Re: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Sat Mar 09 2002 - 19:51:15 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Rumsfeld Says...."

    Received: by id TAA29405 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sat, 9 Mar 2002 19:48:42 GMT
    Message-ID: <000d01c1c7a3$e4359cc0$dcafeb3e@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence
    Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 20:51:15 +0100
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Grant Callaghan <
    > The "eye for an eye" meme goes back some 4,000 years. I don't know how
    > figure it only started in 1948. The situation they are applying it to may
    > have started then, but they didn't have to choose that meme for answering
    > the challenge. And how do you figure America and Europe made them choose
    > that meme to solve their problems with instead of choosing to negotiate
    > each other in good faith? You haven't told me how that came about yet.

    Hi Grant,

    Sorry for the delay, I was quite busy !
    Here is my answer.

    I was only refering to the situation they are now applying it to, like Alan
    wrote, no more no less.
    If, in a way the Brits could have hold the immigration ( of most East-
    European Jews) to a minimum, if thus the state of Israel wasn 't be
    founded at all, there would be no problem. But that is too simplistic.

    And if the Arabs would have execpted the VN resolution which pro-
    vided a split of the territory in a Jew- Palestinian half, there would be
    no problem either.
    I understand perfectly that the Arabs were not so keen on the Jews,
    after all, after WO II they were smuggled in by the thousands, but
    before WO II the immigration was legal_ Jews bought vast pieces of
    ground, ( kibbutzim) and settled down.

    So, in a sense if the Brits didn 't moved out in 1948 there was no bias
    for the first Israelistic/ Arab war; if the Frensh and the Brits didn 't
    occupied the Suezcanal in 1956 there was no second conflict.
    In a way, Europe and later America made Israel and the Arabs, to
    choose the meme of violence_ in a way, by the histoical events both
    sides were ' forced ' to take the violence- memes on board.
    The origin of the ' ME- violence- meme ' lies within not only Israel
    itself but IMO begins at the end of the 19 th. century with the rising
    of zionism in Europe.
    The immigration- flow which resulted of this expanded into, later, in
    the ME- conflict.

    But, and I agree, the settlement- politc and the attempts to annex the
    Golan, the Sinai and some parts of Jordan are points of discussion.
    And in a broader context, if Europe and America stayed out all the
    together there was no problem.
    But both do have emotional attachments, Europe as with what happened
    with the Jews during WO II and America as with many of its habitants
    have Jewish roots. And in such a way, stuck as we are, we drives the
    sides in the ME up to such a point that it will burst,... and it did !



    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 09 2002 - 19:58:52 GMT