts to name andengender a community that mirrors a reactionary ideology results in adisastrous and horrible evil event, (in its 20th C extremes this wasNazism),  in this case the reactionary use of the word British orEnglish has a single purpose to persecute and oppress those who live inthe UK under the completely arbitrary naming of them as refugees andmigrants.For this reason I am rethinking t
he issue of 'difference' I think i/wehave been wrong to begin to abandon the concept as not useful...regardssdv




--Boundary_(ID_x5L48BN+Pw4VxZ11ZDSa4w)

HTML VERSION:

 

 

 

 

Hugh

I would simply point out that the people who flew the planes into the WTC have been identified by the FBI as not being Islamic Fundamentalists - rather they were more modern - young well educated - vodka drinking youngish men from the middle east. I am slightly bemused about what this means... I had assumed a higher level of involvement of some repressive ideology/theology but it may be something else entirely.

Richard Perls said on the radio here that he wanted to bomb iraq, libya, yemen, sudan and some other places - civilised man.

One more victory for truth over the spectacle...

regards
sdv

hbone wrote:

Steve,

1) The NYTimes reports that a significant percentage of New York City
recruits into the military services are immigrants with green cards.

2) Anyone who has spent time at U.S. colleges or universities in the last
decade knows there are a great many foreign students. About 10 years ago, on
a visit to the Fogg Museum at Harvard, the campus was cluttered with groups
of new students whose orientation leaders were pointing out the sights and
telling ancecdotes.  One was a story of Gertrude Stein explaining to Wm.
James why she hadn't submitted a certain assignment..

There were a great many orientals in those groups.

Despite the lamentable condition of city schools in the U.S.,  the best of
higher education is still attractive to foreigners who can afford it.

3) I think graduates who return to their native countries will be less
likely candidates for sacrificial death by terroist acts against the U.S.
 or
the U.K. than their fellows who know us only through propaganda - theirs
and ours.

The same might apply to immigrants who have served in the U.S. military.
If, on completion of enlistment, the government would give them financial
assistance towards higher education,  it would benefit the U.S reputation in
their home countries, whether those concerned returned home or not.

Scholarships might be more effective and far less expensive  than bombs and
bullets in changing the minds of young Mulslims who are likely to become
dupes of Bin Laden and Hamas.

regards,
Hugh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As part of the British Govenment's disgraceful and increasingly racist
behavior it has begun to think in terms of introducing policies that aim
to integrate people who ask for 'citizenship' through giving
integration, cultural and language lessons on Britishness.

The reason this sudden departure is the ongoing orchestration of the
anti-refugee/migrant issue by the state/media nexus.

The notion of a community and a collective, in this case British and the
British people, is always, as in every case that attempts to name and
engender a community that mirrors a reactionary ideology results in a
disastrous and horrible evil event, (in its 20th C extremes this was
Nazism),  in this case the reactionary use of the word British or
English has a single purpose to persecute and oppress those who live in
the UK under the completely arbitrary naming of them as refugees and
migrants.

For this reason I am rethinking t
he issue of 'difference' I think i/we
have been wrong to begin to abandon the concept as not useful...

regards
sdv