RE: Angela�s Plan

amalhayati2 wrote: Whisper wrote: Whisper wrote: Finally, I have got the time to breathe. We must get organised and push Angela's Plan further no matter what anyone thinks or says. I have just finished a meeting with someone closely connected with someone very prominent on the global Muslim stage (a legendary ex-prime minister of possibly th finest country in the Islamic world). He seems to have good aroma about this plan being initiated by people! Will post a plan of action on the 14th   Amalahayati wrote: does anyone else notice the vague implementation of these words??  Someone closely connected...legendary EX-prime minister....of possibly what is this some sort of game?  What are we kids to think that a bunch of internet savy individuals will supersede the tactics of larger grassroot organizations like Islamic Relief, CAIR, MPAC and others that have spent years involved overseas affairs.  Don't you ppl know the Bush Administration oversees every inch of what goes on in Iraq and what goes on here in America.   What you cassandra, angela, whisper and others members pro with this good but waaay over your head wacky idea are doing is dangerous to islamicity.     unknowingly you guys will be asking for attention from the NSA or CIA or even FBI.   call me paranoid but hey, i'm a muslim and whatever i say might and will be used against me- remember a lawyer's favorite phrase against Muslim organizations, "they are supporting the terrorists"  if they got that against you, you AND islamicity are shunted to oblivion. (unless you are a spy, then you've done your job well) :) PEACE

Angel wrote: Angel wrote: Cassie, what you said to amalhayati2 below is uncalled for, you have been nothing but sacastic thru out your post. I am sorry but I have to stand up for her. Cassandra wrote: As for your snipes first at Whisper, and then at the rest of us trying at least to do something SMALL (see my signature at the bottom of this post, or did you forget to put your specs on LAST TIME?), your contempt is beneath my contempt.  And believe me, you couldn't top my contempt if you were on the ISS. Most of you know that I try to be a voice of moderation here, but this amalhayati2 person has really got my Goat! amal, put forth a legimate concern she had and you put her down, I thought you said that disagreements were welcomed that you asked for along with agreements and you put her down, good one    As I mentioned in good faith at the pond, you need to calm down,

Angel, no, I am sorry but I do not feel that I owe an apology to anyone unless you count the one that I have just posted to you elsewhere.  The original post by Whisper was written in good faith, Amalhayati's comments were SNIPES.  Her paranoid comments about attracting undue attentions annoyed me, and I wrote what I thought.  Perhaps I could have been a little more subtle about it, but the end result would have been the same.  I did not see Amalhayati disagreeing with anything we have written about the plan.  I saw her taking pot shots at those participating, calling them "spies", insinuating words about "supporting the terrorists", etc., (where is the logic in this, please? We are working for PEACE.  That's the irony of all of this.  How could that possibly threaten Islamicity's existence or reputation) and so on.  I responded perhaps too quickly, but no, other than that I stand by what I said.

If the Moderators request it, I will apologise in a very carefully thought out PM.

I feel that this is developing into a certain tension between you and I, and I would like us to put a stop to it right now, if you don't mind. Please, do not tell me to "calm down".

As I said elsewhere, I would far rather than we remain friends.  Cassandra

I think that may very well be the case, Signreader, and it saddens me.  None of us can afford to regionalise our shock and dismay at what is happening in the world today.  This is clearly part of a preconceived plan to take over control the entire Middle East. I have suggested that we form an umbrella group, gather information about, and contact other grass roots groups, but so far the response has been disappointing. We are all very good at talk, not so good at action. But nothing else but people power will ever change this dominated planet.  Is this the beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning.  That's the problem, isn't it?  We just don't know what part of history we inhabit. 

In the meantime, my heart goes out to the whole Middle East.  For that reason, I am posting a petition under "A Plea for Lebanese Civilians" in Current events.  It came from Canada. Please anyone who reads it, consider and sign.  I know, we all know, that these things don't do an awful lot of good.  But doing nothing achieves nothing.  Which is better?

I will be posting this on the forum set up at Across The Pond as I feel
that may turn out to be the natural home for Angela's Plan, since it is
both British and American troops who must withdraw. But I want to
have some feedback here aswell.

I�ve been reading posts on other forums with nothing to do with
politics (Peakoil.com) where Americans are talking a lot about the
Israeli bombings of Lebanon. I�ve read comments posted by readers
on news and information sites commenting on articles about Israel�s
use of white phosphor, cluster bombs, targeting civilians etc. I have
been shocked at the level of bloodlust some people show, who are
confident in their assertions that force and war is the only answer.

But most of all I have been struck by the ease with which we all judge
and justify our own and other�s remarks and beliefs. It seems to me
that so long as we justify our disagreement with someone/something
with judgements such as: �that�s what I�d expect from a lefty/
commie peacenik coward�, or such as these: �she�s just a left-wing
feminist�; �he�s a Moslem radical�; �he�s a rabid liberal� etc. there will
be no progress towards settlement, there will be no negotiation. The
first obstacle is oneself. We do not need to put people into boxes in
order to understand what they are saying. The comment: �I see
where you�re coming from� means: �Ah, I see you are a liberal/
communist/ atheist/ orthodox Jew etc. The idea that someone has
�an agenda� buys into the same rigid and limited concept that we are
all just defending our political or religious viewpoints, rather than
defending our deeply held need to live in peace, and without the
threat of war.

When the Angela Plan was first mooted as a �movement� I saw
nothing but difficulties and obstacles, and saw no future for any such
initiative. The war in Iraq has become such a Behemoth of a problem,
involving corporate plundering, the violence we all know about, and
the undeclared civil/internecine war, that I saw only complicated and
insurmountable problems. Now I have actually narrowed my focus
and this is what I think we can do: rather than found a new
organisation, we should try to bring existing organisations together
under one common cause: American withdrawal. This needs to be
done in America, as international viewpoints are barely taken into
consideration by the xenophobic G.W. Bush admin. I feel The Pond
may be the natural home for this initiative since it is both America
and Britain who must withdraw, hence it is the American and British
public who must form the critical mass of opposition to the American
led occupation.

There are many grass-roots organisations working for peace and
campaigning to bring the troops home, the American public (or so
we are told) are increasingly turning against the occupation, Bush
has the lowest ratings of any president before him and his party are
desperate to maintain their powerbases at home. Experience shows
that only when opposition at home reaches a critical mass (Vietnam)
does the administration start thinking about doing what the people
actually want. Reaching that critical mass MUST NOT take as long as
it did to end the Vietnam war. It must be reached soon, and I think
one way is to draw the various groups who currently don�t have a
link with one another together: strength in numbers.

For this, I suggest we form the umbrella pressure group which will
put these organisations together with the sole aim of becoming such
a loud noise that the government will have to sit up and listen. We
want the troops out of Iraq.

I also want the Israeli�s and Palestinians to get back to a negotiating
table, and I want all foreign troops out of Afghanistan. These don�t
necessarily have to be separate issues. With a working pressure
group dedicated to bringing all non-violent activists with a common-
ground together, we could also turn our attention to these problems.

Maybe this is a lazy way out? I mean, I�m sort of taking advantage of
all the work done by those who have formed and who run the various
pressure groups which already exist. But I just feel it would be a
waste of hard work to set up yet another non-governmental peace
organisation, and the time it would take to get it up and running is
time Iraq doesn�t have.

I know there are groups out there which are founded by Christians
and Moslems, groups affiliated with political parties or charities
owned and run by churches. I feel the organisation which brings
them together should be officially neutral, without political or
religious affiliations although members will of course come from all
sorts of backgrounds.

This is something like the negotiating table differing parties are
forced to sit down at during any labour strike. It would be a little bit
like the moderators sitting back and encouraging negotiation and
communication between the employers and the employees.

It�s not a big idea, it doesn�t involve lobbying for support from
politicians or corporations. But please let me know what you think,
and add suggestions. I have no need to listen to more rhetoric about
why America should not withdraw now, or any other argument in
favour of arms, or war. I�ve read enough and seen enough.