It's a sign.
Still working on my Skekses custome. It'll be ready for Halloween 2012.
Posted by dawnbixtler on 2005-12-06 16:04:34 +0000
Very interesting. Did the world give in to Israel?
Not necessarily... will the crystal be circular? Seems like its going to be a "diamond shape".
Posted by Miriam on 2005-12-06 17:37:22 +0000
The full BBC report on the radio talked about how the Syrians don't recognize the Magan David Adom in the Golan Heights and the Palestinians living there suffer because of that. It's not about caving in to the Israelis, it's about adopting a symbol acceptable to a region divided by EVERYTHING. Most of the divisive things were brought in by others (Crusaders brought the cross, the British/Arab nations brought the Intifada, the Americans brought the fight over oil, etc.). I think that it's a stupid thing to spend so much time over and that the Red Cross is ignorant not to allow Israel membership to it's organization, but if the Red Crystal works...bring on the semantics for the Semites!
Posted by dawnbixtler on 2005-12-06 17:46:14 +0000
Not arguing, just following up...
If the West/Far East and the Middle East were OK with their respective Red Cross and Red Crescent, why change?
Is it because they were going for the one symbol? Well, "the proposal in Geneva would allow national societies to insert the Star of David, Cross or Crescent in the centre of the crystal for non-emergency purposes, such as fundraising."
It all seems odd.
Posted by Miriam on 2005-12-06 18:29:36 +0000
The article seemed to refer to the fact that the Red Cross wasn't comfortable with everyone having their own symbols. I think it was actually their beef...and waste of resources that could've been used to aid victims of disasters all over the world.
Posted by tgl on 2005-12-06 18:34:42 +0000
If everyone would use the same symbol, the cost of using the symbols would go down. Economy of scale.
Posted by Honar the librarian on 2005-12-06 18:36:26 +0000
I suspect that they have to change because some members cannot (will not) accept the Star of David as an alternate symbol, and that it is politically unacceptable for Israel to accept the Cross and Crescent but be denied the use of the Star. So in order to incorporate Israel fully into the organization without losing other members, some other symbol must be chosen.
The whole red cross/maguen david thing has basically always been problematic, and in many ways parallels Israel's often contentious relationships with other international organizations (I am thinking particularly of the U.N.). Or perhaps I should say, the contentious relationships between International organizations and Israel. At any rate, it is interesting to note that the Maguen David was founded almost as soon as modern Israel began.
The inability of countries to get over themselves enough to accept alternate symbols is just one of the many reasons that the middle east problems won't end until the entire region is one radioactive sheet of glass, and given the diaspora populations that unstable regions disperse, probably not even then.
Posted by tgl on 2005-12-06 18:40:23 +0000
Shit is right. Take the ball away!
.
.
.
Wait a minute... that's what we are doing in Iraq, isn't it?