Terrorism: Cause and Remedy

[michael]

It seems that one of the most difficult concepts to accept, on this board at least, is that there are reasons for terrorism that lay outside one of the popular formulations that Palestinians do so,“for the sake of killing”.

A British MP offers a view which, I think might be accepted by many thinking people.
He said, “many decent’ people “cannot help somehow admiring the terrorists and even assisting them when they seek refuge in their houses”.

To combat the cause the terrorism, what is required is to “remove the legitimate cause of grievances” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

If this is done it would win “support of the moderate elements in suppressing terrorism, and I believe that the majority of the population would turn against the extremists”.

Taking the opposite course (as currently), he says, “would merely provoke…a fanatical support of the extremists”.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by michael
It seems that one of the most difficult concepts to accept, on this board at least, is that there are reasons for terrorism that lay outside one of the popular formulations that Palestinians do so,“for the sake of killing”.

A British MP offers a view which, I think might be accepted by many thinking people.
He said, “many decent’ people “cannot help somehow admiring the terrorists and even assisting them when they seek refuge in their houses”.

To combat the cause the terrorism, what is required is to “remove the legitimate cause of grievances” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

If this is done it would win “support of the moderate elements in suppressing terrorism, and I believe that the majority of the population would turn against the extremists”.

Taking the opposite course (as currently), he says, “would merely provoke…a fanatical support of the extremists”.

That was a beautiful justification for mass murdering civilians, Michael.

/sarcasm off

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by michael
It seems that one of the most difficult concepts to accept, on this board at least, is that there are reasons for terrorism that lay outside one of the popular formulations that Palestinians do so,“for the sake of killing”.

A British MP offers a view which, I think might be accepted by many thinking people.
He said, “many decent’ people “cannot help somehow admiring the terrorists and even assisting them when they seek refuge in their houses”.

To combat the cause the terrorism, what is required is to “remove the legitimate cause of grievances” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

If this is done it would win “support of the moderate elements in suppressing terrorism, and I believe that the majority of the population would turn against the extremists”.

Taking the opposite course (as currently), he says, “would merely provoke…a fanatical support of the extremists”.

For sane people, the moral bankruptcy of those who slaughter innocent men, women, and children, babies in strollers, senior citizens sitting down to sacred meals is obvious. Any cause that produces defenders who use such despicable methods against non-military targets deserves no respect whatsoever, and the fact that anyone finds anything admirable in this barbarity very clearly defines the low level of consciousness such people inhabit. Minds that think like this cannot reflect in the normal human manner and so, what regurgitates from them needs to be flushed away like so much sewage.

The position you have presented here is nothing new for you on this board, but as always your conclusions are contemptible.

[David_in_NYC]

The real cause of Arab grievances is Arab failure.

Why they hate us

Blaming terror on the victims thereof is morally reprehensible.

[Leon]

Originally posted by michael
It seems that one of the most difficult concepts to accept, on this board at least, is that there are reasons for terrorism that lay outside one of the popular formulations that Palestinians do so,“for the sake of killing”.

A British MP offers a view which, I think might be accepted by many thinking people.
He said, “many decent’ people “cannot help somehow admiring the terrorists and even assisting them when they seek refuge in their houses”.

To combat the cause the terrorism, what is required is to “remove the legitimate cause of grievances” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

If this is done it would win “support of the moderate elements in suppressing terrorism, and I believe that the majority of the population would turn against the extremists”.


Taking the opposite course (as currently), he says, “would merely provoke…a fanatical support of the extremists”.

Didnt the people of East Timor have a legitmate cause of grievance? They lived under a 30 year occupation far more brutual and no where near in comparison to the so called 'occupation' which the Palestinians live under.

Where exactly did the East Timorese homicide bombers go? Were young and old indonesian civilians been sluaghtered in cafes and buses? East Timor is one of many examples and I use it because it is close to home (good old Australia).


A recent female suicide bomber was dispatched by Hamas after been accussed of adultery by her husband (a Hamas terrorist). She blew herself up and murdered innocent people in order to retain her honor and the honor of her family.

Thats some legitmate cause of grievance.

In another recent episode, a 10 year old Palestinian child was asked to 'deliver' a package. The child had no idea what was in the package and when the terrorists saw that he was stopped by Israeli troops, they tried to activate the packaged bomb via a mobile phone.

These are just two of many examples. If the assessment that Palestinian terrorism is driven by occupation and desperation was accurate than you would see more despereate and occuppied peoples around the world murdering innocent civilians.

Drawing from the two above examples, such murderous actions are whole heartdly driven by extreme national and religious fanaticism, where the terrorist organisations prey on vulnerable people with promises of 'honor' and 'rewards' in the after life (as with the case of the female adultress) and money and rewards in this life (as with the case of the 10 year old).

And if you think this was triggered by the so called 'occupation,' then I would like to remind you that Palestinian terrorism pre-dated 1967 and was at an all time high in the mid 50's and early 60's with the creation of the PLO and its charter (unchanged to this day). Arab terrorism also pre-dated the creation of Israel with the Hebron massacer, pogroms/riots and terror acts in market places.

[michael]

Thanks for your replies – most interesting. But I forgot something. I wonder if this will affect your opinions on the British MPs comments, that they were “a beautiful justification for mass murdering civilians - /sacasm off” or that “this barbarity very clearly defines the low level of consciousness such people inhabit”?

I do agree however, that often “such murderous actions are whole heartdly driven by extreme national and religious fanaticism”.

The British MP I quoted was Richard Crossman. He was writing about Jewish terrorism during the British Mandate.

Just to re-iterate, he commented that the best way to fight terrorism was to “remove the legitimate cause of grievance of every Jew in Palestine” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

He also had something to say on a topic of contemporary interest. Certain British officials felt the Jewish Agency was being less than helpful so suggested replacing it. Crossman countered, “the replacement of the Jewish Agency by another organization” and the disarming of Jewish resistance “would merely provoke the Jews into a fanatical support of the extremists.” (-'Palestine Mission', Crossman, 1947)

It’s probably also a very accurate forecast of what will happen to support for Hamas in the light of Yassin’s death.

[Mediocrates]

No not really, not unless you assume as I'm sure you will that the very existance of Israel is somehow dedicated to the extinction of Arabs. Anyway Hamas is fighting a political battle with the PA. Sowing anarchy between them can only be a good thing or are we sill on the jag that there are maybe 7 people in all of Palestine who can run the place?

[michael]

Originally posted by Leon
Didnt the people of East Timor have a legitmate cause of grievance?
Where exactly did the East Timorese homicide bombers go? Were young and old indonesian civilians been sluaghtered in cafes and buses? East Timor is one of many examples and I use it because it is close to home (good old Australia).

If the assessment that Palestinian terrorism is driven by occupation and desperation was accurate than you would see more despereate and occuppied peoples around the world murdering innocent civilians.

Your ignorance is charming.

There were incidents of civilians murders by Fretilin in East Timor, around 150 in one infamous case.

More incidents of 'murdered innocent civilians'? - like Algerian terrorists in France, the IRA in England , Tamil suicide bombers in Sri Lanka, Chechyan terrorists in Moscow, suicide bombers in Iraq?

So I guess this proves your argument - " Palestinian terrorism is driven by occupation and desperation".

[Mediocrates]

I imagine michael that if Hamas marched down the street and captured and killed a thousand toddlers you'd find a rationale to excuse it. Honestly if you simply want to clap and cheer over terrorism then so be it. I wish you and your hateful paranoia well.

[IsraelAdvocate]

Originally posted by michael
It seems that one of the most difficult concepts to accept, on this board at least, is that there are reasons for terrorism that lay outside one of the popular formulations that Palestinians do so,“for the sake of killing”.

A British MP offers a view which, I think might be accepted by many thinking people.
He said, “many decent’ people “cannot help somehow admiring the terrorists and even assisting them when they seek refuge in their houses”.

To combat the cause the terrorism, what is required is to “remove the legitimate cause of grievances” and to “state objectively…the historical causes for the growth of this beastly phenomenon in a decent people”.

If this is done it would win “support of the moderate elements in suppressing terrorism, and I believe that the majority of the population would turn against the extremists”.

Taking the opposite course (as currently), he says, “would merely provoke…a fanatical support of the extremists”.

This reasoning smacks of "appeasment". Would you reccomend examining the "root causes" of the terrorism that killed 200 Australians in Bali? I doubt it. I would especially doubt it if it were your family members who were in the Bali Discoteque when it was destroyed.

More importantly, people must learn that Terrorism is not an acceptable way to address grievences, even if those grievences are legitimate.. Do we give absolution to a convicted murderer who kills his neighbor over a land despute? Ofcourse not!
The murederer had a grievence, but that grievence is not a license to kill.

I think you simply apply a double standard to when Jews are murdered, as opposed to Europeans, or even Australians.
You should be ashamed.

[IsraelAdvocate]

Originally posted by michael
Your ignorance is charming.

There were incidents of civilians murders by Fretilin in East Timor, around 150 in one infamous case.

More incidents of 'murdered innocent civilians'? - like Algerian terrorists in France, the IRA in England , Tamil suicide bombers in Sri Lanka, Chechyan terrorists in Moscow, suicide bombers in Iraq?

So I guess this proves your argument - " Palestinian terrorism is driven by occupation and desperation".

Not True.
The so-called occupation did not even begin until 1967.
That being the case, if we follow your reasoning, then there should have been no Palestinian Terrorism before 1967.
In actuality, there has been Palestinian Terrorism for most of the last century, beginning with the first Jewish arrivals in Isael in the late 1800s. So, you cannot argue persuasively that Palestinain Terrorism is due to Israeli occupation.

[IsraelAdvocate]

Originally posted by michael

It’s probably also a very accurate forecast of what will happen to support for Hamas in the light of Yassin’s death.

Yassin's death will not be the first, I promise you. Be patient.
More of your friends will follow.

In the mean-time, let's make a score card -

Shehada - Dead
Yassin - Dead
Barghouti - Imprisoned
Yasser Arafat - Imprisoned (in compound)
Yehiyeh Ayash - Dead

Saddam Husein - Imprisoned
Udah Hussein - Dead
Kussah Hussein - Dead
Osama Bin Laden - Soon to be Dead

TALIBAN - TOPPLED
BAATH PARTY - TOPPLED
Syrian BAATH PARTY - TOPPLED soon

By the way, Michael, SYRIA HAS BEHAVED VERY BADLY LATELY, TOWARD THE KURDS. ABOUT 20 KILLED IN RIOTS, AND NONE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO CITIZENSHIP OR PROPERTY.

Where is your bleeding heart now? I did not hear you or one European filth open his big mouth for them. It is only when Israel lifts a finger to defend its' self, do you protest.

.

[Noam]

.

[Leon]

Originally posted by michael [/i]
Your ignorance is charming.

Perhaps it is charming (to such an extent that the birds fall of the trees), but what is certain is that your own proven ignroance provides you with a pure bliss:

1. you completley ignore my point as to why Palestinian terrorism pre-dated 1967 (IsraelAdvocate had to bring it up as well).

2. Along with your past posts: ignoring certain points (e.g why it took Autsralia 69 years to grant aboriginies citizenship, not to mention the above point) and picking and chosing certain facts along with the regular misqoutes.

There were incidents of civilians murders by Fretilin in East Timor, around 150 in one infamous case.

Can you provide a full account? Did Fretilin go around murdering Indonesian toddlers, school children and women? Did they blow up cafes, school buses and nightclubs in Jakarta? Was the group founded on the basis of destroying the Indonesian state - murdering its entire population ( where non-military targets such as women, children and the edlerly were the prime targets?)

More incidents of 'murdered innocent civilians'? - like Algerian terrorists in France, the IRA in England , Tamil suicide bombers in Sri Lanka, Chechyan terrorists in Moscow, suicide bombers in Iraq?

Funny that you even bothered to mention Iraq, since the majority of the so called 'freedom fighters' are foreign Al-Queda terrorists from Sudan Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia etc.
A recent survey, found that a majority of Iraqis were happy under the US than under Saddam. What a suprise.

The IRA and the Tamil tigers took their inspiration from the PLO and were even PLO trained. Yet, their past tactics dont even compare to the PLO and are nowhere near as barbaric. They never resorted to such systematic mass murder of civilians.

And like their Palestinian counterparts, the catholics in Ulster and the Tamils in Sri Lanka (who have a state within a state along with an army) do not have it so tough. There are people who are far more brutualised, yet never adopted the same tactics as the Palestinians, and to a much lesser extent the tactics of the PLO trained Tamil and IRA.

So I guess this proves your argument - " Palestinian terrorism is driven by occupation and desperation".

A women accussed by her terrorist husband of infidelity was sent to blow people up in order to retain her honor.

A 10 year old is bribed into carrying an unknown package to destination in Israel. When he is stopped by the IDF, the terrorists try to activate the hidden bomb inside the package showing total disregard to the life of the 10 year old child.

Yes, it certainly does prove that argument and disproves the fact (constantly driven by that evil zionist group MEMRI) that the Palestinain leadership has no regard for the lives of its people (especially children).

The following actions which are attributed to the Palestinian leadership is pure myth (fabricated by MEMRI):

a. The total brainwashing of Palesitnian people (especially children) and inciting them to voilence

b. Bribing the poor, most unwitting and vulernable folk with false promises of money in this life or 'rewards' in the afterlife

c. drumming the notion of 'honor' into their heads (so regularly displayed in 'Honor' killings among family members or 'honor' homicide bombings).

[MGB8]

Michael,

You assume the answer to your question, without analyzing it to see if it holds up to the facts.

Many facts point to the idea that "the occupation" is NOT the cause of terrorism.

The facts include:

(1) Arab terrorism against Jews (including the people who are now called Palestinians) predates 1967, and in fact predates the founding of Israel.

(2) Netanyahu tried linking terror attacks to increased settlement building - the idea that if each terror attack threatened land in the WB and Gaza, the Pal Arabs might stop terror. That tactic failed, miserably. In reality, the Fence, a defensive measure to stop terrorism, has drawn more ire than "settlements" in the heart of the WB. Neither of these jives if the "occupation" is the main problem.

(3) The Arabs were offered 97% of the WB, all of Gaza, and half of Jerusalem, and rejected it.

(4) Post Oslo, 98% of the Pal Arabs lived under PA rule, with very limited checkpoints (some - but much less than in many war-torn countries and far less than now) and no curfews, but terror increased, and buliding infrastructure for terror increased, not decreased.

(5) In Arabic, the Arabs have been clear that the main problem is Israels continued existence, not the WB and Gaza.

Let me suggest a different explanation for terrorism.

Terrorism is a rational decision to attempt to achieve what are believed to be achievable political gains by the use of violence on non-combatants.

In this case, the politcal gains are the weakening and eventual destruction of Israel, either by an "internation force", a "bi-national state", acceptance of the Pal-Arab "refugees", which, unlike every other refugee, inlcudes decedants, or simply weakening Israels security position to make it open to invasion.

Because Israel's superior military force is constrained by the International community, due to the power of Oil, these goals seem achievable.

The more possible the goal seems, the more terrorism is an attractive, rational choice.

As Israel raises the costs of terrorism (counter-operations), as well as improves its security position (ie. the fence, which hurts both the military and demographic attempts to destroy Israel), terror becomes a less attractive option.

So, Israel must simply raise the costs of terrorism and improve its security conditions. When it had done the opposite (Oslo), terrorism has INCREASED. When it has done what I suggested (recently), terror has actually decreased.

Hmmmm....