Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

[Sensei]

* Door opens, Sensei enters wearing referee uniform *

Jesus, what is that smell? I can't believe you guys hang out in this cesspool. Ok, the only way to settle this is in an adult manner...

Everyone take their clothes off now. Rian, off with your clothes. Samtzu, I see you need no encouraging; good boy. Joel, I said all your clothes, that includes the jockstrap.

* Sensei distributes creme pies to all participants *

Ok, everyone wait for my signal...

3... 2... 1... FIRE!

* Sensei deftly steps outside and slams door shut *

[DVD Burner]

[DVD Burner]

Even though Rian is trying so hard to get theses guys to understand........more power to her.

Anyhoo, Looks like in the next 2 weeks the British are getting ready to get their asses kicked while on their way to Falusha. The British feel they will take over that area and get things under control. Only one thing, who they are fighting will most likely do one of 2 things if not both. Either not be there and will have relocated to 3 other places and 2. ambush the British army along the way and in Falusha.

The British nor Americans get it. I think it is a genetic thing.

[cowboyangel]

whew!! I think I'll continue takin my break from this thread.....it's startin to get like bad dreams....

[DVD Burner]

whew!! I think I'll continue takin my break from this thread.....it's startin to get like bad dreams....

The diffrence is what is about to happen is real.



You take 2 weeks of a break then lets see how you feel then.

[samtzu]

I'm looking for the 1928 bit. Here's something from 20 years after that in Al-Dawayima... just posting info on EITHER side massacreing the other, as information is a good thing.

An unnamed Israeli soldier told this version:

The first wave of conquerors killed about 80 to 100 Arabs, women and children. The children they killed by breaking their heads with sticks. There was not a house without dead. One woman, with a newborn baby in her arms was employed to clean the courtyard.... (they) shot her and the baby.... This was not in the heat of battle.... but a system of expulsion and destruction (Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee Problem, p. 222)

The UN inspection team

On November 17, Agriculture Minister Aharon Cizling told the cabinet; I feel that things are going on which are hurting my soul, the soul of my family and all of us here ... Jews too have behaved like Nazis and my entire being has been shaken. (src)

And yes... this is correct... the Israelis started off in blood and have not slacked off, and have escalated it to a fevered pitch. There is NO (repeat) NO justification whatsoever for the atrocities that have been commited there. The Jews who survived the massacre in Europe went on to commit the same attrocities in Palestine....

Now.... let me make perfectly clear what I mean! BOTH FUCKING SIDES ARE AT FAULT!!! Let me say that again; BOTH FUCKING SIDES ARE AT FAULT!!! That is not my 'superior' experience talking (because, as you know, I don't claim any, don't have any, don't want any) To lay the blame totally on one side is not accurate. Not only that, it avoids the truth... which is this; BOTH FUCKING SIDES ARE AT FAULT!

Also, that cite I gave was from a book I last read over twenty years ago; O, Jerusalem by Larry Collins and Dominique LaPierre. The date of the massacre may be incorrect, the place may even be incorrect, but that a massacre happened is not. Also, the leader of the massacre in 1948 by the Jews of Palestinian women and children was Menachim Begin, who later became the Prime Minister of Israel. A larger piece of murderous scum you would not have found on the face of the planet. He is dead now, but I think he got off easy. He was the leader of a group of Jewish terrorists who eventually were engaged in a pitched battle with the Israeli army during that time.

I am not lecturing you, or anyone else... I am stating my opinion, which, thank god, I can do in America. If I said this in either Israel or Palestine I would be in danger of getting the shit beat out of me by young men, or even worse, I would be killed.

If I offended you, I appologize, but these are my opinions on the matter. It was not my intention to offend you, it was simply to state my opinion. If we can't express our opinions here on the ePlaya without winding up screaming at each other, what hope is there for the World? If we can't find a common ground here, does that mean that force and aggression are the only answers for today's problems? Dunno'. I'll wait to see.

If you accept my appology and still accept me as your friend, good. There are absolutely no hard feelings on my part. If not, there are still no hard feelings on my part.

[robbidobbs]

This is a public service announcement from the Apathy Police...
It is not enough to vote.
It is not enough to spew forth your political opinions.

Volunteer.

If this election is important (and it is), then find out where your local campaign headqarters is at, and sign up for some shifts.
Thank you for supporting the democratic process.

[DVD Burner]

This is a public service announcement from the Apathy Police...
It is not enough to vote.
It is not enough to spew forth your political opinions.

Volunteer.

If this election is important (and it is), then find out where your local campaign headqarters is at, and sign up for some shifts.
Thank you for supporting the democratic process.

This reminds me, for those that belive in the American political process.....this election is gonna be worse than last. cant wait to watch it happen.

[Rian Jackson]

*sigh*

Sam, i made it pretty clear that i was posting in order of what i found, not trying to make claims about whose 'fault' the whole thing is. I wish you would read what i'm saying, not what you think i'm saying.

On that note, i've already stated WHY i'm upset over this thread. You may re-read it at your leisure, when you are ready to.

you know, you could walk into tons of places in I/P and say exactly what you've said here. a lot of people would agree with you. and these sorts of comments are the things i'm having a problem with, secondarily. don't make your sweeping generalisations about the way things 'are' when you haven't tried it. i don't know how many times in my 'research' yesterday (not that i can properly call it that when i'm doing it at work with limited resources) i came across direct refutations of things like your claim that there's no such thing as a popular movement. and fine, if that's your opinion. but you couched it in terms of your long studies and life experience, which supposedly means you have a superior perspective to everyone else here. maybe you're right. maybe you aren't. my hunch is that you're sometimes right. but i don't really want to be talked down to because of an age difference, for god's sake. i'm perfectly willing to have conversations and share knowledge; this ain't no way to do it. you might take it to heart that it does not go over well when you try to trump specific experience with more years on the planet. imagine if you were going to tell me how to play viola just because you are older than i. it's pretty preposterous. and if i must quote you, i will, but frankly this bullshit is putting me in a pretty foul mood, so i would rather not. (of course, this isn't to say that you shouldn't speak, or have an opinion, or have no valid experience to bring to the table. you just don't have ALL of it. and neither do i)

you know, one thing that my friend Nuha frequently comments on is that friendships here are pretty fleeting. that as soon as you disagree, you go separate ways. i personally choose not to take that path (ask Sensei, he pisses me off all the time). You know I love you. We've disagreed before. Doesn't mean i'm not still angry at your behaviour. But that won't last forever either. if i can remain friends with my buddy who thinks that the Republican party is too left wing and is a staunch Israel supporter on top of that, my hunch is that this exchange isn't going to ruin relations between the two of us.

Oh, and yeah - that 1929 bit was more than shitty. If you want i can see if i can find the info for it again and post it. I just wanted - truly - to make sure we were talking about the same thing.

[Simply Joel]

This is a public service announcement from the Apathy Police...
It is not enough to vote.
It is not enough to spew forth your political opinions.

Volunteer.

If this election is important (and it is), then find out where your local campaign headqarters is at, and sign up for some shifts.
Thank you for supporting the democratic process.

This reminds me, for those that belive in the American political process.....this election is gonna be worse than last. cant wait to watch it happen.

i'll be here to remind you how fun anarchy is, once the looting begins...

[birdbrain]

Off to Reno to see/participate in Kerry rally; I look like a cross between an outdoor- homed person, a skihead, and a hillbilly hippie! Oh well, this should be fun, anyway....if they let me in the door. No, I don't reek of patchouli or whatever-just having a badly dressed day( I like to focus on the important things, as you can all see)! Outta here.....................................

[DVD Burner]

i'll be here to remind you how fun anarchy is, once the looting begins...

The funniest part of it all is how so much you dont get it Joel.
You will soon though.


I'm hard core anarchy. You have no idea.

[DVD Burner]

Two men arrested for throwing pies at conservative columnist Ann Coulter during speech



ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:16 a.m. October 22, 2004

TUCSON, Ariz. – Two men ran onstage and threw custard pies at conservative columnist Ann Coulter as she was giving a speech at the University of Arizona, hitting her in the shoulder, police said.
University police arrested the men but did not release their identities.

In her half-hour speech Thursday night, Coulter trashed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and derided liberals and Democrats while saluting conservative students who attended her speech.

Coulter writes a column for Universal Press Syndicate. Her appearance was sponsored by the UA College Republicans.

[samtzu]

... there are soooooo many 'pie' remarks that could be made.... especially with that sultry picture of hers... ....Hey, could I get in her pie... In yer' dreams, Buddy....

[DVD Burner]

Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program,
Supported al Qaeda

http://www.pipa.org/

Agree with Kerry Supporters Bush Administration Still Saying This is the Case
Agree US Should Not Have Gone to War if No WMD or Support for al Qaeda

Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War, Favoring Bush Reelection

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.

Steven Kull adds, "Another reason that Bush supporters may hold to these beliefs is that they have not accepted the idea that it does not matter whether Iraq had WMD or supported al Qaeda. Here too they are in agreement with Kerry supporters." Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58% of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61% assume that in this case the President would not have. Kull continues, "To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq."

This tendency of Bush supporters to ignore dissonant information extends to other realms as well. Despite an abundance of evidence--including polls conducted by Gallup International in 38 countries, and more recently by a consortium of leading newspapers in 10 major countries--only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq. Forty-two percent assume that views are evenly divided, and 26% assume that the majority approves. Among Kerry supporters, 74% assume that the majority of the world is opposed.

Similarly, 57% of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would favor Bush's reelection; 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred. A recent poll by GlobeScan and PIPA of 35 of the major countries around the world found that in 30, a majority or plurality favored Kerry, while in just 3 Bush was favored. On average, Kerry was preferred more than two to one.

Bush supporters also have numerous misperceptions about Bush's international policy positions. Majorities incorrectly assume that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues--the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%)--and for addressing the problem of global warming: 51% incorrectly assume he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty. After he denounced the International Criminal Court in the debates, the perception that he favored it dropped from 66%, but still 53% continue to believe that he favors it. An overwhelming 74% incorrectly assumes that he favors including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements. In all these cases, majorities of Bush supporters favor the positions they impute to Bush. Kerry supporters are much more accurate in their perceptions of his positions on these issues.

"The roots of the Bush supporters' resistance to information," according to Steven Kull, "very likely lie in the traumatic experience of 9/11 and equally in the near pitch-perfect leadership that President Bush showed in its immediate wake. This appears to have created a powerful bond between Bush and his supporters--and an idealized image of the President that makes it difficult for his supporters to imagine that he could have made incorrect judgments before the war, that world public opinion could be critical of his policies or that the President could hold foreign policy positions that are at odds with his supporters."

The polls were conducted October 12-18 and September 3-7 and 8-12 with samples of 968, 798 and 959 respondents, respectively. Margins of error were 3.2 to 4% in the first and third surveys and 3.5% on September 3-7. The poll was fielded by Knowledge Networks using its nationwide panel, which is randomly selected from the entire adult population and subsequently provided internet access. For more information about this methodology, go to www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp.


Funding for this research was provided by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

[Sensei]

I noticed things became quite a bit more civil around here after the pie fight. Your welcome.

And DVD? If I had tossed one at Ann, you know darn well Sensei wouldn't have missed.

[cowboyangel]

ann coulter is really a man, and someone ought to slip her some high john

[geekster]

http://www.newsisfree.com/iclick/i,57570887,2447,f/

Sorry, I like "news".

[geekster]

ann coulter is really a man, and someone ought to slip her some high john

Yeah, but I saw her that time you got too close to the property line:

[cowboyangel]

that's a good...here's a good one too!

[DVD Burner]

I dont know if any of you saw the ann coulter footage but man let me tell you.........the way she ran really turned me on.
Such moves when she runs. Really really sexy.



Yeah Baby!

[tisha2]

*shudder*

[Simply Joel]

i'll be here to remind you how fun anarchy is, once the looting begins...

The funniest part of it all is how so much you dont get it Joel.
You will soon though.


I'm hard core anarchy. You have no idea.

who fucking cares DVD, you are sock... there is no person behind to avatar... just whining, preening, the occasional smart ass comment...

however, you thrive in a system you claim to dislike... please leave and leave the rest of us to make it better.

now, after all that... let's see, a hard core anarchist would mean you have a symbiotic or parasitic relationship to this society... i know which one i would use to describe your standing in this society....

Main Entry: sym·bi·o·sis
Pronunciation: "sim-bE-'O-s&s, -"bI-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural sym·bi·o·ses /-"sEz/
Etymology: New Latin, from German Symbiose, from Greek symbiOsis state of living together, from symbioun to live together, from symbios living together, from syn- + bios life -- more at QUICK
1 : the living together in more or less intimate association or close union of two dissimilar organisms
2 : the intimate living together of two dissimilar organisms in a mutually beneficial relationship; especially : MUTUALISM
3 : a cooperative relationship (as between two persons or groups) <the symbiosis... between the resident population and the immigrants -- John Geipel>
- sym·bi·ot·ic /-'ä-tik/ adjective
- sym·bi·ot·i·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

or

Main Entry: par·a·site
Pronunciation: 'par-&-"sIt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from Latin parasitus, from Greek parasitos, from para- + sitos grain, food
1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery
2 : an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism
3 : something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return
- par·a·sit·ic /"par-&-'si-tik/ also par·a·sit·i·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
- par·a·sit·i·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb
synonyms PARASITE, SYCOPHANT, TOADY, LEECH, SPONGE mean a usually obsequious flatterer or self-seeker. PARASITE applies to one who clings to a person of wealth, power, or influence or is useless to society <a jet-setter with an entourage of parasites>. SYCOPHANT adds to this a strong suggestion of fawning, flattery, or adulation <a powerful prince surrounded by sycophants>. TOADY emphasizes the servility and snobbery of the self-seeker <cultivated leaders of society and became their toady>. LEECH stresses persistence in clinging to or bleeding another for one's own advantage <a leech living off his family and friends>. SPONGE stresses the parasitic laziness, dependence, and opportunism of the cadger <a shiftless sponge, always looking for a handout>.

[cowboyangel]

Kidnapped
The heroine who offered hope for Iraq

By Robert Fisk - 20 October 2004

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1020-01.htm

Margaret? Margaret Hassan kidnapped? She who said to me that soon, very soon, "there will be more than one lost generation" in Iraq?

Is there no end to the kidnappers' targets? Margaret Hassan was abducted at 7.30 yesterday morning on her way to work running Care International's Iraq operation. Soon afterwards, Arabic al-Jazeera television showed her sitting in a room looking calm, if concerned. It also showed close-ups of her identification papers and said an unnamed Iraqi group claimed it had kidnapped her.

Margaret was the enemy of United Nations sanctions on Iraq. She is the symbol of all those who believe that Iraq - a real, free, unoccupied Iraq - has a future; and all we can be told is that she, too, has joined the legion of the unpersons, the "disappeared", the list of those who, because of their language or the colour of their eyes or their nationality, have slipped into Iraq's dark hole.

The ultimate disgrace yesterday was to hear British diplomats who supported those deadly sanctions weeping their crocodile tears for "Margaret".

Tony Blair rushed to say Britain will do all that it can to secure her release. "There is really a limit at this stage what I can say to you, but obviously we will do whatever we can," he said, while standing beside the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, in London.

"It shows the kind of people we are up against that they are prepared to kidnap somebody like this. We do not know which group it is."

But Mr Blair, remember, fully supported the sanctions which Margaret loathed. And, of course, he supported George Bush's invasion that led to the chaos that has engulfed Iraq.

Kidnappers have killed at least 35 foreign nationals in Iraq since the invasion. Iraqis seen as co-operating with the occupation forces or the US-backed Iraqi interim government have also been targeted for kidnapping. This week two Macedonian contractors who had been abducted were beheaded. And two weeks ago the same fate befell the British contractor Ken Bigley. And now Margaret has been taken. Margaret, who above all is a humanitarian.

I first met her when The Independent exposed the use by the Americans and British of depleted uranium munitions in the 1991 Gulf War, and the explosion of cancers and leukaemia that afflicted Iraqi children in the years that followed. Readers of The Independent donated £250,000 for medicines and Care - for which Margaret worked - undertook to distribute the vaccines around the hospitals of Iraq. Margaret and her Dublin colleague Judy Morgan found the trucks to take these vital medicines across Iraq to try to save the small creatures in the children's "wards of death".

I watched Margaret cajole the truck drivers, plead with the hospitals, bargain with the air-conditioning moguls to deliver vincristine and other fluids to the children's hospitals in the October heat.

For 30 years Margaret has devoted herself to Iraq. She started working for Care International soon after it began operations there in 1991 at the end of the Gulf War. She has a staff of 60 Iraqis who run nutrition, health and water programmes the length and breadth of the country. She is married to an Iraqi and, though Irish-born, she carries British and Iraqi nationality.

She "considers herself an Iraqi national", Amber Meikle, Care International's spokeswoman, said yesterday. "We want to stress that she sees herself as an Iraqi. Iraq is her home. She has been living there for many years and would never consider coming back to Britain."

Margaret is a driven woman, as I recall so well. Every week, every day, every hour, the evidence of human tragedy on a massive scale - a UN sanctions disaster which they could do little or nothing to alleviate - mounted on their desks in the Care office in a fly-blown estate of Baghdad.

Yesterday, I went back to an old blue-covered notebook and an interview with Margaret. It is dated 5 October 1998. In the margin, I have written of her: "She doesn't shout when she speaks, but her indignation - uttered above her office's hissing air-conditioner - comes across as a cry, angry and frustrated, from someone who is tired of listening to platitudes."

These were black days, but the tragedy continues to unfold for her adopted nation. "This is a man-made disaster," she told me, banging her right hand into the palm of her left. "Yes, some people have benefited from what we have done. But we can't solve the problem of Iraq. It's got no economy. We can't replace this with aid."

Margaret pulled a thick file across her desk back in 1998. "What use can we be here?" she asked. "Now if this was a Third World country, we could bring in some water pumps at a cost of a few hundred pounds and they could save thousands of lives. But Iraq was not a Third World country before the [1991] war, and you can't run a developed society on aid. The doctors here are excellent - many were trained in Europe as well as Iraq - but because of sanctions, they haven't had access to a medical journal for eight years."

Margaret suspected that westerners had somehow divorced themselves from ordinary Iraqis during the 13 years of UN sanctions.

"I don't think we see them as people," she told me. "If you see someone suffering, if you have a grain of humanity in you, you have to respond to that. Sanctions are inhuman and what we are doing cannot redress that inhumanity.

"They are contrary to the UN charter which enshrines the rights of the individual. It's a contradiction, a hypocrisy. It's Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde."

There were times when even she was almost beaten. I remember one afternoon, after she had sent our medicines to the doomed cancer babies of Baghdad, when Margaret seemed defeated.

"The people here are really, really suffering," she said. "Do people know what it's like for a mother to wake up each morning not knowing how to feed her children? I don't think westerners see Iraqis as ordinary people."

Before the war to remove Saddam Hussein, Margaret was among the many who warned the British Government that an invasion and occupation would produce a humanitarian crisis in a country already severely weakened by the embargoes.

It is the ultimate irony that a woman who was brave and good and decent enough to oppose the shameful sanctions with which we chose to purge the Iraqi people should now be taken by kidnappers in Baghdad.

If ever there was a true friend of Iraqis, it is Margaret Hassan. Brave, outspoken, steadfast, she is a heroine. Her captors should be humbled that they can speak to so fine a lady.

[Simply Joel]

Kidnapped
The heroine who offered hope for Iraq

By Robert Fisk - 20 October 2004

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1020-01.htm

Margaret? Margaret Hassan kidnapped? She who said to me that soon, very soon, "there will be more than one lost generation" in Iraq?

Is there no end to the kidnappers' targets? Margaret Hassan was abducted at 7.30 yesterday morning on her way to work running Care International's Iraq operation. Soon afterwards, Arabic al-Jazeera television showed her sitting in a room looking calm, if concerned. It also showed close-ups of her identification papers and said an unnamed Iraqi group claimed it had kidnapped her....

It is the ultimate irony that a woman who was brave and good and decent enough to oppose the shameful sanctions with which we chose to purge the Iraqi people should now be taken by kidnappers in Baghdad.

If ever there was a true friend of Iraqis, it is Margaret Hassan. Brave, outspoken, steadfast, she is a heroine. Her captors should be humbled that they can speak to so fine a lady.

hmmm, Anarchy anyone?

[Simply Joel]

so, some of you want a revolution.... some of you want anarchy...

make sure you know what you are asking for, you may actually get it.


Jacobins

(jk´bnz) (KEY) , political club of the French Revolution. Formed in 1789 by the Breton deputies to the States-General, it was reconstituted as the Society of Friends of the Constitution after the revolutionary National Assembly moved (Oct., 1789) to Paris. The club derived its popular name from the monastery of the Jacobins (Parisian name of Dominicans), where the members met. Their chief purpose was to concert their activity and to secure support for the group from elements outside the Assembly. Patriotic societies were formed in most French cities in affiliation with the Parisian club. The members were, for the most part, bourgeois and at first included such moderates as Honoré de Mirabeau. The Jacobins exercised through their journals considerable pressure on the Legislative Assembly, in which they and the Feuillants were (1791–92) the chief factions. They sought to limit the powers of the king, and many of them had republican tendencies. The group split on the issue of war against Europe, which the majority, including the Brissotins (see under Brissot de Warville, Jacques Pierre) sought. A small minority opposed foreign war and insisted on reform. This group of Jacobins grew more radical, adopted republican ideas, and advocated universal manhood suffrage, popular education, and separation of church and state, although it adhered to orthodox economic principles. In the National Convention, which proclaimed the French republic, the Jacobins and other opponents of the Girondists sat in the raised seats and were called the Mountain. Their leaders—Maximilien Robespierre and Louis de Saint-Just, among others—relied mainly on the strength of the Paris commune and the Parisian sans-culottes. After the fall of the Girondists (June, 1793), for which the Jacobins were largely responsible, the Jacobin leaders instituted the Reign of Terror. Under Robespierre, who came to dominate the government, the Terror was used not only against counterrevolutionaries, but also against former allies of the Jacobins, such as the Cordeliers and the Dantonists (followers of Georges Danton). The fall of Robespierre on 9 Thermidor (July 27, 1794) meant the fall of the Jacobins, but their spirit lived on in revolutionary doctrine. The movement reappeared during the Directory and in altered form much later in the Revolution of 1848 and in the Paris Commune of 1871. 1
See I. Woloch, Jacobin Legacy: The Democratic Movement under the Directory (1970); M. L. Kennedy, The Jacobin Club of Marseilles (1973); Kennedy, The Jacobin Clubs in the French Revolution (2 vol., 1982–88 ). 2


Reign of Terror


1793–94, period of the French Revolution characterized by a wave of executions of presumed enemies of the state. Directed by the Committee of Public Safety, the Revolutionary government’s Terror was essentially a war dictatorship, instituted to rule the country in a national emergency. 1

Origins of the Terror
Initially the Committee of Public Safety was created (Apr. 6, 1793) to preserve the reforms of the French Revolution. Its membership took final form on Sept. 6. Among its twelve members were Bertrand Barère de Vieuzac, Lazare Carnot, Georges Couthon, M. J. Hérault de Séchelles, Maximilien Robespierre, and Louis de Saint-Just and the Hébertists, J. N. Billaud-Varenne and J. N. Collot d’Herbois. Robespierre became the dominant member. Their aim was to eliminate all internal counterrevolutionary elements, to raise new armies, and to assure food supplies for the armies and cities. Some of their measures were demanded by the people of Paris, whose support was essential. 2

Confinement and Execution
Responsibility for the police measures taken during the terror lay also with the Committee of General Security, which had control over the local committees formed to ferret out treason. The Law of Suspects (Sept. 17, 1793) defined those who could be arrested for “treasonable” activities; it was enforced by the Revolutionary Tribunal. Estimates vary as to the number of victims; thousands were guillotined, and over 200,000 were arrested. Representatives on mission, who were agents sent out by the Committee of Public Safety, had absolute power to enforce the terror, including the establishment of special courts. 3
The counterrevolutionary uprising in the Vendée (Oct.–Dec., 1793), which was suppressed with a heavy loss of life, and revolts against the Convention in Lyon and several other cities served as a backdrop to the intensification of the terror of Jan.–Mar., 1794. In Nantes mass drownings called noyades claimed at least 3,500 lives. In June, 1794, the Committee of Public Safety introduced a new law, which strengthened the power of the Revolutionary Tribunal; the court could return only verdicts of either acquittal or death. Executions increased greatly. 4

Government and Economy
The machinery of government was centralized in the hands of the Committee of Public Safety. Military mobilization, planned by Carnot, and based on the levée, a requisition of able-bodied males between the age of 18 and 25, was followed by a complete reorganization of the armed forces that paid dividends in the French Revolutionary Wars. In the field of economics, the demands of the enragés in Paris brought strict controls. The law of the maximum and other measures set price and wage ceilings, forbade hoarding and withholding from the market, requisitioned food and supplies for the army, and instituted rationing. Land purchase by the peasants was made easier. Despite these measures, economic problems continued to intensify. 5

Outcome
When French military success began in June, 1794, popular discontent with the brutal measures at home grew evident. By this time the members of the committee were at odds with one another and with the Committee of General Security. The members of the National Convention, fearing that the new purge would be turned against them, joined forces with Robespierre’s enemies on the committees and overthrew Robespierre on 9 Thermidor (July 27, 1794). 6
The Reign of Terror was followed by the Thermidorian reaction under a reconstituted Committee of Public Safety (1794) and by the White Terror, in which many former terrorists were executed. While the Reign of Terror answered the need for a strong executive and saved France from anarchy and military defeat, its effect upon public opinion, especially foreign opinion, was extremely harmful to the Revolutionary cause. 7

Bibliography
See D. Greer, The Incidence of Terror during the French Revolution: A Statistical Interpretation (1935); R. R. Palmer, Twelve Who Ruled (1941, repr. 1968); S. Loomis, Paris in the Terror (1964); and S. Schama, Citizens (1989). 8

[DVD Burner]

who fucking cares DVD, you are sock... there is no person behind to avatar... just whining, preening, the occasional smart ass comment...

however, you thrive in a system you claim to dislike... please leave and leave the rest of us to make it better.

you actually think and belive what ideas you haved and those that are thinking the wat you are thinking (Bush & Co.) will/are making things better huh?

Ha!

You have quite a bit to learn as most of us already know.

Have a seat and learn my friend. Your approach is all wrong, but I know you're not gonna hear that. you dont hear anything that is said right now. I think it will be way too late by the time you do listen/understand how the world works.


Lets see how long it takes for those to get it after how many ass kickings they get.

( I know, You're just gonna get even more upset when you find out I'm right in another 2 weeks or so.)

[DVD Burner]

who fucking cares DVD, you are sock... there is no person behind to avatar... just whining, preening, the occasional smart ass comment...

however, you thrive in a system you claim to dislike... please leave and leave the rest of us to make it better.

you actually think and belive what ideas you have and those that are thinking the what you are thinking (Bush & Co.) will/are making things better huh?

Ha!

You have quite a bit to learn as most of us already know.

Have a seat and learn my friend. Your approach is all wrong, but I know you're not gonna hear that. you dont hear anything that is said right now. I think it will be way too late by the time you do listen/understand how the world works.


Lets see how long it takes for those to get it after how many ass kickings they get.

( I know, You're just gonna get even more upset when you find out I'm right in another 2 weeks or so.)

[DVD Burner]

Fuck!

I'm not trying again. Ya know what I mean.

[Simply Joel]

Fuck!

I'm not trying again. Ya know what I mean.

fucking parasite.