Newsgroup: it.cultura.ebraica
Titolo: Grande ORIANA

Una isolata e possente voce contro l'antisemitismo ed il vigliacchismo.
Ad'I
---
Per il manifesto, le FAQ ed un'interfaccia Web visita 
http://www.menorah.it/

 Una isolata e possente voce contro l'antisemitismo ed il vigliacchismo.
per chiarire i dubbi sollevati da arduino con questo post (che avarą mai
detto oriana?), dirņ che oriana a sparato ancora una volta contro tutti,
berlusconi, chirac shroeder e del papa ha detto che appesta il mondo col suo
terzomondismo e il suo pietismo.
saluti
claudio


 detto oriana?), dirò che oriana a sparato ancora una volta contro tutti,
[...]
Starà per uscire un libro o qualche altra mercanzia.
Stefano
-- 
Stefano Soro
Bruxelles
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it


 terzomondismo e il suo pietismo.
la solita stronza, in poche parole.
A.


A.
 Questa mi e' arrivata ieri sera da Denver :
" AT WAR
The Rage, the Pride and the Doubt 
Thoughts on the eve of battle in Iraq. 
BY ORIANA FALLACI 
Thursday, March 13, 2003 12:01 a.m. EST 
To avoid the dilemma of whether this war should take place or not, to
overcome the reservations and the reluctance and the doubts that still
lacerate me, I often say to myself: "How good if the Iraqis would get
free of Saddam Hussein by themselves. How good if they would execute
him and hang up his body by the feet as in 1945 we Italians did with
Mussolini." But it does not help. Or it helps in one way only. The
Italians, in fact, could get free of Mussolini because in 1945 the
Allies had conquered almost four-fifths of Italy. In other words,
because the Second World War had taken place. A war without which we
would have kept Mussolini (and Hitler) forever. A war during which the
allies had pitilessly bombed us and we had died like mosquitoes. The
Allies, too. At Salerno, at Anzio, at Cassino. Along the road from
Rome to Florence, then on the terrible Gothic Line. In less than two
years, 45,806 dead among the Americans and 17,500 among the English,
the Canadians, the Australians, the New Zealanders, the South
Africans, the Indians, the Brazilians. And also the French who had
chosen De Gaulle, also the Italians who had chosen the Fifth or the
Eighth Army. (Can anybody guess how many cemeteries of Allied soldiers
there are in Italy? More than sixty. And the largest, the most
crowded, are the American ones. At Nettuno, 10,950 graves. At
Falciani, near Florence, 5,811. Each time I pass in front of it and
see that lake of crosses, I shiver with grief and gratitude.) There
was also a National Liberation Front, in Italy. A Resistance that the
Allies supplied with weapons and ammunition. As in spite of my tender
age (14), I was involved in the matter, I remember well the American
plane that, braving anti-aircraft fire, parachuted those supplies to
Tuscany. To be exact, onto Mount Giovi where one night they
air-dropped commandos with the task of activating a short-wave network
named Radio Cora. Ten smiling Americans who spoke very good Italian
and who three months later were captured by the SS, tortured, and
executed with a Florentine partisan girl: Anna Maria
Enriquez-Agnoletti. 
Thus, the dilemma remains. 
It remains for the reasons I will try to state. And the first one is
that, contrary to the pacifists who never yell against Saddam Hussein
or Osama bin Laden and only yell against George W. Bush and Tony
Blair, (but in their Rome march they also yelled against me and raised
posters wishing that I'd blow up with the next shuttle, I'm told), I
know war very well. I know what it means to live in terror, to run
under air strikes and cannonades, to see people killed and houses
destroyed, to starve and dream of a piece of bread, to miss even a
glass of drinking water. And (which is worse) to be or to feel
responsible for someone else's death. I know it because I belong to
the Second World War generation and because, as a member of the
Resistance, I was myself a soldier. I also know it because for a good
deal of my life I have been a war correspondent. Beginning with
Vietnam, I have experienced horrors that those who see war only
through TV or the movies where blood is tomato ketchup don't even
imagine. As a consequence, I hate it as the pacifists in bad or good
faith never will. I loathe it. Every book I have written overflows
with that loathing, and I cannot bear the sight of guns. At the same
time, however, I don't accept the principle, or should I say the
slogan, that "All wars are unjust, illegitimate." The war against
Hitler and Mussolini and Hirohito was just, was legitimate. The
Risorgimento wars that my ancestors fought against the invaders of
Italy were just, were legitimate. And so was the war of independence
that Americans fought against Britain. So are the wars (or
revolutions) which happen to regain dignity, freedom. I do not believe
in vile acquittals, phony appeasements, easy forgiveness. Even less,
in the exploitation or the blackmail of the word Peace. When peace
stands for surrender, fear, loss of dignity and freedom, it is no
longer peace. It's suicide. 
 
The second reason is that this war should not happen now. If just as I
wish, legitimate as I hope, it should have happened one year ago. That
is, when the ruins of the Towers were still smoking and the whole
civilized world felt American. Had it happened then, the pacifists who
never yell against Saddam or bin Laden would not today fill the
squares to anathematize the United States. Hollywood stars would not
play the role of Messiahs, and ambiguous Turkey would not cynically
deny passage to the Marines who have to reach the Northern front.
Despite the Europeans who added their voice to the voice of the
Palestinians howling "Americans-got-it-good," one year ago nobody
questioned that another Pearl Harbor had been inflicted on the U.S.
and that the U.S. had all the right to respond. As a matter of fact,
it should have happened before. I mean when Bill Clinton was
president, and small Pearl Harbors were bursting abroad. In Somalia,
in Kenya, in Yemen. As I shall never tire of repeating, we did not
need September 11 to see that the cancer was there. September 11 was
the excruciating confirmation of a reality which had been burning for
decades, the indisputable diagnosis of a doctor who waves an X-ray and
brutally snaps: "My dear Sir, you have cancer." Had Mr. Clinton spent
less time with voluptuous girls, had he made smarter use of the Oval
Office, maybe September 11 would not have occurred. And, needless to
say, even less would it have occurred if the first George Bush had
removed Saddam with the Gulf War. For Christ's sake, in 1991 the Iraqi
army deflated like a pricked balloon. It disintegrated so quickly, so
easily, that even I captured four of its soldiers. I was behind a dune
in the Saudi desert, all alone. Four skeletal creatures in ragged
uniforms came toward me with arms raised, and whispered: "Bush, Bush."
Meaning: "Please take me prisoner. I am so thirsty, so hungry." So I
took them prisoner. I delivered them to the Marine in charge, and
instead of congratulating me he grumbled: "Dammit! Some more?!?" Yet
the Americans did not get to Baghdad, did not remove Saddam. And, to
thank them, Saddam tried to kill their president. The same president
who had left him in power. In fact, at times I wonder if this war
isn't also a long-awaited retaliation, a filial revenge, a promise
made by the son to the father. Like in a Shakespearean tragedy.
Better, a Greek one. 
 
The third reason is the wrong way in which the promise has
materialized. Let's admit it: from September 11 until last summer, all
the stress was put on bin Laden, on al Qaeda, on Afghanistan. Saddam
and Iraq were practically ignored. Only when it became clear that bin
Laden was in good health, that the solemn commitment to take him dead
or alive had failed, were we reminded that Saddam existed too. That he
was not a gentle soul, that he cut the tongues and ears of his
adversaries, that he killed children in front of their parents, that
he decapitated women then displayed their heads in the streets, that
he kept his prisoners in cells as small as coffins, that he made his
biological or chemical experiments on them too. That he had
connections with al Qaeda and supported terrorism, that he rewarded
the families of Palestinian kamikazes at the rate of $25,000 each.
That he had never disarmed, never given up his arsenal of deadly
weapons, thus the U.N. should send back the inspectors, and let's be
serious: if seventy years ago the ineffective League of Nations had
sent its inspectors to Germany, do you think that Hitler would have
shown them Peenemünde where Von Braun was manufacturing V2s? Do you
think that Hitler would have disclosed the camps of Auschwitz, of
Mauthausen, Buchenwald, Dachau? Yet the inspection comedy resumed.
With such intensity that the role of prima donna passed from bin Laden
to Saddam, and the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the engineer of
September 11, was greeted almost with indifference. A comedy marked by
the double games of the inspectors and the conflicting strategies of
Mr. Bush who on the one hand asked the Security Council for permission
to use force and on the other sent his troops to the front. In less
than two months, a quarter of a million troops. With the British and
Australians, 310,000. And all this without realizing that his enemies
(but I should say the enemies of the West) are not only in Baghdad. 
They are also in Europe. They are in Paris where the mellifluous
Jacques Chirac does not give a damn for peace but plans to satisfy his
vanity with the Nobel Peace Prize. Where there is no wish to remove
Saddam Hussein because Saddam Hussein means the oil that the French
companies pump from Iraqi wells. And where (forgetting a little flaw
named Petain) France chases its Napoleonic desire to dominate the
European Union, to establish its hegemony over it. They are in Berlin,
where the party of the mediocre Gerhard Schröder won the elections by
comparing Mr. Bush to Hitler, where American flags are soiled with the
swastika, and where, in the dream of playing the masters again,
Germans go arm-in-arm with the French. They are in Rome where the
communists left by the door and re-entered through the window like the
birds of the Hitchcock movie. And where, pestering the world with his
ecumenism, his pietism, his Thirdworldism, Pope Wojtyla receives Tariq
Aziz as a dove or a martyr who is about to be eaten by lions. (Then he
sends him to Assisi where the friars escort him to the tomb of St.
Francis.) In the other European countries, it is more or less the
same. In Europe your enemies are everywhere, Mr. Bush. What you
quietly call "differences of opinion" are in reality pure hate.
Because in Europe pacifism is synonymous with anti-Americanism, sir,
and accompanied by the most sinister revival of anti-Semitism the
anti-Americanism triumphs as much as in the Islamic world. Haven't
your ambassadors informed you? Europe is no longer Europe. It is a
province of Islam, as Spain and Portugal were at the time of the
Moors. It hosts almost 16 million Muslim immigrants and teems with
mullahs, imams, mosques, burqas, chadors. It lodges thousands of
Islamic terrorists whom governments don't know how to identify and
control. People are afraid, and in waving the flag of
pacifism--pacifism synonymous with anti-Americanism--they feel
protected. 
Besides, Europe does not care for the 221,484 Americans who died for
her in the Second World War. Rather than gratitude, their cemeteries
give rise to resentment. As a consequence, in Europe nobody will back
this war. Not even nations which are officially allied with the U.S.,
not even the prime ministers who call you "My friend George." (Like
Silvio Berlusconi.) In Europe you only have one friend, one ally, sir:
Tony Blair. But Mr. Blair too leads a country which is invaded by the
Moors. A country that hides that resentment. Even his party opposes
him, and by the way: I owe you an apology, Mr. Blair. In my book "The
Rage and the Pride," I was unfair to you. Because I wrote that you
would not persevere with your guts, that you would drop them as soon
as it would no longer serve your political interests. With impeccable
coherence, instead, you are sacrificing those interests to your
convictions. Indeed, I apologize. I also withdraw the phrase I used to
comment on your excess of courtesy toward Islamic culture: "If our
culture has the same value as the one that imposes the burqa, why do
you spend your summers in my Tuscany and not in Saudi Arabia?" Now I
say: "My Tuscany is your Tuscany, sir. My home is your home." 
 
The final reason for my dilemma is the definition that Mr. Bush and
Mr. Blair and their advisors give of this war: "A Liberation war. A
humanitarian war to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq." Oh, no.
Humanitarianism has nothing to do with wars. All wars, even just ones,
are death and destruction and atrocities and tears. And this is not a
liberation war, a war like the Second World War. (By the way: neither
is it an "oil war," as the pacifists who never yell against Saddam or
bin Laden maintain in their rallies. Americans do not need Iraqi oil.)
It is a political war. A war made in cold blood to respond to the Holy
War that the enemies of the West declared upon the West on September
11. It is also a prophylactic war. A vaccine, a surgery that hits
Saddam because, (Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair believe), among the various
focuses of cancer Saddam is the most obvious and dangerous one.
Moreover, the obstacle that once removed will permit them to redesign
the map of the Middle East as the British and the French did after the
fall of the Ottoman Empire. To redesign it and to spread a Pax Romana,
pardon, a Pax Americana, in which everybody will prosper through
freedom and democracy. Again, no. Freedom cannot be a gift. And
democracy cannot be imposed with bombs, with occupation armies. As my
father said when he asked the anti-fascists to join the Resistance,
and as today I say to those who honestly rely on the Pax Americana,
people must conquer freedom by themselves. Democracy must come from
their will, and in both cases a country must know what they consist
of. In Europe the Second World War was a liberation war not because it
brought novelties called freedom and democracy but because it
re-established them. Because Europeans knew what they consisted of.
The Japanese did not: it is true. In Japan, those two treasures were
somehow a gift, a refund for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But Japan had
already started its process of modernization, and did not belong to
the Islamic world. As I write in my book when I call bin Laden the tip
of the iceberg and I define the iceberg as a mountain that has not
moved for 1,400 years, that for 1,400 years has not changed, that has
not emerged from its blindness, freedom and democracy are totally
unrelated to the ideological texture of Islam. To the tyranny of
theocratic states. So their people refuse them, and even more they
want to erase ours. 
 
Upheld by their stubborn optimism, the same optimism for which at the
Alamo they fought so well and all died slaughtered by Santa Anna,
Americans think that in Baghdad they will be welcomed as they were in
Rome and Florence and Paris. "They'll cheer us, throw us flowers."
Maybe. In Baghdad anything can happen. But after that? Nearly
two-thirds of the Iraqis are Shiites who have always dreamed of
establishing an Islamic Republic of Iraq, and the Soviets too were
once cheered in Kabul. They too imposed their peace. They even
succeeded in convincing women to take off their burqa, remember? After
a while, though, they had to leave. And the Taliban came. Thus, I ask:
what if instead of learning freedom Iraq becomes a second Talibani
Afghanistan? What if instead of becoming democratized by the Pax
Americana the whole Middle East blows up and the cancer multiplies? As
a proud defender of the West's civilization, without reservations I
should join Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair in the new Alamo. Without
reluctance I should fight and die with them. And this is the only
thing about which I have no doubts at all. 
Oriana Fallaci is the author of "The Rage and the Pride" (Rizzoli
International, 2002), available from the OpinionJournalBoook )
(Copiaincolla di Cesare Simonetti )


 Office, maybe September 11 would not have occurred.
Fate la guerra, non fate l'amore.


 Fate la guerra, non fate l'amore.
10 anni di incessante e ininterrotta attività in favore di Israele, il
massimo sforzo per accordi di pace, e tutto quello che si riceve Clinton è
un calcio nei denti e un insulto da una signora piena di livore.
Una brutta cosa, l'ingratitudine.
Un difetto da vigliacchi.
Resta la consolazione che, almeno lui, qualche soddisfazione erotica se l'è
presa.
Infatti non è isterico e non ha palesi necessità di cure psicanalitiche.....
A.


Cosa si fa per non piazzare un brutto libro di una furbetta che sa
solleticare il basso ventre del popolo.
Rabbiosa Oriana hai ragione tu: l'odio vende.
Giovanni
http://www.olokaustos.org


 Giovanni
Va bene, mi avete convinto, da domani, comincio a partecipare alle
manifestazioni per la pace, alle proteste per l'abbattimento delle case dei
terroristi, mando e-mail di congratulazioni a chirac schroder wojtyla, e di
protesta a Bush, Blair, Sharon, a Oriana. Basta con la violenza! Che Israele
ed America comincino ad imparare a porgere l'altra guancia.
Ciao
Ad'I


 la solita stronza, in poche parole.
proprio cosģ
claudio


 ed America comincino ad imparare a porgere l'altra guancia.
Ah sě?
Da quando in qua Israele e America sono lo stesso identico paese?
Vorrei sapere cosa c'entra Blair con Sharon.
Non mi pare si siano manco incontrati.
Spiegami l'arcano, va'....
A.


Rabbiosa Oriana hai ragione tu: l'odio vende.
A me pare che l'Oriana abbia ancora una volta delle delle verita'
scomode, che non cessano di essere verita' per il solo fatto di essere
scomode.
Certamente deve subire l'assalto del popolo dei "politicamente
corretti ".
E allora, il problema dov'e' ?
Cesare Simonetti


 A.
E chi ha mai detto che siano la stessa cosà? Sono io, che ho deciso di
protestare contro realtà differenti, e visto che no global e sinistra
democratica, vedono come il fumo negli occhi questi personaggi, è evidente
che ciascuno di loro, sia pur nei rispettivi ambiti, debba aver fatto
qualcosa di male, perciò, non risparmierò a nessuno di loro la mia
virilissima e democratica protesta. E indipendentemente da ciò, ho già
appeso una bandiera, con scritto, no alla guerra, si alla dittatura, alle
torture, al genocidio dei curdi e alla decapitazione delle prostitute.
Ciao
Ad'I


 claudio
E si, deve essere proprio stronza, avere dei dubbi sull'utilità della
guerra, criticare gli europei per essersi dimenticati degli americani morti
per liberarli, ed i signori di parigi berlino e vaticano per il loro
pacifismo a senso unico.
Più stronza di così: anzi, mi ci metto anch'io dato che la penso come lei.
Ciao
Ad'I


 E allora, il problema dov'e' ?
Il problema?
Che non hai risposto a proposito di Clinton e Israele.
Il problema č che si fa in fretta a glissare, quando non si sa cosa dire.
Ecco dov'č, il problema....
A.


 Più stronza di così: anzi, mi ci metto anch'io dato che la penso come lei.
PIANTALA CON I TUOI OT.
Parlaci di cultura ebraica.
Un argomento del quale non sai un ca***, tanto per cambiare.
A.


Ecco dov'č, il problema....
Premesso che ho sempre avuto una gran simpatia per Mr. Clinton, e' un
fatto che quando  Saddam caccio' gli ispettori dall'Irak lui era
impegolato con la storia della Lewinsky, e non ebbe il tempo, la
calma, la determinazione di prendere quei provvedimenti che se
adottati allora, ci avrebbero probabilmento evitato i mal di pancia di
oggi.
Cesare Simonetti


 oggi.
Mi fa molto piacere.
Tuttavia, se ben hai notato, io ho parlato dell'impegno di Clinton per
Israele, e dei suoi tentativi di risoluzione diplomatica.
Di Saddam non ho parlato, poichè, come mi sgolo a dirlo da mo', non mi
risulta che costui faccia parte della "cultura ebraica".
Nè da vicino, nè da lontano.
A.


 Fate la guerra, non fate l'amore.
Ne uccide più la lingua della spada.
--
<:3)~~~maisele



Vedo numerosi tuoi interventi sull'argomento: quando lo fai tu è cultura
ebraica, e se lo faccio io è Ot?
Detto questo, Il discutere come si raffronta l'opinione ebraica di fronte ad
un atto di forte denuncia proveniente dal mondo cristiano, non credo sia Ot,
e pertanto credo faccia benissimo il moderatore a non considerarlo tale.
Ciao
Ad'I



Allora, neppure Clinton farebbe parte della cultura ebraica.
Secondo me, la cultura, è tutto ciò che riguarda un popolo. Se io parlassi
dei filistei, parlerei di cultura ebraica, perché questo popolo, è dentro la
storia di Israele. Allo stesso modo, lo sono Clinton e Saddam.
Ciao
Ad'I
Ps: posso dire anch'io di aver apprezzato gli sforzi di Clinton.
Ma per stimare una persona, non si può pretendere una perfetta identità di
vedute, adottando questo metro, si dovrebbe scartare tutti.
Ciao
Ad'I


 E allora, il problema dov'e' ?
Il problema è che moltissimi si sentono indicati dal dito accusatore.
Ciao
Ad'I


 A me pare che l'Oriana abbia ancora una volta delle delle verita'
quali?
AleX
-- 
Le antenne di Radio Vaticana provocano la leucemia
La NATO ha chiesto di poterle installare in Kossovo
                  Luttazzi  -  Marzo 2001


> Ne uccide più la lingua della spada.
Se lo dici tu, deve essere sicuramente vero...
--
Massimiliano Crippa
www.nipponico.com


 A.
Mah! il povero Arduino ha semplicemente detto che stufo di essere trattato
da subumano di destra ha deciso di alzarzi alle alte vette dell'intelligenza
che dimora a sinistra. Se compagni e no global  bruciano assieme le bandiere
di Israele e quelle a stelle e strisce, se nei lori siti insultano equamente
Bush e Sharon ci sara' pure una ragione intelligente sotto....
Giovanni


 Starà per uscire un libro o qualche altra mercanzia.
Anche per leggere Il capitale di Marx bisogna sborsare qualche euro!
Grazie alla libertà e alla democrazia possiamo comprare e leggere
qualunque libro.   Io ho letto i versetti satanici di s.rushdie, poi ho
comprato il corano e
ho controllato cosa c'era scritto li.   Molto interessante.
Ho veramente aperto gli occhi sull'islam.
Vi consiglio di fare altrettanto


 Bush e Sharon ci sara' pure una ragione intelligente sotto...
ragione...?
intelligente...?
sotto...?
Saluti, Hektor


 Allora, neppure Clinton farebbe parte della cultura ebraica.
Ho parlato del rapporto fra Clinton e Israele, e del sostegno degli USA a
Israele.
Israele fa parte della cultura ebraica.
ci sei o ci fai?
(spiegami adesso il lungo rapporto di Saddam con lo Stato di Israele, prego.
A parte che ha sparato degli scud.Questo non è "rapporto". Questo è sparare
addosso alla gente, non mettersi in rapporto con essa.)
A.


 Bush e Sharon ci sara' pure una ragione intelligente sotto....
no.
semplicemente non c'č.
infatti sono dei coglioni.
e prenderli ad esempio di logica la dice lunga.
(autogol, caro :-)
A.


 Ne uccide piů la lingua della spada.
ammazza.
ICE , culla di aforisti....
:-)
A.


 ebraica, e se lo faccio io è Ot?
i miei sono sempre di risposta.
i tuoi no.
inizi tu i thread provocatori.
ha ragione chi mi consiglia di non risponderti nemmeno.
sei un troll.
A.


 Se lo dici tu, deve essere sicuramente vero...
L'ha detto la Lewinsky.
--
<:3)~~~maisele


 A.
Ale!! mi meraviglio di te: che fosse una risposta di ironico sfotto' dei
sinistri  mi pareva chiaro ma ben due interventi  due mi costringono a
precisarlo. Passi per Hector che qui e nuovo ma proprio tu Ale...
Ciao
Giovanni


 precisarlo. Passi per Hector che qui e nuovo ma proprio tu Ale...
lo so che era sfottò.
Tuttavia, l'ho detto lo stesso.
Mi son presa la soddisfazione :-)
A.


 precisarlo. Passi per Hector che qui e nuovo ma proprio tu Ale...
Mi scuso allora di non aver capito l'ironia. Saluti, Hektor


 A.
Saddam attorno al 1994 aveva trattato con lo stato ebraico, trattativa poi
interrotta per la disapprovazione americana.
Se avessi tempo da buttare via, potrei vergarti un trattato sulla relazione
fra la storia e la cultura ebraica con il fallimento di queste trattative,
e, poi farne un altro che smentisca il primo.
Ciao
Ad'I


 e, poi farne un altro che smentisca il primo.
buona idea.
Sono sicura che Rizzoli te lo pubblica subito
A.


 Sono sicura che Rizzoli te lo pubblica subito
Se avessi vanità letterarie, scriverei qualcosa di più interessante.
Ciao
Ad'I
