From: fahs@ecf.toronto.edu (FAHS Samir M)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon
Subject: Re: The Syrian record.
Date: 8 Nov 92 15:10:48 GMT
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility

In article <4314@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Ohm Jihad) writes:

>
>>Hitler's propaganda machine always carried updated information especially
>>to those who knew very little about the situation.  Usually it is most
>>effective on that kind of people.
>
>So you are suggesting that this is all propoganda?  That what was stated
>before in this report is false?.

No, That report could have been an accurate one, which does not
contradict the fact that the CLAO acts more like a propaganda machine. 

The criticism, as was pointed out by others, was not directed at that 
report, it was at the whole frame of work of CLAO, which you yourself said
you knew very little about.


>
>         should appreciate it instead of criticizing it on the grounds that
>it is irrelevant or unimportant in comparison to Lebanese prisoners in Israeli
>prisons. 
>

No one made any such insinuation.  All that was said is that once again
the CLAO shows a lack of interest in the plight of the other thousands
of Lebanese.  And things  are not expected any differently from them,
since what they stand for is known to those who are familiar with the
Lebanese dilemma.                              

>>>                                 We should support each other and be
>>>sensitive to each other's needs and concerns.
>>
>>Now, once one starts calling for a support of "each other" they have already
>>assumed that they do not view themselves as one.  That's where our
>>tragedy lies. The address above views the lebanese as if they are of 
>>different needs and concerns, again if that's one's starting point
>>then lebanon's current situation is the end one. Maybe we if 
>>felt that we were one then there will be no "his/her concern"
>>it will be "my concern" and there will be no need to campaign for
>>"my support" to  "his/her needs".
>
>I agree with you but I think you mistook what I wrote ,

Maybe, but what I understood from the above is that you are telling
the lebanese to be more sensitive to "each others" needs, and I responded
accordingly.  My response was only meant as for the lebanese within each 
other.
 
>would like to tell you this - when I initially responded to another post
>about Arab unity (that we should be considered Arabs first before Lebanese -
>U.S. Elections posting), I recall very clearly some posters flamming me that
>Lebanese are Lebanese before Arabs - that they have their own identity - now
>am I seeing somewhat of a double standard here?

No, not at all.  Read above.

Even if what I meant was in a more general arabic context, keep in mind
that not all Lebanese view themselves to be that widely different from 
the rest of the arabs, as a matter of fact a great majority do not.


> I see your point (even if I was not familiar enough with what you are
> refering to about the various reports the CLAO produces.)

Since you did at more than one occasion indicate your limited familiarity
with the CLAO, it is important to note that the opposition is directed
more at their ideology than at the accuracy of individual reports.
 

Samir.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon