Where are the "good" Arabs? [Archive]

Northlander

04-25-2002, 04:19 AM

As far as Im concerned the whole world is in deep trouble and most people don´t even realize it. Islamic fundamentalists are bound by their holy book to conquer the world and we have all witnessed their style.

Wake up!!!!!!!! How stupid are you? Have you ever read history?
There was a time when christianity played that role in the world.
We conquered arab territories and american. Asian and african.
In the name of the holy book. It was not even considered a sin to kill a non-christian. There you have ONE reason for SOME muslims believeing the same thing. The truth is that those fundamentalists are not very powerful. When I see their expansion and influence and our way of life have to make a last stand then I will join you in your resistance.
But you live in a dream world. We have as many christian lunatics in the world today. things like WACO texas. Protestants throwing rocks at catholic school girls in N.Ireland. I have seen christians putting themselves on crosses with nails through their hands in s.America. Not to mention the hindus in India that are organized in something that is best described as something like hitlerjugend. Singing songs around campfires and propagating to build a temple in the honor of their god of war(name?), on the testsite of their nuclear arms!!! there is alot of lunatics in the world today. But how does it feel for you guys to wake up every morning being so scared? Cant you really see that apart from the most eminent threat of terrorism we here in the westernworld are in control? Its mostly people in the thirdworld that REALLY has to wake up not knowing what life will bring.

Which makes the issue of "collateral damage" that would result from a full scale war on Palestinian terrorism all the more justified.
That is fascism. The world will be a much safer place for you after that! yeah right. Choose your enemies my friend. Not all people in this world would sit still and watch such actions. You will not just fight stonethrowing arabs in eternity if you cross to many lines.

Amercian and Israeli arrogance knows no limits Im sad to hear. There are more scenarios in the future than west agains islam you know. Also there are more ways of combat the american influence in the world than open conflict. Not all european states are all to happy about american arrogance when it comes to economics and trade. That goes for other nations as Japan and China too. I must say that among the next generation that will run EU all your goodwill since WWII will finally be gone. You can already see this in the statements from EU politicians. Its no longer automatically wrong to critisise Israel OR USA. Cross the lines and do what you so obviously want to do, the final ethnical cleansing of all arabs in Palestine. Then you will at last create a full scale european embargo against you. USA will run for cower and you will be isolated.
"collateral damage" it makes me sick. You are so naive. Its really not all people in the world that accept it the way americans do after their great loss of 11th sept.
Its things like that that makes you so provocative.
Economic strenght are more powerfull in the long run. And Israel is without america really a small not very strong nation, not at all capable of taking on the whole world under economic sanctions.

ibrodsky

04-25-2002, 05:44 AM

Wake up!!!!!!!! How stupid are you? Have you ever read history?
There was a time when christianity played that role in the world.
We conquered arab territories and american. Asian and african.
In the name of the holy book. It was not even considered a sin to kill a non-christian.

So the past barbarism of Christianity justifies the present barbarism of militant Islam?

The difference, which you studiously avoid, is that Christianity has been modernized and the extremists are a tiny minority with very little support. Islam, in contrast, does not even contemplate separation of church and state -- let alone standard Enlightment ideas.

To wit, you paper over present day militant Islam's backwardness with complaints about a form of Christianity that all but vanished hundreds of years ago.

But you live in a dream world. We have as many christian lunatics in the world today. things like WACO texas.

Things like Waco, Texas? How does Janet Reno massacring a religious cult figure in any of this?

Amercian and Israeli arrogance knows no limits Im sad to hear. There are more scenarios in the future than west agains islam you know. Also there are more ways of combat the american influence in the world than open conflict. Not all european states are all to happy about american arrogance when it comes to economics and trade.

Your hostility towards the US and Israel -- in defense of Islam -- is revealing.

Europe has practiced protectionism for a long time. This is nothing new. Nor is Europe's glee at finding a respectable reason for lambasting Israel.

Maybe you should get your own house in order first. I am not playing the "anti-semitic card" -- the recent rise of anti-semitism in Europe is indisputable and shameful, and shows that old habits die hard.

"collateral damage" it makes me sick. You are so naive. Its really not all people in the world that accept it the way americans do after their great loss of 11th sept. .

No, certainly a large fraction of the Islamic world rejects the US' right to defend itself against terrorism. Of course, if Islamic-fascist regimes like the Taliban did not harbor and aid mass murders, we would not have had to bomb them.

You can complain about the US all you want. The fact that you see the slaughter of 3,000 Americans as no justification for use uf sufficient force to end a totalitarian regime (that murdered its own people for sport in Kabul stadium) and flush out their evil "guests" speaks volumes about your morality.

Economic strenght are more powerfull in the long run. And Israel is without america really a small not very strong nation, not at all capable of taking on the whole world under economic sanctions.

And when do you predict the "whole world" will take economic sanctions against Israel while the US quietly abandons her?

Don't look now, but Germany's Chancellor has just given a very pro-Israel speech and announced the end of a very short-lived arms embargo.

Go ahead, call us stupid. We know what you are...

Northlander

04-25-2002, 07:57 AM

So the past barbarism of Christianity justifies the present barbarism of militant Islam?
no it does not.
To wit, you paper over present day militant Islam's backwardness with complaints about a form of Christianity that all but vanished hundreds of years ago.
It hasnt vanished totally. As late as during the vietnam war an american priest said "god has given us the weapons, let us use them" Numerous guerillas use christianity as a reason for fighting.
I have personal friends of mine that claims that the serbian warcrimes in bosnia was legitimate cause they are the only thing that stands between us and the great muslim invasion. It is a religous war for many serbs who sees themselves as fighters for christianity.
Christian militant fanatism is still alive. Not as videspread as militant islam maybe but it is still there. Waco was maybe a bad example but my point is that if we turned things around and only showed lets say the people of india day after day of pictures of christian lunatics. Wrote about it in a religous perspective all the time. Their picture of us here in west would be somewhat different. We never sees any peaceful arabs minding there own bussines somewhere in the Iranian countryside. It has no newsvalue here in the west. As with people here most arabs/muslims would only want to go on with there own life and live in peace. Our media here are to blame for alot of the anti-islam feelings around. Give me control of any asian countrys media and I will have them gape in wonder of the fanatical brutal christians around the world.
I dont say there is no fundametalism in Islam I just say you exaggerate it as I just exaggerated the christian. What is interesting is WHY did christianity leave this dark history and evolved? It was not by collectivly beeing the victims of "collateral damage" for year after year. More from the christian societies within. Same will happen with islam. The best way of stopping terror attacks is by letting young palestinians and others live like any normal young human. NOT in refugee camps and koran-schools.
Your hostility towards the US and Israel -- in defense of Islam -- is revealing.
US foreign politics makes me react. And not only me. I feel that USA are incredible arrogant. Our culture here are very much americanized but not in all aspects. I dont like the idea that the rules dont apply to the strongest. As is always the case when america is involved. I support their war in afghanistan but that is about the only war america has gone into since WWII that I can morally support. The millions of dead civilians after american interventions are forgotten in history as "collateral damage" In that aspect I am hostile to USA but Im not a potentional threat. I dont support violence against americans at all if they dont invade other countries. I feel its my right to react this way and I also feel that USA should try to understand that the world has different views when it comes to that countrys role in world politics today and throughout history.

Yes, I feel I have to defend Islam. It has become normal to compare Islam in general with terrorism. I dont belive in that.
I dont support terrorism apart form a few exeptions in history and I can NEVER support terrorism for any religous reasons which of course is the case with many muslim terrorist organisations.

Go on with your campains against all palestinians and you WILL get isolated. There have been discussions of economic sanctions in the debate here now. Finally. Maybe in americas eyes collective punishment of palestinians are ok but not in most people eyes here. Sad to hear about the lift of the weapon embargo of course but Im sure you know by now that israels opinion in this conflict is not widely spread. If germany sells weapons to israel they have blood on their hands.

Mediocrates

04-25-2002, 08:38 AM

The beauty of having self professed ethical and moral purity and neutrality is that you leave the really difficult decisions and their consequences for the rest of us to deal with.

ibrodsky

04-25-2002, 08:47 AM

It hasnt vanished totally. As late as during the vietnam war an american priest said "god has given us the weapons, let us use them" Numerous guerillas use christianity as a reason for fighting.

You must have studied logic with Takeo. The fact that one priest said something is utterly meaningless in defining official US policy. We defend freedom of speech as a basic human right -- even stupid speech.

My point, which you can't deny, is that militant Islam has the support of tens of millions of Moslems. Extreme right-wing Christianity has the support of, at most, a few tens of thousands.

More important, the Islamic world does not believe in separation of church and state. You complain that Israeli democracy is imperfect, but the Arab world flatly rejects democracy as the tool of infidels. Thus, we see militant Islam reflected in many Islamic govts. Show me a govt that bows to extreme Christianity...

Who is responsible for young Muslims going to religious schools where they are taught fanaticism? Is Israel responsible for such schools in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan?

Actually, the way to stop Islamic fanaticism is to show that it will not be tolerated, and societies that breed, glorify, or excuse terrorists will pay a heavy price.

US foreign politics makes me react. And not only me. I feel that USA are incredible arrogant. Our culture here are very much americanized but not in all aspects. I dont like the idea that the rules dont apply to the strongest. As is always the case when america is involved. I support their war in afghanistan but that is about the only war america has gone into since WWII that I can morally support. The millions of dead civilians after american interventions are forgotten in history as "collateral damage" In that aspect I am hostile to USA but Im not a potentional threat. I dont support violence against americans at all if they dont invade other countries. I feel its my right to react this way and I also feel that USA should try to understand that the world has different views when it comes to that countrys role in world politics today and throughout history.

Actually, US policy is motivated by facts, reason, and practical necessity. There is no other country that is less emotional in formulating its policy than the US. Naturally, the WTC massacre drove the US closer to Israel. If we give a wink and nod to terrorists against Israel, then we will only fuel international terrorism by sending the message that we fight terrorism on a highly selective basis -- not out of principle and conviction.

Yes, I feel I have to defend Islam. It has become normal to compare Islam in general with terrorism. I dont belive in that.
I dont support terrorism apart form a few exeptions in history and I can NEVER support terrorism for any religous reasons which of course is the case with many muslim terrorist organisations.

That is a simplistic interpretation. President Bush was quick to say our quarrel is not with Islam, that true Islam is a "religion of peace," and the US has shown zero tolerance for violence against American Muslims.

What you refuse to recognize is that a sizable minority of Muslims have incorporated "martydom" and "suicide bombing" in their version of Islam. This, not all of Islam, is what we (the US and Israel) are fighting.

Go on with your campains against all palestinians and you WILL get isolated. There have been discussions of economic sanctions in the debate here now. Finally. Maybe in americas eyes collective punishment of palestinians are ok but not in most people eyes here. Sad to hear about the lift of the weapon embargo of course but Im sure you know by now that israels opinion in this conflict is not widely spread. If germany sells weapons to israel they have blood on their hands.

The idea that Israel is waging war against all Palestinians is false. Israel offered the Palestinians a state. The PA responded not with a counter offer, but by breaking all previous agreements. Even now, the US and Israel are committed to a negotiated settlement leading to a Palestinian state.

It is Arafat and his terrorist infrastructure that is for all-out war. Arafat hoped he could ignite a regional war, but he has failed. The rest of the Arab world knows that if they act on their evil designs to destroy Israel they will have to fight not just Israel, but the US.

The EU has just come out with a condemnation against rising anti-semiticism in Europe -- which they have clearly labelled as "racist."

Your dream that the "whole world" will unite against Israel is a misguided fantasy. The only people who believe that are followers of militant Islam.

L@mplighterM

04-25-2002, 12:23 PM

The best way of stopping terror attacks is by letting young palestinians and others live like any normal young human. NOT in refugee camps
and koran-schools.

What excuse would you use for other Islam countries?

Mediocrates

04-25-2002, 12:26 PM

Refugee camps surrounded by other Palestinians in Area A under Palestinian dominion and run and paid for by the UN. You've got to call it as it is. Palestinian refugees are the underclass of Palestinian society and the refugee issue is little more than the PA wishing to export their unemployed and unemployable.

Northlander

04-26-2002, 12:37 AM

The beauty of having self professed ethical and moral purity and neutrality is that you leave the really difficult decisions and their consequences for the rest of us to deal with.

Nonense. Cant you see that SOME of the terrorism against you are just a consequence of your previous decisions?

I really belive that the average american has no idea at all what all this is about. You guys on this forum are not representative cause you are informed and thinks about these things but many people do not. therefore i think its time to really go out with the big picture and at least start to think in what position you have put yourselves in. Can you deny that alot of people in this world has legitimate reasons for hating america? Maybe they just hate your army or airforce that made them suffer but in their minds it is your nation as a whole that becomes the problem. That the american public always seems so united and non critical of their foreign politics only strenghtens the opinion.

Consequences of YOUR decisions remember that.
Im tired of having to explain that Im not american when I travel.
In your opinion neutral is the same as coward in my its the same as objective.

Northlander

04-26-2002, 01:06 AM

You must have studied logic with Takeo. The fact that one priest said something is utterly meaningless in defining official US policy. We defend freedom of speech as a basic human right -- even stupid speech.
My point, which you can't deny, is that militant Islam has the support of tens of millions of Moslems. Extreme right-wing Christianity has the support of, at most, a few tens of thousands.
I dont deny it. But my opinion is that militant islam will vanish in the same way militant christianity did when the muslim world stops getting bombed or humiliated as in the case of the palestinians. Israel is just making things worse.
They way should be more of supporting the populations in respective country. There are resistence in Iran for example. Its possible to liberate iran from within. And that definitly goes for Iraq. Obviously it was possible in afghanistan. Its not Islam that is the problem its a numerous of other things. Leaders and economical problems and so on.

The logic I use with that statement is that the result is the same.
His statement and then half a million christian troops in buddist vietnam. We might not see it that way but the result is that. They have tens of millions supporters you say and we have tens of thousands. Still most wars are waged on arab soil NOT christian.
You are no logical. Historically AND today the arabs are not the aggressors.
And finally dont forget militant jews. How many supporters?
You do know that you are a militant jew? If you are jewish which I dont know. Correct me if Im wrong. But most guys here in the forum are militant, hence: militant jews.
Your dream that the "whole world" will unite against Israel is a misguided fantasy. The only people who believe that are followers of militant Islam.
Wrong. Im not a follower of militant islam. Not all of the world but most. In the end not even USA will support Israel. Yesterday in Oslo EU decided to give 1.2 billion dollars something to rebulid areas in WB. I mean, seriously!! Do you haev any idea how irritating it is for european taxpayers to pay for this and then soon again see it all destroyed by Israeil bulldozers. Searching for terrorists? Did they found any in all the houses and then decided to raze it just to prevent the terrorists to go back ot the same house? Whole areas are razed. Old ladies trying to stop bulldozers in front of their house. Some terrorists! Its nothing but harrasments and cleansing. And we pay and you destroy. Over and over again. Im telling you, people are getting tired of it.

ibrodsky

04-26-2002, 03:21 AM

from Ha'aretz:

Swedish ex-pats demonstrate outside Swedish embassy in Tel Aviv, in protest at media coverage of Israel (Itim)

ibrodsky

04-26-2002, 03:45 AM

Originally posted by Northlander

I dont deny it. But my opinion is that militant islam will vanish in the same way militant christianity did when the muslim world stops getting bombed or humiliated as in the case of the palestinians. Israel is just making things worse.
They way should be more of supporting the populations in respective country. There are resistence in Iran for example. Its possible to liberate iran from within. And that definitly goes for Iraq. Obviously it was possible in afghanistan. Its not Islam that is the problem its a numerous of other things. Leaders and economical problems and so on.

It is possible Iran will be liberated from within. And that would be preferrable, too. But the Iranian militant Islamic fascists are very involved in exporting terrorism. (Hezbollah has killed hundreds in south Lebanon and Latin America.) The rest of the world does not have to absorb such attacks until the Iranian people succeed in overthrowing the Ayatollahs -- which may never happen.

Islam isn't the problem. Militant Islam is the problem.

The logic I use with that statement is that the result is the same.
His statement and then half a million christian troops in buddist vietnam. We might not see it that way but the result is that. They have tens of millions supporters you say and we have tens of thousands. Still most wars are waged on arab soil NOT christian.
You are no logical. Historically AND today the arabs are not the aggressors.
And finally dont forget militant jews. How many supporters?
You do know that you are a militant jew? If you are jewish which I dont know. Correct me if Im wrong. But most guys here in the forum are militant, hence: militant jews.

I didn't say we have tens of thousands of supporters. I said that militant Islam is a very sizable movement, while the Christian extremism you complain about is tiny and insignificant.

Where do you get the sweeping statement that "most wars are waged on Arab soil"? Thanks to militant Islam, these are certainly current flashpoints. It would be more accurate to say that, historically, most Arab wars have been fought on foreign soil, as Islam has a history of conquest, extending well into southern and even central Europe.

When I refer to "militant Islam" I am not referring to Muslims who would fight to protect their homes and way of life. I am referring to Muslims who, like Osama bin Laden, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad, believe that the West must be destroyed.

If you define "militant Jews" as people who are determined to defend Israel then, yes, many of us (if not most) are militant Jews. If you are referring to Jews who espouse killing Arabs simply because they are Arabs, you will find that there are very few. And unlike the PA, which encourages militant Islam, Israel has outlawed such militant Jewish groups.

Wrong. Im not a follower of militant islam. Not all of the world but most. In the end not even USA will support Israel. Yesterday in Oslo EU decided to give 1.2 billion dollars something to rebulid areas in WB. I mean, seriously!! Do you haev any idea how irritating it is for european taxpayers to pay for this and then soon again see it all destroyed by Israeil bulldozers. Searching for terrorists? Did they found any in all the houses and then decided to raze it just to prevent the terrorists to go back ot the same house? Whole areas are razed. Old ladies trying to stop bulldozers in front of their house. Some terrorists! Its nothing but harrasments and cleansing. And we pay and you destroy. Over and over again. Im telling you, people are getting tired of it.

Perhaps the EU should be irritated that PA leaders take such aid and use it to 1) line their own pockets, and 2) fund terrorists rather than buy food, build schools, etc.

Europe proved in the former Yugoslavia that it cannot even police its own backyard without US help. Most of the threats coming out of the EU are simply designed to dissuade the Arab oil states from denying them oil.

Given the alarming rise in anti-semitic attacks in Europe, the EU is also under pressure to stop acting like Israel is the only guilty party.

There may be Israel-haters throughout the world, but the "whole world" isn't going to support sanctions against Israel. Because there are also people all over the world who know that militant Islam and terrorism against civilians are the real problem.

In case you haven't noticed, miltant Islamic suspects have been rounded up throughout not just the US and the (legally captured) Palestinian territories, but Europe as well.

thrud

04-26-2002, 04:15 AM

Originally posted by Northlander

In the end not even [the] USA will support Israel. Yesterday in Oslo [the] EU decided to give 1.2 billion dollars [...] to [rebuild] areas in [the] WB. I mean, seriously!! Do you [have] any idea how irritating it is for [European] taxpayers to pay for this and then soon again see it all destroyed by [Israel] bulldozers. Searching for terrorists? Did they [find] any in all the houses and then decided to raze it just to prevent the terrorists [from going] back [to] the same house? Whole areas [were] razed. Old ladies [were] trying to stop bulldozers in front of their house[s]. Some terrorists! Its nothing but [harassment] and cleansing. And we pay and you destroy. Over and over again. [I¡¯m] telling you, people are getting tired of it.

In this section of your rant I see two points:

1) The US will eventually cut off Israel.

2) You are a financial conservative tired of taxes and so blame the Jews.

To discuss point one, I think the only way for the US to drop support for Israel is if Sharon (or any Israeli leader) went completely insane and ordered a missile attack on an Islamic holy site. I think no one in their right mind would support Israel then (including most of the Jews in Israel), but I do not think that will ever happen. It would be far worse than what the Taliban did in Afghanistan. I think Israel will continue to live with US support (monetary, emotional, and political) for many generations.

Part two is equally stupid. I think you can blame your high taxes on living in a perpetual welfare state. Stop supporting socialism, close down all the redundant programs, and put everyone to work. Do these things and I promise you that your taxes will go down. Do not blame the Jews for European financial failings! I think point two is an internal problem and does not have anything to do with international support.

If American conservatives can shell out the green to defend Israel, then it must not be that expensive or it must be very important (money demands legitimacy).

Grow up bud. Blame yourself for your own failings and not anyone else.

Mediocrates

04-26-2002, 06:21 AM

The EU pays about $415 million (US) per year to manage the Palestinian refugee camps inside of Palestinian controlled areas of the West Bank. I can appreciate their frustration with what amounts to basically flushing money down the loo. So here's what you should do - hold the PA accountable for the money you send them, get an audit, have them make a budget and make them tell you where they spent the money. Like most 'aid' projects there are probably 500 under junior assistant deputy vice ministers of nothing in particular. Figure the usual 25% baksheesh (hey we're Arabs you know - it's our culture!!). And if it irks you that terrorists sometimes have their houses blown up, maybe you could ask them nicely to stop shooting long enough to put up a few homes.

And then you can roll over, go back to sleep and be grateful that unwashed horde isn't burning down your neighborhood in the name of freedom and peace.

Vic

05-02-2002, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
So where are all of those "good" Palestinians?
The most recent poll shows that 85% of Palestinian Arabs support terrorism.

The 15% who don't?

Batman

05-15-2002, 05:15 PM

If there are any Arabs who would dare to think that terrorism is not such a great Islamic idea and think independently of what the Islamic religious leaders are preaching straight form Quaran to kill the "infidels" (non Moslems,) then nontheless they could be slightly influenced by the gory sights of collaborators being savagely killed. See:

http://www.rootofevil.com/tyranny/default.php?image=3

It's common for the tyrannical governments of the Arab nations to crack down on any disagreeing voices. However, it's almost amazing that instead of the Arab people rising against this, there seems to be a need to join this dictatorial and savage mentality.
Even in the more 'moderate' countries the Arab people have become more radicalized.

Why? Why not rebel against the true tyrants, the Arab governments? Why has the population become anti-west tyrants? Why do they follow their abusive leaders' manipulations of the masses? Is it really fear? Is it convenient? Is it a culture of death? Or has it always been the case and only now it's becoming apparant?

elke

05-16-2002, 08:49 AM

Moderate is as moderate does. Propaganda is a very powerful weapon.

In effect, I think that the situation in the Arab world today is reminiscent of Germany in 1930's. Abject poverty, hopelessness, feelings of humiliation, perception of powerlessness and of being wronged. The leadership in the Arab world, like the Nazis before them, do not need to look far for the scapegoat for these misfortunes. Conveniently located at locations near you, - Jews, of course. Except, unlike in 1930's Germany, these Jews are actually armed and capable of successfully defending themselves.

The "moderate" Arab regimes, i.e. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, - are quick to suppress any activists that work to dislodge them, so that a "normal" Arab has no desire to do anything anti-government. The only ones that try anymore are the flakes like Islamic Jihad. Or so it seems. It may not be quite as simple as that. Do we really know all about the people tortured and killed in Egypt, for instance, under the guise of "Islamic militants"? It may be worth investigating...

Northlander

05-16-2002, 10:28 AM

The leadership in the Arab world, like the Nazis before them, do not need to look far for the scapegoat for these misfortunes. Conveniently located at locations near you, - Jews, of course.

Bla bla bla. Always those arguments about everybody hating jews. Even though alot of arabs want to get rid of israel as a state there are numerous reasons for that other than the fact that most israelis happens to be jews. Had Israel been full of catholics and that country acted the same way as Israel have done, I can easily imagine that it would have been attacked too. I do think many arabs feel USA have much to answer for when it comes to their regimes and poverty which of course is true.
successfully defending themselves.
well, I dont agree to that. Is israel safe? In the same way as european countries or many asian countries? Even as USA are apart from 9-11? Israel are safe from being invaded yes, but still israelis dies in attacks. Civilians and soldiers. Israels politics have not solved anything. The more effort they put on a military sollution the more israelis will die. Its as simple as that. Start using diplomacy. I could put it this way: someone that is depending on another person is in a weak position. Without USA, Israel would be in a load of trouble. Its better to strengthen the positon in the region and prepair for a situaton when USA is backing of. The absolute most necessary step to take is to let a palestine state be created.

Mediocrates

05-16-2002, 10:41 AM

"Bla bla bla. Always those arguments about everybody hating jews. Even though alot of arabs want to get rid of israel as a state there are numerous reasons for that other than the fact that most israelis happens to be jews. Had Israel been full of catholics and that country acted the same way as Israel have done, I can easily imagine that it would have been attacked too."

You're almost there - - the correct interpretation is that anything not Arab Muslim is anathema to them therefore is intolerable and must be eradicated. There are two state condtions in Arab culture and politics:

1) 100% hegemony and purity
2) Warfare

"Israels politics have not solved anything. The more effort they put on a military sollution the more israelis will die. Its as simple as that. Start using diplomacy. I could put it this way: someone that is depending on another person is in a weak position. "

Which reinforces the same point. All the Israelis need to fear is being Israeli, yes? If only they were just another Arab state the Arabs would be so much happier.

elke

05-16-2002, 10:46 AM

"Bla Bla Bla" is a powerful argument, no contest. Blood in the Hamantashen is also a rational argument.

I did not say that Israel was safe. I said that Jews are successfully defending themselves in Israel - meaning that Israel is still there, against all odds.

Coexistance and cooperation in the region would indeed be preferable for all sides, I am sure. However, given the reality of the situation, it's not likely to happen until deeds, and not just words to that effect, are put into practice.

Pathfinder

05-16-2002, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Northlander

Israels politics have not solved anything. The more effort they put on a military sollution the more israelis will die. Its as simple as that. Start using diplomacy. I could put it this way: someone that is depending on another person is in a weak position. Without USA, Israel would be in a load of trouble. Its better to strengthen the positon in the region and prepair for a situaton when USA is backing of. The absolute most necessary step to take is to let a palestine state be created.

You're right. Israels policy of appeasement since Oslo has only made the situation worse. Israel's authorizing the PA only created a protected pocket where terrorists nests could fester and grow. Arafat was too weak or incompetent to really lead and root out the extremists and terrorists, his part of the bargain. Instead, he chose to ally himself with the terrorists he was supposed to eliminate or control.

Let's go back in time. What if right after Oslo, Arafat had gone around giving speeches to rally his people in support of the plan and at the same time used his newly armed-by-the-west security forces to eliminate the terrorists or put them in prison. At that point, if it were too great a task he could have asked for and gotten plenty of help from the US and Europe. If that request were made for the sole purpose of cleaning out the terrorists, I'm certain Israel would have gone along. The PA could have consolidated control, established a solid credible government to continue the peace process. We would probably have a PA state today.

But he chose terrorism instead. And now his PA, which could have formed the foundation of a stable Palestinian State, is merely an extention or even competitor of the other terrorist organizations. And you expect Israel to hand the keys to her security over to that?

Northlander

05-16-2002, 03:14 PM

I just saw a documentary about the Israeli peacemovement.
Jews! Relious people. Educated and well informed. Soldiers or ex soldiers. All kinds of people. They all used the same arguements that I or Takeo and others have been using here. Still you just call us anti-semits. I guess it must be harder to call an israeli that.
They were not typical left-wing activists either. Some really ordinary israelis and some really patriotic. Some soldiers refused to serve on occupied territory but still wanted to DEFEND israel. That is a morally strong statment and something that could solve alot of problems for israel and jews all over. They testified about what crimes they was forced to do in the army and as always it takes guts to say no. What is clear is that they see the conflict as you fail to do, NOT as solely an israeli security issue.
If we stop all this islamistic nonsense for a while and concentrate on the conflict and on israel instead. First, the occupation is ILLEGAL. War crimes are illegal!!. You say that the law dont apply to Israel cause the security is more important and that you can belive but it doesnt make it morally right OR legally right. Do you guys belive in the american legalsystem? Do you belive that it serves it purpose? Just because a murderer doesnt feel the law is in his liking, doesnt give him the moral right to kill anybody does it? He can give himself moral right fine, but he should still be punished, right? If you dont belive that you must belive in total anarchy. Its not any better just because the palestine terrorists uses just as morally or legally wrong methods.
All warcrimes commited by Israelis should be dealt with. By israeli courts or, since that is not happening, international courts.
The situation in Jerusalem is nothing but apartheid.
The arabs in israel doesnt have the same rights as jews.
Your arguements about the rest of the arabworld are not relevant. Equal rights for ALL inhabitants. Equal rights!! To hear especially americans defending this is sad. How can you guys morally defend that a group, based on race and religion, dont have the same rights as other in a democratic state? Is it democratic? No matter what security reasons its morally wrong and its ALL israelis responsibilty. All those indifferent are guilty by not objecting. This is what happend in germany before the war. People knew what was starting to happen and no one cared. Instead they came up with historical reasons, economical, whatever! Torture was even legal in Israel up to recently.
All those crimes against humanity just for the security. Is it morally right? No its not. Is is working? No its not.
When the whites in s.africa finally gave in and stopped with their crimes on the black population they had been screaming about that their lifestyle would end. The end for s.africa as a nation. What happened? Nothing. What harm would come for israel to comply to international laws? To stop warcrimes? To stop this rasist treatment of arabs in israel? Morally there are a few bad guys here. The suicide bombers that taget innocent civilians. Also without any doubt some people within PA. The israeli government and some people within IDF. AND all those israelis well informed enough to know what their nation are really doing. Something that no other western country would get away with. Its incredible that so many israelis have fallen for this big lie. Security for israel as a state!
Who will invade you? Syria or iraq? What bad would happen if arabs in Israel had the same opportunities as jews? Stop whining and just do what has to be done. And remember that everybody that knew what was going on and didnt do anything are all guilty.

As an israeli from Tel Aviv said "200 000 people are determining the future for 6 million. What I would like to see is an israeli leader that is not wondering HOW we should leave the settlements, but just told the settlers which day we are withdrawing the army."

Personally I think the oslo plan is laughable. 70 percent of WB to israel and the autonomous palestinian areas separeted. With israeli securitycontrolled areas between. I dont think anyone can claim that is fair.

Northlander

05-16-2002, 03:35 PM

I forgot the sollution to the conflict.
Give the palestinians something to live for and you will finally see an end to those bombings. Continue to terrorise them and you will not. The ONLY sollution to prevent terrorism.

If Israel continues like this they will have to kill every single palestinian alive. Everyone. If not, always some will feel their only choice is to use terrorism. Stop this state terrorism from Israel and the counter terrorism will stop too.
Do you guys here understand the difference between state terrorism and the terrorism conducted by small groups of desperate extremists?

NewsGuy

05-16-2002, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
They were not typical left-wing activists either. Some really ordinary israelis and some really patriotic.[QUOTE]
Curiosity, what is a typical left-wing activist like?

[QUOTE]Some soldiers refused to serve on occupied territory but still wanted to DEFEND israel. That is a morally strong statment and something that could solve alot of problems for israel and jews all over.
By any chance, did your Northlander TV station explain that these army sabateurs and cowards account for less than one-thousandth of a percent? Did your TV station report that there has been a huge increase in the number of Israeli soldiers volunteering for elite-combat service against the Palestinian centers of terrorism?

Probably not. After all, we are talking about Europe, where every night, the TV news station interviews the extreme minority of Israelis and deceives its audience into believing that those extremists and traitors actually represent the Israeli population. That is of course false, but very popular indeed with the local Arab and neo-Stalinist audience.

It would be as if American TV decided to interview a rapist in a Swedish jail and then when the rapist blames his childhood abuse, then the American TV station presents that most Swedish citizens were abused as children. Of course this is total nonesense, just like the show you are referring to -- the tiny minority falsely presented as a picture of typical society.

The majority of Israeli society, which apparently doesn't interest European TV at all, will say that they support a Palestinian state but not while terrorism is going on. And this message of peace and reasonableness is what your TV tries to conceal from its viewers.

Its not any better just because the palestine terrorists uses just as morally or legally wrong methods.
No, but how much time did your TV show devote to Palestinian crimes against humanity? Come on, please enlighten us on this point, before giving us your moral superiority attitude.

L@mplighterM

05-16-2002, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
Do you guys here understand the difference between state terrorism and the terrorism conducted by small groups of desperate extremists?

State terrorism in Israel, WB, and GS is ordered and orchestrated by Arafat as a matter of fact he’s the purveyor of ALL terrorism in that region.

Northlander

05-16-2002, 04:54 PM

Every single terrorist attack in israel are reported here belive me.
We sees it and condemn it. But didnt you read my post?
I didnt say anything about the numbers of israelis that are against the occupation and colonial politics. As far as I know sharon has large support. My point is that since Israel clearly has a government that does not care the slightest about human rights at least the soldiers should show civilcourage. Cowards? A real man doesnt need to to prove himself in an occupation army. IDF stands for "defence" right? It should be in my oppinion.
The large support for Israels politics in Israel doesnt make it legal you know. It only shows that your propaganda machine has succeded in fooling people that the occupation is there to protect israel. Of cource it is not. Everyone that is supporting these politics will by the afterworld be judged as cowards and as guilty as the perpetutors. I think most people understand by now that its Israels humiliation and crimes against the palestinians that are causing this terrorism. Even people in israel I think, but its easier to just go on and pretend its for a juste cause. Well, its not. Its ethnic cleansing and state terrorism and no excuse is good enough. More israelis should refuse to take part.
Elite combat service in Israel are probably the most pathetic thing Ive ever heard of. What special training did they get to shoot stonethrowers. Come on! They didnt even have the guts to disarm the traps in Jenin without using palestinian children for it.
What combat? Do you call anything of that that has happened recently for combat????? From time to time palestinian police officers get involved in shooting with . Maybe with a little fantasy you could get that to real combat. Attackhelicopters and tanks against ak47s. Real heroes. Just leave the occupied territories for starters and then you could at least have the moral right to object to terrorists. Where the germans right to call the french resistence terrorists? Get real. OCCUPATION!!! Do you understand the word? "The occupation of poland" The occupation of kuweit" Stop it THEN expect the terror to end.

USAs war against terrorism has not helped them the slightest and their resources are somewhat bigger than israels. did they find osama? no. Are they even more threatend now. probably.
In some occasions force is necessary but Israel cant even understand the most basic thing of all, that these guys are not blowing up themselves for fun. Take them out who does, fine, but
Israel has created this problem by expanding settlements, occupy....etc. Its BS that all this is to find terrorists. It doesnt work!! Preventing pregnant women from getting medical aid is not helping. Isolate whole villages and preventing them from reaching their jobs doesnt help. I saw a document that IDF had confiscated 22 fishing boats in Gaza because the enginesize was against "regional regulations" 22 families that lives from fishing can fish. What happens? Come on here. a little fantasy. At best what happens with those families? Who will they hate for not getting food. They know just as you and I know that its not about war against terror. Those "regional regulations" are made up. Its nothing else than a planned long term method of terrorising them in every different situation thinkable. To get them to leave at best or just stop resisting at second best. What probably happens is that they learn to hate and when the children of the families get big enough to understand how unfair it really was and how little they can do to then Israel has created a problem. It doesnt take much more. How much evidence does the public opinion in israel need to see that this kind of hatred doesnt just pop up by itself? Not one single country in the west does anything near what israel does. Have you even thought of why?
Do you think britain does anything on n.ireland that can even slightly remind of that IDF does? Still even britain can never be totally sure that a bomb wont go of. They didnt solve their problems only by fighting IRA. Also their occupation can hardly be called an occupation anymore since a majority of n.irelands population want to be a part of britain.

Northlander

05-16-2002, 05:04 PM

State terrorism in Israel, WB, and GS is ordered and orchestrated by Arafat as a matter of fact he’s the purveyor of ALL terrorism in that region.

When IDF makes a "likvidation" its a political murder.
That must be terrorism cause when lets say RAF in germany or red brigades in italy makes it, its called terrorism.
IDF are controlled by the Israeli state. Hence "state terrorism".
Do you deny Israel kills people within PA? Do you deny they have ever done that? Do you deny they have used explosives to kill palestinians. that is the backbone of all terrorism. Long range striking capability if you like. Without B52s. Kill without being there. The whole terrorist arsenal has and is being used by israel too. Whats wrong with you guys? Do you actually dont know Israel uses this methods?
By the way israeli terrorists killed my fellow countryman Folke Bernadotte when he was working for UN in the 40th.
That was not state terrorism but the same kind of terrorism you hate so much now.

Mediocrates

05-16-2002, 06:26 PM

Just because you can't determine a consequential event called Victory doesn't mean you don't have success. Police forces don't simply eradicate all crime and then go home, do they? It's called maintaining a stasis against the forces that want to kill you.

L@mplighterM

05-16-2002, 07:19 PM

Bold by Northlander

Every single terrorist attack in israel are reported here belive me.
We sees it and condemn it. But didnt you read my post?
I didnt say anything about the numbers of israelis that are against the occupation and colonial politics. As far as I know sharon has large support. My point is that since Israel clearly has a government that does not care the slightest about human rights at least the soldiers should show civilcourage. Cowards? A real man doesnt need to to prove himself in an occupation army. IDF stands for "defence" right? It should be in my oppinion.
The large support for Israels politics in Israel doesnt make it legal you know. It only shows that your propaganda machine has succeded in fooling people that the occupation is there to protect israel. Of cource it is not. Everyone that is supporting these politics will by the afterworld be judged as cowards and as guilty as the perpetutors. I think most people understand by now that its Israels humiliation and crimes against the palestinians that are causing this terrorism. Even people in israel I think, but its easier to just go on and pretend its for a juste cause. Well, its not. Its ethnic cleansing and state terrorism and no excuse is good enough. More israelis should refuse to take part.
Elite combat service in Israel are probably the most pathetic thing Ive ever heard of. What special training did they get to shoot stonethrowers. Come on! They didnt even have the guts to disarm the traps in Jenin without using palestinian children for it.
What combat? Do you call anything of that that has happened recently for combat????? From time to time palestinian police officers get involved in shooting with . Maybe with a little fantasy you could get that to real combat. Attackhelicopters and tanks against ak47s. Real heroes. Just leave the occupied territories for starters and then you could at least have the moral right to object to terrorists. Where the germans right to call the french resistence terrorists? Get real. OCCUPATION!!! Do you understand the word? "The occupation of poland" The occupation of kuweit" Stop it THEN expect the terror to end.
Tune to the white mans TV Station when you watch Svensk TV from now on. Don’t pay to much attention to the Arab station. As always your posts contain Arab propaganda and fabricated nonsense. I know exactly what is happening in the Scandinavian countries and the day is coming when the electorate isn’t putting up with you people’s nonsense, you’ve gone too far and they are putting their feet down.
I don’t think that you even have an elementary understanding of the conflict in the ME. Children to disarm traps LOL , what utter nonsense. I guess you’re one of the NUTS that think Jews drink children’s blood.

USAs war against terrorism has not helped them the slightest and their resources are somewhat bigger than israels. did they find osama? no. Are they even more threatend now. probably.
In some occasions force is necessary but Israel cant even understand the most basic thing of all, that these guys are not blowing up themselves for fun. Take them out who does, fine, but
Israel has created this problem by expanding settlements, occupy....etc. Its BS that all this is to find terrorists. It doesnt work!! Preventing pregnant women from getting medical aid is not helping. Isolate whole villages and preventing them from reaching their jobs doesnt help. I saw a document that IDF had confiscated 22 fishing boats in Gaza because the enginesize was against "regional regulations" 22 families that lives from fishing can fish. What happens? Come on here. a little fantasy. At best what happens with those families? Who will they hate for not getting food. They know just as you and I know that its not about war against terror. Those "regional regulations" are made up. Its nothing else than a planned long term method of terrorising them in every different situation thinkable. To get them to leave at best or just stop resisting at second best. What probably happens is that they learn to hate and when the children of the families get big enough to understand how unfair it really was and how little they can do to then Israel has created a problem. It doesnt take much more. How much evidence does the public opinion in israel need to see that this kind of hatred doesnt just pop up by itself? Not one single country in the west does anything near what israel does. Have you even thought of why?
Do you think britain does anything on n.ireland that can even slightly remind of that IDF does? Still even britain can never be totally sure that a bomb wont go of. They didnt solve their problems only by fighting IRA. Also their occupation can hardly be called an occupation anymore since a majority of n.irelands population want to be a part of britain.

If Palestinians cant use their motorboats I guess they better learn to row. Arafat needs to loose some weight in any case. Boats are used to transport weapons and several been destroyed. Instead of posting your Arab propaganda and wasting your time get a spare time job so you can buy some fishing poles to send to your brethren.
No these guys are not blowing themselves up for fun they do so to make $ 30,400.00 US for their daddies and mommies. They also believe there’s 72 ugly virgins wrapped in old blankets or potato sacks waiting for them in hell.

NewsGuy

05-16-2002, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
When IDF makes a "likvidation" its a political murder.
That must be terrorism cause when lets say RAF in germany or red brigades in italy makes it, its called terrorism.
Naturally, what you have left out is who exactly is being liquidated. In Israel's case, they liquidate armed Palestinian terrorists, who are directly involved in perpetrating terrorism against Israeli civilians, and that is considered a military operation in self-defense.

On the other hand, when the Palestinians strap explosives to their bodies, after packing the explosives with nails, and go into a restaurant or a shopping mall and mass murder Israeli civilians, then that is terrorism.

And, similarly, when the RAF or other British troops shoot and kill al Qaeda and Taliban members in Afghanistan, then that is a military operation, too, even if there are unintended innocent afghanis killed in the process.

NewsGuy

05-16-2002, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
Everyone that is supporting these politics will by the afterworld be judged as cowards and as guilty as the perpetutors.[/B]No, my bet is that the European oil-slave governments and deluded Euro-Leftists will be judged for their role in financing and providing political cover for the Palestinian mass murderers. I think that Nuremberg would be a perfect place to put the European supporters of Arab terrorism on trial.

I think most people understand by now that its Israels humiliation and crimes against the palestinians that are causing this terrorism.
Actually, most people I know understand very well, especially after 9-11 that it is Arab terrorism that is the global problem and that the only solution to Arab terrorism is an all-out war to destroy the terrorist infrastructure. Even most Palestinians understand by now that their murderous government's crimes against humanity have brought national disaster on them. Maybe soon even the Europeans will awaken from their terror-supporting delusion.

What special training did they get to shoot stonethrowers. More fantasies of tanks vs. stonethrowers, ignoring of course the handgrenades, anti-tank missiles & missile factories, RPGs, Kalachnikovs, TNT, C-4, pipe-bombs, and land-mines used by the Palestinians against unarmed Israeli civilians and against the IDF.

But all this Palestinian arsenal doesn't fit neatly into the "stones vs. tanks" fantasy. Too bad, Northlander, because it is the truth that scares you most. If you admit the truth, then you have no more cause to fight and what would your life be like then?

USAs war against terrorism has not helped them the slightest and their resources are somewhat bigger than israels. did they find osama? no. Are they even more threatend now. probably.
You are wrong about that. I am sorry that al Jazeera presented it that way to you. In fact, there is now no Islamic government that will knowingly allow al Qaeda to operate, because they learned the Taliban lesson.

But on the other hand, the U.S. is indeed failing to finish the war against Islamic terrorism, because the U.S. has not yet confronted the rest of the sources of Islamic terrorism like Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority. Until the U.S. confronts those terrorism-sponsoring countries, you are correct, that Islamic terrorism will live on.

Northlander

05-17-2002, 02:28 AM

Tune to the white mans TV Station when you watch Svensk TV from now on. Don’t pay to much attention to the Arab station.
I dont have any arab station sorry. Never had. Obviously a PA TV station wouldnt be anymore trustworthy than an israeli. Its all about the truth. We all know that the palestininan terror is hard and cruel. No one in europe is denying that. Its never a discussion about if it exist or not. however when it comes to Israeli terror that is clear and obvious for every big western newspaper and TV station, WESTERN, not arab, then people start denying things. Its like in germany like I told you. Dont pretend you didnt know what was going on!! As Ive been told from friends in USA their newsreport are somewhat twisted but things have improved lately.Still if you speak to many americans people dont even know that PA doesnt have a regular army. They think its a war etc. they dont know about the occupation etc. There its more a terrorsit debate when it should be a debate about a people denyed of all and a strong israel. the journalist traditions in many countries in europe is strong and independent. They are not questionable in many cases as you guys dont know.
Boats are used to transport weapons and several been destroyed. Instead of posting your Arab propaganda and wasting your time get a spare time job so you can buy some fishing poles to send to your brethren.
This was actually a hebrew document and an israeli translated so... It was fishingboats. Search them, take the weapons and put the terrorists or smugglers on trail. Have you heard about the democratic ways of solving things? Like all armies and policeforces in west do? do you want a crashcourse in how to "not taking away everything for innocent people and leave them to starve and therefore creating suffering and resistance"?
In Israel's case, they liquidate armed Palestinian terrorists, who are directly involved in perpetrating terrorism against Israeli civilians,
directly involved??? wake up!!! Just because IDF succesfully kills a few real terrorists doesnt mean every target is legitimate. If you start operations like that it will eventually turn or yourself.
You seize to be a democratic functioning country and becomes a military controled country when everything is solved without ant regards to law and order. what guarantee that the same organisations that murders for political reasons against terrorists doesnt change objectives. Maybe the next time they start target other people not wanted for israel. Like the waffen SS compared to more specialised SS units. The confict with the palestinians are dirty. From both sides. By denying that israel is fighting a dirty war you are just being naive and ignorant. I have on the other hand heard people knowing exactly what IDF and mossad etc does but still defending what they do cause it benefits israel. It least I can repspect that opinion cause its not stupid and ignorant but total denial??? in a democratic state there has to be a trail before execution. It is just so. If you dont like it go join a club for fascist regimes elsewhere but dont think you will ever get treated like a normal western country. Someone needs to take the whole Israeli goverment and educate them in basic democratic rules. Courts!! Laws!! Evidence!!
And, similarly, when the RAF or other British troops shoot and kill al Qaeda and Taliban members in Afghanistan, then that is a military operation, too, even if there are unintended innocent afghanis killed in the process.
You cant be serious to compare the US/british operations in afghanistan to IDFs on WB? When you surround a palestine village and prevents medical personel from going in and people from going out its nothing else than cold blooded murder. Old ill people are not terrorists and should not be detained. Pregnant women are not terrorsits! Arab doctors should not even be capt out but when IDF officers refuse israeli doctors?? That is not military operations against terrorist networks. Its a brutal act against civilians aimed at terrorising them and to humiliate them.
Its not PAs incompetence that kills those people in need of medical aid its IDF. Its wrong,wrong,wrong no matter how many suicide bombs that goes of in Israel. and thats just one example of Israeli murders on civilans. then we have numerous shootings of women and children. Dont compare it to US/british soldiers in afghanistan. they dont execute people on the spot for being neigbours to al-qaeda soldiers. Or for being family. Have you even seen that they have prisoners on guatanamo? trails!! justice!! controlled courts with full international cooperation.
the difference even between USA and Israel is so big you shouldnt mention them in the same sentence. And I am usually very critical against US ways of solving military issues.
No, my bet is that the European oil-slave governments and deluded Euro-Leftists will be judged for their role in financing and providing political cover for the Palestinian mass murderers. I think that Nuremberg would be a perfect place to put the European supporters of Arab terrorism on trial.
We are not supporting arab terrorism. We are against Israels state terrorism AND arab.
Actually, most people I know understand very well, especially after 9-11 that it is Arab terrorism that is the global problem and that the only solution to Arab terrorism is an all-out war to destroy the terrorist infrastructure.
That is nonsense. Terrorism itself is based on the lack of infrastructure. Its not possible to destroy the terrorist infrastructure. All military experts know this very well. For every al-qaeda fighter prisoned or killed in afghanistan they created a new one. Exept from Iran iraq or afghanistan there are not many more countries you can invade like that. If lets say al-qaeda have a few members in sweden, its not impossible. they dont need much to live as ordinary people in the states or in europe. If USA bombs sweden and goes in with troops in sweden with the excuse of "war against terrorism" we would still see it as a invasion and we would be forced to strike against USA as well.
You cant invade every nation in the world where there might be a terrorist cell that are making explosives or planning attacks. Its just not possible. This is not possible. So if military experts knows all this why are they doing it? Well, that is interesting debate but I would say that president bush has mainly other political reasons
USA will never ever again be safe from terrorist attacks. Thats the fact. All it takes is motivation and you or I or anyone could cause total havoc. To fight terrorism all means BUT the military are effective. You will understand what I mean in 30 years when this war against terror have failed and 9-11 is just one of many attacks. I hope Im wrong and that Israel and USA have solved its problems by other means but as it seems now they will continue to do it this way. I think al-qaeda will have to reform their organisation somewhat. That is a result from afghanistan. Its not necessary with kalashnikovs in training camps anymore. Knowledge in english and university degrees in chemistry is more effective. they dont need to live in a cave to plan attacks, they will probably figure that out soon after the american attacks and then they will plan it from suburbs to london or in new jersey.
The motivation has to been taken away not the means. My little brother has the means to use terrorism. What infrastructure are you talking about? Money? Then bombs wont help.
More fantasies of tanks vs. stonethrowers, ignoring of course the handgrenade, anti-tank missiles & missile factories, RPGs, Kalachnikovs, TNT, C-4, pipe-bombs, and land-mines used by the Palestinians against unarmed Israeli civilians and against the IDF. When they use it against civilians its a warcrime and they should be punished. But as long as Israel are occupying
their territory they have the right to attack the occupation army.
Its called resistance. Why dont you just stop the occupation if you dont like it?

Mediocrates

05-17-2002, 06:28 AM

no matter how many suicide bombs that goes of in Israel.

no matter how many suicide bombs that goes of in Israel.

no matter how many suicide bombs that goes of in Israel.

no matter how many suicide bombs that goes of in Israel.

---do I have it right yet?, that's pretty much the predicate of everything you've ever written on this board. An unlimited number of Jews have to die to make sure your lights stay on at night and your internet connection works.

elke

05-17-2002, 06:55 AM

Terrorism itself is based on the lack of infrastructure. Its not possible to destroy the terrorist infrastructure.

Are you trying to say that the suicide bomb belts, AK47's, and mortars are easily available at a location near you? Are you trying to say that young people, on their own, just one day decide to commit suicide while killing as many as they can of other young (or elderly)?

In fact, this is baloney: a couple of days ago, some young boys decided to attack an Israeli check point - all by their lonesome; and Hamas got up in arms about it. I will a link for that article for you a little later.

The terrorist infrastructure consists, among other things, of the following:
1. Bomb factories (like the one found in Bethlehem, near the Church of the Nativity, etal)
2. Arms caches (like the ones found in Jenin refugee camp, etal)
3. Secret routes of arms smugglers (like the tunnel in Gaza, etal)
4. All of the above hiding in the civilian population centers.

THAT's terrorist infrastructure.

Vic

05-17-2002, 07:06 AM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
No, my bet is that the European oil-slave governments and deluded Euro-Leftists will be judged for their role in financing and providing political cover for the Palestinian mass murderers.
NewsGuy, sorry, you are wrong. Anti-Israel tendencies are not limited to the Left in Europe. There are hardly reliable statistics on that, but just look at Jacques Chirac...
My guess is that such sentiments (and with them direct or indirect support for Palestinian terrorism) are spread more or less evenly throughout the political landscape.
The economic side of it - it's not just oil. It's a large export volume, investments on both sides etc. The currently most prominent anti-Israel politician in Germany is head of the Liberal Party and as such not exactly a leftist. On the other side he happens to head a "German-Arabic society" and is as rumors go, he is greatly involved in business dealings with Arab countries, acting as their semi-official lobbyist.

Pathfinder

05-17-2002, 08:00 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Northlander

All military experts know this very well. For every al-qaeda fighter prisoned or killed in afghanistan they created a new one.

Baloney!

If USA bombs sweden and goes in with troops in sweden with the excuse of "war against terrorism" we would still see it as a invasion and we would be forced to strike against USA as well.

If the Swedish govt. is supporting, harboring, or financing terrorism, so be it.

You cant invade every nation in the world where there might be a terrorist cell that are making explosives or planning attacks. Its just not possible.

Thats not the point. Only nations that clearly support Terrorism must fear US or Allied action.

To fight terrorism all means BUT the military are effective. You will understand what I mean in 30 years when this war against terror have failed and 9-11 is just one of many attacks. I hope Im wrong and that Israel and USA have solved its problems by other means but as it seems now they will continue to do it this way.

Well..., lets see, if terrorism is so effective what has it accomplished in the last 30 years? Why would the next 30 be different?

I think al-qaeda will have to reform their organisation somewhat. That is a result from afghanistan. Its not necessary with kalashnikovs in training camps anymore. Knowledge in english and university degrees in chemistry is more effective. they dont need to live in a cave to plan attacks, they will probably figure that out soon after the american attacks and then they will plan it from suburbs to london or in new jersey.
The motivation has to been taken away not the means. My little brother has the means to use terrorism.

Northlander, you have a hidden talent. Sounds like you might apply for the job writing the next jihad manual. After all if you have been watching the news Al Quaeda has lots of current openings in their leadership ranks. Same with Al aksa etc.

But as long as Israel are occupying
their territory they have the right to attack the occupation army.
Its called resistance.

If they are freedom fighters as you say, this is their only morally justifiable action. Wow, combatants against combatants, what a concept!
:)

Northlander

05-17-2002, 09:08 AM

---do I have it right yet?, that's pretty much the predicate of everything you've ever written on this board. An unlimited number of Jews have to die to make sure your lights stay on at night and your internet connection works.
my god you are stupid. How many suicide bombs went of before the occupation? Sharon chooses to let more israelis die by not ending the occupation. And politicians before him.

And elke. I know what they are aiming for. But all it takes really is to have a decent knowledge in chemistry and of you go. Any university has the components. Even if USA bombs all islamic countries they will take out revenge on the western population with new attacks. All it took for 9-11 was a couple of razors.
Cant you really see that it is impossible to prevent attacks if the terrorists are determined enough. And in these days with more and more powerful weapons. Israel is basically playing a risky game with all its inhabitants by sticking to this illegal occupation.
Just end it and alot of your problems will dissapear.
If the Swedish govt. is supporting, harboring, or financing terrorism, so be it.
But no state can guarantee that terrorists are not hiding and living there. For osama personally its hard maybe but I would guess some of his groups are living in europe and even in the states. How will USA solve that with military operations?
By the way, according to you guys PA are nothing than terrorists and we in europe are donation huge amounts of money to them so maybe we are supporting terrorists. You are welcome to bomb us any time you like.
Thats not the point. Only nations that clearly support Terrorism must fear US or Allied action
hahaha thats a new one. All countries invaded and bombed by usa have been harboring terrorists, yeah right.
Well..., lets see, if terrorism is so effective what has it accomplished in the last 30 years? Why would the next 30 be different?
You have to look for the reasons why they are doing it. Its obviously desperate. A more peaceful country than USA would not get an attack as 9-11. Russia gets them too and its no wonder. Britain got them during the occupation of n.ireland.
Israel gets them. The only countries that gets this kind of attacks are countries with a colonial history or that are still occupying or terrorising another people.
If they are freedom fighters as you say, this is their only morally justifiable action. Wow, combatants against combatants, what a concept!
As I said I belive they should be punished when they target civilians. But by democratic means. Not killed without trails etc.
But they can rotten slowly in prison as far as im concerned. Thats not the question. We are all against terror on civilians. But just as convinced you are that USA had the right to defend against the japanese after Pearl Harbour, as convinced am I that the palestinians has the right to defend against Israeli occupation. Morally its no different than when the americans launched the airraid on Tokyo soon after PH killing civilians. It was aimed at lowering the boosted japanese moral and showing that this war was going to be costly for them too. Wrong? Yes I think these kinds of bombings of civilians are wrong. As I think the bombs inside israel are wrong. But they still have the right in my opinion to target every single israeli soldier on occupied territory. If you dont want that to happen just pull out. Pull back you army. Its easy really. Do you want all this to end? Just end the occupation.

Mediocrates

05-17-2002, 11:53 AM

So all war of any kind is justified against any suffciently large and-or mismatched opponent. That's good to know, now any country that wants to win should simply pick on the biggest country using the puniest force, children preferably and you have a defacto victory. Therefore any act of terrorism, however you define it is not only justified but victorious.

Is there even such a thing as crime or should we seek for reasons to blame the victim?

Mediocrates

05-17-2002, 11:57 AM

"We are all against terror on civilians"
<obligatory statement of outrage over terrorism here>

Well some of us are at any rate. Most of you seem to abhor it in the same breath that you justify it. Actually you in particular give little more thought to dead Israelis than you would to the kind of milk you put in your coffee. I wouldn't call it hate, just a demonic kind of indifference.

Pathfinder

05-17-2002, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by Northlander

Its easy really. Do you want all this to end? Just end the occupation.

Ok, Northlander, lets play. Tomorrow, Sharon decides to take your advice and orders all his forces back behind the green line. We'll even throw in a bonus. He forces all Israelis living in those areas to abandon their homes in Judea, Samaria and Gaza to move to Tel Aviv.

With your wisdom, tell me how Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah etc. will react to this wonderful turn of events? :rolleyes:

NewsGuy

05-17-2002, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by Vic

NewsGuy, sorry, you are wrong. Anti-Israel tendencies are not limited to the Left in Europe. There are hardly reliable statistics on that, but just look at Jacques Chirac...
I actually wrote "the European oil-slave governments and deluded Euro-Leftists... "

But you're certainly correct that French President Abu Chirac is a pro-Arab terrorism apologist. In fact, the Arab Republic of France is home to numerous anti-Israel hypocrites and anti-Semites across the political spectrum.

Just as a point of reference, though, for me as an American, a socialist like Chirac would be considered left-wing in my book.

Vic

05-17-2002, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
Just as a point of reference, though, for me as an American, a socialist like Chirac would be considered left-wing in my book.
Chirac a SOCIALIST??? He'd sue you for libel, if he knew :-)

NewsGuy

05-17-2002, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
We all know that the palestininan terror is hard and cruel. No one in europe is denying that. Its never a discussion about if it exist or not...
That's right -- there's never a discussion about it in Europe. Finally something that is starting to make sense from Northlander.

So now, please tell us how many anti-Palestinian demonstrations have you seen in your own country of Sweden, for example?

Has your hypocritical prime minister or snake-lady Anna Lindh proposed a UN resolution to condemn the Palestinian terrorism? Of course not, because that would be way too honest for a country which has no idea about terrorism and where the worst conceivable national problem is its citizens running out of Glog on Christmas Eve.

NewsGuy

05-17-2002, 08:28 PM

Originally posted by Vic

Chirac a SOCIALIST??? He'd sue you for libel, if he knew :-)
For my POV, France is a socialist country, with Abu Chirac only a hair less socialist than Jospin.

Vic

05-18-2002, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy

For my POV, France is a socialist country, with Abu Chirac only a hair less socialist than Jospin.
Umm... just for the sake of definitions: is there a single French (or European) politician you woudn't call a socialist?

Vic

05-18-2002, 07:45 PM

"Sometimes I really envy the Palestinians. Now, for example, there is a demand for them to institute democratic reforms that will create a transparent, responsible regime and carry out all sorts of really important measures that are vital if they want to have a truly democratic state. Has anyone demanded that we introduce similar changes? Has anyone dared to come out openly in favor of such changes? Can you possibly imagine President [George W.] Bush telling the Saudis, for example, that they must alter the structure of their economy and that they must see to it that their economy is transparent so that it will be possible to discover what happened to all the fat fees that American and European industrialists handed over to the princes of that kingdom? Has anyone demanded that Syria or Egypt embark on democratic reform? In the final analysis, Palestine will be the world's only democratic Arab state, simply because it was forced to establish a democratic regime. The citizens of every other Arab state will look on in envy at that truly great accomplishment."

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=165288&contrassID=2&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Batman

05-19-2002, 09:38 AM

Original post by Northlander:

The situation in Jerusalem is nothing but apartheid. The Arabs in Israel doesn't have the same rights as Jews
The Middle East conflict is not about Israel's occupation of the territories. It is about the refusal of the Arabs to make peace with Israel, which is inevitable by-product of their desire to destroy it.

In 1920s the British and French created the states that now define the Middle East out of the ashes of the empire of the defeated Turkish Empire. They drew the boundaries of new states, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. The British had previously promised the Jewish Zionists a "national home" in the remaining area, known as Palestine Mandate. In 1921 the British separated 80% of the Mandate, east of Jordan River and created the Arab kingdom:"Transjordan." It was created for the Arabian monarch King Abdullah who had been defeated in tribal warfare in the Arabian peninsula and he lacked a seat of power. Abdullah's tribe was Hashemite while the vast majority of Abdullah's subjects were Palestinian Arabs.

What was left of the original Palestine Mandate-between the west bank of Jordan and the Mediterranean sea had been settled by Arabs and Jews. The Jews, continuously lived in that area for 3,700 years, even after the Romans destroyed their state in 70A.D. Arabs became a dominant local population for the first time in the 7th Century A.D. as a result of the Muslim invasions. These Arabs were largely nomads who had no distinctive language or culture to separate them from other Arabs. In all the time since, they had made no attempt to create an independent Palestinian state west or east of the Jordan and none was ever established.

The Nazi Holocaust created great pressure for a Jewish homeland since not even the US or Britain opened their borders for the Jews to escape from Nazi Europe.

Under the partition plan the Arabs were given the Jews' ancient home in Judea and Samaria- not known as the West Bank and the Gaza Strip on the border of Egypt. The Jews were allotted 3 slivers of disconnected land along the Mediterranean and the Sinai desert. They were also given access to their holy city of Jerusalem but as an island cut off from the slivers, surrounded by Arab land and under international control. 60% of the land allotted to the Jews was the Negev desert. the entire portion represented only about 10% of the Palestine Mandate. Out of these unpromising parts, the Jews created a new state, Israel, in 1948. At this time - the idea of a Palestinian nation, or a movement to create one did not even exist.

Thus, at the moment of Israel's birth, Palestinian Arabs lived on roughly 90% of the original Palestine Mandate- in Tran Jordan and in the UN partition area, but also in the new state of Israel itself. There were 800,000 Arabs living in Israel alongside 650,000 Jews. At the same time Jews were legally barred from settling in the 35,000 square miles of Palestinian Tran Jordan which eventually was renamed simply as Jordan.

The Arab population in the slivers called Israel had actually more than tripled since the Zionists first began to settle the area in the 1880s. The reason for this was because the Jewish settles had brought industrial and agricultural development with them, which attracted Arab immigrant.

If the Palestinian Arabs had been willing to accept this arrangement in which they received 90% of the land in the Palestine Mandate, and under which they benefited from the industry, enterprise and political democracy the Jews brought to the region, there would have been no Middle East conflict.

But they were not.

Instead...the Arab League- representing 5 neighboring Arab states, declared war on Israel on the day of its creation and 5 Arab armies invaded the slivers with the aim of destroying the infant Jewish State. During the fighting according to the UN mediator on the scene, an estimated 472,000 Arabs fled their homes and left the infant state. Some fled to escape dangers, others were driven out by the heat of the war. They planned on returning after an Arab victory and the destruction of the Jewish state-an outcome their leaders promised.[QUOTE]Northlander Comment: The situation in Jerusalem is nothing but apartheid. The Arabs in Israel doesn't have the same rights as Jews

Batman

05-19-2002, 09:39 AM

Continued from above re:

Original post by Northlander:

The situation in Jerusalem is nothing but apartheid. The Arabs in Israel doesn't have the same rights as Jews

But the Jews-many of them recent Holocaust survivors-refused to be defeated. Instead, the 5 Arab armies that had invaded their slivers were repelled. Yet, there was no peace. even though their armies were beaten the Arab states were determined to carry on their campaign of destruction and to remain formally at was with the Israeli state. After the defeat of the Arab armies, the Palestinians who lived in the Arab area of the UN partition did not attempt to create a state of their own. Instead, in 1950 Jordan annexed the entire West Bank and Egypt annexed the Gaza strip.
There were n protests.

As a result of the annexation and the continued state of war, the Arab refugees who had fled the Israeli slivers did not return. There was a refugee flow into Israel, but it was a flow of Jews who had been expelled from the Arab countries. All over the Middle East, Jews were forced to leave lands they had lived on for centuries. Although Israel was a tiny geographical area and a fledgling state, its government welcomed and resettled 600,000 Jewish refugees from the Arab countries. No Arab country welcome Palestinian refugees or allowed them to become citizens.

At the same time, the Jews resumed their work of creating a new nation on what was now a single sliver of land. Israel had annexed a small amount of territory to make their state defensible, including a land bridge that included Jerusalem.

In the years to follow Israel made their desert bloom. They built the only industrialized economy in the entire Mid East, the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. They treated the Arabs who remained in Israel well. To this day the very large Arab minority which lives inside the state of Israel has more rights and privileges than any other Arab population in the entire Middle East. There is no Arab country in the Middle East for example, whose Arab citizens can vote.

This is especially true of the Arabs living under Yasser Arafat's corrupt dictatorship, the Palestinian Authority, which today administers the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and whose Arabs subjects have no human rights. In 1997 in a fit of pique against the Oslo accords, Palestinian spokesman Edward Said himself blurted this out calling Arafat" Our Papa Doc"- after the sadistic dictator of Haiti- and complaining that there was a "total absence of law or the rule of law in the Palestinian autonomy areas."

The present Middle East conflict is said to be about the "occupied territories"- the West Bank o f the Jordan and the Gaza Strip- and about Israel's refusal to "give them up." But during the first 20 years of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel did not control the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. When Jordan annexed the West Bank and Egypt annexed the Gaza Strip after the 1948 war, there was no Arab outrage. But the war against Israel continued.

One reason there was no Arab outrage over the annexation of the West Bank was because Jordan is a state whose ethnic majority is Palestinian Arabs. On the other hand, the Palestinians of Jordan are disenfranchised by the ruling Hashemite minority. Despite this fact, in the years following Jordan's annexation of the West Bank, the Palestinians displayed no interest in achieving "self determination" in Hashemite Jordan. It is only the presence of Jews, apparently, that incite this claim. The idea that the current conflict is about "occupied territories" is only on of the many large Arab deceits- now widely accepted- that have distorted the history of the Middle East wars.

In 1967 Egypt, Syria and Jordan- whose leaders never ceased to call for the destruction of Israel- massed hundreds of thousands of troops on Israel's borders and blockaded the Straits of Tirana, closing the port of Éclat. Israel's only opening to the East. This was an act of war. Because Israel had no land mass to defend itself from being over-run, and to avoid destruction, Israel struck the Arab armies first and defeated them for the second time. It was in repelling these armies that Israel came to control the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as well as the oil-rich Sinai desert. Israel had every right to annex these territories captured from the aggressors- a time honored ritual among nations, and in fact the precise way that Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan had come into existence themselves. But Israel did not do so. On the other hand, neither did it withdraw its armies or relinquish control.

The reason was that the Arab aggressors refused again to make peace. Instead they declared themselves still at war with Israel, a threat no Israeli government could afford to ignore. By this time, Israel was a country of 2-3 million surrounded by declared enemies whose combined populations numbered over 100 million. Geographically, Israel was so small that at one point it was less than ten miles across. No responsible Israeli government could relinquish a territorial buffer while its hostile neighbors were still formally at war. This is the reality that frames the Middle East conflict.

In 1973 six years after the second Arab war against the Jews, the Arab armies again attacked Israel. The attack was led by Syria and Egypt abetted by Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and 5 other countries who gave military support to the aggressors, including an Iraqi division of 18,000 men. Israel again defeated the Arab forces. Afterwards, Egypt- and Egypt alone- agreed to make formal peace.

the peace was signed by Egyptian president An war Sad at who was then assassinated by Islamic radicals paying his statesmanship with his life, Sadat is one of the 3 Arab leaders assassinated by other Arabs for making peace with the Jews.

Under Camp David accords that Sadat signed, Israel returned the entire Sinai with allots oil riches. This act demonstrated once and for all that the solution to the Mid East conflict was ready at hand. It only required the Arabs to agree.

Even to this day, the Arabs claim that Jewish settlements in the West Bank are an obstacle to peace. But there are Arab settlements in Israel- they are actually called "cities"- they are not a problem for Israel so why should Jewish settlements be a problem for Arabs?

The Middle East conflict is not about Israel's occupation of the territories. It is about the refusal of the Arabs to make peace with Israel, which is inevitable by-product of their desire to destroy it.

elke

05-19-2002, 09:41 AM

Personally, I don't trust any polls conducted anywhere in the Arab world, including the West Bank and Gaza.

In any totalitarian regime, the dichotomy between public speech and private thoughts exists. Looking at the "treatment" of the "collaborators", I can sympathize with a person who cannot afford to lose their life that way. As for the "Arab Streets", it's easy to fill them with whatever people you want, if you can force them out of their homes at gunpoint. I wonder just how many of those demonstrations are truly spontaneous: one of my clearest childhood memories (in USSR in the '70s) is a November 7 demonstration we were forced to attend, for fear that my father would lose his job and not be able to publish his papers, etc. What if the "penalty" was death? How much larger those demonstrations would have been?

When the Arab governments,including that in PA, perceive that real peace in the ME is in their interest, much of this incitement - and terrorism with it - will disappear.

Morpheus

05-19-2002, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy

For my POV, France is a socialist country, with Abu Chirac only a hair less socialist than Jospin.

LOL, Chirac a socialist. Than Reagan was probably a communist ... sure, you are well informed on European politics i must say.

Chirac is one of the most capitalistic swines of today's society. He's corrupt, chauvenistic, imperialistic, and if it wouldn't have been of le pen, also jailed :D

Northlander

05-19-2002, 02:15 PM

Well..., lets see, if terrorism is so effective what has it accomplished in the last 30 years? Why would the next 30 be different?

Well, maybe not the last 30 but go back just a little longer and we´ll see. I would say that terrorism has been very effective from time to time to reach goals politically. Without Israeli terrorism there probably wouldnt be any Israel at all today. And Irish etc.
Israeli terrorism by the way was very effective. I never hear any one of you here complain about that. It seems to me that the only terrorism that is bad in your eyes are the one targeted at Israel. Also a single attack 1983 against the US marines in lebanon got USA to leave the country. It has worked numerous times. Many european former colonies got their independence after terrorism/resistance whatever you call it.
Is there even such a thing as crime or should we seek for reasons to blame the victim?
I asked you? Is a warcrime not always a warcrime? Isnt international laws to be followed? Or is it ok that some is above the law?With your wisdom, tell me how Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah etc. will react to this wonderful turn of events?
With more terror? Obviosly things would improve. Some members of above organisations would probably still continue with terror to reach their goal of the final destruction of israel but they would lose most of their support. As long as you dont do anything nothing will change but the fact that even more palestinians will sign up as fighters against israel. Explain for me how it could be that Hamas turned into an organistation THIS brutal in the first place? They where nothing like this in the beginning, when Israel supported them by the way as a counter-meassure against PLO.
Has your hypocritical prime minister or snake-lady Anna Lindh proposed a UN resolution to condemn the Palestinian terrorism? Of course not, because that would be way too honest for a country which has no idea about terrorism and where the worst conceivable national problem is its citizens running out of Glog on Christmas Eve.
You dont know much about the world I hear. We have had our share of terrorism too. But what we are is the country in the world with the longest consecutive peace. In your book maybe that doesnt count for much but in my book its positive. It makes us think clear and we have a tradition when it comes to diplomacy. Our foreign and primeministers have been attacked and hated before by guys like you when out country speak out against wars. During vietnam our relations froze with US cause we didnt support them. Alot of countries followed our example after that one. It took 20 years but most people have their opinion about that war made out now. Same with s.africa. Others followed when they got the picture. Basically you cant do much about it. There are other ways than the military you know. We have had a certain big neighbour here for 500 years so we know somethings about diplomacy and defence too. You are arrogant as always over there when it comes to judging other people and countries. We knows all about the muslim countries over here belive me. We have a tradition of giving refugees from there a new chance here. But opposed to the american way of seeing things we just dont paint things in black and white, friend or enemy. We dont support Israel just because their neighbours are worse. Its very simple, even you should be able to get it. A warcrime is always a warcrime. British warcrimes are as bad as german warcrimes. Russian in afghanistan as american in vietnam.
Israeli or palestinian. Now we are focusing on this conflict. Both sides have to make compromises its time Israel understands that. Our snake-lady is just pointing out the fact that Israel is not more important and have no more special rights than the rest of the world. The palestinians have not had any rights for 50 years so its no use pointing that out.

Batman, impressive writing, you have done your sionist homework, but very subjective.
this one I like: "Israel had annexed a small amount of territory to make their state defensible, including a land bridge that included Jerusalem."

This one is lovely,hehe:"Even to this day, the Arabs claim that Jewish settlements in the West Bank are an obstacle to peace. But there are Arab settlements in Israel- they are actually called "cities"- they are not a problem for Israel so why should Jewish settlements be a problem for Arabs?"

"an estimated 472,000 Arabs fled their homes and left the infant state. Some fled to escape dangers, others were driven out by the heat of the war."
Deir Yassin, Lod/Lydda etc. You have a nice way of putting it.
Those refugees are more than welcome back to Israel now am I right??

Again comparisons between Israel and the Arabstates, why? If you ask me which country i would prefer to live and work in for a while, of the countries in ME, it would be Israel. Maybe Lebanon too but Israel most of all. Its not comparable to states as IRaq and sarabia etc. But whats the point? Do you seriously belive me to close my eyes to the fact that thousands of civilians have died on the palestinian side by israeli force? Do only Israeli casualties count because its a democracy? There lived arabs in palestine when Israel was created. Even if other arab countries attacked Israel the question of the future for all those palestinians is still there. If they attack again of course you have the right to defend.
I would give my support to israel in the event of such an attack. But it would help if you withdraw to 1967 borders and defended from there. Im not alone of that opinion. It would benefit israel from a strategic view. It would cool down the conflict with the palestinians and probably with most neighbours too. It is a step that sooner or later has to be taken anyway so the sooner the better.

hehe yes I agree to Morpheus that newsguys post of chirac shows he is...hmm..not well informed.

Pathfinder

05-19-2002, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Northlander

With more terror? Obviosly things would improve. Some members of above organisations would probably still continue with terror to reach their goal of the final destruction of israel but they would lose most of their support. As long as you dont do anything nothing will change but the fact that even more palestinians will sign up as fighters against israel.

So basically Israel's reward for this huge concession would be continued terrorism until the membership of these organizations begins to diminish at some vague point in the future. You obviously agree that Arafat would not be able to control these groups even if he wanted to.

Also, this event would be nothing but a morale booster, a great victory, for these groups seeking the total destruction of Israel. A reward for evil. It would probably only encourage them to greater effort, greater violence, more innocent deaths.

So, yes, you are correct things would improve for palestinians and terrorists. What benefit for Israel? More fear. Less security. A vague promise that eventually fanatics will give up their evil since Israel is giving what they demand.

There must be something in it for Israel other than making themselves more vulnerable. There must be leadership or organization among the palestinians that is both willing and capable of eliminating those groups. Until then Israel would be a fool to accede to these demands.

NewsGuy

05-19-2002, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Vic
Umm... just for the sake of definitions: is there a single French (or European) politician you woudn't call a socialist?
Maybe the UK is somewhat less socialist than the rest.

From my POV (and I'm definitely NOT concerned with European self-definition), European countries all have a huge socialist component, from large-scale subsidies to a huge amount of government intervention in national and international trade, not to mention the socialist income tax rates of 50%-70%.

Of course, the U.S. also has social programs and an exaggerated tax burden, but the Europeans have really outdone themselves in socialist interventionism in business.

Morpheus

05-20-2002, 01:12 AM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
[B]
Maybe the UK is somewhat less socialist than the rest.

B]

OK, com'on, stop BS'ing Newsman, where were you at the latest elections in France, Holland? Don't you see socialism is dead? Holland has voted against socialism, so had France, Italy did it a while ago and Germany will most likely continue this new wave of rightwingers.

The ONLY country which still has a socialist majority IS THE UK. Facts facts facts .... :o

Batman

05-20-2002, 05:06 AM

Original quote by Northlander:

The situation in Jerusalem is nothing but apartheid. The Arabs in Israel doesn't have the same rights as Jews

The Middle East conflict is not about Israel's occupation of the territories. It is about the refusal of the Arabs to make peace with Israel, which is inevitable by-product of their desire to destroy it.

What was left of the original Palestine Mandate-between the west bank of Jordan and the Mediterranean sea had been settled by Arabs and Jews. The Jews, continuously lived in that area for 3,700 years, even after the Romans destroyed their state in 70A.D. Arabs became a dominant local population for the first time in the 7th Century A.D. as a result of the Muslim invasions. These Arabs were largely nomads who had no distinctive language or culture to separate them from other Arabs. In all the time since, they had made no attempt to create an independent Palestinian state west or east of the Jordan and none was ever established.

Under the partition plan the Arabs were given the Jews' ancient home in Judea and Samaria- not known as the West Bank and the Gaza Strip on the border of Egypt. The Jews were allotted 3 slivers of disconnected land along the Mediterranean and the Sinai desert. They were also given access to their holy city of Jerusalem but as an island cut off from the slivers, surrounded by Arab land and under international control. 60% of the land allotted to the Jews was the Negev desert. the entire portion represented only about 10% of the Palestine Mandate. Out of these unpromising parts, the Jews created a new state, Israel, in 1948. At this time - the idea of a Palestinian nation, or a movement to create one did not even exist.

Thus, at the moment of Israel's birth, Palestinian Arabs lived on roughly 90% of the original Palestine Mandate- in Tran Jordan and in the UN partition area, but also in the new state of Israel itself. There were 800,000 Arabs living in Israel alongside 650,000 Jews. At the same time Jews were legally barred from settling in the 35,000 square miles of Palestinian Tran Jordan which eventually was renamed simply as Jordan.

If the Palestinian Arabs had been willing to accept this arrangement in which they received 90% of the land in the Palestine Mandate, and under which they benefited from the industry, enterprise and political democracy the Jews brought to the region, there would have been no Middle East conflict.

But they were not.

Instead...the Arab League- representing 5 neighboring Arab states, declared war on Israel on the day of its creation in 1948 and 5 Arab armies invaded the slivers with the aim of destroying the infant Jewish State. During the fighting according to the UN mediator on the scene, an estimated 472,000 Arabs fled their homes and left the infant state. Some fled to escape dangers, others were driven out by the heat of the war. They planned on returning after an Arab victory and the destruction of the Jewish state-an outcome their leaders promised. [/B]

NewsGuy

05-20-2002, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by Morpheus
Facts facts facts .... :o
Listen, Morpheum, you're mistaken. European countries are very much socialist, no matter what the particular party name happens to be elected or defeated at any given moment.

NewsGuy

05-20-2002, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
It makes us think clear and we have a tradition when it comes to diplomacy.Yes, of course, a tradition of never taking a firm position against Nazism, Communism, nor Islamic terrorism. Collaborate with whichever brutal, immoral regime threatens world peace, and hopefully you will be saved. Great tradition, Northlander, but not one that I'd be proud of if I were you.

During vietnam our relations froze with US cause we didnt support them...

...We have had a certain big neighbour here for 500 years so we know somethings about diplomacy and defence too. Yes, this an example of what I just wrote above.

A warcrime is always a warcrime. British warcrimes are as bad as german warcrimes. Russian in afghanistan as american in vietnam.
Israeli or palestinian. Now we are focusing on this conflict. Both sides have to make compromises its time Israel understands that. Our snake-lady is just pointing out the fact that Israel is not more important and have no more special rights than the rest of the world. The palestinians have not had any rights for 50 years so its no use pointing that out.
ok, starting with the war crimes and your country's hypocrisy, of the entire list of war crimes you mentioned, why is Israel the ONLY country your UN representative ever proposed bringing a resolution against?

At some point, even you should start to admit that your country and you personally are biased against Israel. To be clear, there's of course nothing wrong with having any opinion you please, but at least admit that it is based on personal bias and not on any facts.

Again comparisons between Israel and the Arabstates, why?
Again, because it clearly points out your country's and your own personal hypocrisy, when you give your arrogant speeches criticizing Israel only.

Mediocrates

05-20-2002, 12:05 PM

Oh just cut to the chase:

Israel and the US are the worst countries in the world
Israelis and Americans are the worst people in the world
Americans have never built, created, written or done anything of any significance, ever.
Israel and America are the only countries in the world where racism and slavery are official policy
The EU is the light of the world.
God made the Norwegians and Swedes in his own image and everyone else is a ****ty clone.

From now on we can call that 'orange' and when someone is saying it, it's called 'lobbing the orange'.

Skogan

05-20-2002, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Oh just cut to the chase:

Israel and the US are the worst countries in the world
Israelis and Americans are the worst people in the world
Americans have never built, created, written or done anything of any significance, ever.
Israel and America are the only countries in the world where racism and slavery are official policy
The EU is the light of the world.
God made the Norwegians and Swedes in his own image and everyone else is a ****ty clone.

From now on we can call that 'orange' and when someone is saying it, it's called 'lobbing the orange'.

ROFL

Skogan

Mediocrates

05-20-2002, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by Skogan

ROFL

Skogan

It ridiculous really. A country who's last great naval engagement consisted of the largest warship in the world capsizing 300 yards from its maiden berth in calm seas and no wind with the loss of all hands on board and who's contribution to the 20th century is the commemoration of dynamite and a sudden withdrawal to 'neutrality' which is the same thing as whoredom chattering on what's right and what's not. Stick to making booze out of fish.

Batman

05-21-2002, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Northlander

If they attack again of course you have the right to defend.

The unfortunate thing about your suggestion is that you say "if they attack..."

The reality of the Middle East is perhaps not so idealistic as you may believe. I wish it were as you think because then peace through peaceful negotiations would have happened already.
But how do you explain the following:

The Palestinians and their supporters claim that the Middle East conflict is about the Palestinians' yearning for a state and the refusal of Israel to accept their aspiration. This claim is false. The Palestine Liberation Organization was created in 1964, sixteen years after the establishment of Israel and the first anti-Israel was. The PLO, however, was not created so that the Palestinians could achieve self-determination in Jordan, which at the time comprised 90% of the original Palestine Mandate. the PLO 's expressed purpose, in the words of its own leaders, was to "push the Jews into the sea."

The official charter of the new Palestinian Liberation Organization referred to the "Zionist invasion" declared that Israel's Jews were "not an independent nationality," described Zionism as" racist" and "fascist" called for the "liquidation of the Zionist presence" and specified "armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." In short, "liberation" requires the destruction of the Jewish State.

The PLO was not even created by Palestinians but by the Arab League- the corrupt dictators who ruled the Middle East and who had attempted to destroy Israel by military force in 1948, in 1967 and again in 1973.

Additionally, the Palestinians' determination to destroy Israel is abundantly clear in their newly created demand of a "right to return" to Israel for 5 million Arabs. The figure of 5 million refugees who must be returned to Israel is more than ten times the number of Arabs who actually left the Jewish slivers of the British Mandate in 1948.

In addition to its absurdity, this new demand has several aspects that reveal the Palestinians' genocidal agenda for the Jews. The first is the "right of return" is itself a calculated mockery of the prime reason for Israel's existence- the fact that no country would provide a refuge for the Jews fleeing Hitler's extermination program during World War II. It is only because the world turned its back on the Jews when their survival was at stake that the state of Israel grants a "right of return" to every Jew that asks for it.

But there is no genocidal threat to Arabs, no lack of international support militarily and economically and no Palestinian "diaspora" ( although the Palestinians have cynically appropriated the very term to describe their self-inflicted quandary.)

The fact that many Arabs, including the Palestinian spiritual leader- the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem - supported Hitler's "Final Solution" only serves to compound the insult. It is even further compounded by the fact that more than 90% of the Palestinians now in the West Bank and Gaza have never lived a day of their lives in territorial Israel. The claim of a "right of return" is thus little more than a brazen expression of contempt for the Jews and for their historical suffering.

More importantly, it is an expression of contempt for the very idea of a Jewish State. The incorporation of 5 million Arabs into Israel would render the Jews a permanent minority in their own country and would thus spell the end of Israel. The Arabs fully understand this and that is why they have made this a fundamental demand- that is why Yasser Arafat walked out on the Summer 2000, Camp David negotiations with Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak after being offered the West Bank and 1/2 of Jerusalem -Yasser Arafat walked out and went ahead to declare the new Intifada in September of 2000 - because he realized that the only way to fulfill his dream of destroying the Jewish State is by war and terror. He realized that he could not destroy Israel unless he runs it over with his people, so he decided to unleash his terror and suicide homicide population. The
Arab-Palestinians have been in terror training for many years. See "www.mideasttruth.com" video called 'seeds of hatred' http://server12.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?format=wm&s=72BD589B3EED11D6B9CD000629396D69&ak=47390383 among others.

The most glaring expression of Arabs' bad faith can be seen in their deplorable treatment of the Palestinian refugees and their refusal of over 1/2 century to relocate them and improve their condition, even while they were under Jordanian rule. While Israel was making the desert bloom and relocating 600,000 Jewish refugees from the Arab states, and building a thriving industrial democracy in the allotted sliver, the Arabs were busy making sure their refugees remain in squalid refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza where they were powerless, have no rights and are economically destitute.

Today, 50 years after the first Arab was against Israel there are 59 such refugee camps and 3.7 million 'refugees" registered with the UN. Despite economic aid from the UN and Israel itself, despite the oil wealth of the Arab kingdoms, the Arab leaders have refused to undertake the efforts that would liberate the refugees from their miserable camps, or to make the economic investment that would alleviate their condition. There are now 22 Arab states providing homes for the same ethnic population, speaking a common Arabic language. But the only on that will allow the Palestinian Arabs to become citizens is Jordan. And the only state the Palestinians covet is Israel.

The refusal to address the condition of the Palestinian refugee population is- and has always been- a calculated Arab policy, intended to keep the Palestinian Arabs in a state of desperation in order to incite their hatred of Israel for the wars to come.

Not to leave anything to chance, the mosques and schools of the Arabs generally, and the Palestinians in particular- preach and teach Jew hatred every day. Elementary school children in Palestinian Arab schools are taught to chant "Death to the infidel Jews" as they are learning to read. The television programs such as 'The Childrens' Club' looks innocent enough until you realize the children are singing about dying as a suicide bomber and about conqueing all of Israel. The summer camps of the Palestinian Arab children train them for war fare complete with fire arms suicide mission courses. Yet both these policies of depriving the Palestinian Arabs and teaching Jew-hatred goes on without protest from any sector of the Arab world. This should speak volumes for the true nature of the Middle East conflict.

"If they attack again of course you have the right to defend"
This is already happening. This is not conventional war as we are conditioned to think. This is the new war of the 21st century originated by the madman Arafat and the League of Arab Nations -where there are no defensible lines and no rules of war conduct- where children are sent to die (with their own mothers' blessings!) while exploding in supermarkets and pizza places.

We need to rethink the problem urgently, rather than repeating an old Arab-Palestinian media propaganda-pushed message about the myth of 'occupation' etc., which is meant to cover the true intention behind it of destroying Israel and killing Jews. Israel is just the testing ground for militant terror Islamic movements. If Israel is to be defeated than all other democracies will follow. The Islamic terror machine is watching. Since Israel pulled out of Lebanon, Islamic terror acts steadily increased in both sophistication and quantity, encouraged by the terror organization Hizbolla's claim that they defeated Israel.

If we don't understand the message coming from the militant Islam world by now after 9/11 then we are truly very naive. Just as Hitler fooled eveybody while he was rising to power and was signing 'peace' treaties with every democracy in the world, we are witnessing the process of history repeating itself - We should try to do something before it's too late- and too late not just for Jews and Israel but for the free world.

Forums like this one would not exist without risking one's life for speaking what's on one's mind- not to speak of what would happen to anyone who is not Moslem -who is considered an "infidel" - if it were up to Arafat the Terrorist and the Palestinian Arab terror regime which regularely executes people. http://www.rootofevil.com/tyranny/default.php?image=3

Read:http://www.danielpipes.org/article/402

Jorge

07-10-2002, 12:00 PM

This thread has been "sleepy" for quite a time ; pity, because there were some interesting exchanges within it. It started with a good question from NewsGuy, quote:

The big question is where are those “good” Palestinians who oppose Islamic extremism and terrorism? Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement?

To my regret I have now a partial answer to those questions; partial because there are a number of other factors in play and, to my regret, because the incident I will refer to is shameful for our government.
.

Prof. Sari Nusseibeh, president of the Al-Quds University in East Jerusalem, is one of those Palestinians referred to in the above quote.
In numerous public debates, lectures and conferences he has consistently opposed Islamic extremism and terrorism. He is perhaps the most outspoken moderates among prominent palestinians and an international figure on its own right among world intellectuals. Last month, together with other intellectuals and politicians, initiated a Public Declaration
calling for an end to terrorism and a resumption of peace negotiations

The declaration was signed by a large number of palestinian public figures and received wide publicity in their newspapers. The declaration even called for abandoning the request for "right of return" of arab refugees (a difficult and courageous pronouncement for any palestinian leader)

Two days ago the offices of Mr. Nusseibeh at the University were ransacked by israeli police, the ID's of the clerks taken away and the offices closed "till further notice". Police officers confiscated all files and documents and removed them to headquarters for further inspection. Police didn't offer any explanation about what crime was being investigated or about any law violations that may have been incurred. No charges have been pressed against Prof. Nusseibeh (who is currently abroad) and the only explanation heard so far:

In an interview on Israel Radio, Landau referrred to the university as serving as "an arm of civilian government of the Palestinan Authority with the goal of undermining (Israel's) sovereignty in Jerusalem."

The Mr. Landau referred to is the Minister for Public Security,
and as such in charge of police affairs; he is a right winger so much to the right that makes Mr. Sharon look like
a radical leftist in comparison. He,together with Mr. Haneghbi and a few other Ministers appear to act according to the following tactics:

The chorus line: "We are for peace but there is no one in the
other side to talk to " is the best governmental propaganda line we've found so far. If someone or a group shows any signs of moderation and willingness to talk, better to shut them up early
before people starts to ask why don't we talk to them.

Those tactics were also applied against the late Feisal Husseini another moderate, who was continuously harassed before and after the closure of Orient House.

The moral of the story appears to be that in the eyes of our present government there are no "good arabs" in the sense of the above NewsGuy question. This is what I called shameful for Israel's supposed democracy and is rightly being condemned by international public opinion.

cerulean

07-10-2002, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
Prof. Sari Nusseibeh, president of the Al-Quds University in East Jerusalem, is one of those Palestinians referred to in the above quote.
In numerous public debates, lectures and conferences he has consistently opposed Islamic extremism and terrorism. He is perhaps the most outspoken moderates among prominent palestinians and an international figure on its own right among world intellectuals. Last month, together with other intellectuals and politicians, initiated a Public Declaration
calling for an end to terrorism and a resumption of peace negotiations

Israel has shut down Nusseibeh's office in the last day or two.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/10/international/middleeast/10MIDE.html
Quote from the article:
"Sari Nusseibeh's amiability," said Uzi Landau, the minister of public security, who ordered the seizure, "should not mislead us into thinking that he can't be used, like the Trojan horse, to steal in and undermine Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem."

Mr. Landau, a hard-line Likud member of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's cabinet, added, "A civil representative of the Palestinian Authority was operating from the heart of Jerusalem with the aim of putting our sovereignty in question." Al Quds University is in mostly Arab East Jerusalem.

====
My understanding is that the public declaration only referred to acts of terrorism that occur within the Green Line. The declaration would not have affected the two bus bombings in neighborhoods of Jerusalem a couple weeks ago.

Nusseibeh is also the one who was helping Saddam Hussein target Scuds at Israel in 1991.

He's certainly urbane and Westernized, but I'm not sure he's a good bet for peace.

Vic

07-10-2002, 01:25 PM

A rather garbled summary of a lecture delivered by Nusseibeh in UAE (at the same institution that hosted a conference to prove that Israel is the worse thing to happen to Jews from Muslim countries http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=12845#post12845 ) about 2 months ago:ZCCF has organized a lecture on the tragic conditions of Palestinians delivered by Dr. Serri Nasibah officer in charge of Jerusalem at PLO.

Dr. Nasibah called on a comprehensive honest review of incidents since the break of the Al-Aqsa glorious Intifadha in September 2000. He added that the political situation in Palestinian is now worse than a year and half ago.

He said that there is still enough time to detect and correct mistakes. He pointed out that if we review media means and Arabic satellites we will find many Palestinian leaders attributed the break of Intifadha to the strategic purpose to destroy the Oslo negotiation bases and exchange it with a better option.

Regarding the current Palestinian political position he explained that the economic Palestinian infrastructure was destroyed regardless of corruption in the PNA performance during the past seven years. He reaffirmed that the Palestinian suffer from Israeli occupation repression, expropriation, colonization siege, blockade, closure, racial discrimination. He referred to the destruction of PNA Head Quarters and offices by the Israeli forces. He talked about East Jerusalem and the Israeli tightened grip on the holy city. He clarified that Israel had rejected the Palestinian demands since Camp David and Taba negotiations.

In an answer to a question regarding the situation without the impact of 11th September, he confirmed that it would be very difficult situation for Sharon to accomplish his goals, without the American consent and support. He added the Palestinian leadership is strongly tenacious of the Palestinian invariable stances. The Palestinian leadership is committed to get rid of occupation and establish the Palestinian independent state on the 1967 territories with Jerusalem as its Capital.

He hoped that the reform process in the PNA should be rise from inside not outside. Regarding the Palestinian refugees he expressed his vision to resolve this issue on the bases of resolution No.194. He reiterated that if a compromise has been reached the refugees will be repatriated into the Palestinian state or compensated.

http://www.zccf.org.ae/LECTURES/E2_lectures/e219.htm

elke

07-10-2002, 04:28 PM

IMHO, Sari Nuseibeh's biggest problem is lack of following. In general, based on various information available, he seems to be a rather reasonable man.

However, he does seem to emphasize different aspects of his views, according to which side interviews him (at least, as quoted in the translations of the Arab press vs. the interviews by the Western journalists, as well as articles he wrote in English) - which may be why he's still alive, I suppose.

I have to admit though, I don't understand the rationale behind closing his offices a few days ago.

Mediocrates

07-10-2002, 04:47 PM

Actually his program doesn't seem that different from a hundred others; the Saudi plan, the sanitized version of the PLO charter, Arafat's interviews on CNN. Not much variation. What is different is that he appears mute as to HOW any of this actually happens.

Regarding the current Palestinian political position he explained that the economic Palestinian infrastructure was destroyed regardless of corruption in the PNA performance during the past seven years. He reaffirmed that the Palestinian suffer from Israeli occupation repression, expropriation, colonization siege, blockade, closure, racial discrimination. He referred to the destruction of PNA Head Quarters and offices by the Israeli forces. He talked about East Jerusalem and the Israeli tightened grip on the holy city. He clarified that Israel had rejected the Palestinian demands since Camp David and Taba negotiations.

I fail to see the moderate in this. Again, I guess what makes this moderate is he leaves the last part of the sentence blank - how to address these grievances.

elke

07-10-2002, 04:53 PM

Sari Nuseibeh was the first Palestinian to openly admit that the right of return into Israel proper was not to be pushed. He also has advocated, - albeit only in the West, AFAIK, - that Israel be accepted fully and completely as a partner and friend, once the negotiations are complete.

Yes, in general it is similar to the Saudi plan, but he stated it much earlier than the Saudis, as well as more explicitly.

cerulean

07-11-2002, 03:45 AM

The US is criticizing the Israeli action in shutting down the office. I can't help but wonder if maybe there was something else going on in that office besides what has been reported. But I guess we won't find out.

US presses Israel to reopen office of Palestinian official Nusseibeh
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Full&cid=1025787758704

A viewpoint from IsraelInsider, which basically states not to be fooled by Nusseibeh (scroll to the second half of the article)
http://www.israelinsider.com/views/articles/views_0239.htm

Mediocrates

07-11-2002, 05:17 AM

I'm sorry, what? I was looking for the ****ing Tab and Return keys.

"Give me Ritalin or Give me...hey a squirrel !!!"

Mediocrates

07-11-2002, 05:20 AM

BTW does it not sting to be categorized? Do you not bleed? Imagine that.

xkater

07-11-2002, 11:26 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
Despite the hard feelings, there are of course plenty of Palestinians who want peace and are willing to live as good neighbors alongside Israel. Many of our readers may not realize that in many places in Israel (and elsewhere) there are good friendships on a personal level between Israelis and Palestinians.

Many Palestinians, as well, say that they would much rather live in Israel, even under the rule of the Sharon government, than go live under the corrupt and brutal Palestinian dictatorship.

The big question is where are those “good” Palestinians who oppose Islamic extremism and terrorism? Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement? Why does the Palestinian and Arab community never cast out its extremists, or publicly dissociate from the so-called religious leaders who incite to violence and hatred?

You are so right. If they exist, they are invisible. I am especially surprised that the women have no movement to speak of. After all, they have much to gain from a stable life.

The totality of religion, values, culture and beliefs can make or break a society. It is becoming clearer and clearer that "moslimism" is dangerous to all of our health and well-being, including the Moslems.

No religion will solve the problem that exists, and violence cannot be the answer. Education, exchange programs, persuasion and diplomacy have a chance.

On the lighter side, I have the feeling that the Palestinians need to be given something else to do. I mean, that they seem to be obsessive-compulsive about suicide bombing and terrorist activities. Their entire societal existence has become synonymous with killing Jews. Just like when you want to stop a kid from doing something you don't want him to do, the best thing is to get the kid to do something else (hopefully more constructive). As funny as this may sound, one day I visualized rows of Arabs in casino-like setting, playing the slot machines...obsessively, compulsively and possibly missing some of the busses that they were scheduled to blow up. Really, in essence I think that they don't have anything better to do, and that's why they are doing it.

Well that's all for now.

Northlander

07-12-2002, 12:23 AM

I would guess it must be harder to speak out on terrorism and fundamentalism if you are an arab in ME. If by "good" you mean someone looking for a peaceful sollution to coexistense between jews and arabs there are quite many here in europe. I also personally know a few in Washington D.C. One of the problems certainly is that arabs generally are less influential in society, in europe, USA and Israel.

For women that is even more clear since they are also less influencial even in west than their male counterparts. Still there are alot of muslim female networks that you can hear about from time to time here in europe. I dont know about US and Israel. Its maybe not directly connected to the conflict in Israel/palestine but still its a movement for modernisation of islam and in many aspects things are changing slowly. But that there is no loud community of arabs against terror in Israel and Internationally is not surprising. They lack power and influence, in general.

Also for medicrates and others.
Even though there has been attacks on jews in europe and that there are some anti-semitism its not at all in the scale you are believing. And absolutely not from governments which I have heard theories of here. Arabs have in my opinion more problems with rasism and segregation. Especially after 9-11. I dont recognice the scenario some of you paint with large mobs in france and elsewhere that agitates against jews.
Arabs are constantly looked upon with suspicion. From the public and from society. Even "good" arabs.

The latest news here in sweden is that 2 palestinians was stopped at the border in June and have been imprisoned since. They are beeing held for "connections" with Hamas and are waiting for deportion to Austria where the came from when being caught by swedish security service.

Its a growing debate here now which can be interesting because it demostrates how things really works here and that your picture of the terrorist supporting europe is not accurate.
The issue here is that their lawyers(swedish) have not been presented any form of accusations.
Our minister of justice just commented that since the capture was done after cooperation with a foreign security service(which?) its all classified. So without even their lawyers knowing what they are accused of they will be sent back.
Im personally glad IF it is true cause I obviously dont want Hamas supporters here but on the other hand I understand the lawyers frustration and the somewhat strange fact that terrorist accusations in itself doesnt even have to follow ordinary legal procedure.
As the lawyers said, "what is a connection? They can have been on the same bus or on the same market as the wrong person." No one knows, not even the suspects, but they are already considered terrorists themselves basically.

It can maybe glad some of you that this is how things work right now despite our snakeladys critisism of Israel. Its not a conspiracy against Israel from EU.
Anything that can even be remotely fundamentalist is considered a threat to all. In Austria similar treatment awaits them.
There will be no safehaven or recruting ground for terrorists in europe thats for sure.

Mediocrates

07-12-2002, 06:19 AM

One of the problems certainly is that arabs generally are less influential in society, in europe, USA and Israel

That frequently quoth canard is debatable. Arab interests are represented by Arab business interests, at least from a foreign policy perspective. And internally, in Europe where the Arab minorities are a few orders of magnitude larger than the total Jewish constituency it is simply paranoid to claim that a tiny handful of Jews have more import on domestic politics and policy than their Arab and/or muslim counterparts. If that were true then your whole notion of republicanism, democracy and civil discourse is broken.

Here in the states the Arab population isn't nearly as large, proportionally as it is in Europe. We have other ethnic minorities instead. So if we extrapolate your claim it would be like saying the huge numbers of Latinos in California have less effect on local politics than the few Jews in and around LA, SF and SD. If that were true then I'm waiting in line for the mothership to return me to my homeworld orbiting the Hale Bopp comet.

Everyone wants to point to a Jewish mayor or Congressman (Tom Lantos, Holocaust survivor) and say 'See, See I TOLD you they run everything!'

The simple fact of local politics is that IT IS mob driven to some extent. For years and years special interest groups in NYC who were able to rouse a crowd and call the media got the city to stop, stand still and take notice on any issue they chose. It happens all over the world. Politicians aren't blind to this.

Jews in the US exert whatever political clout they have by NOT BEING A SPECIAL INTEREST. The only reason that AIPAC and all of the lobbying efforts have had any sucess is that they link their issues to the wider scope of American issues. It has nothing to do with some nefarious plot for One World Government. And this is where the Arab centric polity breaks down. It's about shared goals and shared methods.

Any minority no matter how loud how justified how well funded will fail politically unless they can link their goals to the wider body. Arabs have held over the collective European heads the Great Question Mark of "What If?" as an implied threat. It is basically two steps removed from Le Pen or Brownshirt politics. They may even prevail to some extent, they may even get a very senior political position, even a head of state in the next 20 years, somewhere in Europe, but they will never, never, never, never become part of the general political community, the community of shared values unless and until they establish a credible link to all of the other societal and political issues across Europe.

Jorge

07-12-2002, 08:00 AM

Quotes from Cerulean #80:

My understanding is that the public declaration only referred to acts of terrorism that occur within the Green Line. The declaration would not have affected the two bus bombings in neighborhoods of Jerusalem a couple weeks ago.

Nusseibeh is also the one who was helping Saddam Hussein target Scuds at Israel in 1991.

He's certainly urbane and Westernized, but I'm not sure he's a good bet for peace.

__________________

The said declaration condemned acts of terrorism whether
inside or outside the Green Line.( some palestinians do support attacks within the Green Line only but no one has it the other way round as you tend to think)

If. Mr. Nusseibeh has been monitoring Scuds for the Iraqis he'd
be charged and in jail a long time ago. Or may be you know something that our police doesn't. Believe me, Mr. Landau is so eager to put him in prison than even if he was caught stealing an apple from the grocer's he'd get 10 years at least.

No one can be sure about someone being a good or a bad bet for peace. The fact is that Mr. Nusseibeh managed to nucleate around around him a group of palestinian public figures that dared to "stand up and be counted"; instead of encouragement from our side he gets harassment. May be the moral of the story
is that our Likud hardliners are not a good bet for peace ?

NewsGuy

07-12-2002, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
If by "good" you mean someone looking for a peaceful sollution to coexistense between jews and arabs there are quite many here in europe. I also personally know a few in Washington D.C. One of the problems certainly is that arabs generally are less influential in society, in europe, USA and Israel.

That is simply not true on many levels.

Arabs are, in fact, very influential in the U.S. and Europe, where they have had an enormous impact on society. It is undeniable that Arab and Islamic terrorists have influenced our society by causing huge damage to our economy, to institutions like the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, the stock markets all over the world, and to our national security.

The influence of the Arabs is felt at airports, where Americans are subjected to delays, property searches and even to body searches as a result of the ongoing Arab terrorism threat to Western civilization.

The only place where Arabs are not heard from is on the peace front and the condemnation of their Islamic and Arab massacres.

There is no Arab movement on a large scale to battle their own terrorist elements or extremists in the Arab community. And it has nothing to do with influence on society as a whole, but rather it is a matter that the overwhelming majority of Arabs and Muslims apparently support terrorism against Israel and quite possibly against the U.S. and European targets, as well.

Remember, the Arabs need not influence society as a whole -- they need to influence their own Arab and Muslim society, and there is no excuse that they don't do this.

Arabs have in my opinion more problems with rasism and segregation.

I understand that in Europe, the general population is fed up with Arab immigrants because they have created a big problem of Arab street crime and also because the Arabs are seen not to contribute to society as much as they take from society. I have not personally observed any of this, but these are basically the issues in the European elections that are reported in the press.

But the problem of racism and violence in Europe against Jews is caused to a great extent by Arab Anti-Semitism. It is the Arab community that is directly responsible for a good part of the hatred of Jews, and has perpetrated violence against Jews and Jewish institutions.

I find it hard to be sympathetic to the strong dislike of the Arabs in Europe, when those are the very same people who are violent racists and Anti-Semites themselves.

NewsGuy

07-12-2002, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by Jorge
Believe me, Mr. Landau is so eager to put him in prison than even if he was caught stealing an apple from the grocer's he'd get 10 years at least... instead of encouragement from our side he gets harassment. [/B]

Jorge, you know better than that.

Nusseibah's offices were closed down not for stealing an apple, but for conducting illegal foreign government activities on behalf of the PLO and Yasser Arafat, in the territory of the State of Israel.

The Left wing should start to understand that international agreements must be upheld. Under Oslo, the Palestinians are not permitted to conduct state business inside Israel. Period. Nonetheless, the Palestinians have violated that agreement repeatedly, most notably resulting in the closing of Orient House last year.

If Nusseibah is acting as Arafat's foreign agent in Israel and if he is conducting illegal activities, the it is Israel's responsibility to shut down his offices and take action as the law provides.

Vic

07-12-2002, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by elke
[quote]IMHO, Sari Nuseibeh's biggest problem is lack of following.Some gloomy predictions of the possible consequences:Of course, Ramallah represents relative wealth, education and sophistication vis-a-vis other places in the West Bank and the Arab world. But that only increases the frustration of its bored, young men. They have long since stopped comparing themselves to other Arabs, and instead have been overwhelmed by their envy of the Israelis, who are so close-by and whose lifestyles appear so much more alluring. If this continues, their only gratification may be found within an extreme version of Islam, whose very severity provides both a rationalization for their plight and an outlet for their powerful frustrations.

Expect similar thugs to be undermining regimes in Jordan, Syria and elsewhere in the future. And after the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, they may turn on the upper- middle class Palestinian elite that now claims to be speaking in their name. The articulate Palestinians on CNN are often Christians with no power bases of their own. After a complete separation from Israel, the politics of the West Bank could evolve very bloodily, with the flames veering eastward eventually toward Amman. A population pyramid so wide at the bottom with young people is a population without loyalty to any regime, unless it provides them with demonstrably better material opportunities. Wrom: AFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZU
(now what the hell has happened to the line above???)
By Robert Kaplan
The Wall Street Journal
December 7, 2000
http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?sec=publications&pg=article&pubID=184&T2=Article I have to admit though, I don't understand the rationale behind closing his offices a few days ago. Here is someone else who doesn't either:

Jul. 12, 2002
Ben-Eliezer calls decision to close Nusseibeh's office "misguided"
By DANA M. GOLDBERG
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Full&cid=1025787770015

NewsGuy

07-12-2002, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
Instead of enquiring for the reasons why so many
friendly countries suddenly started to criticize their policies in the conflict, they prefer to raise the accusation of antisemitism as the
cause of the criticism.

And who would that be, for example?

elke

07-12-2002, 03:44 PM

Well, at the risk of getting pelted by virtual vegetables, it seems that as far as any peace deal - or even just a cease-fire - with Israel is concerned, the integrity (i.e. the will to keep their word) and political power of the Palestinian leaders are bigger factors than whether or not they have blood on their hands. Truthfully, it is doubtful that any Palestinian leader can honestly be said to be free of at least some involvement with terrorism.

Sari Nuseibeh seems to be one of the "better" bunch, his conviction of guiding the scuds notwithstanding. Among other things, he seems to be genuinely concerned about the Palestinian people, and realize that friendly relations are beneficial to them (based on his writings in English and actions such as keeping the joint projects between his Al Quds University and Jerusalem University alive, at least last year they were).

Sure, the scuds cannot be completely forgotten, and his current activities must have been somehow suspicious, so trust is going to be shaky. But this is the best available at this moment, it seems, so why aggravate the situation any more than it already is?

cerulean

07-12-2002, 03:54 PM

He also has a British wife, Lucy Nusseibeh, who, if a Google search is to be believed, almost might be titled Saint Lucy for all the peaceful and charitable causes she is involved with. (Sorry, don't meant to be too cynical.)

elke

07-12-2002, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by cerulean
He also has a British wife, Lucy Nusseibeh, who, if a Google search is to be believed, almost might be titled Saint Lucy for all the peaceful and charitable causes she is involved with. (Sorry, don't meant to be too cynical.)

:D

As befitting the wife of a saint? ;)

elke

07-12-2002, 08:01 PM

An article by an Egyptian peace activist:
http://www.ariga.com/peacewatch/pv4n4.htm

"That leg-stretching Arab is, indeed, the very reason why peace became so difficult to achieve. Waiting for Israeli peace movements is certainly not enough; a single hand does not clap as the Egyptian idiom goes! What makes those movements impotent, is that exactly while Peace Now activists were making a long line to donate blood in Al Maqased Hospital for the Palestinian victims of refugee camps, the smoke of a bomb, exploded by a suicide bomber terrorist, was rising all around! Until the Arab response to such terrorism is another long queue donating blood for Israeli civilian victims, those movements, unfortunately, will be insignificant."

Vic

07-13-2002, 03:01 AM

Originally posted by elke
An article by an Egyptian peace activist:
http://www.ariga.com/peacewatch/pv4n4.htm

"That leg-stretching Arab is, indeed, the very reason why peace became so difficult to achieve. Waiting for Israeli peace movements is certainly not enough; a single hand does not clap as the Egyptian idiom goes! What makes those movements impotent, is that exactly while Peace Now activists were making a long line to donate blood in Al Maqased Hospital for the Palestinian victims of refugee camps, the smoke of a bomb, exploded by a suicide bomber terrorist, was rising all around! Until the Arab response to such terrorism is another long queue donating blood for Israeli civilian victims, those movements, unfortunately, will be insignificant." Off-topic, but this describes neatly, among other things, one of the main drawbacks of the Israeli Peace Movement (or, to put it correctly, of its loudest part): the lack of compassion towards "their own". There is a lot of emotion in this conflict; it's about being pitied, or being an object of genuine empathy, or getting into the limelight...

elke

07-13-2002, 04:30 AM

Sometimes people believe that re-stating the obvious is a waste of time, so they concentrate on what they perceive as the main problem and forget to keep their eyes on the whole picture. It's hard to imagine that any - normal - Israeli would truly lack compassion for his/her own.

Vic

07-13-2002, 04:56 AM

Without discussing the criteria of "normalcy" - have you ever encountered Uri Avnery in person (or on the TV)?

elke

07-13-2002, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by Vic
Without discussing the criteria of "normalcy" - have you ever encountered Uri Avnery in person (or on the TV)?

Can't do it without the criteria of "normalcy" - crazy people don't count. No, I haven't seen him in person, but based on writings by and about him, he doesn't sound terribly sane to me.

Jorge

07-13-2002, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by Vic
Off-topic, but this describes neatly, among other things, one of the main drawbacks of the Israeli Peace Movement (or, to put it correctly, of its loudest part): the lack of compassion towards "their own". ...

To Vic:
Your comments are insulting> They don't even
deserve an answer. I expect you to withdraw them.

Jorge

07-13-2002, 09:05 AM

The incident concerning prof. Nusseibeh has brought into the limelight a number of issues that are being currently debated in the press and other media.

In the first place the incident has shown clearly( in case there was any doubt) that there is a sector of the israeli government which is actively seeking to eliminate any possibility of peace negotiations with the palestinians and even the possibility of any dialogue with their public figures. This sector has managed up to now to impose their views on the whole Cabinet and has consistently molded its forceful tactics.

The incursion into Prof. Nusseibeh's offices has also highlighted issues pertaining to the status of East Jerusalem and the legal situation of its inhabitants. Some of the points that are being debated in this context were stated by NewsGuy on post # 99 and the following (orange) paragraphs are quotes from it:

Nusseibah's offices were closed down not for stealing an apple, but for conducting illegal foreign government activities on behalf of the PLO and Yasser Arafat, in the territory of the State of Israel.
Omitting the allusion to the apple, which was intended to be sardonic, there has been no official statements about the reason of the closure, neither the police has filed any charges against Prof. Nusseibeh . The reasons you quote are from a radio interview from Mr. Landau and repeated in a TV interview by Mr. Hanneghbi (Minister for the Environment). Opinions of Ministers do not, to my knowledge, constitute evidence of a crime.

The Left wing should start to understand that international agreements must be upheld. Under Oslo, the Palestinians are not permitted to conduct state business inside Israel. Period. Nonetheless, the Palestinians have violated that agreement repeatedly, most notably resulting in the closing of Orient House last year.

You cannot prosecute someone for not complying with the Oslo agreements for the simple reason that they are not incorporated into our law. If they were someone could prosecute the israeli government for repeated violations of the said Oslo agreements. Israel committed itself to a "freeze" of the settlements and
instead, both the number of settlements and settlers have substantially increased since 1993. Israel also committed itself to a gradual return of territories according to an agreed time table which were to culminate 5 years hence in the signing of the final agreement. These clauses were ignored by successive governments so we can scarcely accuse any one in the other side,
particularly in such a minor transgression as the one we are discussing.

The sad part of the story is however that the State has no need to prove that Prof. Nusseibeh has transgressed any law. For the police in Israel to invade the offices of a University or the office of any ordinary citizen and confiscate papers, a written authorization from the judge in charge of the case would be needed. In West Jerusalem that would be the normal procedure but not in East Jerusalem, there as in any other part of the occupied territories the police or the army can enter any house and do whatever they deem necessary without any sort of warrant. A resident of East Jerusalem can be jailed for an indeterminate period without trial( the so-called administrative detention) and if trial takes place he'll be judged by a military court and not a civil one.

If Nusseibah is acting as Arafat's foreign agent in Israel and if he is conducting illegal activities the it is Israel's responsibility to shut down his offices and take action as the law provides.
How come a foreign agent not to be subject to the legal system of that country? Which law provides that Oslo agreements are legally binding? How come a resident of Israel have no right to be tried by a civil court
and no right of appeal to a higher court? The simple answer being that East Jerusalem is not really Israel regarding the rule of law and a local commander has the power to close a whole University if he deems necessary.

It has been argued that these and other legal
"arrangements" are regretably necessary to fight terrorism. However to include Prof. Nusseibeh in the terrorist cathegory
would be an indication of how much our cherished democracy is being strained and nearing the rupture point.

Vic

07-13-2002, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by Jorge
To Vic:
Your comments are insulting> They don't even
deserve an answer. I expect you to withdraw them. I am very sorry if you see it this way, but I do not have the least reason to withdraw them. I am capable of seeing the situation with the eyes of an outsider, which is a mixed blessing, and I am too painfully aware of the impression some of the prominent figures of the Israeli Peace Movement make on the European public. To take it even further: What someone like Uri Avnery conveys to the Average Joe, is a sense of sheer limitless, visceral hate for his country, a willingness to uncompromising servitude to external tastes and desires, on the backs of his fellow citizens. I will gladly discuss it in more detail once you have calmed down, since I believe that this is a very importatnt topic.

Vic

07-13-2002, 10:22 AM

Help! Just what am I getting myself into in this thread? :confused: :confused: :confused:

Add Jorge to Lamplighter and divide the result by two...

Vic

07-13-2002, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Can we live with this? Certainly :)

Mediocrates

07-13-2002, 07:37 PM

If we had a 'best of the week' I would nominate #109. Thank you Vic.

The immigrant experience in the US seems to be entirely different, from what I've heard.

Whatever happened to the Americans, btw.? Criticism of the way Europeans treat their minorities used to be a never-ending topic in the American media. Some of us certainly admired you for this, but "the times they are a-changing...". Pity.

I think the short answer is that in the past 6 years, since Clinton's reelection the country swung hard to right and significantly less sensitive to immigrant and non English speaking residents' issues. We've probably generalized that opinion to the world at large. America has become more xenophobic and it predates 9-11 by several years. We used to carp about other people's shortcomings as long as we believed it was important to view ourselves as more liberal.

elke

07-14-2002, 05:09 AM

Any "nerd" can tell you that humans act weirdly when in groups. There has been much discussion (but unfortunately, not enough scientific study), of just what happens to the individual psychologically when s/he becomes part of a mob, and why individual moral judgment is abdicated by the huge majority of individuals in such a situation.

We do know that panic and anger are triggers for such behavior, so it's not surprising that events of September 11 would wreak moral havoc, even in a society that puts such stock in individualism, like the US - or modern Europe for that matter. All of a sudden, many seemingly normal people will flock to join those who purport to have all the answers, such as the "far-left" and "far-right". This is a temporary situation, lasting only until the individual reason wins out - as it always, always does in the end.

This is not to say that we should be silent about this - never! However, IMO it is important to keep the very temporariness of this situation in mind, always, and believe that reason and rationality are integral and ultimately, dominant parts of human psyche, as they have always been.

The solution is not to keep Uri Avnery and Avigdor Lieberman locked up in a closet (tempting, but no can do! ;) ); but rather to counteract them harder than ever in such times as those we live in right now.

Vic

07-14-2002, 06:09 AM

Oops!

Whatever became of Lamplighter's posts in this thread (it had a total of more than 120 posts last time I saw it)?

Kind of surrealistic... :confused:

cerulean

07-14-2002, 12:52 PM

Sharon: Nusseibeh's office ran illegal activities

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Full&cid=1025787783160

Quote:"PA offices are barred from operating in Jerusalem," Sharon said. "This is the government's policy and this is what will be. The university is still operating, but [Nusseibeh's office] took over the illegal activities that moved there after the closure of Orient House."

US National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice and
Ambassador Dan Kurtzer both criticized Israel last
week for closing the office. Sharon has since provided information to Kurtzer about the office's illegal activities and explained why such activities violate Israel's agreements with the Palestinians.
=====

I still don't know exactly what was going on, but it has occurred to me that the PA might think it's easiest to run such activities the office of someone who is to some degree "trusted" in the West. Obviously the denunciation that has followed this move is greater than if a more obviously unpleasant person's office had been targeted.

cerulean

07-14-2002, 01:03 PM

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=186616&contrassID=1&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=0
Sharon okayed Peres talks with Arafat associate in Copenhagen
By Aluf Benn, Ha'aretz Correspondent

Foreign Minister Shimon Peres met last weekend in Copenhagen with Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat's financial advisor - but only after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon approved the meeting.

Sources in Jerusalem said Sunday that Sharon knew in advance of Peres' meeting with Mohammed Rasheed. The sources added that Rasheed, who has been actively working in Europe for a resumption of talks with Israel, initiated the meeting with Peres, who received permission from Sharon to accept. The prime minister's bureau declined to comment.
...
=====
The article also mentions an upcoming trip to Egypt by Burg and Ben-Eliezer.

I suppose negotiations have to go on one way or another, but I'm not sure anything has changed to make this round any more successful than the last Oslo rounds.

Vic

07-14-2002, 06:37 PM

Is it possible to split this thread in 3?

Topics:

- The original good Arabs thread / Nusseibeh etc.

- The Israeli Peace Movement and the good/bad Europeans

- The minorities in Europe

Did I miss something?

It's getting difficult to follow the discussion, the three are hardly connected to each other.

NewsGuy

07-14-2002, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
In the first place the incident has shown clearly( in case there was any doubt) that there is a sector of the israeli government which is actively seeking to eliminate any possibility of peace negotiations with the palestinians and even the possibility of any dialogue with their public figures.

I don't know where you get this kind of misinformation, Jorge. You are mistaken and the facts are that the Sharon government, like all preceding ones, tried to achieve peace bya greeing to make painful concessions, but was rebuffed by the Palestinians time and time again.

Nusseibeh was arrested for illegal activities on behalf of a foreign terrorist organization and therefore was arrested and his offices shut down. And speaking of trying to destroy any chance for peace, Nusseibeh's activities were in direct violation of the Oslo agreement.

I don't know if Oslo is dead yet, but it was certainly sabotaged by the Arabs in a deliberate attempt to throw the entire Mideast into chaos. Instead of criticizing, you should thank Sharon for acting with tremendous restraint. Otherwise, the very same Palestinians that you support would have caused a disaster both to Israel and to their own people.

This sector has managed up to now to impose their views on the whole Cabinet and has consistently molded its forceful tactics.

Well, considering that the current Likud government was elected by a landslide, you can hardly blame them for being at the head of the government. I know that it must be very frustrating for you to admit that your party is not in power because it is not very popular in comparison with the Likud, but you should respect the democratic process. Furthermore, as you very well know, the Likud quite generously is sharing power with Labour. So now, Peres and Ben Eliezer have a great influence over Israel's foreign policy. I really wonder why you would oppose a coalition governemnt and their right to appoint the cabinet as they please.

The incursion into Prof. Nusseibeh's offices has also highlighted issues pertaining to the status of East Jerusalem and the legal situation of its inhabitants.

Yes. Very clearly, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the Arabs are merely squatters with many of them granted the rights of equal Israeli citizens. The Arabs also happen to unfortunately be in control of Judaism's holiest site, Har Habayit - the Temple Mount, which is an outrageous mistake.

there has been no official statements about the reason of the closure, neither the police has filed any charges against Prof. Nusseibeh . The reasons you quote are from a radio interview from Mr. Landau and repeated in a TV interview by Mr. Hanneghbi (Minister for the Environment). Opinions of Ministers do not, to my knowledge, constitute evidence of a crime.

Wrong again, Jorge.

How about this?

From the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Full&cid=1025787783160):

Sharon: Nusseibeh's office ran illegal activities

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon yesterday justified
closing Nusseibeh's office at Al-Kuds University,
telling the cabinet that Israel will not accept
violations of its sovereignty.

"PA offices are barred from operating in Jerusalem," Sharon said. "This is the government's policy and this is what will be. The university is still operating, but [Nusseibeh's office] took over the illegal activities that moved there after the closure of Orient House."

You cannot prosecute someone for not complying with the Oslo agreements for the simple reason that they are not incorporated into our law.

That's right. In addition to being tey another Palestinian violation of the Oslo agreement in an attempt to sabotage the chance for peace, Nusseibeh's activities are in fact illegal under Israeli law. You cannot have a foreign terrorist organization just deciding to conduct its affairs in Israeli territory. That is illegal.

A resident of East Jerusalem can be jailed for an indeterminate period without trial( the so-called administrative detention) and if trial takes place he'll be judged by a military court and not a civil one.
Well, that is the fact in other democratic countries, too. For example, in the U.S. a defendent in a criminal proceeding can be held in jail without seeing a judge for 3 days. And we already know about terrorist operatives facing military courts.

How come a foreign agent not to be subject to the legal system of that country? ...and no right of appeal to a higher court?

Look, even a mass murderer like Barghouti who ordered amd paid for the suicide homicides of hundreds of Israeli citizens is granted a public civil trial. Don't worry so much about a junior-level terrorist supporter like Nusseibeh. He'll get his day in court.

However to include Prof. Nusseibeh in the terrorist cathegory would be an indication of how much our cherished democracy is being strained and nearing the rupture point.

The democracy of Israel is only strained by people who oppose the will of the Israeli democratic voter by taking advantage of Israel's flawed parliamentary system. Radicals and enemies of the state like the Meretz and Arab parties try to destabilize the country by bringing votes of no-confidence to topple the government even during a time of war.

But regarding Nusseibeh, I'll tell you something that may be surprising to you -- Israel is taking action against him to raise his status among the Palestinian population, which will make him a stronger candidate to replace Arafat. As a moderate who may also be a realist and may be willing to talk about real peace with Israel, he would normally be automatically disqualified by the Palestinian public from being considered a leader. Nusseibeh has not even called for a single Jihad against Israel and he has been known to advocate an end to suicide bombings. So, he needs to be boosted in the eyes of the Palestinias by being painted by as committing crimes against Israel, which is a main criteria for admiration and support among the Arab "street."

NewsGuy

07-14-2002, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by Vic
Is it possible to split this thread in 3?

Good suggestion, Vic.

I split the thread into 2, to separate the minorities in Europe discussion.

Here it is (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=15982#post15982).

Jorge

07-15-2002, 12:02 PM

To NewsGuy:
A number of points in your post # 107 deserve counter arguments. For lack of time I'll deal first with the ones that appear to me more important, leaving others (like your portrait of Mr. Sharon as a champion of the peace process) for future Notes.

The democracy of Israel is only strained by people who oppose the will of the Israeli democratic voter by taking advantage of Israel's flawed parliamentary system. Radicals and enemies of the state like the Meretz and Arab parties try to destabilize the country by bringing votes of no-confidence to topple the government even during a time of war.

I said that the Nusseibeh's incident was an example of how our democratic system is becoming strained. Even more serious in this context, is that remarks like yours above are being heard in Israel as well.

Admittedly, they are voiced only by a small minority so far, mostly by a fringe of the political far right. In the last year or so, however, we hear them more and more frequently and this should be a cause of grave concern to all the ones that value democracy in Israel.

Let me tell you, in case you haven't thought about it, that one of the pillars of the democratic system is the existence of a parliamentary opposition. In Israel we don't have a one party rule nowadays but usually a ruling coalition of a number of parties that agree on certain common guidelines. Those parties that do not accept them, form the parliamentary opposition. The government has a majority of seats in the Knesset which ensures that the executive and legislative branches pursue the same policies, this in turn reflects the will of the people as expressed in the elections. You call this "Israel's flawed parliamentary system"; I agree that it is not a perfect sytem but to define it as "flawed" is really a bit too much.

The opposition usually disagrees with the government policies. It is expected to do so. In major Knesset policy debates the leader of the opposition is given equal time to that of the PM so that his dissenting opinions may be properly heard. The same applies to TV and radio owned by the State.

When opposition parties are branded as "enemies of the State" as you and people of similar views do, it is implied that they have no right to express their views. They should be outlawed, prosecuted and imprisoned. In short "freedom of expression" is out and a unified ideology is in. This is outright fascism.

In every democratic country there are fascists elements waiting in the outskirts of the system for the propitious opportunity. In most they do not pose a real threat. In Israel the situation is more ambiguous because we are an essentially democratic country holding part of it under military
occupation. We are then exposed to the danger that some may think that the methods used to deal with the population in the occupied territories should also be applied to the opposition inside Israel proper.

Vic

07-15-2002, 12:13 PM

Think like a Palestinian, speak like a Jesuit (courtesy of Mediocrates(?)) - Sari Nusseibeh in an interview on an Arabic site (link courtesy of http://talg.blogspot.com ):
[...]

We want a resistance plan that aims at ending occupation and establishing a Palestinian state. We should realize the means and tools which can serve the achievement of this objective and those, which jeopardize it.

In our call we stated the suicide bombings might harm us because they increase radicalism within the Israeli society. As we can see the prevalence of radicalism will make ending the occupation more difficult. So, we should be careful in anticipating the reactions within the Israeli society to all our actions and know how to influence this society.

[...]

Hamas leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yasin, said before sometime blatantly “his movement might stop these operations if Israel stopped bombing the Palestinian cities, civilians, villages and refugee camps.”

[saying that one might do something is saying something "blatantly" in Nusseibeh's world... still, it has the weight of a message worth being conveyed to one's adversary:]

I think this is very important and should be exploited. In other words, this message should be conveyed in a clearer manner to the Israeli society in order to put pressure and have some influence on it.

[...]

Q. When you prepared your statement, did you consider geographic boundaries for the operations? Did your call include the halt of these operations in the lands under the Palestinian Authority jurisdiction in the West Bank and Gaza Strip?

A. We said in Israel; the statement was about operations carried out inside Israel.

[...]

... this Intifada is not like the previous one, which erupted, in the late eighties. To make things clear, I said what is going on is partly a Palestinian action but mostly is an offensive war launched against the Palestinian people.

There is a difference between the Intifada and offensive war as in the first we see the Palestinian action that aims at achieving a clear objective that has been agreed upon within a multi-dimensional and defined strategy based on wide popular participation.

These elements were found in the first Intifada but they are not, in my opinion, met in what is going on.

I said many times before and repeat it here that what is going on now is mostly an Israeli action; it is an offensive Israeli war and what we do is just an attempt to defend ourselves. I am here talking about the majority of people in their villages, cities and refugee camps.

Q. So you consider the benefit from the current Intifada as falling short of aspirations to end occupation and establish the Palestinian State. What is the solution in your opinion?

A. I think we should notice that we are facing a real Israeli offensive war, which aims at destroying the Palestinian project. Therefore we should know how to prevent Israel from achieving this political objective. We can do this through pressing towards the political arena rather than the military arena.

On the military arena we are considered the weaker side. It is true that we can resist here and there but the damage inflicted upon us by the Israeli military arsenal is greater than the damage we can cause to them.

[I find it interesting that he doesn't mention the civilian casualties]

But on the political arena we are stronger because we have obvious rights. We should assert that we are armless people and victims of terrorism who resist in order to achieve freedom and independence according to the international legitimacy and laws.

[...]

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=217647&lang=e&dir=news

The last sentence quoted is IMO the most important one. Since Nusseibeh isn't proposing that Palestinians surrender every last gun and every last gram of explosives under the observation of some reliable institution - how is he going to "assert" a lie as obvious as that of "armless people"? Only if he counts on an audience that is prepared to accept it from the start. Taking it further - only if a lie is the only thing his audience wants to accept.

Therefore he has no problem with contradicting himself: he says that "we are able to resist here and there [to the Israeli military]", but recommends one paragraph later to "assert that we are armless people". Truth is not a concept in Nusseibeh's books. And given his academic background and rhetoric practice this contradiction can hardly be a slip of the tongue.

Any associations? For a reminder: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=542 (Mind you, I am not comparing Nusseibeh with some of the ignominious historical figures mentioned in the thread and in the links, but I'm uncomfortable about his ploy)

P.S.: And having posted this http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16552#post16552 I wonder what is the place of this kind of stuff in Nusseibeh's "poor little us" universe.

Vic

07-15-2002, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
But regarding Nusseibeh, I'll tell you something that may be surprising to you -- Israel is taking action against him to raise his status among the Palestinian population, which will make him a stronger candidate to replace Arafat. As a moderate who may also be a realist and may be willing to talk about real peace with Israel, he would normally be automatically disqualified by the Palestinian public from being considered a leader. Nusseibeh has not even called for a single Jihad against Israel and he has been known to advocate an end to suicide bombings. So, he needs to be boosted in the eyes of the Palestinias by being painted by as committing crimes against Israel, which is a main criteria for admiration and support among the Arab "street." How do you know?

IMO, not a good idea for Israel, if true.

Come to think of it, the discussion between Jorge and NewsGuy on Israel curiously mirrors my own discussion with NewsGuy on Europe. In both cases the ones "on the ground" are the less militant ones. Just why? ;)

NewsGuy

07-15-2002, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
Admittedly, they are voiced only by a small minority so far, mostly by a fringe of the political far right. In the last year or so, however, we hear them more and more frequently and this should be a cause of grave concern to all the ones that value democracy in Israel.
Well, my views happen to be shared by the same citizens of Israel whose candidates won the last election by a landslide. That leaves those who think like you to be a small minority, my friend.

Let me tell you, in case you haven't thought about it, that one of the pillars of the democratic system is the existence of a parliamentary opposition.
Right, a political opposition is vital for democracies. But there is a big difference between voicing legitimate political opposition and between trying to tear down the government and destabilize the country in a time of war.

We are then exposed to the danger that some may think that the methods used to deal with the population in the occupied territories should also be applied to the opposition inside Israel proper.

Well, that would be the dream of the Israeli opposition to be treated like the Palestinians -- they would LOVE to be given control over half of Israel, receive hundreds of millions of dollars from the EU and the U.S., receive moral and cultural support from 22 other like-minded neighboring countries, have the opportunity to elect their own government, teach their own ideology in their schools, control their own mass media, license business as they please, set up their own societal institutions, etc., and the only condition for this utopian life is the single demand not to massacre their neighbors. Not a bad deal for the opposition...

NewsGuy

07-15-2002, 08:45 PM

btw - I just wanted to clarify that I don't believe that the opposition parties are somehow "enemies of the state."

The vast majority of the opposition members are every bit as patriotic as the Likud and Labour members. The different parties simply have different ideologies by which to reach the same goal of implementing Zionism and guaranteeing the right of the Jewish people to live independently and securely in Israel.

But there certainly exists a handful of opposition members who would like nothing more than to see the State of Israel destroyed. Most of these are Arab Israelis. Some of them have stated publicly their support for terrorist groups and others think so silently. Those members are at the extreme Left of Israeli politics and, IMO should have their diplomatic immunity removed and be dealt with as the law provides. I think you know who I'm talking about.

Conversely, if there are members of the extreme Right who act in a destructive way, they too are not above legal scrutiny.

Jorge

07-16-2002, 12:11 PM

Reply to NewsGuy:
Quote from your post #120

Well, my views happen to be shared by the same citizens of Israel whose candidates won the last election by a landslide. That leaves those who think like you to be a small minority, my friend.

I'm afraid that you didn't read carefully what I wrote. I was referring expressly to your views, quote:

Radicals and enemies of the state like the Meretz and Arab parties try to destabilize the country
(the italics are mine). The people that think that Meretz and Arab parties are enemies of the state are, fortunately, a small minority in israeli society. The mainstream of the Likud party wouldn't use such expressions, neither of course the Labor party. The same goes for most of the other coalition parties. That leaves you, my friend, as part of a tiny minority.

Right, a political opposition is vital for democracies. But there is a big difference between voicing legitimate political opposition and between trying to tear down the government and destabilize the country in a time of war.
and:

destabilize the country by bringing votes of no-confidence to topple the government even during a time of war.

Any political opposition does of course, aspire to topple the government; dissenting with government policies means that you would like to replace them by your own policies and hence a change of government is required. Elementary, Dr. Watson.

In a parliamentary system the way to topple the government is through a vote of no-confidence and, for such a vote to be approved, a majority is needed in the Knesset. If the opposition becomes a majority the government has to resign.
This was the situation that led to the last PM, Mr. Barak, resignation. Nothing subversive about it, this is legitimate parliamentary politics.

Your idea that it is not legitimate to destabilize the country in a time of war, merits counter arguing. First, it is never legitimate to try to destabilize a country from within, war or no war.
Sometimes a country is destabilized unintentionally
due to inadequate or short-sighted policies. That is the case with the present government who in less than two years has managed to destabilize Israel. Our economy is in shambles, social tension is growing to unprecedented levels and the outflow of capital is record high. Security wise we're worse off
than the time of the fedahyeens. Second, we're not at war in the commonly accepted meaning of the word. What we have now is the case of an Army re-asserting its control over a civilian population without being opposed by an enemy Army.

Your last remarks, on the other hand,namely:

Well, that would be the dream of the Israeli opposition to be treated like the Palestinians -- etc.

do not merit counter-arguing. I refer you to press articles on the conditions of life in the occupie territories.

articles on the present conditions in the occupied territories.

Mediocrates

07-16-2002, 12:38 PM

articles on the present conditions in the occupied territories.

Why, that it's poor? The problem with social science is that there is no control group. What might have happened otherwise is little more than a guess. No one debates that the living conditions for the Palistinians (and the Jews) who live in Gaza and Yesha is harsh. So?

I'll admit that having an overly broad scope of sedition is not good but there are at last scenarios where in a 'classic' war limitations are imposed on speech and activism. Where that is not done you see much of the same anarchy that you are trying to suppress. For example the recent 'season of marching' in N. Ireland where the government purposely tries to 'stay neutral' by allowing one group to aggressively intimidate another under the aegis of 'tradition'. The other end of the spectrum is what Pres. Wilson did during WW1, basically tearing up the bill of rights and leaving interpretation of civil liberties and their violation up to the Justice Department. He had a presidential candidate imprisoned during the election in order to 'preserve civil order' (Eugene Debs) and he was convicted under the Sedition law until he was pardoned in 1921 by another criminal Warren Harding.

At any rate there are cases where limitations are permitted and exercised in extreme times. It may not be all that right or pretty but there it is. It would seem to me that the logical approach would be to set down rules of membership and apply that standard. For example one of the rules could be "convicted felons are out", another could be "MK's can espouse whatver they want and represent any bona fide constituency but their actions can not take on the effect of extra-Parliamentary actions either against the state of Israel. And go down the list. Any violations of these will result if censure or expulsion predicating possible criminal legal proceedings under the following statutes.....and list them out......

Sometimes I wonder if Parliamentary systems are inherently unstable and whether that leads consequently to poor decision making processes. A key objective of government should be governance but that function is crippled in Parliamentary systems that aren't defacto 2 party republican states like the UK. It really seems kind of silly to this outsider that special interests in the US are lambasted but in Israel they are embeded into and lead to the fall of, the government itself.

What kind of decision process can you execute when policy is in flux almost constantly? At any given moment alliances change and some group like Shas can upset everything for their 5% representation. This is not to say that differing points of view should not be welcomed but that is not the same thing as policy.

Vic

07-16-2002, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy

Well, that would be the dream of the Israeli opposition to be treated like the Palestinians [...]Looks like this is what most of the world wants by now...

cerulean

07-16-2002, 04:38 PM

Wednesday, July 17, 2002 Av 8, 5762 Israel Time: 03:33 (GMT+3)
Seized Al-Quds University papers show PA is operating inside Israel

By Jonathan Lis
Documents seized by Jerusalem police during last week's raid on Sari Nusseibeh's office at Al-Quds University's East Jerusalem office reveal that the Palestinian Authority has been operating inside Israel, in violation of the Oslo Accords.

The documents, released for publication yesterday, show that the PA paid the rent on houses in Jerusalem's Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood that had been recently vacated, inhabiting them with new Arab families to stop Jews from occupying the area.
...
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=187458&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Vic

07-16-2002, 05:00 PM

Damn it, where are the good Arabs, or rather the good Palestinian politicians?

elke

07-16-2002, 05:08 PM

Do you think the Diogenes route will work: get a lantern and run around WB looking for a good man or woman, while sleeping in a barrel? ;)

NewsGuy

07-16-2002, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
The people that think that Meretz and Arab parties are enemies of the state are, fortunately, a small minority in israeli society.

Really? Is that why the Knesset voted to remove the diplomatic immunity of MK Bishara and is now also investigating Baraka, and previously Meretz members were investigated for possibly being involved in financing the army sabateurs/refuseniks?

Although no evidence so far has been found against Meretz members, I'll bet it's just a matter of time before their luck runs out like tehina through a hole in a pita at Falafel King.

But the main point here is that it takes a broad slice of the Israeli political spectrum to approve the actions I just mentioned, which again, places people like me in the Center-Right.

Any political opposition does of course, aspire to topple the government; dissenting with government policies means that you would like to replace them by your own policies and hence a change of government is required. Elementary, Dr. Watson.

Ah, nothing gets past you, Jorge... ;)

But you might be surprised to know that most legitimate political opposition aspires to win the popular vote of the people in the next regularly scheduled elections, not to ambush and collapse the government at any given moment -- especially not during a time of war.

Yes, bringing a vote of no-confidence at any time is legal in Israel. It is one of the main flaws in Israel's democracy. But at the same time, every voter is entitled to draw his/her own conclusions about the character of the parties bringing those votes of no confidence during a war.

...That is the case with the present government who in less than two years has managed to destabilize Israel. Our economy is in shambles, social tension is growing to unprecedented levels and the outflow of capital is record high.

This is a very important point. I have heard it from many radical Leftists and I think that it lies at the root of the radical Leftist delusion. It proves that certain elements of the Left have swallowed the pro-terrorist propaganda hook, line and sinker.

I find it incomprehensible that even intelligent people like yourself have decided that the current security and economic disaster is the fault of the government of Israel and not as a result of the Palestinian terrorism.

I admit that I do not understand the point of view where the victim is responsible for the acts of the perpetrator.

cerulean

07-16-2002, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by elke
Do you think the Diogenes route will work: get a lantern and run around WB looking for a good man or woman, while sleeping in a barrel? ;)

Who's going to volunteer for the task? :D

I hate to think what it must be like to live in the WB, know very well that the government you have is rotten, but be afraid to say anything at all. I have to admit that if I were in that situation, I might not say anything either. The only way we're going to see such people is if they have some safety to speak.

Vic

07-17-2002, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by elke
Do you think the Diogenes route will work: get a lantern and run around WB looking for a good man or woman, while sleeping in a barrel? ;) For all I know about the situation it is likely to be the only way :)

Which means: stop playing short-term realpolitik, plugging political holes with people like Nusseibeh - just to wait for new holes to appear. Instead start thinking about a long-term social and political infrastructure, give it a chance to develop. This is what I liked about the "Sharansky plan", whatever its other flaws may be. Political figures for certain roles should emerge only as a result of such a development process.

elke

07-17-2002, 03:37 PM

The trouble, as I see it, is that social infrastructures do not develop by themselves. They have to be nurtured somehow. The current Palestinian leadership is, needless to say, not only bereft of any nurturing capacity, but is actively involved in killing off any sprouts of intelligence in their constituency.

The only hope, therefore, is for someone from "outside" to take over the "gardening". The only question is who, and the logical answer is Europe. Unfortunately, Europe seems to be more interested in appeasement than in real progress - hence, grasping at straws in guise of Nuseibeh etal.

Northlander

07-18-2002, 12:28 AM

I have to agree with elke apart from the not being intrested in progress part. Europe would be the most logical choice. Its between US and EU as I see it. Europe is probably ready to lay out the huge amounts of money and the expertise necessary to develope the infrastucture etc and the palestinians would probably not accept any US interference anyway so thats the most logical.

When it comes to the security issue its a different story. For israel to withdraw the security must be solved. I have stated earlier that I belive the best sollution is for IDF to take care and concentrate on the internal security inside israel and that I belive that EU forces could cope with the security inside the PA territories if it would come to that.
The problem and the question is if any european country are ready to take that responsibility. They would probably be ready for administrative tasks and building infrastructure but its very doubtful if they would want to get into a military situation in ME.
Im not even sure if the US would take on that mission as it is now.
For israel to accept a sollution like this it would probably have to be a quite large and specialized force and the situation would be fragile. I dont think EU is ready to take that risk regretably.
For once we probalby agree on something. However Spains military show of lately makes you think if not at least some militaries in EU gladly would take on any military misson.

Which troops to send then? Many countries are controversial. How would german peacekeeping troops be seen by israelis? French troops? British by the palestinians? Those countries are the most important in EU and they would play a role even if the actual personell could be picked from other states.
Hopefully it would be more a police and intelligence situation than a military but many military analysts in EU would probably paint up worst case scenarios and take them into consideration.

elke

07-18-2002, 03:31 AM

OK, Northlander, for the sake of harmony and objectivity ;) : Europe is simply at a loss as to how to lead.

Mediocrates

07-18-2002, 03:57 AM

North -

Neither the US nor the EU has the requisite number of military personnel with Arabic skills for that job - administrative oversight of building a government. But if you're talking about cooperative peacekeeping/border patrol, the US is capable. I welcome it. We should own that problem.

Vic

07-18-2002, 04:45 AM

Europe is the worst choice imaginable. European representatives tend to identify much too strongly with the Palestinians. Their presence would only stir up more passion.

The best bet would be IMO to let Israelis and Palestinians sort things out by themselves, with a minimum of international attention. Should the Palestinians really need a kind of management for a transitional period, then it should come from countries with a more or less decent recent record of managing their own affairs on modest means and no history of involvement in the region, capable of a neutral, clear-headed unsentimental approach. Which leaves few candidates - how about Vietnam?

I doubt that the Palestinian terrorism will ever stop as long as the current pathological, pitying, blubbering European-Palestinian symbiosis exists.

Northlander

07-18-2002, 05:38 AM

The best bet would be IMO to let Israelis and Palestinians sort things out by themselves, with a minimum of international attention
that has worked out just fine before.
and please dont blame palestinian terror on pal-EU relations,
come on! seriously.
Neither the US nor the EU has the requisite number of military personnel with Arabic skills for that job - administrative oversight of building a government. But if you're talking about cooperative peacekeeping/border patrol, the US is capable. I welcome it. We should own that problem.
EU would also be capable of border patrol of course. The palestinians would have difficulties accepting US troops I belive so EU would be better.
When it comes to administrative support for PA and also regular built up of infrastructure I think EU HAS enough arabic speaking personell even if those are not military. Also the necessity of arab speaking personell is limited in some fields.

Mediocrates

07-18-2002, 06:15 AM

EU would also be capable of border patrol of course.

No doubt, mechanically that is true. I think they lack the will to. They don't want to be seen as a force.

The palestinians would have difficulties accepting US troops I belive so EU would be better.

The PLO will refuse anyone's help, even yours. Any EU scenario would be double guarded anyhow. IDF troops on their side of the border and your's on the other side of the border. It's simply a matter of trust so it may not ameliorate the situation vis-a-vis better passage through the border if you try to do it this way.

When it comes to administrative support for PA and also regular built up of infrastructure I think EU HAS enough arabic speaking personell even if those are not military.

And how are they used now? How effectively? Don't forget you'd need people with some proficiency in Hebrew as well - it's chauvanistic to think this is not the case.

Also the necessity of arab speaking personell is limited in some fields.

This is unclear, what do you mean?

Northlander

07-18-2002, 06:54 AM

No doubt, mechanically that is true. I think they lack the will to. They don't want to be seen as a force

I agree that they lack the will to. I dont even think USA would exactly jump into it as the situation is now. But things can change.
The PLO will refuse anyone's help, even yours. Any EU scenario would be double guarded anyhow. IDF troops on their side of the border and your's on the other side of the border. It's simply a matter of trust so it may not ameliorate the situation vis-a-vis better passage through the border if you try to do it this way.
I dont think PA would refuse EU troops as the situation is now.
But some palestinians would refuse anything for sure. TPA are absolutely without options. Soon enough they would probably even consider US troops to get out of this situation. What will there be to build up if they sit in this grip for too long?
And how are they used now? How effectively? Don't forget you'd need people with some proficiency in Hebrew as well - it's chauvanistic to think this is not the case.
Of course hebrew is needed. But with the israeli side the language barrier would be smaller dont you think?

Also the necessity of arab speaking personell is limited in some fields.
"This is unclear, what do you mean?"
I just meant that for EU to build up infrastructure in WB and the PA not all personell would need to be fluent in arab. Interpeters works fine in some occations. There are numerous scenarios where european experts can help and work and to some extent even educate without speaking arabic.

minusthejihad

07-18-2002, 09:06 AM

Europe is simply at a loss as to how to lead.

-Understatement of the year.

ibrodsky

07-18-2002, 09:11 AM

Join the National Rifle Association.

Teach your kids to use firearms.

We did.

elke

07-18-2002, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by minusthejihad
Europe is simply at a loss as to how to lead.

-Understatement of the year.

Hey, "understatement" is supposed to be classy ;)

Vic

07-18-2002, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Northlander (post #136 http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16825#post16825 )
----------------------------------------------------------
quote:

The best bet would be IMO to let Israelis and Palestinians sort things out by themselves, with a minimum of international attention

----------------------------------------------------------

that has worked out just fine before.
It has never been tried. AFAIK Israel and the Palestinians have never been off the front pages since 1967.and please dont blame palestinian terror on pal-EU relations,
come on! seriously.Not the official relations, but unless the "Poor Little Palestinians Searching Protection From Big Bad Zionists in the Welcoming Arms of Noble Europeans" Flying Circus we are enjoying today comes to a halt, IMO nothing will ever happen. The Palestinians must be able to assume responsibility for themselves, and this implies that they will have to deal with more realistic-minded people, capable of administering tough love where needed. People who would be more difficult to manipulate, who wouldn't find any pleasure in the spiritual symbiosis of the kind we see between Palestinians and their European friends.

One can neither kick all the Palestinians out of Europe for some time, to allow them a rehabilitation phase, nor their friends from their territories, but one should at least prevent the latter from taking part in decision-making. The attention Palestinians recieve now only promotes the kind of thinking that Eyad El-Sarraj displays: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16428#post16428 .

Micah

07-18-2002, 10:54 PM

I remember reading someplace that when the UN made a military border between Israel and Lebanon that the PLO went so far as to use UN camps for training and storage of weaponry =-/

Is this the same situation of the UN being a border or is this different?

Sorry is it 3:00 AM here so I am kinda tired =-/

cerulean

07-19-2002, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Join the National Rifle Association.

Teach your kids to use firearms.

We did.

I understand in one way why a lot of people are advocating this, and I'm not opposed. However, if I think of the situations a lot of people are in when they might encounter violence or threats (whether these are "hate crimes" or not), they are simply not in a situation where it's possible to engage in a gun battle, or the other side (which is sometimes several people) has more weapons.

I don't mean to sound hysterical, but think of a situation where a woman and two small children are walking home from a bus stop at night, or a 10-year-old is walking to the park or store. Brandishing a firearm in these everyday scenarios is just unrealistic. Thus, I understand why many want to feel in charge of defending themselves, but this is never going to be possible for many people much of the time.

Jorge

07-19-2002, 01:11 PM

To NewsGuy:

Again I'm sorry to postpone arguing with you about several points you raise in your post # 128. For the time being your comments about the economic situation, the army sabateurs (whoever they might be) the refuseniks, the no-confidence votes and other items. I must do so in order to keep hammering against what appears to be a dangerous opinion: that Meretz and the Arab parties are to be considered enemies of the state and, as such, dealt with accordingly.

quote from # 128:

Although no evidence so far has been found against Meretz members, I'll bet it's just a matter of time before their luck runs out like tehina…
Implying, I assume, that when Meretz luck runs out they will be, what, silenced, outlawed?

It worries me. It worries me more than none of our fellow Forum members has chosen to rebuke you meaning, I assume, that they agree with you. It worries me even more that the same opinions are voiced in this country; a minority so far, but their number increasing from day to day. If we go on following our present course, the day could arrive when the Jewish State will no longer be a democratic one.

"If the present situation continues(and here the emphasis must be on if), the growing savagery of Israeli society will be as inevitable as the severance of the State from the Jews of the world. The policy of a government of Sharon, Raful and
Druckman (or their counterparts) which in such circumstances also seems unavoidable, will begin with suppression of reliable information, elimination of free speech, the setting up of concentration camps for traitors and end in mass expulsion
and slaughter of the Arab population "

The above sentences were written above 20 years ago by one of our most prominent religious thinkers, Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz. At the time they were written, most of his followers, not to mention his detractors, thought they were a gross exaggeration, the well known remark, this cannot happen to us summed up the general reaction. Now in 2002, his words appear ominously prophetic.

Vic

07-19-2002, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
It worries me. It worries me more than none of our fellow Forum members has chosen to rebuke you meaning, I assume, that they agree with you.Jorge, this is an internet forum, not the Knesset. ;) . For myself, I tend to treat the statements you criticise as an internal Israeli matter, a byproduct of a heated rhetorical battle, unless I have more reliable information. And I've heard our own, enlightened Western European politicians and prominent public figures, in your books - if I understand you correctly -, suitable arbiters of Israel, making much less "politically correct" statements.

And doesn't Yeshayahu Leibowitz, like Uri Avnery, try to serve the tastes of the outside world more that the Israeli society? I wonder, because I know all too well the delight with which such statements are quoted ("look, there are some good Jews too") - a fact both gentlemen can hardly be unaware of.

Is there really a serious chance of the so-called "refuseniks" being sent to "concentration camps" (are there actually any? what does this imply - hard labour?)? Just one question out of the many that come to my mind when I read your posts.

minusthejihad

07-19-2002, 01:51 PM

Besides my Muslim friends, I'd like to post another incident of an Arab leader coming out against terrorists.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,58207,00.html

It's good to hear that there are moderate Muslim leaders out there who practice what they preach. Attention needs to be given to these types of leaders.

Vic

07-19-2002, 02:23 PM

The name sounds Persian to me, but I'm not sure. Here is a page about the guy, btw.:

http://www.naqshbandi.org/about/biohmk.htm

A Sufi, no surprises here. They are the ones the fundamentalists (Wahhabi or related?) have been butchering most of the time.

elke

07-19-2002, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by minusthejihad
Besides my Muslim friends, I'd like to post another incident of an Arab leader coming out against terrorists.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,58207,00.html

It's good to hear that there are moderate Muslim leaders out there who practice what they preach. Attention needs to be given to these types of leaders.

Another person that should be cloned! Why don't they ever put him on TV?

Vic

07-19-2002, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by elke
Another person that should be cloned! Why don't they ever put him on TV? Maybe because he represents an embattled minority with little relevance for the Middle East? Sufism's stronghold is more in Central Asia, AFAIK, it has been close to wiped out in the ME under the British (this is what they promoted the Saudi Wahhabis for, apparently: they wanted loyal Arabs they could unleash against the Turks - there are conflicting stories on this, what is true is that the Saudis still boast publicly about their Sufi massacres). Few "good Arabs" here, it looks, but motivated and knowledgeable allies in the fight against islamist terrorrism.

NewsGuy

07-22-2002, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Vic
Come to think of it, the discussion between Jorge and NewsGuy on Israel curiously mirrors my own discussion with NewsGuy on Europe. In both cases the ones "on the ground" are the less militant ones. Just why? ;)

Ah, something that slipped through the cracks, which I intended on answering, but never got to... till now.

First, my views on Israel are very similar to the Center-Right of Israeli politics on most issues. As for my views on Europe, they are identical to those of Center-Right Americans, of which I am one.

elke

07-22-2002, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Vic
Maybe because he represents an embattled minority with little relevance for the Middle East? Sufism's stronghold is more in Central Asia, AFAIK, it has been close to wiped out in the ME under the British (this is what they promoted the Saudi Wahhabis for, apparently: they wanted loyal Arabs they could unleash against the Turks - there are conflicting stories on this, what is true is that the Saudis still boast publicly about their Sufi massacres). Few "good Arabs" here, it looks, but motivated and knowledgeable allies in the fight against islamist terrorrism.

Maybe so, but nevertheless I think it would be very helpful to at least show that these types of views can be held by Muslims. If Sufists have been massacred by other Muslims, it would also be good for their plight to be known, wouldn't it?

Jorge

12-02-2003, 09:02 AM

This thread was started quite a while ago by NewsGuy with a very searching question (Quote from his #1):

The big question is where are those “good” Palestinians who oppose Islamic extremism and terrorism? Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement?

As may be seen by the large number of Replies, the question led to a lively (and inconclusive) debate. Yesterday, as I was happily watching the ceremony at Geneva, I suddenly remembered that old NewsGuy’s question; there, on the TV screen, was quite a notorious group that met his definition of “good” Palestinians. Surely, to be there, they must had some backing at home and in the PLO. There is also Prof. Nusseibeh whose joint declaration with Mr.Ayalon had been signed so far by more than 60.000 Palestinians.

How this came to happen? Was it that suddenly they decided “to come out of the closet” so to speak? Did they change their minds only in the last few months? Or, was it that they were there all the time but they weren’t open for lack of the proper counterparts in the Israeli side?

This last proposition might sound preposterous. Surely there always have been in the Israeli side plenty of leaders eager to pursue negotiations, but what we are seeing now is a different kind of “counterparts”. They are marginated from the daily political squabble and have no interest in it like Mr. Ayalon or they have gone outside it, like Mr. Beilin, Burg, Mitzna, etc. to pursue, with admirable tenacity, agendas which are not to be compromised in the give and take of party politics.

May be, just may be, we are witnessing a new process whereby ordinary people on both sides, tired of their leadership’s inability or unwillingness to reach an agreement, have decided to pressure them from the roots by signaling to issues where mutual agreement can be reached.

Enuff

12-02-2003, 02:31 PM

NewsGuy

12-02-2003, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
This thread was started quite a while ago by NewsGuy with a very searching question (Quote from his #1):

The big question is where are those “good” Palestinians who oppose Islamic extremism and terrorism? Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement?

As may be seen by the large number of Replies, the question led to a lively (and inconclusive) debate. Yesterday, as I was happily watching the ceremony at Geneva, I suddenly remembered that old NewsGuy’s question; there, on the TV screen, was quite a notorious group that met his definition of “good” Palestinians. Surely, to be there, they must had some backing at home and in the PLO. There is also Prof. Nusseibeh whose joint declaration with Mr.Ayalon had been signed so far by more than 60.000 Palestinians.

How this came to happen? Was it that suddenly they decided “to come out of the closet” so to speak? Did they change their minds only in the last few months? Or, was it that they were there all the time but they weren’t open for lack of the proper counterparts in the Israeli side?

Jorge, yes, it is interesting to revisit this question after so much time. Thank you for that.

I personally don't really believe that these Palestinians oppose terrorism against Israelis. If they did, they would not back arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat, who continues till this very day to pay for terrorism.

I believe that these Palestinians have been searching for long time for a way to undermine the Sharon government, and have done a lot of research to find ways to destroy Israeli society form the inside. The answer they finally came up with is this phony "peace" agreement.

As we all know, there has never been a lack of peace plans. Rather, the Palestinians have never kept their end of any peace agreement, because "killing the Jew" is a fundamental principle of Arab society. So, the terrorism continued and dozens of good peace plans, as well as dozens of not-so-good peace plans fell by the wayside.

But now the Palestinians have found a bunch of failed Israeli Leftist politicians who want nothing more than to collaborate with the Palestinian enemy to hurt the legitimate, democratically elected government of Israel. Together, mass-murderers like Jibril Rajoub and Abed Rabbo have shaken hands with Beilin who is funded by millions of Euros of foreign money to bring about as much harm as possible to the State of Israel.

So, I say: 'Let's see a Palestinian peace movement demonstrating against Arab terrorism, not in Geneva, but in the streets of Gaza. Let's see the Palestinians produce hundreds-of-thousands of demonstrators demanding Arafat's resignation and demanding a Palestinian society free of racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamic extremism. Let's see the Palestinian "street" demanding that their dream "Palestine" be a place that welcomes Jewish residents with full rights to land ownership, government resources, subsidized education, etc. Then we'll know that something has changed in Palestinian society, and that there exist some "good" Palestinians.

But this PR stunt in Geneva only tells me that Arafat has found a new tactic to try to overturn the will of the Israeli voter.

ibrodsky

12-03-2003, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
So, I say: 'Let's see a Palestinian peace movement demonstrating against Arab terrorism, not in Geneva, but in the streets of Gaza. Let's see the Palestinians produce hundreds-of-thousands of demonstrators demanding Arafat's resignation and demanding a Palestinian society free of racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamic extremism. Let's see the Palestinian "street" demanding that their dream "Palestine" be a place that welcomes Jewish residents with full rights to land ownership, government resources, subsidized education, etc. Then we'll know that something has changed in Palestinian society, and that there exist some "good" Palestinians.

Heck, let's see the Arabs support something as innocuous as a non-binding UN resolution against anti-semitism... or for protecting Israeli children.

Ireland retracts proposed UN resolution condemning anti-Semitism after Arab countries refuse to support proposal (Haaretz)

humus_sapiens

12-04-2003, 12:47 AM

Joseph Farah is one Arab I admire. He's not Muslim, though.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35811
The priorities of Muslim-Americans

American Muslims need to get their priorities straight.

Synagogues and consulates are being attacked in Turkey. U.S. troops are fighting an Iraqifada. And Palestinian Arabs continue to blow themselves up in suicide-homicide attacks on Israeli citizens.

It's clear there is a worldwide terror jihad being waged by a small minority of the planet's 1.1 billion Muslims against the West, Jews, Christians and anyone who cooperates with them.

And where are American Muslims – or, at least the groups and leaders who claim to represent them – focusing their attention?

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is whining about radio talk-show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger's suggestion that it is inappropriate for a mother to send her daughter to a mosque with her Catholic school class.

CAIR is whimpering about an innocent newspaper comic strip that subliminally attacks Islam because it includes an outhouse with a crescent moon on it.

CAIR continues to target remarks by the U.S. general charged with capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in which he suggested his God was bigger than the god of a terrorist leader in Somalia.

If all of this weren't so tragic and sad, it would be humorous.

To Dr. Laura's credit, the radio counselor says she will not apologize or back down from her comments, despite accusations by CAIR of making an "anti-Muslim tirade."

"It's absurd that anyone would even imagine that I was expressing disdain for everyone who is a Muslim or who is an Arab," she said on her show Thursday. "That's even stupid. If anybody has listened to me for any period of time, that's absurd."
...
I guess it's time for a reminder of exactly what CAIR really is and what it represents. CAIR is not what it seems – not what it pretends to be.

It is not a group fighting for equal rights for Muslim-Americans. It is not a group trying to protect the interests of Muslims in America. It is not a group promoting human rights for anyone.

It is a group whose real mission is changing the very character of America – remaking it in the image of the Islamo-fascists who fund them from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.

You will never hear a nice word about America from CAIR. It's a hate group. It spends all or most of its time and resources denigrating America, condemning it as a pariah state that exploits and oppresses Muslims.

According to CAIR, America is a terrible place for Muslims. At the same time, CAIR boasts Islam is the fastest-growing religion in America. It makes you wonder: If conditions for Muslims are so bad in America, why is Islam so popular? Why are Muslims flocking from all parts of the world to the United States – this hideous concentration camp for Muslims?

I'll tell you why. Many Muslims have come here and continue to come here to escape the Islamo-fascism of places like Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia – places about which CAIR never has a bad word to say.

CAIR was late to the party in condemning al-Qaida for the Sept. 11 terror attacks. It finally got around to it three months after the fact. Don't expect to hear any CAIR officials condemn suicide bombings by the terrorists in Hamas. The founder of this organization is on record in support of the goals and tactics of Hamas.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, a Muslim convert, indicated in a 1993 interview with the Minneapolis Star Tribune that he wants the United States to become a Muslim country.

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future," Hooper told the Star Tribune. "But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education."

Founded in 1994, CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association of Palestine, identified as a "front group" for the terrorist group Hamas, according to Steve Pomerantz, former chief of the FBI's counterterrorism section.

Another ex-FBI counterterrorism chief, Oliver "Buck" Revell, has called the Islamic Association For Palestine – Hooper's former employer – "a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants."

CAIR advisory-board member Siraj Wahhaj was named by U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White on Feb. 2, 1995, as one of the "unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators in the attempt to blow up New York City monuments," including the World Trade Center in 1993.

How seriously can we take the charges of a group that called the conviction of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers "a travesty of justice"? How seriously can we take a group that called the conviction of Omar Abdel Rahman, who conspired to blow up New York City landmarks, a "hate crime"? How seriously should we take a group about which Steven Pomerantz, former FBI chief of counter-terrorism, says: "CAIR, its leaders and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups"?

Very seriously.

But just don't assume the group has any credibility.

The real goal of this group was made clear by its chairman, Omar M. Ahmad, who told a rally of California Muslims in 1998: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."

This is the real CAIR. Amazingly, some American people and institutions have fallen for CAIR's ad hominem attacks on patriotic Americans.

It's time for American Muslims to decide if CAIR really represents their best interests as Americans or Muslims. It's time for American Muslims to distance themselves from extremist organizations like CAIR. It's time for American Muslims to get their priorities straight because America is at war.

ibrodsky

12-04-2003, 07:49 AM

It is outrageous that CAIR is allowed to operate in the US. It's leaders should be rounded up and caged in Guantanamo.

Now this group of terrorist supporters is attacking Dr. Laura Schlessinger, a talk show host, for expressing opinions offensive to their totalitarian agenda.

Jorge

12-06-2003, 08:54 AM

NewsGuy : you are not being fair. First you ask where are the good Palestinians that (quote #1):

Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement?

Now, when they are heard publicly and openly and constitute what may be called a Palestinian peace movement, you raise the barrier and ask from them in addition(quote from your #155):

'Let's see a Palestinian peace movement demonstrating against Arab terrorism, not in Geneva, but in the streets of Gaza.

Well this might take some time; you must concede that it takes not only firm convictions but a lot of guts to parade against terrorism in Gaza main street, with the said street filled with armed hostile terrorists and a few policemen which, in the event, may be busily looking to their shoe-laces.

You must concede that even in milder cases, it took time for public movements to parade in the streets. Gays and lesbians, started to come out of the closet en masse a number of years ago and it’s only recently that they parade in public carnival’s processions; even so, they don’t parade in cities like Rome or Madrid, do they? Another, more political, case: the civil-rights activists in the South did not organize street marches in southern towns in the beginning. The demonstrations were held in Washington or other northern towns, for reasons which then were quite easy to understand.

But when you are definitely being unreasonable is when you ask the said peace movement to demand that(quote):

their dream "Palestine" be a place that welcomes Jewish residents with full rights to land ownership, government resources, subsidized education, etc. Then we'll know that something has changed in Palestinian society, and that there exist some "good" Palestinians.

It’s grossly unfair! You are not only searching for “good” Palestinians, you want “angel-like” Palestinians. Who in Israel is prepared to have open doors for “Palestinian residents” with full right to state resources, etc. etc. ? After 50 years we haven’t yet managed to avoid discrimination in resource allocations to Israeli Arabs, education, employment, the lot. I don’t imagine any Israeli movement demanding open doors for whoever wants to settle here. Or, could it be that your sense of humor is too subtle for my wits?

Donna

12-06-2003, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
It is outrageous that CAIR is allowed to operate in the US. It's leaders should be rounded up and caged in Guantanamo.

Now this group of terrorist supporters is attacking Dr. Laura Schlessinger, a talk show host, for expressing opinions offensive to their totalitarian agenda.

It seems the list of people CAIR finds offensive is growing daily. We can add to it: Rep. Cass Ballenger, R-NC, who is being hit with a $2 million defamation suit for claiming the group (CAIR) raises funds for terrorists. Also, CAIR is demanding an on-air apology from radio commentator Paul Harvey, for saying that Islam encourages killing.

I was happy to see that Dr. Laura Schlessinger said that no apology was necessary.

Mediocrates

12-06-2003, 04:20 PM

Would Rabbo fit the definition?

NewsGuy

12-07-2003, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
NewsGuy : you are not being fair. First you ask where are the good Palestinians that (quote #1):

Why are they never heard from publicly and why is there no Palestinian peace movement?

Now, when they are heard publicly and openly and constitute what may be called a Palestinian peace movement, you raise the barrier and ask from them in addition(quote from your #155):

'Let's see a Palestinian peace movement demonstrating against Arab terrorism, not in Geneva, but in the streets of Gaza.

Well this might take some time; you must concede that it takes not only firm convictions but a lot of guts to parade against terrorism in Gaza main street, with the said street filled with armed hostile terrorists and a few policemen which, in the event, may be busily looking to their shoe-laces.

You must concede that even in milder cases, it took time for public movements to parade in the streets. Gays and lesbians, started to come out of the closet en masse a number of years ago and it’s only recently that they parade in public carnival’s processions; even so, they don’t parade in cities like Rome or Madrid, do they? Another, more political, case: the civil-rights activists in the South did not organize street marches in southern towns in the beginning. The demonstrations were held in Washington or other northern towns, for reasons which then were quite easy to understand.

Jorge,

I've anticipated this response. Here are a few thoughts:

1. I find it interesting and very telling that you, who follows the news closely and who are very familiar with peace movements, have searched low and high and only now can point to "good" Palestinians who could conceivably be termed a peace movement.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I understand this to be clearly your admission that until now there have been no "good" peace-loving Palestinians, at least in an organized sense.

But I don't believe this group of Palestinians, including mass-murderer Jibril Rajoub and Arafat co-conspirator Yasser Abed Rabbo to be genuinely interested in peace, or to be forming a peace movement. I believe this to be a ploy designed solely as a PR stunt to smear the democratically elected government of Israel and collaborate with Leftist sore loser Yossi Beilin to further splinter Israeli society.

I believe that this charade was concocted in Ramallah by the Father of Modern-day terrorism, Yasser Arafat, without whose instructions nothing happens in the Palestinian-occupied territories. We both know very well that if Arafat did not think this meeting would damage Israel, anyone seeking to make peace deals that circumvent Arafat find themselves either dead or as political pariahs. (Example: Muhammad Dahlan and Abu Mazen).

And so long as Arafat is behind any "peace" initiative, conducted by his inner circle co-conspirators, we all know the whole thing is phony as a 2-dollar bill.

So, to summarize, I don't think that we're seeing a true peace movement, nor any "good" Palestinians here. This is just another attempt by Arafat to destroy Israel in stages, of which this is a small one.

2. It is also interesting that you compare public rejection of a Palestinian peace movement to the plight of gays in other societies. In both cases, the general population views such people as deviants and outcasts (although unfairly). I agree with you in this assessment that most of Palestinian society would judge Palestinians who do not support terrorism to be deviant outcasts. This much is true indeed, unfortunately, and a sad commentary on Palestinian (and much of Arab) society.

But when you are definitely being unreasonable is when you ask the said peace movement to demand that(quote):

their dream "Palestine" be a place that welcomes Jewish residents with full rights to land ownership, government resources, subsidized education, etc. Then we'll know that something has changed in Palestinian society, and that there exist some "good" Palestinians.

It’s grossly unfair! You are not only searching for “good” Palestinians, you want “angel-like” Palestinians. Who in Israel is prepared to have open doors for “Palestinian residents” with full right to state resources, etc. etc. ? After 50 years we haven’t yet managed to avoid discrimination in resource allocations to Israeli Arabs, education, employment, the lot. I don’t imagine any Israeli movement demanding open doors for whoever wants to settle here. Or, could it be that your sense of humor is too subtle for my wits?.

I won't debate with you the extent of the amount of the Israeli taxpayer's money that goes to provide Israeli Arabs with municipal services, subsidized healthcare and education, the right to own land in Israel, the right to elect Arab representatives of their choice to the Knesset, etc. Suffice it to say that we both know that all these rights are granted to Israeli Arabs -- even those who do not consider themselves as Israelis, but as Palestinians, i.e., Israel's enemies.

The interesting thing here is that you would consider "unreasonable" the demand that the upcoming "Palestine" grant equal rights to all its residents regardless of religion. Do you really think it unreasonable for the Palestinians to adhere to even the most basic of human rights which are currently granted in all civilized countries?

You see, Jorge, at least I have respect for the Palestinians to the extent that I don't consider them to be incapable of fulfilling the minimum requirements of a modern-day country. I do, however, consider them unwilling to act as civilized human beings.

You, on the other hand, like so many Leftists, apparently consider the Palestinians to be so sub-standard as to be only capable of running a Medieval country, and so you want to give them a free pass on basic human rights. In other words, you and so many Leftists are saying in effect that the Palestinians are born racists that must be excused from discriminating against people of other races and religions.

I think that you should show more respect to the Palestinians and start demanding that they act as a 21st Century society, and shed their racist and violent customs in favor of peace and civility.

Canajew

12-08-2003, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Jorge
"If the present situation continues(and here the emphasis must be on if), the growing savagery of Israeli society will be as inevitable as the severance of the State from the Jews of the world. The policy of a government of Sharon, Raful and
Druckman (or their counterparts) which in such circumstances also seems unavoidable, will begin with suppression of reliable information, elimination of free speech, the setting up of concentration camps for traitors and end in mass expulsion
and slaughter of the Arab population "

The above sentences were written above 20 years ago by one of our most prominent religious thinkers, Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz. At the time they were written, most of his followers, not to mention his detractors, thought they were a gross exaggeration, the well known remark, this cannot happen to us summed up the general reaction. Now in 2002, his words appear ominously prophetic. [/B]

except, of course, that none of these 'prophecies' are true. The information comming out of Israel is FAR better than that coming out of the Palestinians, and as European media relies so heavily on Palestinians for their media coverage Israel now ranks ahead of Europe on its honesty meter. Speech is more free in Israel than it is almost everywhere else, with citizens having a right to criticize not only decisions of the state but the legitimacy of the state and to lend oral support to enemies during wartime. Europe isn't any better than Israel with regards to free speech, when all is tallied. Arabs are more free today in Israel than they were 20 years ago, and civil rights have progressed in Israel comensurate with progress in other western nations.

And of course the only mass slaughter being attempted is the palestinians genocidal offensive against the Jews, in Israel and elsewhere.

So basically, it is the propaganda which you have internalized which led you to believe this musing was "prophetic". this is, of course, indicative of an internal problem with you, rather than of anything actually happening in the real world and israel. You misunderstand Israel and Israelis based on your lop-sided exposure to facts as they are presented by the European media. That you cannot even recognize this demonstrates how effective they have been, especially with your labelling of such musings "prophetic" even though every single prediction is demonstrably false.

Jorge

12-10-2003, 08:45 AM

Re., your post above #163 : Had you red my original post with a bit more of attention, you could have saved yourself a number of allusions to my conscious, subconscious and the general inner workings of my mind. (together with an unwarranted european-bashing)

Had you read with more attention you’d have realized that I didn’t say that Israeli democracy had ceased to exist (with all that it would entail regarding civic liberties and human rights). What I did say is that the ideas of Prof. Leibowitz in his essay of more than 20 years ago sounded ominously prophetic.

I’ll put it in even plainer English: At the time the essay was published, there was widespread consensus even among his disciples that the dear old Prof. was grossly exaggerating. A situation such as the one depicted there, could not happen in Israel, thus everyone thought. Nowadays there’s far more widespread concern about Israel loosing her democracy if (and the emphasis must be on the if ) the present situation continues. In this sense the ideas of Prof. Leibowitz sound prophetic (in the sense that the situation described may actually happen). The ominous added to give the sense of threatening, menacing, boding evil (as my Thesaurus says).

It is not the subject of this Thread to discuss the possible dangers to democracy that an hypothetical annexation of the conquered territories may entail. In case you’d be interested in doing this in another Thread, I’d be happy to oblige.

Oh Jerusalem

12-10-2003, 09:10 AM

Professor Leibowitz's rantings seem ominously pathetic - not prophetic - to me.

The biggest suppression of free speech in Israel has come from the left.

The savagery of terrorism against the Jews is excused and therefore promoted by the left.

Self-righteous bunk. No wonder his grandson, Shamai Leibowitz, wound up being Mawan Barghouti's defense attorney, comparing his mass-murdering client to Moses, no less.

Like Grandfather, like grandson. He was just another flase prophet. We have many today.

Canajew

12-10-2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Jorge
Re., your post above #163 : Had you red my original post with a bit more of attention, you could have saved yourself a number of allusions to my conscious, subconscious and the general inner workings of my mind. (together with an unwarranted european-bashing)

no Europe bashing at all. Just comparing freedom of speach and other civil rights in Israel with the same freedoms in Europe. Maybe you only perceive it as bashing because you perceive Israel to be unabashedly evil and consider it an ad hominem to be compared with them, but I think Israel is quite a wonderful civil society and so while I basically said Europe is not the best, this hardly would constitute a bash on Europe.

Had you read with more attention you’d have realized that I didn’t say that Israeli democracy had ceased to exist (with all that it would entail regarding civic liberties and human rights). What I did say is that the ideas of Prof. Leibowitz in his essay of more than 20 years ago sounded ominously prophetic.

But of course if he said it 20 years ago, which he did, and the "present situation" continued for all this time, which it did, then his "prophetic" musings would already have come true. My response was geared towards this, pointing out that not only have they not come true at all, but they are further from reality than in other countries, including in Europe.

So because they are not prophetic at all, my next issue was how do I explain that you perceive them to be prophetic, and thus my hypothesis that your biased view of Israel and its actions and behaviours is what led you to believe that the things talked about in the 'prophecy' APPEARED true, even though they are not. Seems reasonable, no?

I’ll put it in even plainer English: At the time the essay was published, there was widespread consensus even among his disciples that the dear old Prof. was grossly exaggerating. A situation such as the one depicted there, could not happen in Israel, thus everyone thought. Nowadays there’s far more widespread concern about Israel loosing her democracy if (and the emphasis must be on the if ) the present situation continues. In this sense the ideas of Prof. Leibowitz sound prophetic (in the sense that the situation described may actually happen). The ominous added to give the sense of threatening, menacing, boding evil (as my Thesaurus says).

in that case, you were just latching onto an alarmist point of view from 20 years ago and trying to import the title of 'prophetic' to it. It may be more of a concern today, but this does not in the least make it more prophetic.

Example of your argument: We are, in general, more concerned today about being abducted by aliens than we were 1000 years ago (still not too many people, but certianly more today. Roswell gets thousands upon thousands of 'pilgrims' a year). Does this mean that someone who said "watch out for aliens" a thousand years ago would have been "prophetic"? Silly argument.

none of the things he says above actually happened, nor are they appearing to be happening. While 100 years from now who knows, 20 years seems a long enough time in this context to be able to reject the assertion that his words were indeed prophetic.

It is not the subject of this Thread to discuss the possible dangers to democracy that an hypothetical annexation of the conquered territories may entail. In case you’d be interested in doing this in another Thread, I’d be happy to oblige. [/B]

we likely agree, though I have no real problem with annexing parts of it where mostly Jews live.

Jorge

12-10-2003, 12:40 PM

From NewsGuy #162:

I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I understand this to be clearly your admission that until now there have been no "good" peace-loving Palestinians, at least in an organized sense

No, it’s quite OK! I admit that until now we haven’t seen an organized (rather loosely organized if you ask me) movement of “good, peace-loving” Palestinians.
The term “peace-loving” though sounds a bit too romantic. Let’s say, a loosely organized movement of “pro-agreement” Palestinians is nowadays openly expressing his views, for anyone to hear.

This is a recent development which, in my opinion, should be fostered as much as possible by the Israeli side. (more about it later).

When I say “until now” I mean since the outbreak of the second intifada. I suppose you’ll agree with me that your question about the “good” Palestinians wouldn’t have made much sense in the so-called Oslo period. In those rosy days, a sizable segment of the Palestinian population aligned itself with the “pro-agreement” camp. The outbreak of the second intifada and the Israeli retaliations resulted in a serious blow to that camp in both sides. The negative impact in the so-called “Israeli peace-camp” was considerable and quite a number of people were completely at a loss; somehow however, it went on, although much reduced in its popular support. The blow on the Palestinian “pro-agreement” camp, far more weaker and fragile than its Israeli counterpart, resulted in its virtual disappearance from the political scene.

Thus, Round One was victory for Hamas, Jihad and Co., one of whose main goals was and still is, to convince people in both sides that co-existence is not a feasible option.

Somehow in the last six months the Israeli left overcame its state of shock and became active through a number of initiatives discussed elsewhere in this Forum. The Palestinian camp, although understandably more cautious, seems also to be re-awakening.
..
As I said above, this recent development in the Palestinian side should be fostered, encouraged, by the Israeli public, by all available means. It’s existence is vital for giving popular support for those on the other side who are striving to break the present dead-lock in the conflict . The attempts to denigrate it and to discredit it, that we hear lately so loudly, serve no other purpose than to give additional support to the terrorist factions.

Mediocrates

12-10-2003, 02:59 PM

"Where are the 'good' Arabs?"

I dunno where are the gay priests who calmly go about their lives not molesting anyone, living under the radar hoping no one outs them? See the point is, the path up the chimney is paved with indifference.

ok I'll shut up now.

NewsGuy

12-14-2003, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by Jorge
When I say “until now” I mean since the outbreak of the second intifada. I suppose you’ll agree with me that your question about the “good” Palestinians wouldn’t have made much sense in the so-called Oslo period. In those rosy days, a sizable segment of the Palestinian population aligned itself with the “pro-agreement” camp. The outbreak of the second intifada and the Israeli retaliations resulted in a serious blow to that camp in both sides.

Unfortunately, even in those rosy days, the Palestinians never dismantled their terrorist groups, and so the bus bombings in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem continued throughout the whole time.

The only Palestinian "concession" was to treat Oslo as a free pass to control their 8 major cities and build weapons factories for the continuation of their ongoing campaign to mass-murder the Jews.

At the same time, Arafat made deals to transport weapons from Iran to Syria to Lebanon and in through the coast of Gaza, while tunnels were constructed to arm the Palestinians through the Egyptian border. That was what really happened while Abu-this and Abu-that talk "peace" with Barak, Beilin and Sarid.

InnaNiGaandmari

05-28-2006, 08:49 AM

Peace abiding palestinians, what have the jews left for them, after ww2 the JEWS had nowhere to live, they fled germany cos the germans were on a mission to kill all black, olds, handicapped and jews. Who was the coutry that allowed the jews into ther land, not UK, it was the palestinians, you guys talk about terrorism. how exactly was the land of Israel created, through terrorism!!

The past prime ministers of occupied lands says it all, no respect for the palestinians.

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."

-- David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

TERRORISM!! HOW CAN YOU TALK ABOUT PALESTINIANS, THEY HAVE A RIGHT GOT SELF DEFENCE YOU TOOK WHAT BELONG TO THEM,

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

RACIST!!

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

YOU CALL THE PALESTINIANS BEAST, YOU VOTED THESE GUYS IN!

DELETE THIS POST IF YOU DARE!! THIS IS THE TRUTH, YOU GUYS HATE THE PALESTINIANS!!

KettleWhistle

05-28-2006, 09:52 AM

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

RACIST!!

It says nothing about "Palestinians'" race.

YOU CALL THE PALESTINIANS BEAST, YOU VOTED THESE GUYS IN!

DELETE THIS POST IF YOU DARE!! THIS IS THE TRUTH, YOU GUYS HATE THE PALESTINIANS!!
This is not the truth. The truth is that most the land given to Israel in 1947, 94% of it, was owned by Jews. Go to your own Arab countries, where you belong. Leave the Land of Israel alone.

InnaNiGaandmari

05-28-2006, 10:08 AM

It says nothing about "Palestinians'" race.

This is not the truth. The truth is that most the land given to Israel in 1947, 94% of it, was owned by Jews. Go to your own Arab countries, where you belong. Leave the Land of Israel alone.

Israel did not exist pre 1947, so go back to america and germany wherever you came from. You JEWS are treating the Palestinains as the nazis were treating you!! Forcing them to live in ghettos, tell me if someone came to your house and you helped them cos you felt sorry for the guys, you allow them to live in your house eat your food, but then they crafitily start terrorism!! Slowly grabbing land, how will the owner feel like. The jews are thief, the land doesnt belong to you, be grateful if some palestinans are prepared to giv you the land agreed in the 1947.

Dont tell me where to go, go back to germany, you might get some more interset ther. I hope the iranians build the bomb that the only way to stop this double standard, maybe then everything will be balanced!!! The Americans are funding a terrorist organisation in the Israeli govt. THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE UNTIL WE GET OUR LAND, THAT TRULY BELONGS TO US, THERS NO DIPUTED LAND. YOU HAVE THE BACKING OF AMERICA THAT WILL SOON BE GONE! THE AMERICAN EMPIRE AROUND THE WORLD WILL SOON END!

KettleWhistle

05-28-2006, 10:18 AM

Israel did not exist pre 1947, so go back to america and germany wherever you came from.

LOL! I'm a Jew. My people are from the Land of Israel. Ohhh, and did that titbid about the fact that 94% of the land given to Israel in 1947 was owned by Jews get past you somehow?

You JEWS are treating the Palestinains as the nazis were treating you!!
Really? The Jews are preventing you from moving to an Arab country?

InnaNiGaandmari

05-28-2006, 01:04 PM

LOL! I'm a Jew. My people are from the Land of Israel. Ohhh, and did that titbid about the fact that 94% of the land given to Israel in 1947 was owned by Jews get past you somehow?

Really? The Jews are preventing you from moving to an Arab country?

so your trying to tell me if i live in america or Uk, and IF the land is owned by muslims/ARABS, does that mean i can make up my own country?

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT KID, GO BACK TO YOUR 1947 BORDER WHERE 94% OF THE LAND BELONGED TO JEWS, THE REMAINGNING 6% OF LAND THAT DIDNT BELONG TO JEWS HAVE THAT AS GOOD WILL!! THE REST OF THE LAND GIVE BACK TO US!! GO ON. YOUR NOT PREPARED TO THAT AINT YOU. ZIONIST LAND GRABBERS.

GO BACK TO AMERICA OR GERMANY DONT TELL ME TO GO TO AN ARAB COUNTRY, PALESTINE IS MY HOMELAND, THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE, HAVE ALL THE NUKES, F16'S, ALL LATEST TECHNOLOGY PROVIDED BY AMERICA, OUR TIME WILL COME.

UNDER THE UN RULES THE LAND BELONG TO US!! OR DO YOU JEWS CLASSIFY THE UN TO BE IRRELEVANT, ONLY USEFUL WHEN YOU START ILLEGAL WARS.

GIVE ME A BREAK, PALESTINE BELONGS TO US, HAV YOUR LAND FROM 1947..

scattergood

05-28-2006, 01:27 PM

so your trying to tell me if i live in america or Uk, and IF the land is owned by muslims/ARABS, does that mean i can make up my own country?

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT KID, GO BACK TO YOUR 1947 BORDER WHERE 94% OF THE LAND BELONGED TO JEWS, THE REMAINGNING 6% OF LAND THAT DIDNT BELONG TO JEWS HAVE THAT AS GOOD WILL!! THE REST OF THE LAND GIVE BACK TO US!! GO ON. YOUR NOT PREPARED TO THAT AINT YOU. ZIONIST LAND GRABBERS.

GO BACK TO AMERICA OR GERMANY DONT TELL ME TO GO TO AN ARAB COUNTRY, PALESTINE IS MY HOMELAND, THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE, HAVE ALL THE NUKES, F16'S, ALL LATEST TECHNOLOGY PROVIDED BY AMERICA, OUR TIME WILL COME.

UNDER THE UN RULES THE LAND BELONG TO US!! OR DO YOU JEWS CLASSIFY THE UN TO BE IRRELEVANT, ONLY USEFUL WHEN YOU START ILLEGAL WARS.

GIVE ME A BREAK, PALESTINE BELONGS TO US, HAV YOUR LAND FROM 1947..

Why does the land belong to you? What claim do Arabs have on it prior to say 650 CE? None. It is only because of the empire building of the early Muslims that any Muslims or Arabs live there at all. And they had to kick out the Byzantine empire, which came in under the guise of the Romans.

The only reason that the Arabs lost the land between the 1947 and 1967 borders is because they REJECTED THE UN PARTION and then ATTACKED ISRAEL. And then in 1967 they tried again, and lost again.

If you want the land back, make peace, as required under UN 242. Israel has proven that it will give up land for peace, with Sinai, but the Arabs under Khartoum in 1968 have said No peace, No negotiation, and No recognition.

CoinToss

05-28-2006, 03:23 PM

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.We took less than 0.1% of the arab land.
(10.000sqkm/14millions sqkm).

But 0.1% is already too much.
Even 0.01% would be too much.
Because you are bloody racist arabs.

Take your camel and go into an arab land, land graber !

sutter

05-28-2006, 03:35 PM

MGB8

05-28-2006, 05:12 PM

There has never been a state of Palestine - its a ROMAN WORD, Arab.

Your coward predecessors, like your coward brothers, tried to committ genocide on peaceful imigrants and natives (remember, Jews have ALWAYS lived in Jerusalem, were the original inhabitants, and European Jews started coming in the late 1800's when the Turks, not Arabs- btw, were in control) who were providng your living 7th century like conditions ancestors jobs.

You lost, because G-d is not on your side. But instead of living happily in the Jordan + WB mass majority of the British Mandate of palestine, you cried like the pathetic children that you are. You can't accept the consequences of your actions - actions which are as evil as the Nazis that the Arabs got support from.

Then the Jews, humiliating the pathetic people again, were KINDER AND MORE GENEROUS to the Pal Arabs than any Arab state. Even in majority "Pal Arabs" (Pal Arab being just a mutt-arab with no particular tribal lineage) is ruled by the Hashemites - and ask the Egyptians or Saudis or Kuwaitis or Iraqis or real Lebanese what they REALLY think of Pal Arabs...

You lost again in 1967. And again with the "brave" sneak attack on the holliest day of the Jewish year (yes... that is Arab pride and courage, attack when your foes are praying and fasting.. or else just attack the children, women and elderly).

And you still can't deal with the consequences of attempting genocide. Too bad. You are a people of losers, pathetic, cowardly, unable to face soldiers so you blow yourself up in a pizzeria or a bus or a disco. No one on this earth thinks highly of Pal Arabs. Terrorism is an abomination, but Pal Arabs support it in vast majorities - and other Arabs also think like this... and this is why the Arab world is hole it is today.

There is no Palestine, and at the rate that you are going, there never will be. You want a war... start it up again... but don't cry when you are all dead of your own stupidity.

ps - you do know that the Israeli Army could any day kill EVERY SINGLE Pal Arab. They don't because of humanity... because of morality... things Palestinians lack en masse.

KettleWhistle

05-28-2006, 11:02 PM

We took less than 0.1% of the arab land.
(10.000sqkm/14millions sqkm). We took no Arab land. The Land of Israel is not "Arab land." If anything, the Arabs should be owing us some compensation for the use of our land while weren't there, and should be thankful to us that they stayed there.

KettleWhistle

05-28-2006, 11:03 PM

Maybe it was just so inaccurate he didn't see the point in even bothering to acknowledge it.

Jewish ownership of the land in Mandate Palestine in 1947 was 6-7%.

Are you confusing the figure of how much land (much privately owned by Palestinians) Israel converted to state (quasi-state actually) ownership post-independance with how much was privately owned prior to independance??

That's the only logical explanation I can come up with for your hopelessly wrong figure.

Wasn't talking about the "Palestine" that included the territory of modern-day Jordan.

MGB8

05-28-2006, 11:52 PM

No. Michael is half-right, although, per his usual dishonestly, he is also telling a half-lie.

6-8% of the land of all of Mandatory Palestine was Jewish. Another 60% or so was "state land".. ie. British. The rest was Arab ownership, absentee or local. When the Western part of the Mandate was partitioned, the vast majority of the land given to Israel was either Jewish or State. About 20 % was owned by Arabs.... 18% by those who fled, and they lost title due to the war. Of course, they did support the genocide of the Jews of Israel....

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf3.html#b

another post:

http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000047.html

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 02:10 AM

Ok, I stand corrected, Arabs owned 20% of the land, mostly due to discriminative policies of the British who prohibited Jews from buying land, and then the Arabs lost some in a war.

And Israel doesn't have "Palestinian" citizens. There are Arab citizens, who are not discriminated against. And if they feel that they are, nobody is keeping them here. They should move to their own (Arab) countries.

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 02:26 AM

Typical fanatic.

Palestinians living in their own homeland (ie Israel) are told to go "to their own countries" where they have never lived before.
Israel is not their homeland. It is a Jewish state, for Jews, by Jews.

Why don't the Jewish immigrants (like the Russians or Americans) go back to the countries where they really did come from (ie. where they were born) and where they probably still have citizenship and passports. LOL!
The Russian Jews are not Russians. Russia is not their homeland, whether or not they were born there. Ditto any other nation-state, e.g. Germany, Poland, Romania, etc.

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 03:02 AM

Some fascinating ideas there KW.

So, a Palestinian born in Nazareth, where his father and his father before him were born, is not in his homeland, but a Russian Jew who was born in Moscow as was his father before him etc etc, lives in his 'homeland' in Nazareth-Ilit.

Correct. Russia is a country of ethnic Russians, not Jews. Why do you think nearly a million Jews returned to Israel from FSU the moment the Russkies let them leave?

serdar

05-29-2006, 03:13 AM

if those lands were in Ottoman terrority as before ww1, you would not discuss this right now :)

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 04:58 AM

Flight from poverty, and why not when the Israeli Govt paid for it all.
That's why so many of them weren't even Jewish. They just wanted to get out of Russia. LOL!

LOL, indeed. Majority of Russian Jews (not Russians) who returned to Israel were solid middle class. It is here that many, at least initially, became poor. And most Russians who came with the Jews only came because they were married to Jews.

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 05:33 AM

Hahaha... yeah, you must think they were all so poor and starving, LOL. Go tell your fairytales to someone else. I grew up in USSR. It was never homeland for the Jews, and that's why Jews left, and left the Russkies to rot in their country.

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 05:42 AM

I'm not a Russian, I'm a Jew. A proud and patriotic Jew.

But nice stereotyping, bigot.

BTW, Lieberman is not a Russian either. The Russians are Slavic peoples from certain territories of today's Russia. Jews are a Semitic people from the Land of Israel.

KettleWhistle

05-29-2006, 06:03 AM

I could convert to Judaism tomorrow and it wouldn't change my ethnic identity one iota, no matter how much I wished it. Yeah, and you would be another fake Jew.

Likewise a Russian converted to judaism will still be slavic. His offspring may like to claim Jewish ethnicity if they wish, but they'll jst as Russian as if their ancestor had never converted. "Russian" Jews are not former converts. They are foreigners who were exiled to Russia, and that's why many have recently returned from the exile. Living around Russians doesn't make one Russian. Russia, Poland, Romania, Germany, France, etc, are not our countries. Only Israel is. Only the Land of Israel is our homeland.

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 06:14 AM

We took less than 0.1% of the arab land.
(10.000sqkm/14millions sqkm).

But 0.1% is already too much.
Even 0.01% would be too much.
Because you are bloody racist arabs.

Take your camel and go into an arab land, land graber !

Think, carefully on what you are saying, i am not a racist, your quote just proves how racist YOU really are. according to the UN you hav no right to the land you are currently occupying. nothing racist there mate!!

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 06:26 AM

Why does the land belong to you? What claim do Arabs have on it prior to say 650 CE? None. It is only because of the empire building of the early Muslims that any Muslims or Arabs live there at all. And they had to kick out the Byzantine empire, which came in under the guise of the Romans.

The only reason that the Arabs lost the land between the 1947 and 1967 borders is because they REJECTED THE UN PARTION and then ATTACKED ISRAEL. And then in 1967 they tried again, and lost again.

If you want the land back, make peace, as required under UN 242. Israel has proven that it will give up land for peace, with Sinai, but the Arabs under Khartoum in 1968 have said No peace, No negotiation, and No recognition.

you are now being ignorant, so you are telling me that American belongs to the red indians, bush and his cronies hae no right over america. I'll tell you what if america gives backs the land to the indians, you can 'LAND OF PALESTINE',

even your prphet moses(pbuh) didnt enter a foot into palestine because your forefathers were so arrogant. i dont know how the land belongs to you guys! on paper it belongs to us!

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 06:31 AM

InnaNiGaandmari you are a very angry man.. if you want iran to nuke israel you will also be the victims you know ? how much do you think the land of israel is worth after a nuke.. look, make your arab friends stop suicide bombs and then israel won't return fire !

and then sit down to a table and do some diplomacy.. without bombing right after for once !!!

i dont want iran to nuke 'land of Palestine', i just want the balance of power to be neutralised again, at the moMENT there is double standards in the favour against jews in palestines.

Do you guys intend to use the nuke!!, do UK/America want to use the nuke, i doubt it. its there as a deterrent and show your might. Iran has every right to make technologiacal advances in the nuclear power.

SO DONT BE SILLY,

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 06:40 AM

We took no Arab land. The Land of Israel is not "Arab land." If anything, the Arabs should be owing us some compensation for the use of our land while weren't there, and should be thankful to us that they stayed there.

what about the illegal land you occupying now, will WE ever get any of that back! We hav no chance till the blind support from the reacist americans continues. The world is with us but they are afraid of the reparation from the US, cant wait for the the emerging superpowers INdia, China and Russia, the tide will change my friend.

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 06:53 AM

ps - you do know that the Israeli Army could any day kill EVERY SINGLE Pal Arab. They don't because of humanity... because of morality... things Palestinians lack en masse.[/QUOTE]

no they would love to do that, it just that they will not hav any legs to stand on!! the american people would no longer giv you support as you are currently getting from the jews in the congress. America is the only support you hav, no one else agrees with you!!

My ancestor are not cowards, well were your ancestor cowards in germany when they were masacred!! i doubt it, please refrain from what you post!

At the moment who are on illegal territories? please ask the question. i do not giv a rats about 7 billion years ago that a jew was born ther..

sutter

05-29-2006, 07:45 AM

i dont want iran to nuke 'land of Palestine', i just want the balance of power to be neutralised again, at the moMENT there is double standards in the favour against jews in palestines.

Do you guys intend to use the nuke!!, do UK/America want to use the nuke, i doubt it. its there as a deterrent and show your might. Iran has every right to make technologiacal advances in the nuclear power.

SO DONT BE SILLY,

so all the big words from the iranin president about whiping israel of the map doesen't sound insane? what do you think people around the world think when they hear such threats ?

InnaNiGaandmari

05-29-2006, 10:12 AM

so all the big words from the iranin president about whiping israel of the map doesen't sound insane? what do you think people around the world think when they hear such threats ?

it depends how you intrpret wiping off, all we know pre 1947 there was no Israel, wiping Israel off the map is not insane, he doesnt mean throwing a bome or a nuke at them, many palestinians do not believe israel should exist, and logically they hav a case.. so in uk a majority in one town is all muslim, does this giv them a right to make there own country just cos the majority ther are muslims. NO WAY! same implies for israel.

Just for the record, go and look at the previous prime ministers of occupied lands of Palestine, Sharon etc, ther are some reacist, bigot remark made by these guys..

MGB8

05-29-2006, 10:37 AM

No, Arab, its you who have no leg to stand on. Israel was created via mechanism of law. The Jews had rights, and your cowardly and evil ancestors tried to kill them, with British and Nazi support, no less. And you lost.

But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.

And Israel could, any day, kill ever single Pal Arab. It would take a couple days. It won't happen, not because of what the US thinks, but because of what ISRAEL thinks. You think we are like you, restrained only by our weakness. No, Arab, we could kill all of you, but are restrained by our humanity. But you Arabs keep pushing and pushing.

As for Michael, there is no evidence of his "converts to Judaism in the middle ages" lie... which is all that it is, another Michael lie, one of the reasons he was banned. Meanwhile, Jews are genetically linked - it certainly is a tribal nation - not simply a religion - another LIE by Michael.

Finally, Again - 80% of partition Israel was either owned by the Sovereign or by Jews. The parts of Israel that were conquered by the Arabs... do you think the Jews were able to keep their title (in Gaza, in Hebron?) OF COURSE NOT. Its a hypocritical and opportunistic and, par for the course, decietful argument by Arab Imperialists like Michael. Arabs lost land... it is true. Jews lost more land. Arabs lost land because they started a war and lost, and possed an existential threat to the state that they attacked - oh, and because they would not come back and live peaceably, they are entitled to nothing under Geneva.

Meanwhile, Jews were similarly dispossed, despite not attacking their host nations. Further, at the same time and subsequently, Millions of people have lost property to state, particularly in border changing conflicts - note that Michael and his ilk have no problem when communist states nationalize property of foreigners - only when Israel (read Jews) does it.

Its merely part of their little personal war against the Jews. Despicable wastes of non-humanity. Nothing more, just utter filth.

CoinToss

05-29-2006, 10:40 AM

[deleted for racist remarks]
- NewsGuy

[Edit]
Is it racist to tell him, that his beloved tunisian brothers expelled my family and stole all their properties ?

Ricky

05-31-2006, 04:26 AM

So Mr Innanigaandmari, you have your own simple solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Simply do away with the State of Israel. Maybe you support the suggestion of the President of Iran to repatriate Israeli Jews to Europe where there fathers came from. (Incidentally about half the Israeli Jewish population hail from Arab countries. I wonder how pleased the Arab states would be to have them back). Anyway, ideas like these are mirror images of extremist Israeli ideas to transfer Arab Israelis and inhabitants of the West Bank to Arab countries. Israel is here to stay and the Arab population of the Land of Israel, as Jews call it, or historic Palestine, as the Arab population call the area, and the two population groups must learn to live in peace together in this tiny stretch of territory

E

CoinToss

05-31-2006, 06:43 AM

But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.
But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.
But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.
But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.
But, instead of being a grow up and saying: well, we Arabs have 99.9% of the mid-east, and 81% of the Palestine Mandate... you continue to cry and whine.
One Jews standing for his rights is still to much for those extremists.

presa1200

06-01-2006, 10:58 AM

MGB8

06-01-2006, 11:03 AM

Mecca and Medina will both be radioactive ash and glass before Islam rules the world. Its funny, but in fact the violent imperialist elements in Islam are EXACTLY WHY it spread so fast - COERSION, not inspiration.

The Arab legions conquered, and in order to have equal rights, to not pay the Jizya or worse, be slaughtered, people converted en masse.

And you come here and preach Islamic Imperialism and World Domination. Good luck. Because it simply is not going to happen. Ever.

KettleWhistle

06-02-2006, 12:58 AM

So Mr Innanigaandmari, you have your own simple solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Simply do away with the State of Israel. Maybe you support the suggestion of the President of Iran to repatriate Israeli Jews to Europe where there fathers came from.

There is no such thing as "repatriating" Jews to Europe. We, Jews, are not Europeans. We can only be repatriated FROM Europe, and other Diaspora countries, to our only paternal land--the Land of Israel.

CoinToss

06-02-2006, 02:03 AM

but prophet Muhammad has said, Islamic civilization will be rising up from eastern countries for the 2nd time and that time Islamic will take over the world. For those who hates islam, plan to destroy islam or insult islam, please remember, Muhammad's word was real and it will going to be happened. Do not regret.The Jews are the chosen people of G-od.
Maybe you could regret one day to have been so stupid and so wicked to them.

sutter

06-02-2006, 05:21 AM

scattergood

06-02-2006, 05:41 PM

why do all people relate a muslim's sin to his religion? The world always accuse islam is the terrorist but the problem is those who doing destruction is the human themselve, not religion. But when i noticed US army killing innocents, conquering other's land why don't people relate their 'behavior' to christian is brutal?

if people saying islamic teaching is a violence, why don't they go and study the history of Islam and then debate? Do you think a brual religion can grow so fast and global? Furthermore, islam is the first who build the civilization. When the time european contries still in dark age and catching rabbits, the islamic countries has developed science and technologies. These are real knowledge from Quran which existed 1,400 years ago. Just look at bible, what do christian get from bible? Story book? perhapss....

but prophet Muhammad has said, Islamic civilization will be rising up from eastern countries for the 2nd time and that time Islamic will take over the world. For those who hates islam, plan to destroy islam or insult islam, please remember, Muhammad's word was real and it will going to be happened. Do not regret.

Many of us have studied the spread of Islam and read the Quran extnesively. But becasue we are not Believers, we have a different take. But you raise an interesting point about Muslims committing violence being generalized to Muslim society being violent.

The major difference is as follows in this hypothetical situation:

1) A soldier from a Western nation, who is assumed to be a Christian, commits an offense, say humiliates a prisoner of war, or shoots somebody and kills them during a combat operation. He NEVER mentions that Jesus taught him to do this, or that the Bible tells him to kill all who don't believe in Christ.

2) The Muslim press states that this is an example of the Crusaders perpetrating violence against Muslims. Christians wanting to invade the dar al Islam and murder the believers.

3) The Western powers repudiate the soldier's behavior, investigate, make the investigation public, and punish the solder. The Muslims cry that the West is just protecting their own and not punishing people properly because the soldier isn't judged by Sharia standards. Thus even when the West repudiates and punishes violence committed against Muslims, it in many cases is seen as protecting the perpetrator and as even more evidence of the Christian plot against Islam.

Now let's look at the other example:

1) A Muslim straps some explosives under his clothes, dresses as an Orthodox Jew, climbs onto a bus, and blows himself up killing dozens of civilians. A tape is published where the Muslim is holding a Quran, telling the world that his is prepared to die for Islam, that the Quran tells him to do this, and that jihad as he understands it commands him to fight the infidel where ever he is to be found.

2) Muslim governments cry that it is a shame that the desperation of the Muslim has driven him to such an extreme, that it is terrible that people will not understand and now look badly upon Islam, name a street after him, and produce TV and radio material saying that the Shaheed has given the most glorious sacrifice in the name of Islam.

This is the big difference.

presa1200

06-03-2006, 01:13 AM

The Jews are the chosen people of G-od.
Maybe you could regret one day to have been so stupid and so wicked to them.

yeah, ESPECIALLY CHOSEN by God to throw back in hellfire...tat's true. :)

CoinToss

06-03-2006, 02:42 AM

yeah, ESPECIALLY CHOSEN by God to throw back in hellfire...tat's true. :)Maybe you need G-od sends you a bit more tsunamis and earthquakes so that you understand.

Reffo

06-03-2006, 09:03 PM

FOGOMAINS

06-04-2006, 01:16 AM

Leon

06-04-2006, 02:11 AM

yeah, ESPECIALLY CHOSEN by God to throw back in hellfire...tat's true. :)

I think its time to say "bye, bye, Mahatir" and throw this guy back into whence he came from. What do you think moderators?

why do all people relate a muslim's sin to his religion? The world always accuse islam is the terrorist.

No, no, we certainly wouldnt want to do that, now would we?

but prophet Muhammad has said, Islamic civilization will be rising up from eastern countries for the 2nd time and that time Islamic will take over the world. For those who hates islam, plan to destroy islam or insult islam, please remember, Muhammad's word was real and it will going to be happened. Do not regret.

With muslims like yourself, your fellow muslims certainly don't need enemies.

Furthermore, islam is the first who build the civilization. When the time european contries still in dark age and catching rabbits, the islamic countries has developed science and technologies.

BS. the Jews brought morality and ethics into the world via the Torah which contained the Ten commandments among other things. Today's civilisation is based on this morality and ethics. Islam merley stole some of these ideas and distorted them. The ancient Greeks on the other hand brought in Democracy, science and philosphy. Apart from the use of arabic numbers, Islam contributed zilch to the world.

Any science or advancements that did come from Islamic nations, were developed by Jews who happened to live in these countries. Among them was the famous Jewish rabbi Maimonidies.

Leon

06-04-2006, 02:17 AM

I see that another troll - another one from the Eurabian capital of Londonistan - hath entered the building.

I guess, we will expect to see him here every week, fresh from his friday night sermon at Finsbury Park, where his local Imam implores the congregents "to kill all the kaffirs and Yahoodi wherever you find them."

MGB8

06-04-2006, 10:08 AM

No, its not quite true, either. A lot came from the African Empires (pre-Islam) or the Zoroastrian Persians.

Canajew

06-07-2006, 09:13 AM

why do all people relate a muslim's sin to his religion? The world always accuse islam is the terrorist but the problem is those who doing destruction is the human themselve, not religion. But when i noticed US army killing innocents, conquering other's land why don't people relate their 'behavior' to christian is brutal?

because Christianity does not drive the US to act the way it does?

if people saying islamic teaching is a violence, why don't they go and study the history of Islam and then debate? Do you think a brual religion can grow so fast and global?

yes. islam's history IS violent and bloody. Expansionist violent jihadiism to spread submission to Muslims has been the norm, not the exception, in Islamic history and tradition.

Whether you like to admit it or not.

Furthermore, islam is the first who build the civilization.

Ahahahahahaha.

Islam came after lots and lots of civilizations, and has done a piss poor job at progress since about a thousand years ago.

When the time european contries still in dark age and catching rabbits, the islamic countries has developed science and technologies.

and what has happened since then?

These are real knowledge from Quran which existed 1,400 years ago. Just look at bible, what do christian get from bible? Story book? perhapss....

and what do Muslims get from the Koran, other than Jihad ideology?

but prophet Muhammad has said, Islamic civilization will be rising up from eastern countries for the 2nd time and that time Islamic will take over the world.

that's exactly right. jihad ideology, Islam and Islamists to dominate and be dominant over others.

With all due respect, please off with your desire and quest to take over the world. Your religion's rights to control people ends at my body and my country and my civilization. Don't like it, well that's just too bad.

For those who hates islam, plan to destroy islam or insult islam, please remember, Muhammad's word was real and it will going to be happened. Do not regret.

Muhammed was a delusional warlord who managed to convince a whole bunch of fanatics that he was talking to god and god wanted him to seize power.

Just because you believe in Mohammed doesn't make it true, and I have every right to insult Mohammed just like I have every right to insult Jesus, Plato, and god.

it is not for you to make judgments on these issues. You so confident in Mohammmed and the lord god, you should be comfortable just living and let live so that god can sort it all out on the "day of judgment" or whatever delusional end-game you contemplate.

CoinToss

06-07-2006, 09:57 AM

Just because you believe in Mohammed doesn't make it true, and I have every right to insult Mohammed just like I have every right to insult Jesus, Plato, and god.Insulting G-od is subject to controverse, since it's considered blasphemy. (forbidden by the 3rd commandement)
But you can insult any human if you feel like :)
Exepted if the guy is too close to you... of course :D

Canajew

06-07-2006, 10:04 AM

Insulting G-od is subject to controverse, since it's considered blasphemy. (forbidden by the 3rd commandement)
But you can insult any human if you feel like :)
Exepted if the guy is too close to you... of course :D

but I can blaspheme as much as I like too. Up to me. MY decision. It is not up to you or anyone else to exercize judgment or punishment.

Ricky

06-09-2006, 05:47 AM

I do not wish to give the impression that I underplay the great danger with which Muslim extremists threaten the world, indeed the danger is great and a harsh war must be fought against these extremists. Also I fully accept the saying of a courageous Muslim journalist who wrote that of course not every Muslim is a terrorist, but it is a fact that virtually all terrorists are Muslims, still in order not to sink into racism per se one should always keep in mind facts like:
Only 15% of Muslims living in Europe pray 5 times a day. Obviously, terrorists do not come from the 65% of Muslims who do not.
Also it would be outrageously unfair to hold that all or even most of the Muslims who do pray 5 times a day support terror. The percentage of Muslims who approve of terror activities is presumably very small. Indeed, President Bush has on a number of occasions warned against considering every American Muslim as a racist terrorist.
Again, I would not wish to be understood as ignoring the gravity of threat of Muslim terrorism, but one must always be sure not to allow the true threat to lead one to anti Muslim feeling per se.

Ricky

06-10-2006, 11:45 AM

A large proportion of the Palestinian society gave written support for the Ayalon-Nusseibah peace plan calling for the establishment of a Palestinian State on most of the West Bank and no call for the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, Palestinian polls frequently show that the majority of the Palestinian population want peace with Israel. Unfortunately, this may not contradict Palestinian support for suicide terrorists. When the Palestinians believe that peace is not near, they may support terror in the hope of weakening the Israelis

MGB8

06-10-2006, 11:55 AM

Except for the fact that is not the trend historically. In fact, support for bombings generally only goes down after strong Israeli responses.

Further, while there is support for a Pal Arab state (often under conditions that murder Israel), that does not mean there is support for Pal Arabs stopping other Pal Arabs from committing attacks, suicide or otherwise.

MGB8

06-10-2006, 11:58 AM

Oh, and Wikipedia disagrees with you on Pal Arab support:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_plan

A large proportion of the Palestinian society gave written support for the Ayalon-Nusseibah peace plan calling for the establishment of a Palestinian State on most of the West Bank and no call for the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, Palestinian polls frequently show that the majority of the Palestinian population want peace with Israel. Unfortunately, this may not contradict Palestinian support for suicide terrorists. When the Palestinians believe that peace is not near, they may support terror in the hope of weakening the Israelis

Jorge

06-22-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote from Ricky #218:

A large proportion of the Palestinian society gave written support for the Ayalon-Nusseibah peace plan calling for the establishment of a Palestinian State on most of the West Bank and no call for the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

Quite right of Ricky to recall the Ayalon-Nusseibeh Declaration of Principles. The Declaration has received little publicity lately in spite of the fact that it has achieved quite an impressive support: up to now over 160.000 Palestinians have signed it ( and 254.000 Israelis). I call it impressive because, given the conditions prevalent in the West Bank and Gaza, such a considerable support by Palestinians is an indication which cannot be ignored.

One might venture that those Palestinians that signed the Declaration of Principles are just a part of the ones that Newsguy had in mind when, long ago, he opened this Thread with the question: Where are the "Good Arabs"?

Reffo

06-22-2006, 02:20 PM

Jorge

I'm sure there are good Arabs. The problem is that they are not the ones who are in control of the agenda. What do you think needs to happen, what must they do, to get control? Please don't tell me it's up to Israel, surely it's up to the Palestinians to do the right thing for themselves and the region, for once. And yes, if they do, it's up to Israel to reciprocate too.

Reffo

06-22-2006, 04:31 PM

A funny thought has just occurred to me. I wonder what would happen if one day we would wake up to the spectacle of 100,000 Palestinians (or more) going out to the street to demonstrate against their own extremists and their violence? I wouldn't even mind if they would also demonstrate against Israel's actions at the same time so long as they would clearly renounce their own terrorists as well and demand a stop to terrorism and the targeting of Israeli civilians.

I dare say, that such an action would generate a lot of support from ordinary Israelis who would, I'm sure, be willing to initiate reciprocal gestures on their side. Especially if the Palestinians would make it a grass roots and sustained effort.

I guess, it's too much to expect of them. It's just science fiction. And unfortunately, even if they try, I suspect that a few well targeted killings of the leading demonstrators, by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa would quickly derail any such attempt by good Palestinians.

NewsGuy

06-22-2006, 09:31 PM

One might venture that those Palestinians that signed the Declaration of Principles are just a part of the ones that Newsguy had in mind when, long ago, he opened this Thread with the question: Where are the "Good Arabs"?
Hi Jorge,

When you mentioned my name, it lit up the "posts for me" button.

Good to see you.

I looked up this topic and found some posts by you from 2003, showing how many years we've considered this topic together and the various opinions of forum members, some still here, some not.

Well, I still doubt that the majority of Palestinians have ever given up their national dream of slaughtering every Jewish man, woman and child.

But I do believe that the more the Arabs see the Israelis' first-world lifestyle in comparison with the Palestinians' self-imposed bombed-out slums, there is a certain part of their population that wants an end to the conflict.

There is a part of Palestinian society that would like to experience normal life without armed gangs roaming the streets and without Israeli aerial drones firing missiles at the cars of Palestinian terrorists.

I think that at this point, many Palestinians will give up their plan to inject millions more Arab enemies into the heart of Israel through what they term the right of return. The partition of Jerusalem is also acceptable to many of them. But the '67 borders is something that Israel cannot sustain. So, there will be a "plus-or-minus" variation on it, and that will be very difficult to sell to the Arabs.

Are the Palestinians now "good?" Who knows. Their election of Hamas shows that they are a nation of terrorists and terrorism supporters. But that is the norm in the Arab and larger Muslim world.

No matter. We don't need them to be "good" or "bad" in our definition. We just need for them to have a self-interest in stopping to mass-murder their neighbors. If that ever happens, there will be progress on the "plus or minus" of the '67 border-line.

sutter

06-23-2006, 06:00 AM

By newsguy
"There is a part of Palestinian society that would like to experience normal life without armed gangs roaming the streets and without Israeli aerial drones firing missiles at the cars of Palestinian terrorists."

I dont think so.. they look at the israelies and see how they live. and how they live them selves.. they will blame the israelies for it! they are tought that jews are the reason.. and how evil jews are. im speaking of the majority here, ofcource not all!

physics

06-23-2006, 08:08 PM

There are always good souls among the evil. Unfortunately, the majority people and group in power are important, and the good people have no significance.

physics

06-23-2006, 08:11 PM

I dont think so.. they look at the israelies and see how they live. and how they live them selves.. they will blame the israelies for it! they are tought that jews are the reason.. and how evil jews are. im speaking of the majority here, ofcource not all!

The Palestinians are taught to hate the same people who give them aid. They forget that their lives depend on Israel & other Non-Arab nations.

The Palestinians are taught to envy Israel. The crazy Palestinian leaders would rather have their own people live in poor conditions just to have a reason to hate Israel.

Ricky

06-24-2006, 11:01 AM

Although I was the one to make mention of the Ayalon Nusseibeh plan, I did so mainly so as not to paint too one sided a picture of Palestinian society. However, I am very doubtful if a majority of Palestinians will be willing to reach a peace agreement with Israel on its terms, particularly as I don't think a majority of Palestinians will be willing to give up on the right of return for the 1948 Arab refugees
A few years ago, Yossi Beilin reached as similar agreement with some (low grade) Palestinian leaders. However, I have grave doubts if an official Palestinian regime (even one headed by Fatah) will be willing to make peace with Israel on its terms, again because of the question of the solution of the refugee problem

physics

06-24-2006, 11:11 AM

again because of the question of the solution of the refugee problem

Half of the Refugee problem is already solved by the millions of Palestinians who live in Jordan. The other half of the solution is in Gaza & West Bank, and will never ever be inside Israel!

KettleWhistle

06-24-2006, 11:31 AM

The so-called "refugee problem" is not Israel's problem. The Arabs are simply trying to make it into one.

As for there being "good" Arabs, and what have you, what does "good" mean? Pleasant? Hard-working? Supporing of his/her community? I'm sure most of them are. Them being generally ordinary people doesn't mean that they won't hate Jews, or would end the war they've been waging on us.

Ricky

06-24-2006, 12:08 PM

ygalg1

06-24-2006, 12:15 PM

Where are the "good" Arabs?turn to "good" muslims

KettleWhistle

06-24-2006, 12:26 PM

Physics and Kettlewhistle
You don't have to convince me that Israel does not have to solve the Palestinian refugee problem, and certainly not by offering all refugees the right to return to Israel. Israel's problem is to convince the Palestinians that they must give up on the right to return

Israel's only problem is that there are people who even think about this "refugee" scam. It will suffice for Israel to simply state this position, and to end the discussion at that. Because it's a non-issue, really.

Jorge

06-24-2006, 02:06 PM

Quote from Reffo’s #222:

I'm sure there are good Arabs. The problem is that they are not the ones who are in control of the agenda. What do you think needs to happen, what must they do, to get control? Please don't tell me it's up to Israel, surely it's up to the Palestinians to do the right thing for themselves and the region, for once. And yes, if they do, it's up to Israel to reciprocate too.

“What must they do to get control?” Since the Palestinian proto-State is, for the time being, following democratic procedures, what they have to do is simply to convince enough voters that their positions are the right ones. At least in theory, in democratic societies, a substantial majority may “convince” its government to act in given ways. In practice, in the situation we are discussing, there are a number of factors which can make that procedure sort of ineffectual.

Let’s consider for a moment the situation of their counterparts in Israel, those who firmly agree with the Declaration of Principles that Ricky brought up in #218. This sector is also set on convincing enough voters that their positions are the right ones. To judge from the results of the recent Knesset elections, little progress was achieved. To judge from the results of their recent PA elections, the ones we are provisionally calling “good Arabs” are getting nowhere.

The problem, on the Israeli side, is that, concurrent to a rational debate of our positions, the “gut reactions” of the people in the face of terrorist attacks comes into play. One bloody suicide bombing can shift the positions of the majority, far more effectively than a myriad of reasoned arguments.

On the Palestinian side the said “good Arabs” have to contend with a parallel convincing process set up by the IDF, (following the strategic doctrine of Yaalon-Mofaz-Sharon) designed to punish the population at large so that it will convince its leadership to eradicate terrorist groups. To judge again from electoral results this convincing has proved very effective… but unfortunately in the opposite direction.

Only in the last weeks, when Abu Mazen decides to take a stand and confront Hamas with a referendum, our forces kill more than 20 innocent bystanders. Suffering from daily rocket attacks, the people from the town of Sderot, normally a nice and easy-going lot, are demanding from the government to wipe out the closest Palestinian town(Bait Janun) from the face of the earth.

Reffo: you request “Please don't tell me it's up to Israel, surely it's up to the Palestinians to do the right thing for themselves and the region, for once”. As you may see I can’t comply. Israelis and Palestinians are inextricably entangled; the policies of each side are determined more by reactions towards actions of the other side, mostly “gut reactions” at that, than by the logic of calm. The relative influence of the “good Arabs” will largely depend on our policies, which should result from decisions of a responsible and foresighted leadership.

physics

06-24-2006, 02:09 PM

Israel's only problem is that there are people who even think about this "refugee" scam. It will suffice for Israel to simply state this position, and to end the discussion at that. Because it's a non-issue, really.

I agree. The refugee issue is a scam. The Palestinians simply use the refugee problem to blame Israel for Palestinian's miserable and poor lives. It's not a matter of "right of return" but a matter of improving current conditions in current residences, Gaza & West Bank.

KettleWhistle

06-24-2006, 02:30 PM

I agree. The refugee issue is a scam. The Palestinians simply use the refugee problem to blame Israel for Palestinian's miserable and poor lives. It's not a matter of "right of return" but a matter of improving current conditions in current residences, Gaza & West Bank.

First of all, most of the "Palestinian" Arabs have pretty reasonable living conditions. I was in the West Bank just last week. I heard a whole lot about their suffering "under occupation." The only thing was, I didn't see any suffering. (I'm considering posting a short essay about my trip on IF, but haven't had the time to do it yet.)

As for the whole "refugee" issue, it is another tool they are trying to use in their war on us. It isn't about blaming. It is about winning. Let's not forget that majority of Israeli Jews (more than 70%) were against Oslo. Yet now, many are OK with giving away Jerusalem. The way things been going in the past 10 years, if they can drag this on for another 10-20 years, the Israeli government, and the majority of the society will consider that.

Reffo

06-24-2006, 04:40 PM

Reffo: you request “Please don't tell me it's up to Israel, surely it's up to the Palestinians to do the right thing for themselves and the region, for once”. As you may see I can’t comply. Israelis and Palestinians are inextricably entangled; the policies of each side are determined more by reactions towards actions of the other side, mostly “gut reactions” at that, than by the logic of calm. The relative influence of the “good Arabs” will largely depend on our policies, which should result from decisions of a responsible and foresighted leadership.Quite right Jorge but it works both ways. So, as you say, what the Arabs do also influences how Jews react and vice versa.

So, if Jews reward negative acts by Arabs, it strengthens the Arabs who commit the negative acts. Therefore, if Jews want to strengthen the hand of the Arab moderates, they cannot reward the Arab extremists by appeasing them. Instead, Jews need to implement a policy of 'carrot and stick', reward positive acts and punish negative ones. Such a policy will not bring immediate rewards but if it will be applied consistently, it will bring the desired results eventually.

My problem with many people on the left side of politics has been their impatience and their wishful thinking by offering too many unwarranted concessions. Of course I don't agree with some of the fanaticism that comes from the rightists who only want to implement the stick without the carrot, of course that will not work either.

Reffo

06-25-2006, 07:20 PM

On the Palestinian side the said “good Arabs” have to contend with a parallel convincing process set up by the IDF, (following the strategic doctrine of Yaalon-Mofaz-Sharon) designed to punish the population at large so that it will convince its leadership to eradicate terrorist groups. To judge again from electoral results this convincing has proved very effective… but unfortunately in the opposite direction.I don't agree with you regarding the above. I think you are being a tad simplistic because this narrative omits the fact that Gaza was evacuated. And can you tell me what was Israel's reward for that? I think that you'll have to agree with me that "the reward" was more quassam rockets on Sderot. Conversely: How did Palestinians interpret the Gaza evacuation? They saw it as a reward to the intransigence and the actions of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. So of course they responded by voting for Hamas (Yes, I know there were other reasons for that too but Israel's reward of terrorism also played a part in it).

Only in the last weeks, when Abu Mazen decides to take a stand and confront Hamas with a referendum, our forces kill more than 20 innocent bystanders. Suffering from daily rocket attacks, the people from the town of Sderot, normally a nice and easy-going lot, are demanding from the government to wipe out the closest Palestinian town(Bait Janun) from the face of the earth. Yes, you've got a point with this one. I do agree that the timing was very unfortunate. In fact the whole incident was very unfortunate, irrespective of the timing, period.

But having said that, I'll add the following two thoughts: First, it just shows that it's impossible to calibrate and finely tune operational responses at all times. Israel was responding to ongoing terrorist provocations and shellings of peaceful Israeli residents. Unlike the Palestinian terrorists, Israel didn't target the innocents but of course such unfortunate outcomes are inevitable from time to time. Secondly, I'm not so sure that Israeli leaders favour the idea that Hamas and Fatah should reach a consensus which would offer Israel peace in exchange for withdrawal to the pre 1967 boundaries. I don't think such an offer is acceptable to Israel, so I don't really think that they want to see them reach a consensus on that. Are they right about it? Personally, I think that yes, they are right. But that's of course another discussion.

Now, back to the main item of our discussion (rather than the old tit for tat type argument which I couldn't resist above). I do believe that Israel's main task is to respond, as I said before, with a 'carrot and the stick'. But the main targets of such a response have to be, inevitabely, those Palestinians who are in control of the agenda. And unfortunately, currently Hamas is in control of the Palestinian agenda so given their current behaviour, the primary response to them at this time has to be 'the stick'. Of course, if they really do change, then it should be 'the carrot'. In the meanwhile, whenever possible, "the good Palestinians" should be rewarded but that's a much more difficult proposition so long as "the good Palestinians" are not in control of the agenda.

Ricky

06-26-2006, 12:48 AM

Ricky

06-26-2006, 01:08 AM

Kettlewhistle says that the standard of living of the Arabs on the West Bank is reasonable. i admit that I have never been to the West Bank or Gaza but I have read statistics in Israeli newspapers and they don't back up Kettlewhistle's impressions. I don't remember the exact figure, but the unemployment rate in the occupied territories is well over 50%. Child malnutrition in Gaza or the West Bank is one of the highest, if not the highest in the world. i would fully accept that the Israel-Palestinian conflict, for which the Palestinians are most responsible for its continuation, is a major contribtution to the plight of the Palestinians, but let us at least acknowledge that their economic-social position is bad.
Furthermore, there is a political point here. Many colonialists justified their controling of their colonies with the claim that the socio-economic state of the natives was good.
If Israel wishes to rule J&S,then regardless of the socio-economic situation of the Arabs living there, democratic principles require that she give the Arabs of J&S Israeli citizenship, including of course, the right to vote for the Knesset. If Israel does not wish to give Knesset voting rights to the Arabs of J&S, she must at least acknowledge that she does not intend to be the permanent sovereign power in J&S, and that requires, at the very least, that she refrain from establishing Israeli civilian settlements in J&S

Reffo

06-26-2006, 02:13 AM

This is a difficult view to express, when the crisis of the kidnapped IDF soldier is in full swing, but if Israel tries to negotiate with Abu Mazan at least to coordinate with him any pull out from the West Bank, this will surely strengthen his position vis a vis the Hamas, and will afford Israel support from the international communityUnfortunately I'm not convinced that Abu Mazen can be counted among the good ones. He may be, but I'm just not sure about it. The best that I can say about him to date is that he was weak, indecisive and ineffectual. He seems to want to be all things to all people.

So, even if he is good, deep down there, we and the Palestinians need someone different. We/they need someone who is good but a lot more assertive.

Jorge

06-26-2006, 01:47 PM

From Reffo’s #238:

…I do believe that Israel's main task is to respond, as I said before, with a 'carrot and the stick'. But the main targets of such a response have to be, inevitabely, those Palestinians who are in control of the agenda. And unfortunately, currently Hamas is in control of the Palestinian agenda so given their current behaviour, the primary response to them at this time has to be 'the stick'. Of course, if they really do change, then it should be 'the carrot'. In the meanwhile, whenever possible, "the good Palestinians" should be rewarded but that's a much more difficult proposition so long as "the good Palestinians" are not in control of the agenda.

I’m all in favor of the use of a “carrots and sticks” tactics in the present confrontation. It has been proved over the ages as a sound and wise method. However, in the present case, there seems to be a number of misconceptions and misunderstandings around the issue of which carrots and which sticks and which is the real donkey.

First of all one shouldn’t forget that the method is a tactic, not a strategy. In the absence of well defined goals (and successive Israeli governments after 1967 have not stated them clearly) one cannot design a strategy. At times one has the impression that our desired goal is simply an end of violence from the Palestinian side. Suppose that we reach that goal…then what? If the weighty issues of the conflict are not resolved, violence will erupt again sooner or later.

In the second place one has to be clever in the selection of the right donkey(no offence intended at the Palestinians). It just doesn’t do to give the carrot to one donkey and beat another one with the stick. Regrettably, this is what we have been doing almost too often. The policy of extended curfews and roadblocks (the stick) was primarily designed to make their lives miserable; not the lives of the terrorists, that couldn’t care less about not going to work or to reach a hospital, but of the population at large.

I tend to agree with Reffo in that the carrot and stick approach should be tried in principle on those “in control of the agenda”. However,on the Palestinian side, those in control of the agenda have been lately an assortment of terrorists groups unwilling to accept a central authority. We have no carrot to offer them and, since they are willing to suicide, we have no effective stick to use.

The recent Quassam attacks to the region around the Gaza Strip illustrates this point. Our answer was day and night continuous artillery bombing designed to terrorize the population and that didn’t manage to kill ( as far as we know) a single rocketeer. Nowadays our PM is holding the heads of the PA, with Abu Mazen foremost, responsible for the attack to Kerem Shalom and threatening them with “the strictest of punishments”. Another case of punishing the wrong donkey and, on top, without any carrot on sight.
If Mr. Olmert is serious about his threats, we are going to get into Gaza and wipe out the little that is left of the PA, that is the amorphous leaderships of Hamas and Fatah.
Nice!, some might say, but …and then what?

MGB8

06-26-2006, 02:07 PM

Jorge,

first, you are wrong about Olmert. He pretty much has absolved Abbas of responsibility, putting it on Hamas. He supplies Abbas with Arms, and even now Abbas is negotiating to prevent the incursion.

Further, your post was defeatist. There is something Israel can do. KILL THE TERRORISTS. Every single one. And if innocents die, so be it. They want war, and innocents die in war. The Pal Arab people support hamas in huge numbers. They are completely unwilling to stop their bretheren from committing terrorism on Israel.

So Kill them. End the conflict. Through military victory. And THEN talk about peace and a Pal Arab state with the ones who survive.

Or, you can get on your knees and beg... that's your approach, no?

Reffo

06-26-2006, 05:31 PM

First of all one shouldn’t forget that the method is a tactic, not a strategy. In the absence of well defined goals (and successive Israeli governments after 1967 have not stated them clearly) one cannot design a strategy. At times one has the impression that our desired goal is simply an end of violence from the Palestinian side. Suppose that we reach that goal…then what? If the weighty issues of the conflict are not resolved, violence will erupt again sooner or later.Actually, I was under the impression that Israel's ultimate goal has been clearly stated, many times, over the years, it was and is:

Formal recognition of Israel by it's Arab neighbours and the Palestinians
Stop terrorism and violence
Create an atmosphere of peace, free of incitement
Withdrawal to secure and defendable borders
Creation of an independent Palestinian state side by side with Israel
The settlement of Palestinian refugees and their descendants in the new Palestinian state, not in Israel proper.

The only goal that has not been fully defined was the meaning of: "secure and defendable borders". This was not defined because Isreli leaders felt that this issue warranted a certain amount of flexibility on their part and that it's determination via negotiations would be wiser than by just simply dictating their goals to the Palestinians. They may have been wrong about that, I don't really know.

In the second place one has to be clever in the selection of the right donkey(no offence intended at the Palestinians). It just doesn’t do to give the carrot to one donkey and beat another one with the stick. Regrettably, this is what we have been doing almost too often. The policy of extended curfews and roadblocks (the stick) was primarily designed to make their lives miserable; not the lives of the terrorists, that couldn’t care less about not going to work or to reach a hospital, but of the population at large.I think that one of the misconceptions of some Israelis and most of the rest of the world (even Israel's friends) was/is that they have been over complicating the concept of what you call "the donkey". They have allowed the Palestinians to represent themselves as a number of separate, distinct "donkeys". So that one "donkey" say Abbas could put his hand on his heart and claim, with a solemn expression on his face, that he is not responsible for what Hamas, the IJ or even Al Aqsa do. I think that has been a grave mistake which allowed the Palestinians to "have their cake and eat it too" for many years. And it didn't just start with Abbas, the same thinking was evident for many years even with Arafat, except towards the end when they woke up to that tactic. But then of course he died and it started all over again with Abbas.

The bottom line is that Israel and the world has to make it clear to the Palestinians that ultimately the Palestinians themselves are responsible and answerable for what anyone of them does in their name. They need to understand that if they want the right to have their own independent country, then they themselves have to ensure that only their own legal representatives can act on their behalf. They have to understand that unless they are willing and able to control the various factions, they cannot aspire for independence.

Of course, once the Palestinians demonstrate that they are willing to operate on that basis, Israel would be wise to offer them as many "carrots" and as much assistance as possible to ensure that the "right donkey" prevails. But the unfortunate thing is that to date, the Palestinians have not demonstrated that they are willing to act this way, and many in the world and some in Israel have been letting them get away with it for far too long!

However,on the Palestinian side, those in control of the agenda have been lately an assortment of terrorists groups unwilling to accept a central authority. We have no carrot to offer them and, since they are willing to suicide, we have no effective stick to use.Precisely! You confirmed what I said above, and it is high time that Israel and the world get the Palestinians to understand that unless they deal (in a determined and sustained manner) with their own disparate factions appropriately, there will be no progress towards their own cherished goals, period, no excuses and no exceptions!!!!

The recent Quassam attacks to the region around the Gaza Strip illustrates this point. Our answer was day and night continuous artillery bombing designed to terrorize the population and that didn’t manage to kill ( as far as we know) a single rocketeer. Nowadays our PM is holding the heads of the PA, with Abu Mazen foremost, responsible for the attack to Kerem Shalom and threatening them with “the strictest of punishments”. Another case of punishing the wrong donkey and, on top, without any carrot on sight.
If Mr. Olmert is serious about his threats, we are going to get into Gaza and wipe out the little that is left of the PA, that is the amorphous leaderships of Hamas and Fatah.Well what else could Israel do? Evacuate Sderot? How can Israel ram home the message that violence begets violence, suffering begets suffering. What is wrong with the idea of pressuring the Palestinian voters themselves to bring about a change of attitude by their leadership and perhaps even apply pressure on their own terrorists? I think that if anything, the reason why Israel's hard response has not worked in the past was because every time Israel upped the ante, someone from the outside turned up and rescued the Palestinians and applied pressure on Israel to back off. Remember what happened in Beirut when Arafat was cornered? The same thing happened a number of times later.

But I must say that Israel too bears a responsibility for not being able to capitalise on their advantage and bring the situation to a decisive conclusion. I think that they have been highly ineffective in getting the world to understand the real situation in the Middle East. Conversely, the Arabs have been highly successful with their propaganda and every time that they got in real trouble on the ground, they were able to muster sufficient outside support to force Israel to relieve the pressure. I must say, that this is where the Israeli left has been misguided and they played a very irresponsible role and they almost acted as a fifth column against Israel's long term interests. While I do understand that many are motivated by altruism and morals, they should recognise that we don't live in an ideal world and that bad things do unfortunately happen in war. To me, the best way to avoid the "bad things" is to end the war as soon as possible, rather than to allow it to fester through a misguided idealism.

Nice!, some might say, but …and then what?See the last paragraph above.

Jorge

06-27-2006, 12:12 PM

Quotes from MGB8’s # 243:

Jorge, first, you are wrong about Olmert. He pretty much has absolved Abbas of responsibility, putting it on Hamas.

My info comes straight from Mr. Olmert’s lips, through Israeli TV. Where did you get yours from?

Further, your post was defeatist.

Not at all; I was merely criticizing what I consider to be wrong policies. To be defeatist is to think that there’s no way out of the present conflict. I think there is: one day the majority of Israelis will realize that they have been led by the nose by a bunch of misguided messianic Jews, seconded by inept politicians and will elect a new leadership that will put an end to this conflict. I’m such an optimist (I even believe in Peres vision of a New Middle East) because I’m convinced that most of the Israelis are quite a clever lot and, rather sooner than later, will realize that we’ve been led astray.

There is something Israel can do. KILL THE TERRORISTS. Every single one.

Again this is tactics, not strategy. Even if we kill them all, new ones will appear. There’s a generation of Palestinian children, now coming of age, that have been born and bred during years of bloody confrontation; quite a number of them may replenish the ranks of terrorist groups. Our policies should be directed to ensure that at least the children of the next generation will grow up in normal conditions.

And if innocents die, so be it. They want war, and innocents die in war. The Pal Arab people support hamas in huge numbers. They are completely unwilling to stop their bretheren from committing terrorism on Israel.

The doctrine you enunciate is repugnant to me. It is precisely the sort of pronouncements we hear from AlQueida and other terrorist groups. Innocents shouldn’t die, not even in a war, precisely because they are innocents. To kill them is bloody murder, no matter what ideology we use to disguise the fact. What you are saying amounts to justify the killing of American civilians because most of them wanted the war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

Or, you can get on your knees and beg... that's your approach, no?
No, not at all my approach. I keep telling you: either read my posts more carefully or, abstain to comment on them.

MGB8

06-27-2006, 12:23 PM

If war is repugnant to you, so be it. When its kill or be killed, you will die, and I will live.

This is what you don't get.

Your libelous comparison to Al Queda shows YOUR immorality. You are repugnant, Jorge, in comparing war, where you kill those seeking to kill you (and sometimes, as in every war, tons of non-combatants die) to TERRORISM - the TARGETTING of non-combatants.

As for Olmert, he said PA, not Abbas. Abbas is not the Prime Minister (something else right from Olmert's lips). And right now, Abbas is negotiating to avoid the incursion. Please.... don't take me for a fool.

As for you - no, your tactic is surrender, and beg.

You WIN THE WAR first, Jorge. If "there will be new terrorists" - you kill them too. And if that means that every single Pal Arabs will join the terrorists and thus become a combatant and be marked for death, you kill them anyways.

This is war, Jorge. If you are unwilling to fight, you die. That is the difference between you and I. You might find me repugnant for my callousness... I find you repugnant for your weakness.

I would kill to save my family, you would not - you would not want to dirty your hands. That is the difference between us.

They will not stop, Jorge. Not if they get all of the WB and Gaza. Not until Israel is destroyed, demographically or otherwise. It IS Kill or be Killed. And you prefer to be killed. Well, bully for you.

MGB8

06-27-2006, 12:26 PM

Please Jorge, enlighten me as to one war where mass numbers of innocents did not die?

Oh, and then give me a war where one side decided to hide among its populace and large numbers of non-combatants did not die.

YOU are unwilling to fight war, Jorge. That's why you are a defeatist. When the other side is willing to war (to kill), and you are not, you end up dying. That is YOUR strategy, Jorge. Death of Israel.

Reffo

06-27-2006, 05:43 PM

And if innocents die, so be it. They want war, and innocents die in war. The Pal Arab people support hamas in huge numbers. They are completely unwilling to stop their bretheren from committing terrorism on Israel.
The doctrine you enunciate is repugnant to me. It is precisely the sort of pronouncements we hear from AlQueida and other terrorist groups. Innocents shouldn’t die, not even in a war, precisely because they are innocents. To kill them is bloody murder, no matter what ideology we use to disguise the fact. What you are saying amounts to justify the killing of American civilians because most of them wanted the war against Afghanistan and Iraq.I think you are being very harsh when you compare MGB8's doctrine (and mine) to Al Quaida's. For one, we don't advocate deliberate targeting of innocents. To the contrary, we would like to minimise civilian casualties but we are just being realistic and we say that there hasn't been, there isn't and there can't be any war where unfortunately some innocents don't die because that is just the nature of war.

So let me ask you Jorge: What do you think would have happened if the Western powers would not have restrained Israel, time and time again, and if they would have allowed Israel to press it's military advantage to it's natural conclusion? Don't you think that this dirty pointless war could have been concluded many years ago? Sure, in doing so many people would have died up front. But the conflict would have been concluded by now and in all probability there would also be an independent Palistinian state in the WB. So let's just do the sums: If Israel could have finished off the military arm of the PLO and Hamas, say in the 1980s, resulting in the resolution of the conflict? How many lives would have been saved since then? Don't you think that the number of lives saved would have been much greater than the number lost in the war up front? If you don't believe me, then just study a bit of modern history. I think you will find that the western allies understood this principle very well when it came to their existential war against the Axis powers. They conducted their war ruthlessly to it's logical conclusion and they didn't stop until they totally defeated their enemies who then surrendered unconditionally. That's what Israel needs to do too, it's a pity that the very same countries who insisted on their right to conduct the war that way, don't want to allow Israel to do the same.

Now, having said that, I'd also like to explain my own reference which likened the actions of the Israeli left to a "fifth column". I didn't mean to make it sound as harsh as it may have come across. I am sure that most Israeli leftists (other than a very small band of ratbags) have Israel's interests at heart. However, that does not change the fact that they have been misguided and through their undoubted good intentions, have caused a lot more suffering to both Jews and Arabs by helping to prolong the conflict unnecessarily.