Muslims lament Israel's existence

[yoyo]

http://www.iht.com/cgi-bin/generic.cgi?template=articleprint.tmplh&ArticleId=98479

Meg Bortin/IHT IHT
Wednesday, June 4, 2003

PARIS If the American threat of preemptive military action against Iraq inflamed the Muslim world over the winter, the war itself fanned the flames, with a sharp new rise in hostility toward the United States, the latest Pew survey has found.

Animosity is so high that solid majorities in five populations surveyed expressed confidence in Osama bin Laden to "do the right thing" in world affairs.

And, at a time when the Israeli government has accepted the right of Palestinians to statehood, most Muslim populations surveyed believe by wide margins that the needs of Palestinians cannot be met so long as the state of Israel exists.

The poll, conducted by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, surveyed more than 15,000 people in May. Muslim populations included were Indonesia, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority and Turkey.

The survey shows that negative attitudes among Muslims toward the United States have soared anew since the war, both in the Middle East and beyond.

Anti-Americanism peaked in Jordan, where 99 percent of the people now have a somewhat or very unfavorable opinion of the United States, up from 75 percent last summer, the survey found. Hostility was also extremely high in the Palestinian Authority (98 percent).

More than eight out of 10 in Turkey and Pakistan questioned since the war have a negative view of the United States, as do seven out of 10 in Lebanon and two-thirds in Morocco. The most extreme shift was seen in Indonesia, where 61 percent had a favorable opinion last summer but now only 15 percent do.

Steven Simon, an analyst of Muslim affairs with the Rand Corporation, said the about-face in Indonesia could be explained by "a rising sense of Islamic identity of a kind that is new" for that country.

Part of this new self-perception, he said, is tied to the return of people who went through the Islamic fundamentalist camps in Afghanistan and became radicalized there. "The way they see the United States as having acted in the last couple of years confirms views like, 'The United States is evil, the United States wants to devour the Muslim world.'"

As for the spike in hostility in Jordan, he said, the war in Iraq was "colossally unpopular" there and heightened the resentment of the country's largely Palestinian population, who already saw U.S. policies in the Middle East as "helping to perpetuate a situation that is grossly unfair to Palestinians."

Even in Nigeria, traditionally a friend of the United States, favorable opinion sank to 61 percent after the war from 77 percent last summer.

Several Muslim populations also express strong dislike of Americans as people. Nine out of 10 Palestinians, eight out of 10 Jordanians and 60 percent of Turks say they feel somewhat or very unfavorable toward Americans. The rise is sharpest in Jordan, where fewer than half had a negative view last summer.

Still, among Muslims with an unfavorable view of the United States, most put the onus on President George W. Bush - who has included two Muslim countries in his "axis of evil" and has focused his war on terror on the Islamic world - rather than America in general.

Distrust today blazes so brightly that majorities in seven of eight Muslim populations surveyed - Turkey, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Lebanon, Jordan and Kuwait - expressed fears that the United States could become a military threat to their country.

In Morocco, 79 percent said they felt Islam was under serious threat today, and people in other countries largely agreed, in many cases far more strongly than last summer. In Pakistan, for example, 64 percent now say Islam is seriously threatened, up from 28 percent in summer 2002. The threat is perceived most sharply in Jordan, by 97 percent, up from 81 percent last summer.

Perhaps as a consequence, bin Laden was one of the three "leaders" most trusted by the nine Muslim populations surveyed, outranking even the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan. The Qaeda leader's confidence rating was matched only by Yasser Arafat, leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

As for the crisis in the Middle East, in a wave of sentiment that bodes ill for the future of the U.S.-sponsored "road map" to peace, Muslims lined up strongly behind the opinion that "the rights and needs of the Palestinian people cannot be taken care of as long as the state of Israel exists."

The conviction that no way can be found for Israel and the Palestinians to coexist is strongest in Morocco (90 percent), followed by Jordan (85 percent), the Palestinian Authority (80 percent), Kuwait (72 percent), Lebanon (65 percent), Indonesia (58 percent) and Pakistan (57 percent).

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who chairs the Pew project, called these results "very disheartening, and very dangerous, frankly."

"I hope that this is temporary and that, if there are some improvements in the situation because of the peace process, it will change," she said. "There is no way Israel is going to disappear. We will just have to find some way to mitigate those feelings."

Even beyond the Muslim world, the United States is seen as favoring Israel over the Palestinians unfairly. Those sharing this attitude range from 99 percent in Jordan to a surprising 47 percent in Israel itself. Only in the United States does a plurality say that U.S. policies in the Middle East are fair.

Overall, Muslim populations see U.S. policies as destabilizing the Middle East, as do pluralities in many other countries surveyed. Nearly 50 percent take this view in France and Spain, as do 63 percent in Morocco, 74 percent in Indonesia, and 91 percent in Jordan.

Regarding the U.S.-led war, disappointment was widespread among Muslims that Iraq put up so little resistance. More than 70 percent shared this view in Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, Lebanon, Jordan, Morocco and the Palestinian Authority. The notable exception was Kuwait, which was invaded by Iraq in 1990 and where 61 percent said they were happy Iraq did not put up much of a fight.

Despite the animosity toward America, the survey found "a considerable appetite in the Muslim world for political freedoms," the Pew report says.

In eight of the nine Muslim populations surveyed, at least 50 percent believe Western-style democracy can work in their countries. The exception is Indonesia, where 53 percent see democracy as a Western way of doing things that would not work in their country. International Herald Tribune

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by yoyo
As for the crisis in the Middle East, in a wave of sentiment that bodes ill for the future of the U.S.-sponsored "road map" to peace, Muslims lined up strongly behind the opinion that "the rights and needs of the Palestinian people cannot be taken care of as long as the state of Israel exists."

The conviction that no way can be found for Israel and the Palestinians to coexist is strongest in Morocco (90 percent), followed by Jordan (85 percent), the Palestinian Authority (80 percent), Kuwait (72 percent), Lebanon (65 percent), Indonesia (58 percent) and Pakistan (57 percent).


Even though it was the Muslims/Arabs who started one aggressive war after another in order to exterminate us - again. Even though we do not send our children to explode in the midst of civilians and our polls come out much more peaceful.

Still, the world calls the Jews "racists", our communities "settlements", and ironically, wouldn't mind uprooting us from our land, turning us into refugees and spilling Jewish blood - again.

[Mediocrates]

http://www.israel21c.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Views%5El80&enZone=Views&enVersion=0&

The impending renewal of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and the resumption of Arab-Israeli contacts across the region is an appropriate occasion for reassessing one of the weak points of Israel's foreign information effort. For since its establishment in 1948, Israel has not developed an effective strategic public relations policy for the Arab world.

Despite several PR initiatives beginning as early as 1919 when some of the region's Arab leadership supported the Zionist movement, Israel's subsequent information efforts toward its Arabs neighbors have been ad hoc, at best. Israel's longstanding failure to adopt a communications strategy for the Arab world even attracted the attention of State Comptroller Eliezer Goldberg. In a report released in late 2002, Goldberg documented Israel's longstanding shortcomings in this area and highlighted its inadequate responses to Arab propaganda and incitement against the existence of the Jewish state.

Perhaps of greatest concern, Israel has failed to dispel the overarching Arab perception that its creation was the result of the Jews' exploited claims of Holocaust victimization that justified "Zionist crimes" against Palestinians.

Only recently has Israel's Foreign Ministry moved to establish a separate department of Arab affairs and media after recognizing the failure to grasp the complexity of Palestinian self-understanding and political culture during the Oslo peace negotiations.

The demise of Sadaam Hussein's dictatorship in Iraq has created an opportunity for Israel to relaunch diplomatic contacts with the Palestinians and perhaps Syria. However, as an essential part of the diplomatic process, the Sharon government should craft an effective public relations strategy to the Arab world that communicates Israel's rightful place in the region alongside Muslim and Arab peoples based on a shared ancient Semitic heritage, language, and roots in the land.

Israel must engage its neighbors in this ideological dialogue in Arabic as an integral part of its larger struggle against anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement and propaganda. At the same time, Israel's message must reflect a deeper awareness and respect for Arab and Muslim civilization and political culture.



The 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, held shortly after America's victory over Iraq in the first Gulf War, and co-sponsored by the United States and the former Soviet Union, represented a major breakthrough in Israeli-Arab relations. For the first time since 1948, Israel was engaged in direct, face-to-face, political negotiations with all of its Arab neighbors, other than Egypt which had signed a full peace treaty with Israel in 1978.

Israel successfully exploited the multilateral framework of Madrid to promote regional normalization with Arab states whose interests in developing diplomatic, trade, and cultural ties with Israel were not conditional on Israel's first signing a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Significantly, Madrid's principle of "normalization" of relations that had been advanced by Israel was framed in the language of "mutual respect and acceptance," and the rejection of incitement.

Eytan Bentsur, Director General of Israel's Foreign Ministry at the time, noted, "There was a perception by the Arab states of a light at the end of the tunnel for the entire region." For the first time, Israelis were received as desired guests in most Arab capitals.

Equally dramatic at Madrid was the Arab media's "PR baptism" by then Deputy Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu exploited the "reigning spirit of normalization," in the words of a senior Israeli diplomat, to present Israel's side of the Arab-Israeli conflict to a handful of curious reporters from Arab and Muslim countries. The small meeting quickly turned into a major press conference. Netanyahu provided scores of reporters with articulate explanations of Israel's positions that the Arab media had never heard.

At another press briefing, Netanyahu pulled out the PLO Covenant from his coat pocket and began reading from the document, particularly articles 19 and 21 that called for Israel's destruction. Dr. Dore Gold, an advisor to Netanyahu during the Madrid Peace Conference, noted that Arab reporters were intrigued to hear Netanyahu despite the fact that he was firmly defending Israel's rights and its battle against Arab terror.

Many of Israel's key public relations and diplomatic gains made at Madrid were lost during the eight-year Oslo peace process. One senior foreign ministry official admitted that Israel's negotiating posture opposite the Palestinians suffered from being overly "Israel-centric" and reflected a lack of understanding of the complexities of Arab self-identity and its consequences for Arab political culture. Notably, neither Israel's negotiating teams nor its advisory groups fielded experienced Arabic-speaking diplomats, media advisors, or experts in Arab political culture.

As early as 1994, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, in his book The New Middle East, wrote that Israel would lead a new Middle East to become economically borderless and integrated similar to the European Union and the Benelux states.

Uri Savir, Israel's chief negotiator at Oslo from 1993 to 1996, wrote in The Process, 1000 Days That Changed the Middle East, published in 1998, "The Casablanca [economic] conference unleashed strong forces of economic change in the region...the new Middle East was under way."

A senior foreign ministry official has characterized as "naive" the Israeli notion promoted in 1994 at Casablanca that the Arab world was ready for broad economic cooperation with Israel. In fact, the Israeli delegation's aggressive economic designs for the Middle East scared Arab delegates and seemed to confirm their perception of Israeli economic imperialism, according to one Israeli diplomat.

Bentsur, who had formulated Israel's strategy at Madrid, noted that Israel's "paternalistic" approach to the Palestinians at Oslo contributed to the ultimate collapse of the process. Benstur said Israeli negotiators appeared to be "conquering rather than negotiating with their Palestinian counterparts with a self-serving, triumphant vision of peace."

Perhaps the best example of Israel's political and cultural misunderstanding of its Palestinian negotiating partners was the "end of conflict" declaration made by Prime Minister Ehud Barak as a non-negotiable condition at the Camp David summit in July 2000.

As an Arab Israeli lawmaker recently alleged, "The Arab mentality is influenced by revenge and honor. Barak may have been 'generous' in the land concessions he offered but he was 'cheap' in the honor he showed Palestinian negotiators." A leading Israeli authority in Arab studies has noted that Arab political culture is as sensitive to how negotiations are conducted, as much or more than it is to what is being negotiated.

Palestinians also perceived that Israel seemed too eager from the outset of Oslo to negotiate over national Jewish symbols such as Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. Israel's concessionary attitude was interpreted as a lack of national self-respect and a sign of Israeli capitulation, that Arafat sought to advance more quickly through the use of terror.

[Mediocrates]

Some senior IDF intelligence officials say Barak's decision to pull IDF troops out of Lebanon unilaterally in May 2000 was also perceived as Israeli capitulation by many in the Arab world, particularly the Palestinians. The spin put on Israel's retreat by the Lebanon-based Hizballah terror group would motivate Arafat to launch a terror war on Israel four months later.

Some Oslo-period PR initiatives to the Arab world were successful, however. Dr. Fawaz Kamal, Head of the Government Press Office's Arabic Press Division and an Israeli Druse, hosted a number of visiting delegations from Jordan, Egypt, and the Gulf States from 1997 to 1999. Kamal noted that his Arab guests were very impressed by their personal experience with Israelis, which stood in contrast to violent Arab television images of Israeli soldiers battling Palestinians.

He emphasized that personal relationship-building initiatives with Arab leaders, officials, and journalists are critical to their acceptance of Israel.

The launch of Arab satellite television in 1994 would provide Israel with direct access to millions of Arab and Muslim viewers throughout the Middle East. In theory, Israel would now have a platform from which to disseminate its own message directly into Arab living rooms. Prior to 1994, Arab state-controlled television news would not mention Israel by name, referring to it as the "Zionist entity" or the "enemy state."

Over the past nine years, however, enormous competition for audience share among privately-owned Arab satellite channels has had a democratizing effect on Arab television as they emulate the CNN style and approach.

Dr. Raanan Gissin, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's foreign media advisor, is regularly interviewed on the leading Arab channels, Al Jazeera and Abu Dhabi television, both of which have Jerusalem-based operations. Gissin noted that his interviews are not edited or censored even when his responses are not what Arab audiences would want to hear.



The Israel Broadcasting Authority's new Arabic-language Middle East Satellite Channel is perhaps Israel's most concerted government-funded effort to influence Arab and Muslim public opinion. The channel was the brainchild of current IBA director general Joseph Barel, one of the founders of Israel's Arabic news service in the late 1960s. The satellite channel was launched in July 2002 with a reported $20 million annual budget, amidst much fanfare, in order to provide balanced Arabic-language news and programming about Israel, and to combat Arab incitement and propaganda that is rampant on many of the more than 100 Arab-language cable and satellite channels.

Despite the channel's high standards of news programming, reported and produced by professional Israeli Jewish, Druse, and Arab journalists, critics claim that the channel's purchased entertainment programming is old and of poor quality, and that the station is not widely viewed in the Arab world because it is recognized as an Israeli government-controlled and funded operation.


A more successful Israeli media initiative was unveiled in late 2001 when the leading Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot launched ArabYnet, an Arabic translation of its popular Ynet Hebrew news website. The site's advisor, Dr. Guy Bechor, a leading Israeli expert in Arab affairs, noted that ArabYnet won reader trust from the beginning. "The site stated up front that it was a private commercial Israeli news service, thereby eliminating user fears that the Israeli government exerts editorial control."

ArabYnet presents Israel to millions of Arab and Muslim Internet surfers from an Israeli point of view, but with no particular political agenda. Bechor emphasized, "The site has no message, and that is its message."

ArabYnet empowers users, whose knowledge of Israel is largely shaped by Arab propaganda, to control a private cyberspace experience of Israel. Missing is the user suspicion that Israel is trying to feed them Zionist propaganda. According to the site's editors, ArabYnet is the most interactive news site on the Arab Internet, as evidenced by thousands of reader emails that the site receives every month. ArabYnet logs nearly a million unique monthly users, and its fame has spread largely by word of mouth. Saudi Arabia ranks first in the number of visitors to the site residing in Arab countries. Seventy percent of the site's users have been traced to computer servers in North America because Arab governments have blocked direct access due to the site's popularity. Dr. Fawaz Kamal sees ArabYnet as a model for Israeli media initiatives in the Arab and Muslim worlds.

An Israeli public relations strategy for the Arab and Muslim worlds should strive to incorporate cultural principles, metaphors, and terminology that relate to Arab and not Western terms of reference.

1. Show respect and honor for Arab civilization. Israeli leaders should consider that the Arab world does not see its strength on the world stage as based on the West's standards of economic, technological, and scientific prowess. Therefore, Israeli leaders and diplomats should avoid presenting Israel as the twenty-first century high technology savior of a technologically backward Middle East. A mistaken assumption of the Oslo process was that Arab states would welcome the idea that Israeli technological knowhow would educate the "ignorant" Arab states and transform the Middle East. One useful idea would be to encourage Israeli media outlets to co-produce and distribute documentary programming with Arab partners about ancient Arab and Muslim civilizations.

2. Engage the Arab world in a new ideological dialogue to diffuse rampant anti- Israeli and anti-Jewish incitement and propaganda. Israeli officials should avoid presenting Israel in English to the Arab world primarily as a modern refuge for victims of anti-Semitism. Rather, Israel should be presented by Arabic-speaking diplomats, academics, and journalists as an ancient civilization seeking to live in peace and honor with other Semitic civilizations in an Arab and Muslim Middle East. Israel should also encourage the development of relations with pro-Western Arab regimes and freethinking Arab and Muslim intellectuals.

Spokespeople and diplomats should also be equipped to engage Arab media personalities and intellectuals in Arabic over rampant anti- Israel and anti-Jewish incitement in Arab media, political, educational and religious institutions. Israel should draw lessons from its significant diplomatic and PR successes at Madrid which prohibited incitement and promoted "mutual respect and acceptance" as guiding principles for Arab-Israeli normalization.

3. Advance Israeli humanitarian initiatives. Israel had been successful in promoting health and agricultural extension services to the Arab world via radio and Internet before the programs were ceased. Humanitarian medical response initiatives in Turkey following a deadly earthquake there in 1999 also earned Israel public relations accolades with the Turkish press and public.

4. Consider Arab political and cultural perceptions. Israeli government leaders should consider the profound psychological aspect of engaging in diplomatic efforts with the Arab world, particularly, the Palestinians. An advisor to Abu Mazen told this author that Palestinian collective identity with regard to Israel has been shaped by a deep sense of humiliation and failure among fellow Arab and Muslim states. An Israeli PR approach should avoid the danger of being perceived as dictatorial and threatening by the Palestinians, who have always perceived Israel as the far stronger side in the conflict. Senior Arab and Palestinian sources emphasized that Prime Minister Sharon should consider offering the Palestinians the "respect" of sincere Israeli recognition of Palestinian suffering, even without accepting direct responsibility for it. At the same time, the government should send a symmetrical message to the Arab world regarding the forced transfer of 800,000 Sephardi Jews from Arab countries after 1948.

5. Show Middle Eastern honor and respect to Arab and Palestinian leaders. A leading Palestinian human rights activist noted that Sharon's public treatment of Abu Mazen will influence the Palestinian street's approval of the newly-elected Palestinian prime minister. "If the correct opportunity comes, and Sharon were to invite Abu Mazen to the Knesset, announce jointly that 50,000 Palestinians could work again in Israel, issue a public statement in Arabic and treat the Palestinian Prime Minister with the same honor he would accord a European head of state, many Palestinians would begin to understand that Arafat is irrelevant.




(Reprinted from The Jerusalem Letter and Jerusalem Viewpoints, published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs - jcpa@netvision.net.il)

[andak01]

I'd love to see more posts like that one. Both sides need to establish a respectful tone in order to proceed.

[yoyo]

Originally posted by Mediocrates


What do I say to this??? Well I could resume it in one word "bullocks" but I will elaborate, just for today :o

So in order to get love by a bench of barbarian, all we need is love? Worst, we need to keep a low profile... this is not far from what Europe is saying to us "take what your given and shut your mouth - by the way, you Jew have always did as you were told during the last 2 millenia". Why not create a commitee at the UN to ban short skurts since it may excite rapist and who knows, prevent children to show their face before 18 because you need to understand the feeling of pedophiles.

In order for the arab world to "love us" we need to be less rich, les educated, less bright and poor like them, his argument is similar to what lead to the Holocaust. Worst, according to him we need to give a state to this never-never-land people and they should not agree to end their wishes to destroy Israel. That is not far from Sharon concessions in Aquaba. Maybe we should give every arab country the atomic bomb and tell them that they are allowed to kill "a jew a day" (each and everyone of them should they feel humilated) and 2 per day during Ramadan (you know happy festivity times). Sound like a stupid argument? Remember that is what despotic tyrans (the ones which we should bow in front of) says to the world "we can't stop the killing because it will lead to the explosion of the arab street". Hey I heard that you get sodomize in S.A. prison, ho well, here it is another concession "get a fresh jewish bum when you go to Mecca".

Oh well, maybe "bullocks" was enough after all, what do you say to that?

[yoyo]

Originally posted by andak01
I'd love to see more posts like that one. Both sides need to establish a respectful tone in order to proceed.

Both side... both WHAT??? Do both sides teach hatred to their children? Do both side blow off mothers and their kids whilst they buy milk at the supermarket? You tell me how you can have "common ground" with a murderer that has sworn to kill you. If to please one (you seem to call it be respecful) all we need to do is change from bright to dumb, from succeful to tramp, then you have a very phoney way to live your life. Respect is not one way. When a muslim says he wants to kill Jews he should not expect love but a smart bomb. When an arabo-muslim speaks of "humiliation" do not forget that the "humiliation" is because they fail to "throw the jews into the sea" and "liquidate the zionist entity" so here is the deal, they get humiliated Israel live, they get succefull Israel dies... Hard choice!

Hey why don't arab (the whole arab world) make the first move for a change. Maybe by declaring "no boycott, no more hatred, Israel is a legitimate entity in the middle east and has the right to live as a Jewish state" maybe then things will look much better!

Maybe the problem is that there is no conept of "martyrdom" in Judaism, but there is very deeply rooted survival instinct!

[andak01]

Originally posted by yoyo
Both side... both WHAT??? Do both sides teach hatred to their children? Do both side blow off mothers and their kids whilst they buy milk at the supermarket?

The article wasn't just about Palestinians, it was referring to relations with all Arabs. The Arabs could also use to give Palestine a rest and get on with something more constructive.

Hey why don't arab (the whole arab world) make the first move for a change. Maybe by declaring "no boycott, no more hatred, Israel is a legitimate entity in the middle east and has the right to live as a Jewish state" maybe then things will look much better!

The King of Morocco did that quite a few years ago. I might add, he died of old age.

Maybe the problem is that there is no conept of "martyrdom" in Judaism, but there is very deeply rooted survival instinct!

I believe there is a concept of martyrdom in Judaism. I read about it once on Kahane.org. At any rate, noone would deny Jews a right to defense. Perhaps the holocaust could have been prevented if such a concept had been better developed.

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by andak01
[B]The article wasn't just about Palestinians, it was referring to relations with all Arabs. The Arabs could also use to give Palestine a rest and get on with something more constructive.


Wholeheartedly agree with you. Why don't they? There are so many problems around them. Overpopulation, under-education, totalitarism, disempowerment... There is not much Jews can do to help.


I believe there is a concept of martyrdom in Judaism.


Of course, remember Masada? Or Samson.


At any rate, noone would deny Jews a right to defense.


Unlike other peoples, ours always follows with "but". We are so special.

[yoyo]

Originally posted by andak01
The article wasn't just about Palestinians, it was referring to relations with all Arabs. The Arabs could also use to give Palestine a rest and get on with something more constructive.

Palestine being the fruit of their hatred towards Israel, one may think that the 2 are link. But even if by the irony of destiny, those Jordanians, syrians and egyptians found themselve a true identity after being expelled from their original community how can their "borthers" help them? They are all in power by fear. If Ahmed asked for more human right, Abduallah will say "don't you know we are at war? And stop filling your head with zionist doctrine they are out to destroy Islam". That is why they kept them in camp living like rats for 50+ years. But just to show you how much the arabword is brainwash, who do you think they blame? Could it be the Syrian that massacred 40000 and kick the palestinians out of Tripoli? Could it be King Hussein who killed 10000 of them when they rightfully asked the state back from the Hashemite? Could it be the Lebanese who refuse them work/social security/to own houses/pass houses they own to their children and refuse building material to go in the camps so as to not make it "permanent"? Or is the Israelis who have bent over backwards to give what there own brothers would not: A STATE. Treat them as equal whilst they where the beggers in the negotiation, isn't that RESPECTFUL? Before Israel mistakenly left the PA in Chargem there was a palestinian run admisnistration/justice/instituation in the West Bank, today there is chaos! Would they blow off the PA leadership for being so rich whilst they are starving? NO, OF COURSE NOT!


Originally posted by andak01
The King of Morocco did that quite a few years ago. I might add, he died of old age.

An I will add that his son was faced with the same problem as his father, but unlinke his father he appease and concede to fundamentalist. Just look what has happen with spain Perejil/Leila, unthinkable a few years ago!


Originally posted by andak01
I believe there is a concept of martyrdom in Judaism. I read about it once on Kahane.org. At any rate, noone would deny Jews a right to defense. Perhaps the holocaust could have been prevented if such a concept had been better developed.

When I talked about martyrdom, I talk about "Shahidim", you know the suicide to kill a maximum of civilians just because you don't like the persons in front. When a Tsahal officer dies in his/her duty he/she is a fallen hero (martyr is not a word I would use as a Jew living in today's era). In the same token if a Jew went in a market place in Ramallah and murdered civilians and commit suicide he will be a murderer. I have no doubt that Jews have enough confidence to recognize a murderer, I am extremely doubtfull the arab can even make the difference between good and evil anymore.