Sv:
Your message expressed some legitimate differences of opinion, which I will
address shortly. In the mean time, since Im occupied at the moment with
some other matters, I suggest rereading Posting old message - formatted
this time! at
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-October/006966.html, which
explains why we shouldnt realistically expect much civility on this issue,
which clarifies my points to all the concerns you raised.
However, right now I need to deal with the claim thats flat out false.
You state:
Yes, you say this because you happen to have some
ethnic sympathies-- That is understandable.
First, dont conflate this often-ambiguous collective identity with an
ethnic one. It is not an ethnic or racial identity, and only a nationality
within the context of Israeli citizenship. If one were forced to use an
ethnic identity, you could note that most Jews (although there are converts)
have Semitic lineage.
Second, you state:
I encourage you to consult your Faith
However, Im of no faith and this is a rude remark when directed toward
anyone in general.
Third, you state that I suggest that I consult my faith rather than
consult[ing]
the history of US-Middle East foreign policy
if [I
am]looking for metaphorical solutions.
If you think that I view the RK matter, or for that matter foreign policy in
the Middle East, because of a faith that I dont have, and this Jewish
ethnicity (which is utterly meaningless- use a dictionary and find out why
this is a contradiction of terms), you are sadly mistaken; this goes against
my entire approach to history. Earlier, a number of users were accusing me
of inserting pro-Saddam biases in articles; now Svs accusing me of opposing
a ban on RK I share his views on US-Middle East foreign policy!
I admit, my normative views of the Israel-Palestinian matter are more
agnostic, and I refrain from the formulae of criticism and effecting change
(a role of the social scientists and history first heralded by Marx and
one that I admire), and opting for the less provocative one of understanding
and comparison. It's not that I don't believe that a Marxist revisionist
framework for interpreting things wouldn't work here- I think that it can to
an extent, when other matters are considered. But I'm not going to speak as
a partisan of either side. Nor would I be qualified; Im not a Mid East
specialist.
In short, I support RKs role; I dont stand by his often-sketchy work.
And if you dont want RK at your throat on the Middle East articles, just
wait until your buried under the avalanche that you wanted to create. The
minute the balance, tone, evidence, and analysis of the articles sees a
minor, ostensibly trivial shift, just wait for the irate new RKs to flood
the site in droves, lambasting Wikipedia for a lack of neutrality. Theyll
start attacking you from every direction and at once, and making your job
even harder. And youll then realize that it wouldve been far better to
deal with the devil you knew, rather than the new ones you dont.
_________________________________________________________________
Instant message during games with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE!
http://msnmessenger-download.com