If you want to be notified the next time we publish something, sign up for FREE email alerts or subscribe to the RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
My condolences and sympathies for the family and friends of the people that were killed today due to today's suicide bombing in Tel Aviv.
Unfortunately, this is not everything. This is not the end of all the violence.
I got this from Sam today, and I think it summaries the situation real well.
Dear friends,
This was written yesterday by an Israeli journalist (one of the brave handful that see the results of Israel's occupation) in an Israeli newspaper.
Today, watching the latest suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, I think many of his questions are answered!
Expecting curfew,
SamWho is a terrorist?
By Gideon LevyThe scenes from Gaza are heartbreaking. Heartbreaking? That's not for certain. The sight of the Aben family from Beit Lahiya mourning its 12-year- old daughter Hadil last week did not stir any particular shock in Israel. Nor did anyone take to the streets and protest over the sight of her wounded mother and little brother lying in shock on the floor of their shanty in Gaza.
On the day Hadil Aben was killed, Yedioth Aharonoth carried a story about Nelly, the dog from Kibbutz Zikim that died of heart failure from the booming noise of the Israeli artillery firing into Gaza.
Instead of expressions of sorrow at the death of children, the upper echelons of the defense establishment came out with a stream of strident statements. The defense minister said that the only thing to do was step up the pressure on the Palestinians. The deputy chief of staff spoke about a possible invasion of Gaza and the head of army operations added, "what we've seen so far are only the previews." The IDF announced it would further reduce the "safety range" that is designed to avoid shells hitting the civilian population.
It was a chilling, united chorus. Israel is dropping thousands of bombs on towns and villages, on the "the launching pads" of the Qassams – another dubious term created by the defense establishment and blindly adopted by the press – and only the Palestinians, whose Qassam rockets haven't killed anyone since the disengagement, are called "terrorists."
Nor was there any substantive debate after a possible slip of the tongue by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, in an interview to the BBC, in which she said that there was a difference between attacking civilians and attacking soldiers. Even though she did not resolutely stand by her own words in an interview with Channel 10, Livni dared to speak the truth: If harming civilians is a measure of terror, then Israel is a terror state. With 18 killed in Gaza alone in 12 days, three of them children, the absence of intent cannot suffice for us. Someone who uses artillery to shell population centers and says with horrific indifference that this is "just a preview," as if it were another reality show on TV, cannot claim that he does not intend to kill children.
Those responsible for such bombings around the world are rightfully considered war criminals. That's terror – just ask Livni. And when it is done in the name of a state, it is much worse than in those cases when the perpetrators are from rogue organizations.
Israel declares it is striving to apply pressure with its cannon on the Palestinian population, so that it will prevent the Qassam fire. That is a hollow argument. No Palestinian leader can promote a cease-fire while dozens of civilians are being hurt. No Palestinian, no matter how peaceable, can prevent with his body the launches from inside Palestinian Authority territory. Could Hadil Aben's parents have done something? What exactly was the crime of these poor people? And how, exactly, will killing their daughter lead to a halt in the Qassams?
The continuing imprisonment of besieged Gaza is precisely the opposite policy that should be applied to serve Israeli interests. The current policy only strengthens support for the Hamas, just like the terror attacks within Israel always strengthen the Israeli right. A nation under siege, its leadership boycotted, will have far more determination and resolve to fight to its last drop of blood. It is impossible to break the spirit of a desperate people. Only a nation that sees a light at the end of its desperation will change its ways.
What would happen if Israel were to turn to the world and call upon it to enlist in the cause of support for the residents of Gaza, to donate and invest money to help them out of their utter poverty? If an Israeli prime minister did such a thing and at the same time called for a meeting with his elected Palestinian counterpart, it would create far more effective and positive pressure than any cannon fire.
If the Palestinians only saw for the first time in their lives that Israel also had their well-being in mind, which is not necessarily bad for Israel, they would have a lot more to lose and they would expel the Qassam launchers themselves. Only the Palestinians can do that, and sowing the seeds of hope is the only way to do so. And if, in the current situation, the artillery fire were to end, and they were to stop the Qassams, would Israel ease the siege, enable freedom of movement from Gaza to the West Bank, allow Palestinians to work in Israel, agree to the construction of a seaport and airport in besieged Gaza? Israel's declarations prove that the answer to all these questions is an unequivocal no. Its current policy and the policies we have seen it adopt lead only to intensification of the violence on the part of the Palestinians.
No Qassam justifies the killing and terror that the shells sow in Gaza. Cannons are meant for war against an army. Using them against a helpless civilian population is supposed to be beyond the realm of the legitimate, without any ifs or buts about it. A state does not shell towns. Period. Just like in the war against crime that is also deadly and endangers state security, no end justifies all the means. Would it ever occur to the Israeli police to evacuate an entire neighborhood from which some murderers came? Would anyone decide to shell such a neighborhood, even if it would mean minimizing the crime coming out of it?
Those who really want to end the Qassam launches from Gaza, should turn Israeli policy upside down. To show restraint in the face of the Qassams, to lift the siege, to immediately meet with the elected Palestinian leadership and call on the world to stop withholding the funds from the Palestinian Authority. Only a free and secure and thriving Gaza will stop launching Qassams. Have we ever tried that?
Lives are still lost. Be it Palestinian or Israeli, they all count. To some, it is just a mere number. My heart goes out to the innocent people who died.
Will this madness comes to an end? I'm afraid to say, not soon. Israeli occupation forces are still shelling the occupied territories. They didn't need an excuse to do so, not even today's suicide bombing.
{ 122 } Comments
I must disagree with you in the condolence, I will accept it if you take the responsiblity of condoling every palestinian life, every tree, every destructed house, EVERY DAY.
When I don't see your blog filled every day with these condolings, I must ask you with every politeness in the world not to show your sympathy for Israelis, not to feel sorry for six lives while tens of Palestinians are being butchered with no blink.
I am not questioning your loyality here, I'm only begging for the right focus, when we break into their houses, line them naked in the streets, rape their women, and shoot them in the head, then, I will show my condolences.
who is the terrorist?
who is the occupier?
who is the occupied?
who is the aggressor?
who has the higher death toll?
who has the weapons?
hmmm, all good questions.
Great Post, thanks,
thats definetly a plan the isreali goverment should try ..
i personally doubt that such a plan is possible,the extremist zionist will never make it possible ,since the everlasting goal is to retrive what they claim to be their "Holy Land" ,which comes by elimnating the palestinian people and occupying nearby arab lands.
noting that the extreme zionist are considered the most powerfull people in the u.s and are pretty much the most popular ideas in isreal i belive.
elimnating the palestinian race is an ulimate goal ,they try to achieve it in any possible way,by straving ,genocide,destroying cultue ,either way ,the extremist zionist in my opinion fits more the defintion of a terroist.
!!!!!!
I am proud of Ismael Haneyyeh's declaration that the bomb was a natural result of the israeli occupation …. Hamas Lives..
I hope the next bomb will smash Tel Aviv and kill more pigs…
Terrorists are people who terrorise others.
The Zionists are terrorising the Palestinians. The Palestinians are terrorising the Jews.
The Palestinians are being occupied.
Does this make them terrorists or freedom fighters?
Their methods make them terrorists with a legitimate cause but still wrong because it still affects civilians.
Still, it is a country (Israel) terrorising a people who are occupied.
Two rights don't make a right, just as two wrongs don't make wrong or a right.
Israel has too much power to control the Palestinians, the media and the US. This puts the Palestinians at a disadvantage.
We should look at everything and decide that Palestein HAS TO BECOME A STATE, and they have to be free from tyranny.
Until Bush is gone and someone who understands democracy is in the White House this will never happen.
Kimmy, at the least there is a big "moral" difference between Irael and Palestinian terrorists: Israel doesn't want to kill civilians, even if it does too (the result it's the same:()…Instead for Palestinian terrorism – Hamas, Islamic Jihad and also Brigades of Matyrs of Al-Aqsa (oh, yes, they are real "marthys"! :) )- isn't bad to kill civlians. What about terrorists that use civilians to protect themselves from Israeli attacks? Why don't you talk about that too?
After watching Paradise Now, I can see the rationale behind suicide bombings. These martyrs would rather die in dignity than living in humiliation. In democratic countries,every people are accountable to what their government did. Israelis have freely chosen their leaders, their leader kill innocent Palestinian women and children every second day, so what do you expect? If Israelis don't want to be killed by suicide bombers,then Israelis must elect a peace loving government that give Palestinian their rights, period. Hamas was right in saying that the bombers are acting as self defense.
As long as Israel, US and EU deal with Palestinians as "obey or starve", no condolences… Israeli must feel deprivation of security and beloved ones so as they'll know what it means to loose your daughter, son or brother… More than 17 were killed in Gaza last couple of weeks, 10s of houses demolished by shells, kids cannot sleep, cannot focus in their classrooms!…Palestinians are not interested in loosing their beloved ones who commit MARTYRDOM Operations… You cannot make tantamount the one who commit suicide because his GF left him and the one who struggle for the better of his case!… Now a jackass will come and say these actions will blacken our case and rights into the eyes of the international community!.. huh.. we saw how the international community led by GWB deal with Arabs, preaching about democracy and when it comes, they want us to starve!… We will eat thyme, sure…
Hanzala of Yafaa…
If you link to the article in Haaretz, of interest are the many responses that follow the article, contesting Mr. Levy's opinions. He is, unfortunately, one of a minority voice.
On the bright side, the voice exists, and there are even those willing to put themselves at risk to voice it. But, as in America, we will wait an eternity for that voice to become action within the government. Still, seeds can grow.
What happened is natural for weeks after countless of Israiles intrusions and killings .
I don't have any condolonces for them.
I am not gonna play the weak part here.
They killed Iman.
Their children,men and women do not have a holy blood than ours.
Jesus said "Love your enimies." Perhaps if the Palestians and Israelis followed his advice, Jesus' homeland may finally come to peace.
Maggie, Yasse, Hanzalaaa, this is apology of terrorism: you don't help peace in this way and of course you don't help Palestinian people: you can understand their frustration and desperation (that depends also from TERRORISM AGAINST ISRAEL!), but not going on to think in these way! STOP IT!!!!
I'm sorry, but the comments that somehow terrorism is justified…absolutely inexcusable. Haitham made a good statement, that acts of violence against civilians are acts of evil. The mindset I am seeing in so many of these comments represent exactly why there will be no peace. The "innocents were killed in the Palestinian territories, so we will make sure we specifically aim to kill innocents in Israel" way of thinking shows nothing more than pure barbarism.
I think it is also important to note: Where do Hamas and Islamic Jihad take any responsibility for the deaths and injuries of their fellow Palestinians? Why do they hide in areas surrounded by innocent men, women and children? Why? The answer is all too obvious. They care nothing for these people. The heartbreaking photo of the horribly injured little girl that was posted in another blog entry — the members of those 2 (and other) terrorist organizations don't shed tears for this unfortunate little girl. They jump for joy when their innocent brothers and sisters are maimed, burned and killed. They salivate when these pictures get published, as long as it puts a bad picture of Israel for all to see. The truth is, they WANT civilians hurt. They want those they claim to represent to suffer, because it serves THEIR purposes.
Does this excuse Israel? No. Israel has a responsibility to avoid civilian injuries at all costs. And I will be the first to admit that they have failed terribly at this. But Queen Rania's Fan is right when she says that there is a big difference, on the moral level, between targeting civilians and engaging in operations that result in civilian casualties (even when done without proper care). The terrorists are seeking SPECIFICALLY to kill innocent civilians. And the crap of, "Yes, but these civilians are not innocent, due to who they vote for" is insane. In a democracy, you have the right to vote for who you choose without some maniac blowing himself up to kill everyone who voted for that person (and, for that matter, everyone who didn't). Very well…I think I'll walk into Boston strapped with plastique so that I can kill as many Democrats as possible. See how absurd that logic is? I know the stakes are higher in Israel, but the foolishness of the twisted logic is the same.
Omar, Haitham has posted blog after blog about the plight of the Palestinians. He is man enough to call evil what it is, no matter who commits it. I don't always agree with him on the balance of it all, but I commend him (good job, Haitham) on being able to recognize an act of evil and see that evil actions by a government do not justify murderous attacks against little boys and old ladies.
The article posted takes a good, balanced approach. A lot can be learned from it.
As for the right answer: Joe hit it right on the head.
Philip,
Did you know 18 Palestinians were killed prior to this barbaric act (that killed 7 Israelis and 2 Romanians, mostly poor people who were suffering just like those in Gaza and West bank)?
Have you have any idea that 50% of the fertile land belonged to that terrorist's village was captured illegally by Israel?
Islamic Jihad did say that it was responsible for that act.It didn't hide behind the civilians.
I saw pictures of a 9- month-pregnant Israeli lady who wailed as her husband was buried.It was more painful than anything.But,where was the picture of Palestinian kids killed?WHERE? I could never find them in CNN or yahoo.
Israel does not just kill the Palestinians AND wipes its blood with words like " targetted civilians" but most importantly stole Palestinians' lands , their livelihood,their dignity,their right to live in their land.
I'm sorry but Israel is far from being innocent.
And now Israel is looking for pretext to destroy the elected goverment.This would serve as a much greater pretext to kill more of the Palestinians while yelling They started it first!!.
And, you are questioning how balance the view of Haitham.what a joke.
Israel could move all its settlers from the West Bank tomorrow and helps to establish the state of Palestine.They won't do it.They don't just give a shit about the Palestians.
For five years, Sharon led a Likud government whose party election platform had this to say about mutual recognition and the two state solution:
The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.
from: http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/
Tell Olemrt,to get his ass out of West Bank asap.
Jared is "interesting" that you say: "Israel does not JUST" (JUST???) "kill the Palestinians AND wipes its blood with work like >, but MOST IMPORTANTLY stole the Palestinian lands, their livehood, their dignity, their right to live in their land".
Now, I understand you, BUT is it more important the life of Palestinian people or the land? I would tell that they are both important, but the life of people STILL MORE than this (even if Palestinian terrorists don't think so and Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Brigates of Matyrs of Al-Aqsa, UNUSEFULLY sacrifice poor PALESTINIAN people's lifes, while their leaders just organize the attacks, they brainwash them with their uncivil propaganda and ruin the Palestinian youth, maybe STILL MORE than Israeli occupation!).
About stolen land, it's ok, but when UK governed Middle East they also gave 75% of the land of Jews, to build the kingdom of Tranjordan, then Jordan!
Israelis made Palestininian people to live their homes: but also religous leaders as Haij Hussein Amin (same family of Arafat, the future founder of PLO!). He was a partner of Hitler, he told Palestinian people to live their homes, he ordered to kill the "collabortionist" arabs!!! What about the refugees camps in Arab World? Their condition don't depend from the occupation.
I'm not stupid or hypocrite: Israel ISN'T INNOCENT, but also the Palestinian organization as Hamas (and don't tell me that does also a social work: why don't it does only that? And then in their schools they brainwash children!).
Understanding the reasons of Palestinian doesn't mean support terrorism. Indeed, supporting terrorism means to not care about Palestinian people!!!
Philip,
You perpetuate the myth that the Palestinian militants are blood hungry murderers who take joy in the deaths of their own. That is just as bad as those who think the Jews drink the blood of their victims. Be careful of what words you choose to put in people's mouths, as Haitham did not use the word "evil" in his entry above.
As for the innocence of the Israelis, remember that military service is compulsory in Israel, with 2 years at age 18 and 2 weeks each year for most of their lives. What do you think they do in their military, make daisy chains? You obviously haven't stood in line at any checkpoint where an eighteen-year-old, holding the business end of an M-16 in your face, has yelled orders at you in Hebrew. This while you're just trying to get to school, work, a relative's wedding, or even the grocery. Try it. It might give you a renewed sense of perspective.
Here we go again.
When someone posts a comment supporting or not supporting a cause (be it Palestinian or Jewish) everyone else jumps on his/her case and points out where they are wrong.
BOTH SIDES ARE WRONG!
Has anyone tried to figure out how to stop this madness without pointing any fingers?
This fingerpointing is the problem. The conflict will never end as long as someone is fingerpointing.
"I'm right, you are wrong" is the main problem!
Give it a break. Please consider the children. They are the ones being hurt.
Children should be our main priority.
Blowing yourself up or bombing a village won't solve anything except killing someone.
Give the children a chance to see the future and maybe they can stop this madness.
If any reply blames Muslem extreemist teachers or Zionist teachings, don't reply because you are just fingerpointing.
Actually, when it comes down to it, I agree with Kimmy. My point is that it is hypocritical to curse Israel for that actions while the extremists are doing the same thing you hate Israel for. Until both sides are willing to say, "Innocent people have to stop getting hurt," there will be children dying and more finger pointing. I don't give Israel a pass on their actions. None of you should give Hamas and Islamic Jihad a pass, either. That's why I so like Joe's comment.
To clarify further:
My reason for mentioning the act of using innocent children as a shield from Israeli attacks is to point out the sheer cruelty of it. It's a vicious tactic that does not take into account that they are dealing with the lives of REAL people, children, and using them as a tactical device. Is this propaganda? No. I never have heard this concept proclaimed. I have come to these conclusions reading news reports that favor the Palestinians.
But here is what I am seeing: The lives lost in Tel Aviv do not deserve sadness, because they are "pigs," as one commenter stated. Their lives are supposedly less valuable. The truth is, the life of a Jew, an Arab, a Persian, an African, an east Asian, and Indian, etc. ,,, these are all equal. These are all valuable. Yes, in the course of events in a fallen and broken world, lives will be lost needlessly. But people, please: do not make yourselves a part of the problem you claim to despise. Do not call the Israelis monsters for hurting Palestinians and then call Palestinians martyrs for the same acts you gate the Israelis for. Take off your blinders and see this: It is wrong to purposefully destroy the lives of innocent people. It is wrong for Israel to do it. It is wrong for Palestine to do it. It is wrong for America to do it. It is wrong for Australia to do it. It is wrong for Bangladesh to do it!
Finally, I was complimenting Haitham, not criticizing him. My reason for stating that I don't always agree with the balance of his blog entries is to make it clear that I am not just patting him on the back as someone I agree with. Rather, I am stating that someone whose point of view differs from mine, often greatly, is willing to look at a terrible act and say, "Lives are still lost. Be it Palestinian or Israeli, they all count. To some, it is just a mere number. My heart goes out to the innocent people who died." He's right. The tears of a Palestinian Muslim woman who lost her baby in a shelling and those of an Israeli Jewish man who lost his wife to a suicide bomber both grieve the heart of God.
By the way, it should be noted that the Arab League has condemned the attack and referred to it, appropriately, as terrorism.
Thank you Philip.
To kill is evil.
To kill in your Gods name is even more evil.
Haitham, you have let a non-believer in to your world and I thank you.
I have learned more here than I have ever expected.
I am reading the Qaran and the Bible again and not letting the verses taint my views.
Both books are very alike. I appreciate that. Both books have things in them that I question.
But I appreciate that both books condone love of the fellow man.
Where has this broken down? Where is the hatred of the Jews in there? I haven't found it. I am not looking for it anymore.
Islam according to the Qaran is so peaceful and understanding that I am totally confused.
Maybe not confused, but how can Muslims hate everyone else?
Bush could be an answer.
Totally lost in my research.
I'm not pointing fingers. What I am saying is that I suspect that those people who say "Can't we all just get along. Group hug, everybody!", have not experienced the reality of the situation. I merely challenged Philip and others to take a trip to Palestine and get a first-hand perspective. Whatever the media is feeding you, believe me, it is only the most miniscule tip of the iceberg.
If you get the official "Welcome to Israel" tour through Hillel, Birthright Israel or any other organisation, please be sure to break away from that tour to live amongst and speak to the Palestinians, and again, not the official state of Israel Palestinian representatives, but the ones in Ramallah, Nablus, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Gaza City, selling their falafel, running cultural orgs in the refugee camps, working for the PRCS.
I could give you a long grocery list of these people, but it's quicker for you to look them up for yourselves:
This week in Palestine (with links to many Palestinian orgs)
http://www.thisweekinpalestine.com/dir.php?ed=113
B'tselem
http://www.btselem.org/English/index.asp
Palestine Red Crescent Society
http://www.palestinercs.org/
Machsom Watch
http://www.machsomwatch.org/
It is also important to remember that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are not represented on your television. But I needn't tell you that, right?
I agree with raymond, no one knows what truely is going on unless you have been through it yourself. No one knows what it is see some one you love being killed infront of your eyes, mercilessly, unless you have seen it with your own two eyes, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW, and to make comments in regards to it is like making up fiction. TRUE, "we can not just get along" because this issue has been going on from the start. The start being the birth of all three religions, Islam, Christianity and Judeism. As some one mentioned before, I believe, AMERICA is playing the catalyst in this whole conflict, we must remember. If America didn't support one side, Israel, give them weappons, giving them Israel, and leaving two mare pieces of land to Muslims. Two pieces which were still occupied with Israelies until recent. How can there not be hate when you see this Injustice, that is if you see it, and this is only one example of it.
It's good to remind that Raymond, but if the majority of Palestinian highted more her voice against terrorism, it would be better and the opinion of us about them would be surely better too (also in our media!).
I cannot support the hate, either. I recognise it's cause certainly, recognise the Palestinian right to resistance, and armed resistance, if need be, but reducing it to a problem amongst religions oversimplifies the matter, and greatly removes responsibility from the perpetrators of the occupation.
For the record, America perpetuates the occupation, but they did not start it. For that, you have to look to the British and the Zionists. America's financial and military support came later, unless you say from the start that the UN is responsible, then they are certainly there.
That stated, I still invite everyone to Palestine for a personal look at living daily under occupation.
To clarify, when I say "unless you say from the start that the UN is reponsible", I mean the UN members, who did little if anything after the refusal of their partition plan, to prevent the massacre, mass expulsion and subsequent oppression of the Palestinians. No resolution has ever been enforced, by the UN or its member states. There is a shared responsibility in that.
That one simple statement, "love your enimies" seems almost contradictory, yet, if both sides adopted this proverb, if it were instilled in the hearts and minds of the people, would the violence continue? Do you think a person who loves is capable of the atrocities that we see from both sides? If the love it true and given to both sides, then peace would surely come.
Jesus teaching was controverial 2000 years ago when he spoke it to the Jews. It was they who were under occupation at the time, the Jews, under the Romans, were the Palestinians of today. Do you know what happened when a small group of Jews took this concept of "love your enimies" to heart? They changed civilization. Imagine what would happen if one group of the occupied, say the Brigades of Matyrs of Al-Aqsa were to adopt this philosophy. Would it not be more revolutionary than violence, rage, and wrath?
As it can not be instilled in the hearts and minds of the people, it is a rhetorical question. It can not be answered.
The hatred is there. It is instilled on a daily basis in the Palestinian territories.
While christianity may have changed civilization, it did not end mindless violence. Indeed, it has often been its inspiration, as has Islamism.
Listen, for the final time, I am not giving a clean record to Israel! I am stating that it is hypocritical to say you hate the Israelis for killing innocents and then turn around and call the killing of innocents by Palestinians justified. Neither is justified.
Tell me, someone…ANYONE…what positive result the suicide bomber in Tel Aviv achieved. Exactly HOW did he further the cause of the Palestinians? Tell me WHAT step was taken that day to help the Palestinians case?
I'll tell you what happened. If all these claims of Zionist conspiracies are true, then this murderer so many of you are hailing has helped the Zionists' cause. Every time Palestinian terrorists act, they hurt their own case. This is one of many reasons that I have a hard time believing that Al Qasa, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and the like are just acting out of desperation. It sounds to me like they are engaging in the same genocidal spirit that you accuse the Israelis of. Pardon my skepticism, but the logic is clear.
But it all comes back to this: they kill innocent people. Even Jewish "pigs," as one commenter referred to them.
A visit the Palestinian territories will not change my mind. It will make no difference for this reason: There is NO excuse, NO justification for any actions where innocents are killed whether by targeting them or whether by malicious negligence. In other words, whether it be Israel, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. … there is NO justification, and those who die by murderers' hands (and their loved ones left to mourn) deserve our condolences.
Now, if the Palestinians want to have a sovereign state, and force is the only way to do it, very well. Let their government declare their sovereignty and have their military fortify the borders. The Southern US did this in 1861. They lost — but the people who died primarily were military, not cowards who shield themselves with children and fire rockets at babies. And guess what? Despite the cruelty of Reconstruction (a 10-year period of occupation and puppet military governments), no one convinced a teenager from Alabama to go to New York strapped with explosives and kill a bunch of innocent people.
Maybe it is a pipe dream for people to just love one another. But if that were really put into action, we would no longer see shelling in Gaza nor suicide bombers in Tel Aviv.
Who has been firing rockets at whose babies? Who has extrajudicially executed over 3800 people in the last 5 years? Who has imprisoned over 300 children? Who has ignored Article 132 of the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding the protection of civilians in times of war for the last 56 years? Who has imprisoned without trial over 40% of Palestinian men? Who has disregarded every UN resolution calling for their ethical behavior for the last 58 years? Who keeps the UN from investigating their activities? Who demolishes whose homes? Who stops whose ambulances from reaching the hospital? Who controls whose borders? Who controls whose economy? Who completely disregarded Oslo and continued building settlements in the West Bank and Gaza? Who was recommended to grab every hilltop they can? Who uses M-16s, Apache helicopters and Merkava battle tanks against whom?
Yes, you don't need a trip to Palestine to show you who holds and wields the power. But if the facts don't speak for themselves, maybe to witness them first hand would. Or maybe you can continue to pay lip-service to love. Don't give me love. Give me justice.
Yet you continue to totally miss the point. Not one thing you listed justifies the actions in Tel Aviv. Like I said, declare sovereignty and use a legitimate military to protect your borders. Don't send a teenager to blow up civilians. It's really very simple.
In the US, we had one dramatic act of domestic terror, when someone, under the auspices of oppression by the US government, blew up a building and killed 168 people. No matter what his grievances, nothing justified his actions. In other words, there is no way to claim justification for acts of evil.
I get your "point".
Can you justify the actions of Israel? And where is this "legitimate military" supposed to come from? And what does "legitimate military" mean? One with nice uniforms and shiny boots? One with the same weapons as Israel? Do you really think the Palestinians wouldn't have developed one, given the chance?
Your definition of "acts of evil" seems to be predicated on this idea that Israel's actions are justified, and Palestine's are not, because the Palestinians resist in non-conventional manners.
The flaw in your argument is that Israel doesn't care whether the Palestinians resist or not. They will cut right through with their agenda to take as much of what is left of Palestine as they can, resistance or not. What you suggest is that the Palestinians lay down their weapons and let the Israelis walk all over them. It is exactly what the Israelis have been doing for the past 58 years. Why should the Palestinians sit there and be erased?
The point is, that there is no point unless Israel stops their occupation.
For the record: As stated before, I don't condone suicide bombings. I don't condone the murder of civilians.
I also don't condone acts of terror committed by any state, regardless of uniform.
Instead of arming the Palestinians, why don't we disarm the Israelis, and stop pumping billions of US dollars into their country until they recognise Palestine's right to exist? If we're going to stop aid to Palestine, then to be fair, all funding and support to Israel should cease as well.
I have repeatedly stated that any action by Israel that results in harm to innocents, when it could have been avoided, are also unjustified. My point is that you cannot call Israel's acts cruel and give a free ride to Hamas and the like. Tell me…how did the terrorist attack in Tel Aviv help the Palestinian cause?
By legitimate military, I mean one that is organized with a government as its head ann which specifically targets the opposition government and its military, not one that seeks blows shrapnel into old ladies. I mean one that seeks to defend a state's sovereignty and not kill people for being Jewish. Like I have said time and time again, any targeting of civilians is wrong. Period. Does Israel target civilians? I would be inclined to think they don't, but I do believe they are negligent and don't care if the do harm Palestinians, which makes them wrong as well. Both sides are wrong.
If your sister runs over my son, does that make it justifiable for me to shoot your wife to death? Of course not. But that is the argument all of you who say, "No condolences to the dead Israelis" are using.
And give me a break: You're comparing the Palestinians to Timothy McVeigh and the southerners during the US civil war? This is a myopic and narcissistic American view of the world, where everything reflects inward.
Philip,
If you think the Israelis are descriminating between civilians and militants, you haven't been paying attention. Either stop giving them so much credit, or admit that you have chosen sides. I don't buy your peace and love, middle-of-the-roadism. I have defined for myself whom I support in this conflict. Even Jesus said he would spit the lukewarm out of his mouth.
And for the record, when the Israelis want to punish, they punish collectively. So when your sister runs over an Israeli's son, the Israelis will bulldoze your family home, and your neighbors' homes, imprison or assassinate all the men, and fire a rocket at your sister from an Apache helicopter, killing her and injuring anyone within fifteen yards of her.
this bears repeating:
‘First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then they came for the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.‘
Rev. Martin Niemöller on the Nazi regime.
Like I said earlier!
Fingerpointing is going to keep this conflict going.
"I am right, you are wrong."
Until this argument is solved, no-one is going to be happy.
I don't live anywhere near this dispute, and I accept that. But I see this argument from a neutral view point and you are both wrong. You keep pointing you finger.
Take a step back and see what you are doing. What is happening to your children? What is happening to your lives?
Hate breeds hate, and your breeding is giving hate a playground.
Keep killing and you will see dying. You will keep blaming the other government. If that is the case, then you will deserve what you get. BOTH SIDES!
Just once, try and work together, as hard as it might be!
Excuse me, kimmy,
You should keep your nose out of things you don't understand. This isn't a third-grade playground. The Palestinians have sat down on several occasions with the Israelis and have consequently been stabbed in the back by them. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Yes, each side is responsible for their actions. The Palestinians have been acting against their own self-interest in many matters, and they are very much to blame for that. The Israelis have been smarter, at least in terms of acting ONLY in their own interest. I will blame the Israelis for their wrongdoings as I blame the Palestinians for theirs.
But for everything that the Israelis have done and continue to do, and for what they refuse to do, given their ethical, political and social standing and responsibilities as accepted and lauded members of a world society, and their outright and continued abuse and neglect of those responsibilities, yes, I place the greater balance of responsibility on their side, both with the Israeli government, and with the Israeli people, who largely both accept and support Israel's belligerence and hypocrisy.
If you truly believe that both sides deserve what they get, then you can stop crying or rooting for either. There is no place for you in this conflict. You will have chosen to be in Dante's vestibule of hell, or Limbo, with the neutrals and opportunists, the indecisive, with no real beliefs, and those who don’t choose sides.
If you want to do something, get a job with UNRWA, ICRC, Doctors without Borders, or some other organisation that makes good in the world (or at least is chartered to). If you really truly want to do something, then pack a bag and put you skills to use in the West Bank or Gaza. But if you are going to sit from afar and pass judgements, then please, keep them to yourself.
In the end, it is not about hate, and hate is not what I'm preaching. I'm talking about responsibility. If Israel wants to be a part of the world community, they should be held to the same ethical code that Iran and Syria are being held to. If the world community wants to accept Israel's refusal to abide by this code, whilst still pulling Israel into their fold, then they are hypocrites of the greatest degree. There are responsibilities and obligations, as laid out in the Fourth Geneva Convention, that Israel refuses to recognise. So, if Israel refuses, and the world community refuses to hold Israel accountable, then the world community should refuse to hold Palestine accountable, as well.
This is not hate. This is ethics and accountability.
Raymond,
I used the example of McVeigh to point out that grievances against a government do not justify murdering civilians.
I used the example of the Southern US to describe appropriate response to an occupier. The South seceded based on various cases of unfair treatment by the federal government (no, it wasn't slavery). less than 40% of the US population was paying 80% of the nation's taxes. So the SOuthern states said, "This is unjust. We will form our own nation." Upon doing so, the US government swept down and invaded. In the course of the war, war criminal William Tecumseh Sherman burned down the entire city of Atlanta: homes, business, churches, orphanages…everything. His reason? He wanted to "make Georgia howl." Upon the war's end, Reconstruction followed, which I mentioned before. There was tremendous oppression, including false imprisonments and the like. Yet (and here's my point) NEVER did the Southerners take arms against innocent people. 130 years ago, these people never resorted to the barbarism of the likes of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al Aqsa. I did not choose his example because of its US base. I'm sure there are thousands of examples worldwide. Rather, I have a lot of knowledge of the history from that time.
Have I sided, then, with Israel? In the sense that they oppose the aforementioned terrorist groups, yes. I do oppose a great deal of their methodology. I do not believe they take anywhere near the precautions they could to protect civilians. I do not believe they have tried their fullest extent to reach out an olive branch to the Palestinians. However, groups like Hamas will never cease and desist until Israel is wiped off the face of the earth. So, I DO take sides. I take the side of the average Joe in Israel and the Palestinian territories who would just like to go to the supermarket without wondering if they are going to die by suicide bomber or mortar attack.
I am not opposed to the Palestinians. I am opposed to the terrorist groups that CLAIM to represent them. I am opposed to killing of innocent civilians, no matter who does it, Israel or Al Aqsa "Martyrs" Brigade. I believe that the Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace. I believe that Israel can and should exist as a state, and that a Palestinian state can also exist, as long as strong anti-terror measures are taken. I end up looking like I'm pointing fingers (forgive me, Kimmy), mainly because I see all fingers pointing at Israel and a blind eye where terrorists are concerned (and that if Haitham dares to implicate BOTH, he is somehow being less than loyal to the Palestinians). This is what I cannot fathom. Children are being killed. They are being killed in Gaza; they are being killed in Tel Aviv. And it is WRONG. Jews are not "pigs." (this is a reference to comment #7, by Khawaja M.) Neither are Arabs. They are all people who deserve to live normal lives and peacefully coexist with each other. And if they consider themselves enemies, then they should heed Jesus' words: "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?" But maybe that is just asking too much.
That's just it, Philip. In your language, I find the following disturbing:
"I believe that Israel can and should exist as a state, and that a Palestinian state can also exist, as long as strong anti-terror measures are taken."
You support Israel outright, but your support of a Palestinian state is conditional on their following the rules. The Israelis have broken every rule there is, and that's okay. But the Palestinians are evil because they don't play fair.
And this isn't the only instance. You want to give the Israelis the benefit of doubt, that they've made "mistakes" in killing civilians, but the Palestinians, when they use tactics that kill civilians, are damned.
This is exactly the rhetoric that allows Israel to go on doing what they've been doing all along. It ties Palestine's hands, damning them if they do, and damning them if they don't.
I don't share your perspective, and I don't apologise for mine.
Rather, they should peacefully co-exist. To use another driving example, I would compare Israel's incursions to a drunk driver: Actions are taken without regard to who may be hurt, and the results end up being disastrous. Hamas, Al Aqsa, Islamic Jihad: They are comparable to someone behind the wheel chasing people through a parking lot and running them over. I think it was Queen Rania's Fan who said it earlier, that while the results are the same, there is still not a moral equivalence. Both are destructive and wrong, and both MUST STOP!
Call me naive if you want, but I believe that if the 2 groups existed either as one nation or as 2 separate states, Israeli attacks would end when terrorist attacks against them did. Last I checked, Israel hasn't launched any missiles at Jordan.
"…while the results are the same, there is still not a moral equivalence. Both are destructive and wrong, and both MUST STOP!"
I'm confused. Do you believe that there is or that there is not a moral equivalence?
Go back to the history books. The Zionists have been using terrorist tactics since before Israel was declared Israel. Heard of the Stern Gang? Irgun? After 1948, these people integrated into the IDF, and one later became a Prime Minister. (As Israel has shown, it is always good to found a nation on the shoulders of its greatest criminals.)
So you see, terrorist is a relativistic term. I prefer that the term not be used, because it has been negotiated to encapsulate whomever the US or Israel doesn't like.
Ask any journalist: the language you use will eventually evoke a response in your audience. The Israeli Army isn't the Israeli Defense Force for nothing, ergo everything they do is in defense, never offense. Israel only responds to attacks, they never initiate or instigate, always acting appropriately and when inappropriately, with good reason. The troops or soldiers in Iraq are freedom fighters. The Iraqis and Palestinians that are fighting back are called militants, insurgents, and terrorists.
Also, note that the enemy dead are statistics or casualties, whereas the US and Israeli dead have faces, names, families, dreams and aspirations that they will never fulfill, all conveniently packaged and advertised by CNN and the New York Times.
Do you recall that only a few months ago, when GW Bush had a little press conference with some of the soldiers in Iraq, the cameras started rolling before their queue? Do you remember that the soldiers were being briefed on the questions they would be asked, the responses that they should supply and how exactly they should smile for the camera?
Everyone in the US laughed it off, but that's exactly how things are being packaged and sold to you, completely predigested, day after day.
After a while, their language becomes your language, until you can't be bothered to remember to question whether you thought it, or if it was already thought for you and placed into your collective mind.
There will be one state only after all of the Palestinians are driven from their homes. The two state solution will remain on the table, until the table is itself expropriated from the Muqata.
Yes, it has been some time since Israel fired rockets into Jordan or Egypt. Their Western appointed governments have seen to it that the peace with Israel has been kept, in exchange for Israeli tourists. Jordan and Egypt made peace with Israel, and all I got was this lousy occupation. Shake hands, smile for the camera.
P.S. If Israel is constantly the drunk driver, how come Palestine keeps waking up with the hangover?
How many people died in the New York twin towers? Was is more than 3800? No, it was 2986. How did the US respond? They bombed the daylights out of Afghanistan, then Iraq. (We won't even discuss here how many were killed in this response.)
Over 3800 Palestinians have been killed by Israel since September 2000. Here are some peaceful responses: http://electronicintifada.net/actionandactivism.shtml
Comment 44
Please don't talk down to me.
I only wan't to understand. If you talk down to me it only shows your predjudism.
I'm not right, your not right.
If you think you are right then you are predjudiced.
I was raised as a JEW with a non-believing father. He emphasised that there are two sides to every story.
Both stories have their flaws.
History has its flaws.
I totally agree with Philip as to who is wrong. BOTH ARE!
If Zionism is so great. Why don't they live up to their standards?
If Islam is so great, then why don't they live up to their standards?
One life lost is a tradgity.
You are both living a tradgity and blaming each other!
If you were in the middle of that teagedy kimmy, what would your words be then? If you were living in this tragedy day in and day out, do you realy think you would be talking in the sense you are now? If you would put your self in any of those peoples shoes, let alone bear the tragedy every single day of your life, but just for one day, would you be still preaching what you are now? Think about it, I don't need an answer. . .
Raymond,
Where our conflict begins and ends is where our worldviews are based. Mine is based on this: killing innocents is wrong. If it happens at the hands of the Israelis, the Palestinians, the US, or Costa Rica, it is wrong. In war situations, innocents are sadly caught in the crossfire, so this is not what I am referring to. What I am referring to is the targeting of civilians (terrorism) and the reckless harm of civilians during military maneuvers (malicious negligence). They are both wrong. I use the word "terrorist" for those who seek specifically to kill people simply based on their race, nationality, allegiance, religion, etc. Some terrorist groups are Al-Qaeda (Afghanistan and beyond), Hamas (Palestine), the Ku Klux Klan (USA), the Irish Republican Army (Northern Ireland), FARC (Colombia), Japanese Red Army (Japan/Lebanon), Kach and Kahane Chai (Israel), and Basque Homeland and Freedom (Spain). Notice that these groups are not all Muslim (in fact, only the first 2 are). They all have grievances, some more legitimate than others. But where they fail is when they decide that it is acceptable innocents should die for the "crime" of being of a different culture or mindset than them. At that point, I shake the dust off of my feet.
This is where the concept of moral equivalency falls. Both the terrorist and the negligent government are wrong. But the difference between "So what if civilians are killed in the process" and "Let's blow the heads off some yarmulke-donning kids" is clear. Both are wrong and should be stopped. But the second drips of an evil that is just a little darker, a bit more sinister, a little more bone-chilling.
So to sum it up, my worldview leaves me with only one clear fact: Actions that result in the death of innocents, whether by malicious negligence or pure terrorism, are evil. They are wrong. They are UNJUSTIFIABLE. Nothing will convince me otherwise. I don't care "who started it." Both need to finish it.
kimmy,
My apologies for talking down to you.
Philip,
That you fail to see the IDF, in their indescriminate treatment of Palestinians by collective punishments, is testament to your bias. Malicious negligence is just a pretty term for killing. When the IDF fires indescriminately at the Palestinians, whether with bullets, tank mortars, or rockets, it is taking innocent lives. If the Palestinians did this, the international community would turn their backs on them. That the Israelis do this, and do not face the consequences of their actions, is unacceptable. Where are the Hague tribunals for the criminal Israelis, like Ariel Sharon? The Israeli state was based on the terrorist activities of the likes of the Irgun and Stern, who later came into the fold of the IDF and one of which became a prime minister. Every Prime Minister since the founding of Israel should be held to the same scrutiny that the world community is now holding Hamas and Fateh. Ignoring this fact is ignoring justice.
Since you refuse my invitations to Palestine, to witness life under occupation, let me paint a picture for you:
You wake up at 5:30 am. While you are brushing your teeth, you hear the Israeli jeeps outside harassing a young man selling bread. They are issuing orders to him to go home or face detention. He leaves, having foregone his days wages. The jeep pulls away. Minutes later, you hear them a few blocks away, now harassing some other young men also on their way to work, shouting over their megaphone, "Go back! Go back!"
You pack your hummus sandwich and a few apples, kiss your mother, then head out the door. 6:30am.
At the checkpoint, you wait for 30 minutes to get to the front of the line. You wait another 20 minutes while the woman that was ahead of you, together with her elderly parents, argues her case with the soldiers. She is in urgent need of care at a Jerusalem hospital, but the IDF refuses her papers. Her father tells the soldiers that she will die without treatment. The soldier tells her, in Hebrew, "If she is going to die, let her die in Ramallah." They turn back.
You walk up to the soldiers, hand them your Jerusalem i.d. They ask you to step aside as they process you through their computer. They tell you that you need to pay your television tax. 500 shekels. You don't have the five hundred shekels with you, but you figure you can run home and get it to pay it today. You walk back over the unimproved streets and past a dumpster of burning garbage. You think about how you pay municipal taxes just like the residents of West Jerusalem, but that these taxes never get your roads paved or your garbage picked up. You get the money from your apartment, and grab a letter you'd been meaning to send to your sister in Rome, then make your way back to the checkpoint. 30 minutes have passed, but now there are 200 people ahead of you.
No one is moving, for two hours you wait, in the August sun, growing hotter by the minute. The line grows to over 400. You are all packed into a corral like cattle. Someone bleats like a goat, others follow. You share a laugh. Finally, the line begins to move, then stops, moves, then stops. The soldiers are smoking cigarettes, flirting with one another, drinking coffee. They are barely paying attention to the 400 human beings standing shoulder to shoulder ten metres from them.
You finally make it to the front, after 3 hours of waiting, sweating, but making the best of it.
You walk to the soldiers, they process your i.d. again, remind you to pay your television tax. You notice seven young men have been taken aside and are waiting to be processed. Maybe they'll be sent to detention. Their crime, trying to enter Jerusalem for work. They hoped maybe to do some odd jobs on a construction site, mixing concrete or hauling stone. Now, because they have the wrong i.d. they will be either processed and then sent back, or processed and sent to detention. Detention will last anywhere from three days to 3 weeks, if there is no reason to hold them. They will be beaten, humiliated, asked to give the names of their friends in Hamas or Fateh.
You walk past these seven young men, and board a transit with nine others, all of you stinking, but no one complaining. The transit drives a kilometre, is stopped at another checkpoint, this one two jeeps, a lieutenant, two eighteen year olds who learned how to pull a trigger three months ago, and two Jerusalem police. They're checking everyone's papers, looking for anyone with the wrong i.d. One young man is taken off the transit. The driver is issued a large fine.
You continue to Salah el Din street, get off, walk to the post office, the only one in East Jerusalem, serving over 220,000 Palestinian residents. You wait again in line, the 20 people in front of you taking an hour and 15 minutes to process. The post office acts also as a bank, a place to collect social services and to pay bills.
You post the letter to your sister, leave, and make your way up the hill toward West Jerusalem to pay your television tax (a half-hour walk). You explain at the offices that you have alread paid your television tax, but they can't find you in their records, and insist that you pay it again. Reluctantly, you pass your 500 shekels over the counter, turn to make the trip back home.
Congratulations, it has just taken you over seven hours to travel three kilometres, post a letter, and pay a bill. Seven hours to do what an Israeli can do at leisure on their lunch break.
Luckily, it is Sunday, your day off of work at the French Cultural Centre. You are one of the fortunate ones, with a Jerusalem i.d., and parents who scraped to send you to the French primary school. You possess a mastery of the language which has gotten you this job, first as an embassy driver, now in the offices of the centre.
You are also fluent in Arabic, Hebrew, and English, with three years of study at Bethlehem University in English. You thought about being a writer. You wrote poem upon poem, read every book you could get your hands on. Your father fell ill and died when you were twenty, so you dropped university and you and your younger brother found work in order to support your mother and two sisters. That was ten years ago. Your sisters have since married, your younger brother is in prison for associating with the wrong people. Half of your school mates are in prison, a third are dead. You mind your business, pay your taxes, scrape, save, hope to marry someday soon. You are still supporting your mother, and working to save enough to buy your own house within the next five years.
Note: This is a happy story. The sadder ones are too much to write. My apologies, Haitham, if I take too much space in your blog. I do appreciate the forum, and thank you again.
If the "you' of the story is too affecting, please feel free to replace it with any name you like: Mohammad, Hamza, Khalil, Yousef, Fadi, Tarek, Hani, Nasri, Mahmoud, Omar, Walid, Husam, Sami, or Khader.
I can truly understand how trying it is. There is clearly injustice going on. But that is why you should be turning attention to people like the suicide bomber in Tel Aviv. Would all of these measures be taken if the terrorists would cease their activities? If Israelis could live without wondering if the next Palestinian to walk by would suddenly explode, would their be such suspicion toward the unfortunate people you mentioned? Of course not!
Now should Israel take the care to make social services and infrastructure equal to that of the rest of the country? Of course. Should they make sure that their ID systems work efficiently? Of course. Should they have a TV tax, whatever that is? No! Of course not! Is Israel doing what they can and should as the central government of the nation? No!
It would be interesting to see what changes would occur if the terrorists ceased their activities and all agreed in official terms to behave like decent humans. If Israel did not live up to their end of the bargain, then they would be held accountable, including by the US.
By the way, I would be interested to visit Palestine, but it is a financial impossibility for me, unfortunately. Plus, the danger issue would be a big deal tom me, which is one of the things that makes me so pity the people on both sides of the conflict there.
Unless you are in Gaza, the danger factor is really not near as it appears from the outside. The Palestinians in the West Bank are pretty much like the ones I described, all trying to get through their days, not bothering anyone, just living their lives, getting by as best they can.
Yes, the TV tax is notorious. No one knows why this exists. The Palestinians suspect that it applies only to them. I can't tell you if it also applies to the Israelis. I suspect not.
If you'd like to have a glimpse of what the Palestinians were facing prior to the Al-Aqsa or second Initifada (intifada means "uprising" for those unaware), please read B'tselem's "Restrictions on Movement" pages:
http://www.btselem.org/english/Freedom_of_Movement/Economy_1967_1994.asp
Read "Effect on the economy", "1967-1994", "1994-2000", and "The Paris Protocol".
You will note that Israel has made it impossible for the Palestinians to be self-sufficient all along. These pages describe the policies that would drive any self-dignified people to finally say, "Enough."
Philip,
Just because a suicide bomber don’t have a jet plane to shell Israeli targets does not make him a terrorist!
Let’s but it other way round and assume that the Palestinian have the Tanks and Jets to fight Israeli occupation; would you or anyone else dare calling that terrorism? I guess not. And if you do, then why not calling the same when the Israelis are using their artillery now to kill innocent? Keeping in mind who is the occupier and who is occupied!!
In the past few weeks, more than 28 people were killed by IOF, not a single word from your UN US ambassador. As soon as the Tel Aviv bombing occurred, oh God, not only he and his alike condemned the attack, but they called for Security Council to meet to take all possible actions against the Palestinians.
Not to forget the countless number of vetos your government used to stop any resolutions against Israeli crimes over years, but welcome and worked for all resolutions against the occupied people.
Anyway, I find it useless sometimes to discuss these issues again and again, but thanks to others for saying all what the words failed me to describe, specially Raymond. I agree with you 100%. Please feel free to write as much and as long as you like (and other too).
Is it not the goal of Arab Muslims to erradicate Israel from the Middle East? Does the Qur'an not call Jews "pigs"?
I am not fooled by the cries from people that would toss their own children to their deaths if it meant it might bring Israel that much closer to collapse and the end of the Jewish people.
Israel and the Jews have not lived a day in peace since the day Muhammad first scribbled his start to the Qur'ran.
And NO, I am not myself a Jew. I am a wide-awake Christian.
Haitham,
If Palestinians attacked Israeli military targets, I would not refer to any of them as terrorists. Yes, others would, to their shame. But the targets in Tel Aviv were not military. Therefore, Hamas calling it "defensive action" is ludicrous and does not give me a very bright picture of what is to come. The occupied have no more right to kill innocent civilians than the occupier. This should be obvious.
I have not a single time in these posts given Israel a pass on their actions. I believe the US should use their influence to steer Israel away from the excessive force actions and reactions. But until every Jew vacates that piece of land that is so under dispute, the terror attacks will not end. But my reason for wanting Israel to back off and take more care in their operations isn't to prevent terrorism. Like I said it will continue until the nation is empty of Jewish residents. The reason I advocate restraint is that innocent lives are being lost.
There is much Israel needs to do to make good on their responsibilities. At what point here did I say any different?
My point is that you cannot shake your fist as Israel while lauding Al Aqsa. It's hypocritical.
It is funny raymond that we both agree, but we butt heads.
I just wan't to understand!
The Palestinians are right. The Zionists are wrong.
Raymond, I totally agree with you.
I just want to inject the other side (my upbringing) for argument.
I married a German descent woman. I am of Jewish descent.
33 years later we still love each other. The war is over!
We have gotten over the past. Why can't they?
The Jews and the Muslims are still concerned about the crusades.
It is in the past.
What happened in Palestein in the late 40's is an invasion of Palestein. That is in the past.
Sorry, but live with it.
I don't like it but that is reality.
I'm not happy with reality.Israel is using the US to make the IOF a controlling force in their offence.
"Sorry, but live with it"?! You live with it.
I'm already living with it, and I can tell you it's no way to live to be treated like an guest in one's own home, not even a welcome guest, but a cockroach.
That's the reality, and if you care to live in that reality, by all means, do. I do not.
Should the South Africans live with it?
The Aborigines?
The Native Americans?
The Irish?
The Chechens?
The Algerians?
Should we return to placing "colored only" signs over the water fountains in the United States,
and then tell the African Americans to "live with it"? Should we force them back into servitude?
Please do not "totally agree" with me, and then insult me.
As long as people fail to redefine their mindset, than Palestinian will never get their land. I am talking about the conventional mindset that one can not kill "innocent" civilians in a country that illegally occupy other country and oppress it's people. In case of Israel, US, and UK ,there is no such thing like innocent civilians. If people elect their renegade leaders, than they must be held responsible. It is shared responsibility.
Sorry, Maggie, but your line of logic is disturbing.
I think there are too many Democrats in the US Senate. I think I'll go to a heavily Democratic city like San Francisco, walk into a shopping mall strapped with explosives, and blow up some teenagers and pregnant women. What about the fact that Hamas now controls the Palestinian Authority? Perhaps then Israel is justified if they use excessive force? Maybe Israelis now would be right to walk into the West Bank and start purposefully targeting civilians.
Do those comments sound ludicrous? Then look in the mirror; it's essentially what you just said. In fact, it could be reworded to mean that in a democracy, the civilians are guilty of all the wrongs committed by their governments. Therefore, tyranny is best.
Yes, there are innocent civilians, like it or not. An Israeli man, woman, boy or girl out for a trip to the supermarket is an innocent civilian. Purposefully killing them is this wacky little thing we call "murder." Whether you like a nation's policies or not, whether you are directly affect, indirectly affected or unaffected by a nation's policies, you have no right–NONE–to intentionally kill and maim its residents. Your comments sound like they are right out of the mouth of Usama bin Laden.
And to take it a step further…the very mindset you have displayed here is the very thing that makes Westerners wary of Muslims (I know most don't think that way, but I'm making a point here). Not only that, it is a big reason the Palestinians are in the state they are in now.
I'm sorry Raymond.
I really don't know about the conditions in Palestein. That is my fault.
I sit and I do cry about lives lost on both sides.
My Jewish side tells me about lies from WWII and lies that are now printed in our press. These lies I am taught are supporting Palestein.
I just have a bad problem to take the other side to understand yours. I will press these sides to understand. If I don't ask I won't get answers.
I can give answers that are against 6 mil. Jews killed. Answers that questions the numbers.
I have lost many members of my family in the war. It is in the past.
My mother hates my wife because she is of German descent.
This is why I say the war is over. Live with it!
I let my personal life affect my answers.
Sorry Raymond.
IOF is wrong. But terrorists who kill citizens are wrong too.
Hear, hear!
There is no shortage of information about life in Palestine. I have provided links to many sites such as B'tselem and Machsom Watch, which are both Israeli organisations working for the human rights of the Palestinians.
http://www.btselem.org
http://www.machsomwatch.org
There are plenty of other sources that you can investigate, from the Palestinians side. Al-Haq, Palestine Red Crescent Society, Washington Report on Middle-East Affairs, to name a few.
http://www.alhaq.org
http://www.palestinercs.org
http://www.washington-report.org
If that doesn't feed your curiosity, please visit the pages of the UN for a list of resolutions regarding Israel and Palestine:
http:http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/vGARes!OpenView&Start=1&Count=150&Expand=1#1
I invite you also to read the many essays of Noam Chomsky and Edward Said regarding the Israeli occupation, its designs and effects, and a book entitled "I Saw Ramallah", by Mourid Barghouti, chronicling the expulsion and exile of a Palestinian in 1967.
There is no shortage of information about life in Palestine. I have provided links to many sites such as B'tselem and Machsom Watch, which are both Israeli organisations working for the human rights of the Palestinians.
http://www.btselem.org
http://www.machsomwatch.org
There are plenty of other sources that you can investigate, from the Palestinians side. Al-Haq, Palestine Red Crescent Society, Washington Report on Middle-East Affairs, to name a few.
http://www.alhaq.org
http://www.palestinercs.org
http://www.washington-report.org
If that doesn't feed your curiosity, please visit the pages of the UN for a list of resolutions regarding Israel and Palestine:
http:http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/vGARes!OpenView&Start=1&Count=150&Expand=1#1
I invite you also to read the many essays of Noam Chomsky and Edward Said regarding the Israeli occupation, its designs and effects, and a book entitled "I Saw Ramallah", by Mourid Barghouti, chronicling the expulsion and exile of a Palestinian in 1967.
Sorry for the repeat. Connection problems. The UN link seems to have failed, so here's a less direct one:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusRel.asp?infocusID=70&Body=Palestin&Body1=
After linking, notice the tab "General Assembly" and click the "Resolutions" link.
Philip I believe you should stop putting the shade over your own eyes, and just read what you write first and then talk of someone else. You keep preeching that both sides are wrong yet in every argument of yours it is clear that you support Israel. Stop the cat and mouse game, and decide wether you are in suport of one or the other.Although you already have decided, so why don't you simply admit it? Clearly, there is no need to play mind games with your own self.
Here let me give you an example: "An Israeli man, woman, boy or girl out for a trip to the supermarket is an innocent civilian. Purposefully killing them is this wacky little thing we call “murder.” " If you truely believe that both sides are wrong, why don't you state what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians? . . .
raymond
I have seen these web sites before. I visited them again at your insistence.
Thank you.
I have ignored them after visiting them before because many of them didn't give a fair story. Now they seem to give a more fair story.
I only want to understand. I still believe that the Palestinians are being given a raw deal, that the US and Israel are doing everything they can to destroy Palestein.
But I still have to ask questions because they get the response I want like yours.
Sorry if I got your ire up but it got some of the results I wanted.
Muslimah,
I did strongly criticize Israel for their actions. Over and over and over again. I have chosen sides with neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians. I am in favor of both sides responding appropriately to each other. Maggie said that there is no such thing as an innocent civilian. This is Bin Laden's mindset, the very root of terrorism. I criticize Israel for being maliciously negligent. "Maliciously" is not a nice word. I am saying that they are being negligent of innocent civilians, and do so due to their anger toward the Palestinians (for whatever reasons).
What side am I on? The side of reasonable people, rational thinkers in both Israel and Palestine. I'm on the side of those who think that killing innocents in either situation is dreadful and must not continue. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who thinks, as one commenter stated, that the suicide bomber died in dignity as he sent parts of his body along with shrapnel into the bodies of others who were just trying to live their lives. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who says that there is no such thing as an innocent civilian in a democratic nation. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who looks at others as animals based on their religion and/or ethnicity. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who refers to Jews (nor any other ethnic group, including Arabs) as "pigs." I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who can look at a violent attack on children and say, "Yeah, but look at what the Israeli troops did to us." I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who says, "The Palestinians deserve what they are getting, because they won't stop the terrorists." I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who thinks mortar attacks on villages are an appropriate response against terrorists. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who believes the Palestinians should b treated as less-than-equal in Israel. I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who is willing to punish non-combatants for the actions of terrorists or governments.
The reason I am arguing so much specifically against the terrorist groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al Aqsa "Martyrs" Brigade is this: I saw comment after comment APPROVING of their actions. I could not believe what I was reading. Will you, Muslimah, condemn their actions? Will you, Raymond? Maggie? Yasse? If not, then any complaint you make against Israel is falling on deaf ears. Not because I am a blind supporter of Israel, but because I cannot listen to the complaints of a man who has a whip tearing his back as he holds a knife in a baby's chest. I have heard from REASONABLE Palestinians and Palestinian sympathizers and have respected their views, getting educated somewhat to the plight, to the difficulty of living in the conditions they are in, to the frustrations and resentment that come with it. But they never condone, nor look in any way approvingly at acts of terror. So they have my respect. I never felt the need to debate them, as they proved themselves rational, reasoned, moral people. Is it asking too much to say that innocent life (and there IS such a thing, in the basic sense of the term) be seen as something that should be protected…defended…cherished? I guess I am. How very tragic.
Philip, I'd like to give you more of your examples; read:
" I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who can look at a violent attack on children and say, “Yeah, but look at what the Israeli troops did to us.” "
" Not because I am a blind supporter of Israel, but because I cannot listen to the complaints of a man who has a whip tearing his back as he holds a knife in a baby’s chest."
Now read this:
" I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who says, “The Palestinians deserve what they are getting, because they won’t stop the terrorists.” "
" I am NOT on the side of ANYONE who thinks mortar attacks on villages are an appropriate response against terrorists. "
I don't know about you , but to me you are portaying Palestinians as some vicious,inhumane, bloody, sick bastards who call themselves "maryths" when they blow up into thousands of pieces and send themselves, and the "innocent" people around them to hell, yet you don't draw such a harsh picture of Israel. This gives one an impression that you may be soft on one side. I am just trying to figure out whether or not you justify what Isreal is doing, as it seems to me. You keep convincing that you believe BOTH are wrong, yet are you drwing two DIFFERENT pictures?
" Is it asking too much to say that innocent life (and there IS such a thing, in the basic sense of the term) be seen as something that should be protected…defended…cherished? "
Of course innocence should be cherished,protected, and defended, BUT it is ALWAYS the innocent that pay the price in WAR!!!
Muslimah
You have pegged Phillip on the head.
I have read his messages and thought they were very level headed but I could not put my finger on something that bothered me.
Maybe he is an Israeli trying to stir up dissent on this site, using very subtle means. It has happened before.
Condemn both but try to sway the reader in the other direction.
I confess that I was swayed.
I'll try to pay attention next time.
Muslimah (and Kimmy),
It is very simple, actually. I am not painting Palestinians as terrorists, nor murderers by any other name. I do not believe that the terrorist organizations that I have named repeatedly (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa "Martyrs" Brigade) are representative of the Palestinian people. I do not believe that the typical Palestinian believes that it is ok to do what was done in Tel Aviv. I have read, as I mentioned in the last post, many discussions by reasoned supporters of the Palestinian cause (most of whom are Palestinian themselves) who want killing of innocents to end. They do not speak of each Israeli citizen as a target. They do not condone (in fact, the CONDEMN) acts of terror. It is my assumption that these people speak for the majority of Palestinians. But what I see you (not Kimmy, this statement) and others here doing is saying, "Look what Israel is doing to us." Yet you praise the actions of someone doing the same thing. Moreso, you honor them for taking the evil a step further.
I made a point to describe the nefarious acts of both sides, and what makes them wrong. They differ in some regards, but they are evil acts nonetheless. I am trying to "sway" people only one direction: away from a terrorist mentality, one that says it is okay to target 8-year-old girls and people out for a stroll as a means of resistance to an enemy. It is NOT okay. It is EVIL. There is NEVER any justification. It is not WAR. Your statement about war is accurate. Innocents are the unfortunate losers in every war. But it is not an act of war to blow up shoppers. In a war, you attack military bases, troop encampments, and at the end, government headquarters. You also do not hide amongst your own people in a war and use their homes as bases. That is cruel, and the US Constitution forbids it for that reason.
I am not an Israeli. I am an American (that makes me worse than an Israeli, I suppose). I am not trying to stir up trouble. I am hoping simply to bring some reason into this. I read the story Haitham put up and noted the REASONED point of view of the author. Then I read a number of comments varying from statements of support for terror acts (oddly the majority) to pure anti-Semitism (referring to Jews as "pigs"). I did not expect that. I expected comments about how Israel is just as guilty, etc., but that it is a blight on the Palestinians for terrorists to claim to represent them while committing such acts. I expected abhorrence of the tragic and deliberate destruction of human life. I expected Palestinian voices saying, "Enough of these monsters claiming to represent us! We just want our rights!" I did see one or two. But the rest…
The only way I can figure that anyone sees me defending Israel in my comments is that they are so blinded by their own hatred that any statement that doesn't claim that Israel is the vilest blight on mankind is misconstrued as favoring. This would not surprise me, given the mindset I have seen displayed here. Shocking.
In case any of you still think I am an Israeli instigator, my username (above) links to a website I am a creator of, which verifies my location (the Contact Us link at the bottom) and my general religious views.
Philip, I am still confused,
" I am trying to “sway” people only one direction: away from a terrorist mentality, one that says it is okay to target 8-year-old girls and people out for a stroll as a means of resistance to an enemy."
" But it is not an act of war to blow up shoppers. In a war, you attack military bases, troop encampments, and at the end, government headquarters. You also do not hide amongst your own people in a war and use their homes as bases."
Right, so tell me who this applies to again? "Terrorists". Do you refer to them in that manner because they take a bomb around their waist and blow themselves up, or because they target "innocent" with that bomb? Then what is the Israeli called that uses thir rifles on the "innocent" children of Palestine, or is it just that Palestinians are terrorizing? If the Palestininans had the millitary equipment that was provided to Isreal, perhaps they wouldn't be blowing themselves up! I am not sure where you are getting the use of homes as bases. Does this statement justify the shelling of Palestinian homes by the Israelis?
" That is cruel, and the US Constitution forbids it for that reason."
Why are you bringing into this the US constitution? The US is on Israel's side, that also defeats your argument. If you insist however, look at the cruelty the US is doing itself? "By mistake" they shelled a village in Pakistan and killed mostly women and children. Iraq, in the beginning of their agression they were shelling Baghdad, killing "innocent." Afghanistan, "targeting" the taliban they have killed more "innocent" than culprits. Yeah I bet now you would call that WAR! They have not only done it in the Middle East but, Vietnam, Japan, Latin America . . . etc.
Why are you only criticizing the "terrorist" groups (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa “Martyrs” Brigade), criticize the Isreali "terrorist" organizations aswel.
Then you say; "I expected Palestinian voices saying, “Enough of these monsters claiming to represent us! We just want our rights!” I did see one or two. But the rest…"
What do you expect from the Israelis, or are they no to be expected of?
It is not me who is blinded by hatred,so that every comment that is not against Isreal seems irelevant, but it is you who is blind enough not to even see your own words. I am just saying you are very transparent, but if you wish to improve your argument in that BOTH are wrong, try and attack BOTH sides equally not put all the weight on Palestine and claim that I am the one who is blind!
I never asked for your nationality, but you said you were American. Lets see, you must be sitting in your cumpfy sofa, streching your legs, relaxing and watching TV. You have never experienced WAR, you have never been attacked, molested,raped, and watched your familly being brutally executed infront of you! I am not saying with this that you don't have the right to state your opinion about the matter, but at least do it farely and honestly!
Muslimah,
You stated: "Then what is the Israeli called that uses thir rifles on the 'innocent' children of Palestine, or is it just that Palestinians are terrorizing? If the Palestininans had the millitary equipment that was provided to Isreal, perhaps they wouldn’t be blowing themselves up! I am not sure where you are getting the use of homes as bases. Does this statement justify the shelling of Palestinian homes by the Israelis?"
First, I have stated that Israeli soldiers firing into civilian areas are using "Malicious negligence." This means that their actions are only one small step short of terrorism, which is the direct and intentional targeting of civilians. Malicious negligence is attacks on combatants without regard to the safety of civilians. I stated that these acts are evil.
The reason I asked where the reasonable Paelstinian voices were on this blog entry is because it was regarding an attack by a Palestinian terrorist. Thus, I expected responses in keeping with what I said. Haitham's response seemed very reasonable to me. Haitham, correct me if I am wrong, but did you not say that the families of those killed deserve condolences, because their lives are also valuable? That is the type of response I expected to typify the comments here. Instead, I mostly saw nods of approval, statements of praise for the act. Yet, these same people state how horrible it is for Israelis to kill civilians. In other words, I have heard this: "It is wrong for Israelis to kill civilians, but it is right for Palestinians to." This statement is irreconcilable. I emphasized Palestinians here, because the attack that prompted the post was by a Palestinian. Had I seen the comments generally speaking of both sides' actions as evil (Queen Rania's Fan did a good job of this), I would have felt no need to respond. I would have sat back in my comfy American chair and said, "Right on, brothers." I have been quite honest in my responses here. You accuse me of a veiled attempt at swaying people to support Israel's actions. If that's what I've been doing, calling Israel's actions evil would seem to be self-defeating. My point falls fairly neatly into a few sentences:
It is hypocritical to criticize Israel for killing civilians while praising Palestinians who kill them. It is evil to willfully kill non-combatants, whether your hands are Semite or Arab or whatever. There in never any justification, no matter what trauma you have experienced. No one has the right to kill a member of my family because they don't like my government. No one has a right to kill my son because they don't like what gangs of criminals with revolutionary sounding names are doing in my community.
My question remains: I am willing to (and did) condemn the Israeli attack that left the 8-year-old girl maimed and another dead (which was in one of Haitham's other posts). Are you willing to condemn the acts of the Tel Aviv bomber?
Muslimah
I have read philip's reply.
He is being neutral and very convincing. I find this very scary because this is the Bush's way of covering the Middle East.
Palestein is being invaded and occupied.
Israel is bombing Palestinians at their will.
Palestinians are fighting for their lives.
I don't agree with suicide bombers. I don't agree with Israeli bombing.
But who is right?
People who have nowhere to go. Or a country who is right in the eyes of the US?
Neither.
I should also note that I wrote my Congressman and asked that he oppose the bill going before COngress that would cut off all diplomatic relations with the Palestinian Authority. I have no respect for Hamas, but at this moment they are the players in the process, so cutting off relations also means removing influence. Likewise, if the PLO (which recognizes the right of Israel to exist) comes back into power, then there would cease to be a means to communicate with the moderate voices. If I were a Zionist, is this what I would do? Of course not.
I do have a question (not rhetorical) that I would like to see an honest answer to. If the powers that be in Israel agreed to:
1) enforce equal citizenship between Israelis and Palestinians
2) give equal treatment under law and action
3) cease the malicious negligence that they have been guilty of
4) grant freeflow of Palestinians into and out of Israel proper (no wall, no checkpoints)
5) arm Palestinians as a military force
6) remove residency restrictions…
…would the terror attacks end? Or, if they agreed to allow secession of the Palestinian territories and honor the establishment of a Palestinian state, offering their allegiance to them as allies, would the attacks end? This question is not intended to be provocative. I am just interested to see what the various voices here think would happen.
Philip,
Before you single me or anyone else out again as supporters of suicide bombings, please read my previous post 37 in this string.
Also, to clarify, and to speak at least for myself, and perhaps everyone (if I may) that is pro-Palestinian here. We DO NOT agree the suicide bombings. I don't think anyone herein stated that the suicide bombings were good or should be celebrated.
What we are trying to say, however, is why should the Palestinians be held accountable by the US and EU through the rescinding of funds, and by Israel through their acts of terror, or "malicious negligence" as you so adamantly call it (though I am loath to agree with the term), when Israel is not held accountable at all?
The problem is this. Israel won't do business with Hamas until they recognise Israel. Thus far, Israel has failed to recognise Palestine, that there were, are, or ever will be such a thing as a Palestinian. Israel refuses to recognise that the state of Israel was founded on the terror, murder and expulsion of the native Palestinian population, and that Israel, as the occupier, has any responsibility to live up to the Fourth Geneva Convention, or to recognise and abide by any of the UN resolutions.
In light of the failures of Israel, if we are to be even-handed, why should the Palestinians adhere to Israel's demands? To the US's? To the EU's?
To address the various points of your rhetorical question:
1) enforce equal citizenship between Israelis and Palestinians
I assume by this you mean those Palestinians already living in Israel, not the West Bank and Gaza. That's a start.
2) give equal treatment under law and action
Same as 1. Okay, sounds good.
3) cease the malicious negligence that they have been guilty of
Why are you afraid to call it targeted assassination, or murder when it's at the hands of an Israeli? Cease the occupation.
4) grant freeflow of Palestinians into and out of Israel proper (no wall, no checkpoints)
My inclination is to say that the Palestinians wouldn't want to go in and out of Israel if they were allowed full and true autonomy over borders, trade, economy, natural resources and government.
5) arm Palestinians as a military force
Ha ha ha. Okay, seriously. If this were to happen, if Israel allowed it, they would put an even higher wall up. As long as they kept to the 1967 Armistice line, I think it would be more widely accepted. If they don't want a wall, an intermediary zone could be established.
6) remove residency restrictions…
Do you mean that Israel would not treat the Palestinians in Israel as third-class citizens? Or do you mean that the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza would not have to adhere to Israeli control of their status, as they would be residents of their own autonomous country? Or do you mean that the Israelis would remove the term "Jewish State" from their constitution and live up to their claims of being a democracy? All of the above? Or something else entirely?
So in your plan, does Israel keep all of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, allowing the Palestinians to stay and govern themselves, or do they withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza, allowing for the Palestinians to rule as an autonomous nation?
The Palestinians have been saying this all along:
"Israel, stop your occupation, and we will stop attacking you."
I think that's your answer. It is not about Islam. It is about basic human rights. Islam has been a vehicle for the message, but the message applies to all, regardless of religious affiliation.
The Palestinians are saying, "Enough, get out. It has been almost sixty years and you continue to treat us like dogs. Stop treating us like dogs, stop stealing our land, stop killing our people. An end to the occupation means an end to resistance."
If the Israelis had simply adhered to their promises made at Oslo, or at any other time for that matter, we might not be having this discussion.
Very well…then in the end, we may have common ground. I agree that both sides should be held accountable. I believe that deaths of innocents on both sides deserve condolences. And I believe in Palestinian autonomy (self-government). So if you believe those conditions (and the related items discussed) would end terror attacks, then I can go for that My thought was that until every Jew vacated the whole country, that attacks would continue. I may have been wrong on this. My man thing is that there is never justification for the type of attacks like the one in Tel Aviv (specified, because it was the issue that prompted the post).
There was some support here of the actions, some explicit:
"I am proud of Ismael Haneyyeh’s declaration that the bomb was a natural result of the israeli occupation …. Hamas Lives.. I hope the next bomb will smash Tel Aviv and kill more pigs… " (Khawaja M.)
Some (barely) implicit:
"These martyrs would rather die in dignity than living in humiliation. In democratic countries,every people are accountable to what their government did. Israelis have freely chosen their leaders, their leader kill innocent Palestinian women and children every second day, so what do you expect? If Israelis don’t want to be killed by suicide bombers,then Israelis must elect a peace loving government that give Palestinian their rights, period. Hamas was right in saying that the bombers are acting as self defense." (Maggie) Maggie also went on in the course of the discussion to say: "In case of Israel, US, and UK ,there is no such thing like innocent civilians."
"As long as Israel, US and EU deal with Palestinians as “obey or starve”, no condolences… Israeli must feel deprivation of security and beloved ones so as they’ll know what it means to loose your daughter, son or brother…" (Hanzalaa)
"What happened is natural for weeks after countless of Israiles intrusions and killings ." (Yasse)
It was posts like these that prompted me to respond, that completely shocked me.
My main point is that deliberate killing of innocent civilians by ANYONE is unjustifiable. I only stopped short of calling Israel's actions "deliberate," because the primary targets are terrorists. But, since Israel does not appear to be taking measures to ensure the safety of those uninvolved with the terrorists, they are being negligent, and maliciously so. Either way, I would like to see the measures I described previously taken. Hamas being in control of the PA is not conducive to Palestinian self-government being achieved (I expect they, at least, would financially support terrorists who have the extreme Islamist agenda). But nonethe less, I believe it would be beneficial. Even President Bush has supported this idea.
excerpt re: IDF (from Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDF
"Code of Conduct against terrorists
Recently, a team of professors, commanders and former judges, led by Tel Aviv University the holder of the Ethics chair, Professor Assa Kasher, developed a code of conduct which emphasizes the right behavior in low intensity warfare against terrorists, where soldiers must operate within a civilian population. Reserve units and regular units alike are taught the following eleven rules of conduct, which are an addition to the more general IDF Spirit:
-Military action can only be taken against military targets. (http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20060405.asp)
-The use of force must be proportional. (http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20060416.asp)
-Soldiers may only use weaponry they were issued by the IDF.
-Anyone who surrenders cannot be attacked.
-Only those who are properly trained can interrogate prisoners.
-Soldiers must accord dignity and respect to the Palestinian population and those arrested. (find the dignity and respect in this picture: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4805310.stm , or what about here: http://www.btselem.org/English/Administrative%5FDetention/)
-Soldiers must give appropriate medical care, when conditions allow, to oneself and one's enemy. (http://www.palestinercs.org/pressreleases/Year%202006/pr150406wbrr.htm)
-Pillaging is absolutely and totally illegal.
-Soldiers must show proper respect for religious and cultural sites and artifacts. (http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4659.shtml)
-Soldiers must protect international aid workers, including their property and vehicles. (http://www.ccmep.org/images/spring2002palestine/marilyn/jenin051102-4.html)
-Soldiers must report all violations of this code. (so that they may face exoneration – http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article3552.shtml)
Critics, including B'Tselem and Amnesty International accuse Israel of frequently violating their own Purity of Arms and code of ethics, and protecting soldiers who do."
(my additions)
posted again for the sake of the links
excerpt re: IDF (from Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDF
“Code of Conduct against terrorists
Recently, a team of professors, commanders and former judges, led by Tel Aviv University the holder of the Ethics chair, Professor Assa Kasher, developed a code of conduct which emphasizes the right behavior in low intensity warfare against terrorists, where soldiers must operate within a civilian population. Reserve units and regular units alike are taught the following eleven rules of conduct, which are an addition to the more general IDF Spirit:
-Military action can only be taken against military targets. ( http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20060405.asp )
-The use of force must be proportional. ( http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20060416.asp )
-Soldiers may only use weaponry they were issued by the IDF.
-Anyone who surrenders cannot be attacked.
-Only those who are properly trained can interrogate prisoners.
-Soldiers must accord dignity and respect to the Palestinian population and those arrested. (find the dignity and respect in this picture: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4805310.stm , or what about here: http://www.btselem.org/English/Administrative%5FDetention/ )
-Soldiers must give appropriate medical care, when conditions allow, to oneself and one’s enemy. ( http://www.palestinercs.org/pressreleases/Year%202006/pr150406wbrr.htm )
-Pillaging is absolutely and totally illegal.
-Soldiers must show proper respect for religious and cultural sites and artifacts. ( http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4659.shtml )
-Soldiers must protect international aid workers, including their property and vehicles. ( http://www.ccmep.org/images/spring2002palestine/marilyn/jenin051102-4.html )
-Soldiers must report all violations of this code. (so that they may face exoneration – http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article3552.shtml )
Critics, including B’Tselem and Amnesty International accuse Israel of frequently violating their own Purity of Arms and code of ethics, and protecting soldiers who do.”
(my additions)
In my research on the IDF, I found these rules of conduct to be entirely laughable, and thought to present them here with links to examples of their complete disregard. I will add that I am presenting singular examples, but that they represent the general attitudes and misconduct of the IDF.
Then we are on the same page at this point! Obviously, the rules of engagement are as they should be. The enforcement of those rules appears to be largely non-existent. The powers that be in Israel should be held accountable; they should be reprimanded for not enforcing these guidelines and required to do so. And the US should be at the top of the list of entities spearheading the initiative, pushing Israel to live up to their promises. A lot is said about the power Israel has over the US. I believe this is only partially true. Rather, the US, in its alliance to the nation of Israel, fails to really put any pressure on Israel (although the Gaza pullout was largely a US push). I believe we should use our influence more on our allies, not just on our enemies.
Phillip, I am sympathetic to much of what you are writing, and I realise that the media coverage of the Palestinian conflict is somewhat "skewed" in your country, but you really must get it into your head that the intentional targets of the Israeli military are not just Palestinian "terrorists" it is ANYONE who may be critical of zionist expansionist plans to create "lebensraum" throughout the whole of what is currently referred to as the "Palestinian Territories". It is well known, and has been acknowledged in UK and other courts that the Israeli Offence Force (sic) deliberately targets and murders civilians in the same way as Hamas, aAMB and IJ do. They also claim many more victims than all of the Palestinian "terrorist" organisations too. Hence, this is not "malicious negligence", it is "murder" just the same. Besides the many hundreds of Palestinian citizens who have been deliberately targeted despite having nothing to do with any "terrorist" activity, this includes US, UK and other citizens such as peace activists (including Rachel Corrie and Tom Hurndall) and journalists (James Miller and several others), all of which the Israeli government attempted to cover up. Therefore, the "rules of engagement" of the IDF seems to be "shoot any Palestinians, shoot any other people who has the nerve to protest at our kill-dozers, shoot any journalists who are there to witness it, don't even bother to ask questions later, then orchestrate a cover up if any international / judicial bodies ask questions. Even if they do, the US will bail us out anyway". Incidentally, judicial involvement in the murders of US citizens by the IDF in Israel / Palestine has been vigourously stifled in the US. This has not been the case in the UK, where the truth has been coming out regarding the murders of Tom Hurndall and James Miller.
BTW Philip, you also seem to be fond of the term "moral equivalence". Did you know was originally a rhetorical device invented by the neo-conservative Jeanne Kirkpatick as a method of absolving criminal activity sponsored by supposedly "repectable" governments such as those of the US and Israel. From reading what you have written so far, somehow I don't have you down as a "neo-con" just yet!-).
Israel has more power over the US than you realise, Philip.
They have used the anti-semitic game for years. Just like Bush with his "either you are with us, or you are against us" speech.
Zionism is the main problem along with all the money they get that they use in lobbying the US to look the other way.
Bush's religious views will kill too many people before this is over. He supports the Zionists and their views.
Forget the radicals and the leaders controlling the religion. Islam is a beautiful religion (if you are religious). More so than Christianity.
I am not religious, but I am a humanist. I deplore any act of violence. I don't differenciate between any excuse. You hurt innocents. You are wrong! I don't dwell on situations or reasoning. Hurt innocents and you are wrong!
The two religions can get along, as long as radicals are left out of the picture.
That includes Osama and Bush. They are both wrong!
I find myself appologising to local Muslims for wrongdoings by my government because it is not their fault. This is sad.
I actually joke with them because I was born a Dane and the cartoons that sparked an uprising were from Denmark.
We have no problems about this.
We both agree that the radicals (Osama & Bush) are the problems.
Let the moderates of both religions and the non-believers settle this and you will have a peaceful world.
As my daughter told Jehovas Witness when she was told that she was going to hell. "My father is an air conditioning mechanic and when I go there it will be air conditioned."
I'll do it for everyone.
At the risk of starting another argument, I have to say:
Bush is not an extremist. The "for us or against us" statement has been so far removed from its original meaning, that it is no longer worth mentioning. He was aiming that at nations that decide to keep hush-hush about terrorist activities. This was not aimed at France, Democrats, nor anti-war activists.
Bush is not a Zionist. He is not even Jewish! He has in many ways been harder on Israel than other presidents. No, he has not even come close to doing what he should. But Clinton (who you would probably not call an extremist) stated that his administration actively OPPOSED Palestinian statehood. Bush supports it. The "Roadmap for Peace," though riddled with flaws, attempts to give Palestinians autonomy and requires Israel to back off. The Gaza pullout was prompted by the Bush administration. Calling him Zionist is far from true. Would you call Clinton a Zionist? Bush's religious views will kill no one, any more than mine will.
Has Bush ever put down Islam? No, he calls it a peaceful religion.
And you more or less called it that yourself. Christianity has beauty, yes, but it does have one big, ugly detail: by our tenets, the one innocent man who ever lived, God in human flesh, was tortured and killed. The only man who deserved no harm in any form received some of mankind's worst cruelty. It is a divine injustice, so unjust that French author/existentialist Albert Camus could not accept it for that reason alone. He wanted to be a Christian but could not stand the idea that he would be a part of that injustice, benefitting from the good result of such evil acts. So, yes, Christianity isn't all beauty. There is beauty in the Truth that comes as a result, but that is for another discussion!
Yes, both religions can get along. I, though I share a faith with wild-eyed religious zealot George W. Bush, could easily get along with Muslims. I do not personally know any where I live, but there are very few in the area I live in. Otherwise, I don't doubt I would be friends with some. Yet, Osama and I probably wouldn't hang out much. I just don't think he and I would enjoy the same activities (I like going to the beach; he likes blowing up people).
Kimmy, Israeli influence within the US political establishment it is even greater than you realise! … I have enclosed a link to a a documentary (by a reputable film maker I hasten to add) that hints at the true extent of Israeli influence over the the US. It's about the deliberate Israeli sinking of the spy ship USS Liberty during the "Six Day War". The incident was also covered in a book by the journalist James Bamford entitled "Body of Secrets", and has been covered by many other reputable journalists and writers. The attack was also condemned as a deliberate act by a Secretary of State (Dean Rusk), a director of the CIA (Richard Helms), TWO Directors of the NSA (Oliver Kirby and Lt Gen. William Odom), an assistant to LBJ (Clark Clifford), as well as several survivors of the sinking (34 US servicemen were killed).
The Israeli intention was to sink the whole ship and all crew / witnesses, then blame Egypt for a second "Pearl Harbour". On hearing of the incident, the then president, Lyndon Baynes Johnson was prepared to completely flatten the whole of Egypt. However, when he heard that Israel was responsible, he immediately suppressed the incident, to took steps to muzzle all of the surviving crew members as he did not wish to upset the so called "Israel lobby" in what was a very sensitive time in the second Indo-China war. He subsequently colluded with the Israeli "plan b" story that the sinking was a "tragic accident". There are many aspects to this event, but if you want to explore it further, there are MANY references to it from sevral reputable sources, and you can watch the movie too!
http://www.cerebellum.tv/fvideo/loss_of_liberty.php
Kimmy and Philip, regarding your comments in messages 101 and 102, which seem to hint at at an Islamic / Christian religious demarcation in this dispute…
With all due respect, it is slightly more complex than that. I would like to add for the record that prior to the Israeli land thefts of 1948 onward, as much as 10% of the Palestinian population was also Christian (just as Mr Bush professes to be), and along with Muslims, they have been a significant force in Palestine's struggle for Justice. Most of these were forcibly dispossesed of their land, homes and dignity along with their Muslim brothers and sisters by the advancing Israeli juggernaut. So many in fact, that the proportion of Christians living in Palestine has declined from the 10% mentioned above, to as little as 1.5% now. Notable Palestinian Christian activists (living and dead) include Suha Arafat (the wife of Yasser) and Raymonda Tawil (Suha's mother and a prominent activist), the great writer, theorist and critic Edward Said, George Habash (founder of the PFLP), Daoud Mikhail (founder of the PLO) and his daughter, Hanaan Ashrawi, a major Palestinian spokeswoman who IMHO is the greatest and most underused asset in Palestine's struggle for justice. But I digress. Raymond was right (as usual) when he wrote "It is not about Islam. It is about basic human rights."
Correction: I meant to write that Daoud Mikhail was A founding member of the PLO, not THE founder of the PLO, which was originally a complex conglomeration of several groups which were brought together under the umbrella of the "Arab League" of nations. Just thought I'd clear that up!
Roadmap for Peace
"PHASE I: Ending Terror and Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions
- Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate end to all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere.
- Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two-state vision of an independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel, and calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians anywhere.
- Palestinian institution-building includes drafting a constitution for Palestinian statehood and conducting free elections.
- Israel withdraws from Palestinian areas occupied since September 2000, as security progresses, freezes all settlement activity, and dismantles outposts. It takes measures to improve the Palestinian humanitarian situation."
Words, words, words. My favorite part is the last "Israel withdraws from Palestinian areas occupied since September 2000". September 2000!?! So the Palestinians now have to give up everything that the Israelis took up to September 2000? That explains why the period between Oslo and September 2000 were some of the heaviest in terms of settlement building.
Think BIG PICTURE.
It didn't start with Clinton, nor did it start with Bush. The Israeli agenda has been in process since 1948. They set the stage for Palestine to fail.
As Israel builds more settlements and their wall deep in the West Bank, the Palestinians lose more land, grow more restless, struggle to resist. Some snap, blow themselves up, killing Israelis. The Israelis then take the Palestinians are operating in bad faith against the "Roadmap" or whatever other flavor of the day peace plan the U.S. or other western countries has put on the table. So they extrajudicially assassinate both "terrorists" and civilians. More attacks by Palestinians, more incursions by Israel. Meanwhile, the settlement building continues. 17 billion shekels was recently allotted by Israel to the building of new settlements in the West Bank.
You don't have to be a genius to see this. But you do have to be awake. Whether he says it outright or not, Bush is a Zionist. He will support Israel, whether or not they follow the Roadmap or continue on their current course to gobble up more Palestinian land in the development of Eretz Israel.
Please note that US aid to Israel is not contingent on the Israelis stopping their unlawful killing of the Palestinians. It is not contingent on the Israelis recognising Palestine. No one is holding the billions of US dollars of aid to Israel ransom for their good behavior.
Bush and Rice, Blair and Straw may pay lip-service by condemning Israeli violence, but they will never hold Israel accountable for its actions by countering those actions. This was also true of Clinton, Bush senior, Reagan, Thatcher…
Why?
Paul,
You stated: "Kimmy and Philip, regarding your comments in messages 101 and 102, which seem to hint at at an Islamic / Christian religious demarcation in this dispute…"
I don't see this as a Muslim/Christian issue at all. I know that many Palestinians are Christian. I am Christian myself. In fact, certain anti-Semitic "Christian Identity" hate groups use this fact as a means of drawing support (No, I am not equating supporters of Palestinians with these people. Obviously these groups hate Arabs just as much as they hate Jews), which is how I learned that there were Christians in the community. The issue to me is brutality and what justification there is for it (none). I only talked as much about the faith as I did, because Kimmy referenced its comparison to Islam and suggested that President Bush's Christian beliefs are behind the War on terror and his failure to hold Israel to account for their abuses.
Raymond,
Certainly, the measures of the Roadmap for Peace are just words. But if they were truly put into action (and yes, language regarding Israel's responsibility strengthened), I think there would be some progress. I used the example of the roadmap to demonstrate that references to Bush as a Zionist are incorrect. Whether you agree with his policies or not, the Zionist label is not appropriate. US policy has frequently been poor in its response to allies (and doubly so, its choices of allies, e.g. the Shah of Iran, Saddam at one point, the Saudi royalty, etc.). I believe the US could use the "bully pulpit" to bring about change in allies that need to be brought into account. Israel is one of those. And I suspect they would go along with it. If I were governing a nation the size of New Jersey, and I was surrounded by nations and organizations that would like to see my country turned into a parking lot, I think I would do anything I could do to be on the good side of the most powerful nation on earth! US influence can be a powerful force, and it could be used for a lot of good. Call me a fool, but I believe President Bush is attempting to do that, to some degree. The Roadmap is one way; he has also pushed Israel to exercise restraint on numerous occasions (and been heavily criticized for it). I am not calling him perfect. And many see him as the devil incarnate. But I think, realistically, he is attempting constructive diplomacy, even if it is lacking in certain regards.
Criticism is not action. The Israelis may be criticized, but it is lip-service unless it is backed by action, such as withholding aid to Israel.
Read here for just how much aid it given:
http://www.washington-report.org/archives/April_2005/0504016.html
http://www.washington-report.org/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
Israel does wrong, they get criticised, but the money still flows.
Palestine does wrong, they get criticised, and the money is cut off.
The Roadmap is another lie sold to make the US appear a peacemaker. That's how politics operate in the world today. If you don't go beyond the surface, everyone looks like an earnest do-gooder. Realistically, most of the world's leaders, and the administrations that back them, are criminals of the worst degree, because the stakes involve lives; not theirs, but their citizens and those of the nations whose policies they influence. Governments toss them away for their own gains.
Remember Bush's first term and the rebate he handed every citizen? Why do you think Bush and his administration, who came into office over an extremely questionable election, did that? To help the economy?
Take off your rose-coloured glasses.
Actually, the rebate was designed by the Democrats in Congress. They did it to say, "He may have cut your taxes, but look…WE actually sent money BACK to you!" They knew the tax cuts were popular, so they wanted something to take credit for. It did backfire on them, because people who didn't watch the news tended to think Bush was behind it! The tax cuts, though, were to help the economy. Moreso, they are based on the novel concept that there is no such thing as "government money," that the government is funded by the confiscation of the earnings of others, so people should be able to keep more of their own income and choose how to spend it for themselves.
But yes, words without actions are empty, and I would like to see action taken. But it still is excessive to call Bush a Zionist!
Contrary to your claims that it was the Democrats' idea to send out rebates in 2001:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec01/tax_rebate.html
There is no government money, but the money spent on the rebates meant that social programs would be cut. Furthermore, the Republican plan that Bush and the then Republic controlled Congress signed gave tax cuts to the wealthy.
Which history books are you reading?
The refund was part of a budget passed by the Congress and signed by the President (since the President cannot make laws). The bill had input from both parties and was weaker than the initial proposal from the President. But the Democrats didn't want to look like they were trying to rob everyone, so they added their piece in. I remember seeing Democratic congressmen on television trying to get the message out that the refund was their idea! Most people were thanking Bush, Of course, he DID sign the budget, effectively passing it, but the Democrats actually created the refund idea.
Yes, social programs are cut (or should be) when taxes are cut. Social programs in the US are ridiculously bloated and inefficient. The Salvation Army runs better-equipped, more comfortable, people-friendly, shelters for a fraction of the price the federal government's shelters. Typically a Salvation Army dollar pays about 5 times what a government dollar does.
As for tax cuts for the rich (along with everyone else), that is fine by me. There are a few reasons for this:
1) Being rich is not wrong, thus there is no reason for a punitive tax system.
2) The strange irony is that whatever rich people save in taxes frequently gets spent on investments. Investments enable business to grow and develop. Growing, innovative companies result in more jobs being available, and higher paying ones at that. Even if all the rich do is buy yachts, that means yacht sales go up, putting money in the pockets of salesmen, who spend it on goods and services, growing the economy. Yacht builders hire more workers, more yacht dealerships open, and markets grow.
3) Wealthy business owners generally seek to expand their businesses, so if they can do so at less of a loss to themselves, they will, which provides more and better opportunities.
You're probably thinking I'm some rich guy. Nope. I'm middle class (LOWER middle class, at that). I spent a year and a half unemployed before starting my own business and making less than unemployment benefits provided. This past year I made a little more than half of the average per capita income. My wife is a stay-at-home mom, so we rely fully on my income. So I'm not trying to get those rich guy breaks! Frankly, if more rich people have more money, they may want my services more, too!
Hmm. This seems like an odd place to debate US fiscal policy! :-D
Oh, and to clarify, the middle class got — by far — the largest tax cuts. Many in the lower middle class dropped off the tax rolls completely. Much ado was made about actual dollar amounts the wealthy would save in taxes. But in proportion, the middle class got the vast majority of the cuts. At the time I was still employed and doing so-so financially (about average), and I saved about 40% in taxes between 2000 and 2001.
Not an odd place at all to debate US fiscal policy. Those policies run your lives and the many lives of people abroad. Being wealthy in itself is not a problem, unless that wealth is grown on the backs of the less fortunate of the world. Most of it is. The global economy, with the U.S. at its head, is dependant on the availability of cheap labor. The shirt you are wearing was likely to have been manufactured overseas for pennies, then tagged, shipped and placed on a shelf at the local department store. The US consumes the world, so that the 40% you saved in taxes between 2000 and 2001 can make you feel better about your government, make you a good consumer and buy you that shirt.
http://www.coopamerica.org/programs/sweatshops/sweatshopnews.cfm
Other interesting articles:
Sharon:
http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/Sharon_Is_Terrorist_Number_2.html
Soldiers in Iraq:
http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/We_Must_Stop_Sending_Our_Soldiers_to_Other_Peoples_Countries.html
U.S. Civil Liberties:
http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/Is_it_Fascism_Yet.html
Bush:
http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/Bush_is_Terrorist_Number_3.html
No, I certainly wouldn't call you a fool Philip;-) and I wrote "seemed" intentionally about the comments of yourself and Kimmy, as I wasn't sure whether it was intentional or not. Your point about Clinton was insightful. Clinton did indeed drag his heels on Palestinian statehood, and the eventual Clinton / Barak plan for a series of controllable "Bantustans" was an insulting joke, and rightly treated as such by Arafat. However, I do feel that you pushed beyond the outer limits of credibility with your rose tinted view of Bush. Anyway, whether Bush is a Zionist or not the current Straussian "neoconservative" Rasputins who tell him what to think are so incredibly pro Zionist that it hurts. You were right when you stated that the so called "Road Map" is "just words", and Raymond was even closer to the mark (he was bang in the centre of it in fact!) when he wrote "the Roadmap is another lie sold to make the US appear a peacemaker".
ps sorry if this comment is a little late, I was having problems posting previously
Philip,
Just a little note on your comments taxation "being rich is not wrong, thus there is no reason for a punitive tax system."
Thanks to tax avoidance strategies and the use of numerous offshore accounts, the very rich hardly pay any tax at all! As an example, Rupert Murdoch, the Australian owner of News International, Fox, "myspace" etc and the world's richest media mogul, pays around 2% tax and has often complained in the past that he pays too much! this is not a lone example, it is the norm. However I quoted this example as I used to know someone who used to work as a cog in his huge tax avoidance machine. I would hardly call that a "punitive" tax system!
Fair enough, guys! It looks like we have all gotten a decent grasp of where we all stand, where we mesh, and where we clash. Thus the marketplace of ideas! I'm a die-hard capitalist, so the tax issue is pretty much a no-go with me. Although, in all fairness (Paul), I would like to see the wealthy's loopholes get eliminated (Reagan did this fairly well), so we agree in part on that. As for the adbusters stuff (Raymond), they are left-wing activists, so I have a hard time finding them credible.
Either way, it was a fun debate. Maybe I'll get embroiled in another! Hopefully not too soon, as I need to get my butt in gear on a project that may help me become middle-middle class! Oh, and Raymond … despite the horn-locking, I enjoyed the debate. :-) Paul, I'll get my boxing gloves on for another issue soon enough, I'm sure! Of course, that may make it hard to type… :-D
I wish all well.
I've also enjoyed the debate insomuch as it has helped me better define my position through research and critical thinking.
I do challenge your notion that left-wing activists lack credibility. I find it more a service to humanity to challenge the status quo though well argued positions backed by evidence, than to create arguments, facts, and justifications in the support of business as usual.
We do not blame the conquered for the atrocious acts of the Roman empire. We do not blame the conquered for the atrocious acts of the British, French, Dutch, Turkish or Spanish empires (although many still try). Why so quick to lay blame on those that the U.S. seeks to conquer?
Raymond,
I have been reading your comments for the past two weeks, I respect your opinions and admire your methods of replying and explanation.
Allow me to thank you for every and each word you have written. You managed to impress me and support a JUST case un-affected by what's shown in the media.
Your brain will lead you into glory.
peace be upon you
Mohammad,
I am humbled by your remarks. I am only offering information, and my opinion regarding that information.
Peace upon you, as well
ma salaami
I know I am very late on this discussion, but I am not here to argue. It’s just that I’ve been trying hard to feel sorry for the Israelis killed in Palestine, but I just have this Idea that I can’t get out of my mind.
I think it's logical that I can’t see a difference between the Israeli army that occupied the land of Palestine and killed its people, and between the so called "civilians" or the settlers that are living on this land. It’s very simple fact, the Israeli army didn’t occupy the land for themselves, it’s not a government property, they gave it to those civilians to live in it, and those civilians are paying the salaries of their army, they simply pay them to do that. I cant see those civilians as innocent, they are part of this crime against humanity( well, perhaps their kids are innocent, it's not their fault that their parents decided to kick someone out of his land, to build their own home, but kids are the only innocent in this conflict)
And for those who say that these civilians are innocent, and they have no place to go. I’ll tell them that I am sorry for this fact, but I am more sorry for Palestinians that have to live in a refugee camp in their own land, because the poor Israelis have no place to go. Palestinians are not the ones to worry about those Israeli occupiers, they have enough things to worry about, BUT if UK, USA and the rest of the "democratic" side of the world feel so sorry for Israelis they can give them a piece of their land, not others.
let's admit it, YES there is hate, and this hate is justified, please people save your morals and stop preach us about loving your enemy, while his guns is still aimed at your kids at school. This is a non-stop war, it's not a Hollywood movie, and we are a normal people, not prophets.
For the record, I don’t hate Jews because of their religious background, neither Islam teaches us to hate them because of that, but who I hate is every Israeli occupier. Yes I hate them, and this hate will not end until we get a fair trail.
Thanks Hitham for the interesting post, I am not a frequent reader of your blog, but I think I will be.
I know I am very late on this discussion, but I am not here to argue. It’s just that I’ve been trying to feel sorry for the Israelis killed in Palestine, but I just have this Idea that I can’t get out of my mind.
I think it's logical that I can’t see a difference between the Israeli army that occupied the land of Palestine and killed its people, and between the so called "civilians" or the settlers that are living on this land. It’s very simple fact. The Israeli army didn’t occupy the land for themselves, it’s not a government property, they gave it to those civilians to live in it, and those civilians are paying the salaries of their army, they simply pay them to do that. I cant see those civilians as innocent, they are part of this crime against humanity( well, the only innocent here is the Israeli kids, it's not their fault that their parents decided to kick someone out of his land, to build their own home, but kids are the only innocent in this conflict)
And for those who say that these civilians are innocent, and they have no place to go. I’ll tell them that I am sorry for this fact, but I am even more sorry for Palestinians that have to live in a refugee camp in their own land, because the poor Israelis have no place to go. Palestinians are not the ones to worry about those Israeli occupiers, they have enough things to worry about, BUT if UK, USA and the rest of the "democratic" side of the world feel so sorry for Israelis they can give them a piece of their land, not others.
let's admit it, YES there is hate, and this hate is justified, please people save your morals and stop preach us about loving your enemy while his guns is still aimed at you and your family. This is a non-stop war, it's not a Hollywood movie, and we are a normal people, not prophets.
For the record, I don’t hate Jews because of their religious background, neither Islam teaches us to hate them because of that, but who I hate is every Israeli occupier. Yes I hate them, and this hate will not end until we get a fair trail.
Thanks Hitham for the interesting post, I am not a frequent reader for your blog, but I think I will be.
Sami,
I cannot tell you not to hate those who do injustice to you. That is for you to decide. I will tell you what you already know. The Israelis will use your hate against you. They will use it to justify their actions against you, your family, your friends, your neighbors. If you resist anything, resist that. Turn your anger into resistance. Resist by staying, by living. Harvest your olives and your figs. Send your children to University. Teach them to know the soil under their feet, the history of Palestine, the home of your father's father and his before, the beauty of Jerusalem stone, of Hebron pottery, of Palestinian embroidery. Grow old on your land. Resist by living. Otherwise you will be just another dead Palestinian, another statistic. And numbers don't speak as well as people do.
Well said Raymond…….
I believe that all lives are to be morned, especialy of the inocent children, regardless of where they come from, what colour or race is.
As for philips arguments about how great Bush is foor the economy….I wonder is a trilion dollar defecit consedered good for the economy?
As an Israeli the most important thing to me is the security of the Israeli nation living in Israel.I care more for israelies than i do for Palestinains-there is nothing wrong with that ,the way i see it.
If a wall needs to be built in order to stop suicide bombers then so be it,my life is more important than anything-and just as every father does all to protect his children,so does the israeli goverment do all to protect its own citizens.
As you probably all know Israel has alwyes offered peace to the palestinians.Who started the war in 1948 just after the state of Israel was declerd ? who started the first and seccond Antifadda after israel offered jobs to Palestinians? who started the seccond Antifadda after the two parties alredy sat down for peace talks? It was alwayes the Plestinians who started the violence-and Israel that deffended it self.Throwing bombs on gaza has a bad taste indeed-but does anybody know about an alternative? The Hammas does not want to live alongside with a jewish state,so in war you must look out for your own intrests.
http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0795/9507006.htm http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story412.html
Some people have a different perspective Nir.
Please research the history of your home deed or the land on which it is now built.
Others care for their own also.
Israel should not be in the position to determine whether the Palestinians have jobs, land, water, food, or shelter. But, as the occupiers, it is their obligation, not their choice. Had the Palestinians achieved actual autonomy as was offered them at Oslo, and had Israel not launched one of its most stalwart periods of settlement expansion and closures in the West Bank and Gaza during the post-Oslo period of the late 1990's, in contradiction to their issued promises, the peace that was hoped for by many may have been achieved. Israel has proven by its actions that its words ring hollow and are not to be trusted. That Olmert has offered a unilateral determination of borders culminating in further expansion beyond the armistice line and in the Jordan valley, a determination that means a further diminishing and cantonisation of Palestinian lands and even further hopelessness for a viable and contiguous Palestinian state, lends evidence of Israel's intention, set since its inception, to eliminiate it Palestinian neighbors.
Security and terrorism are buzz-word propagandist terms, utilised by administrations to justify their continued dissociation from the observance of human rights in the occupied territories.
Furthermore, considering that an outright termination of these violations of human rights would reduce or terminate the "need" for further state-sponsored acts of aggression executed in the name of security, the Israeli dependence on these terms has become the chaff in the dialogue.
It is glaringly apparent that Israel has no, nor has it ever had, any intention of recognising Palestine, its native population, or their right to exist. The continued displacement of the native Palestinan population has been relegated to being addressed as "the Problem", rather than being faced and charged that Israel must fulfill its obligations, under the fourth Geneva Convention and international humanitarian law, as the occupier of Palestine, to provide the Palestinian population with the basic rights afforded any occupied population globally.
Raymond,
Do you ever feel like Don Quixote? (because I know I do) It's so damn hard in the face of the reality. Here's a really good definition of terrorism from Wikipedia:
"In recent Western culture, terrorism more specifically refers to a strategy of using political violence, social threats, or coordinated attacks, in order to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, bring about compliance with specified demands. The targets of these terrorist attacks are not the individuals who are killed, injured, or taken hostage, but rather the society to which these individuals belong. This form of terrorism is designed to influence political atmosphere, mass media, curtailment of civilian standards of living and civil liberties associated with greater security demands, economic hardship linked to the costs of war, hopelessness to defend against assaults, fear, depression, and disintegration of morale, all of which are objectives of unconventional warfare.
State terrorism more specifically refers to violence and threats of violence, embargoes and other forms of terrorism against civilians by the government of a state. The civilians, in such case, may be nationals or foreigners."
This is EXACTLTY the definition of Israel's tactics. Wearing the IOF uniform does NOT exempt one from fitting the definition of terrorist as some suggest that because they are a "legal army" they cannot be defined as terrorists. Damn them all and our government for their support.
So that all may know, this does NOT mean I believe that attacking innocent Israeli citizens is OK. Violence begets violence. When are all the parties REALLY going to understand this?
We are not chasing windmills, here, Robin. The dragons are real.
For those who will refuse Wikipedia credit, here's the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
terrorist (noun)
a person who uses violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Plenty of people and governments fitting that description.
and from the American Heritage Dictionary:
ter·ror·ism (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Notice that this one is careful to identify a target "intention of intimidating or coercing societies or government".
I think the Israeli attacks on Gaza in the last 24 hours (let alone over the years) fit both descriptions, as does the US war in Iraq. Plenty of violence, intimidation, and coercion in pursuit of ideological and political aims.
Enough shock and awe to last several lifetimes.
Raymond,
I definitely used the wrong metaphor. I meant to imply, do you ever feel frustrated, especially in lieu of posts such as #134.
But I really don't have the right to ask you that, I was really referring to my own frustration which often comes out in a question to another. Apologies if you misunderstood me.
Others,
It was 38 years ago today, June 10th, that Israel raised it's flag over Gaza at the end of the six-day war (forgive me if it's called something else). For 38 very long years the Palestinians have lived under Israeli occupation. I fully reject my country's continued support of this occupation and the state terrorism of Israel which we turn a blind eye to and continue to support with arms.
During that six-day war Israel fired on the USS Liberty, killing 34 and wounding 173. This occurance absolutely PALES in the face of the atrocities committed against the Palestinians. But I am offering it as a case of a US ship being a victim, and NO investigation was ever carried out properly. Here is an article dated last August about the survivors of the attack seeking still to uncover the truth http://www.wrmea.com/archives/August_2005/0508017.html
Israel does what it does, and continues to get away with it. We even turn a blind eye to their acts against our own ship.
Raymond,
I am so sorry if your family is not safe. I should not be discussing any matters other than prayers for you. Please know my thoughts are with you. May God take care of you all.
Thank you, Robin. My family is a safe distance from there, all things being relative.
Much of the world has forgotten that all of Israel was once Palestine, and is still considered occupied. That started in 1948, only 58 years ago. The Palestinians that managed to return or remain there have done so as second-class citizens, regardless of what democracy any Israeli may lay claim to.
{ 2 } Trackbacks
come?" dicono in sintesi. "Con quello che sta succedendo in Palestina, l'occupazione, il Muro e tutto ci????e sappiamo, tu prendi a vai a suonare a Tel Aviv? Ma ti sembra il caso?" E lui ci ha pensato, ha concluso che effettivamente non era il caso e ha spostato il concerto. Ne sono felice: ?na vita che penso che gli si fa solo un favore, alla coscienza degli israeliani, mettendo in pratica il buon vecchio strumento del boicottaggio, sia pure soft come questo. Bravi quelli del
[...] warcdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/browse.monographs/waro.html Who is a terrorist? New window This was written two days ago by an Is [...]