Isreal vs. Palestine

“Normally I don't talk about politics. but..

Does anyone have an opinion either for or against the Isreali occupation of Palestine? What are your thoughts and why? Do you think America/Bush should support Isreal?

Anyone ever backpacked in the holy land?”

“helloooo????

It is like speaking in a tin can.

I wonder why so many people have an opinion about Osama Bin Laden yet no one knows why we should support Isreal. It is, afterall, one of the reasons why he attacked us.”

“I backpack in the holy land quite often.

There are many sacred places in the Monongehela Natl Forest.


The bonus is that there are no religious wackos smokin' each other there or fighting over the place.

I do see armed men occasionally in these places....but they are not hostile.”

“Miz Biz wouldn't be tryin' to Start Something would she?”

“Well, I hope so!”

“Well, all I can say is that I don't think either camp can claim the Holy High Ground, so to speak.”

“The whole holy land concept is full of holes.”

“Is Palestine defined as the rest of the non-judeo-christian world?”

“Indubitably.”

“Don't forget Islamic when you mention the other two.”

“Someone left the troll-gate open again...”

“And then there are these guys....”

“They're back?”

“More like 're-issued' <G>


o yeah... from mideast policy to the rounders in one swell foop. gotta love it!”

“# 1 Its Israel not Isreal.

# 2: The extremists seem to be winning on both sides of the Israeli - Palestinian divide.

Both sides have behaved quite disgracefully. Israel has had a reasonable leadership in the past, but Sharon, Likud, and the settler movement are nearly as outrageous as the past.

Holding Arafat responsible for terrorism and suicide bombings is absurd. The Israeli's have totally crippled his administration and they expect him to stop attacks when the Israelis can't?

Not that I like Arafat... and Hamas is even worse.

Briefly under Clinton, I thought the US was playing a constructive role - but then he got too heavy handed and tried to force an agreement too fast.

I do not know how much support Arafat has given to people who attack civilians or how much he has been involved in the attacks. I wouldn't put it past Arafat (although I was skeptical at first) to do it, but I wouldn't put it past Sharon, the Mossad and US intelligence to lie about it.

Bottom line: Yucchhh!!!! I ain't feeling optimistic.

I've said a lot more on other threads.

Ifn you wanna check out the http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm” target="_blank"> Hamas Covenant click away (Yikes!)”

“Ooops... here it is again:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm" target="_blank"> http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm”

“I think all of this is getting real old.I think that this country should stay out of there way with there problems.Hey if they want to kill each other lets them.Why does it always have to be us that has to get involved with other peoples problems.For once let them worry about it.

8|”

“Let's get out of there & let them decide their own fate.”

“I am starting to think that doing the right thing is killing to many of us.

I saw a sign the other day that said "Get Us Out Of The Un."

I am starting to agree with that.

8)”

“In a rare moment of lucidity, Patrick Buchanan eloquently sums up the dance of death between Hamas and Sharon.”

“And then there is http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2001/010712_sharon_hamas.html>Lyndon LaRouche.”

“Israel is a flawed but decent democracy. The palestinians are a bunch of murderous scum.

Really, the situation is simple: Palestinians aren't fighting a noble cause for freedom and land, they're bent on the complete destruction of Israel.


Sharon should utterly destroy them.”

“I gotta say I pretty much agree with Pat Buchanon on this one... except that I suspect Sharon wants to expel Palestinians entirely from the West Bank (and maybe Gaza).

Lyndon Larouche, on the other hand, is scum and I wouldn't believe anything he says. I wonder how he has managed to have money and stay so visible for so long. He always seems to have secret information which does not pan out.”

“I have to believe that the vast majority of Palestinians and Israelis would prefer to live in peace and security but are being manipulated by extremists on both sides. I don’t think that mutt’s racist characterization of Palestinians is accurate or fair. By ‘destroy’ them, I assume he means to kill them all because it does not seem that life for the average Palestinian could get much worse than round the clock curfews and the near destruction of their economy and much of their infrastructure.

LaRouche runs a profitable cult. His disciples set up a table outside of my local DMV office. Their collection of ‘secret’ information would be comical except that so many people seem willing to buy into it. His link between Sharon and Hamas appears to be based upon http://www.upi.com/print.cfm?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r" target="_blank">this account in Rev. Moon’s UPI. Does anyone know if any of UPI’s allegations are true?”

“Let's see. There's several highly organized groups who send out suicide bombers to kill innocent civilians, and these groups enjoy overwhelming public support.

My statement is an overgeneralization to be sure, but to say it's racist is certainly non sequitor from someone who claims to know the history of the area.”

“Does this fix it?”

“sorry. effed up the html tag”

“Isn’t an over-generalization based upon race or religion what racism is?

What http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=235455&contrassID=2&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y" target="_blank"> overwhelming public support are you talking about.”

“"What overwhelming public support are you talking about."

From your own cite: "After more than two years of broad support for terrorist attacks and opposition to a tough Palestinian stand against the attackers..."

I wouldn't put too much faith in the veracity of the poll findings, Violin. Such trends need to be replicated to be believed, particularly in a situation such as that.


Oh, and I love how you morally equate:

"the settlement policy of successive governments is a misguided provocation"

with Palestinian terrorism. Risible.”

“If,you check within the founding charter of Isreal,you will find a mandate that the majority of I's population ,will,and always will be jewish.This along would place 'I 'outside the blessings of or our founding fathers.Oops!I can't say that.”

“Isn’t an over-generalization based upon race or religion what racism is?

That's certainly one dimension. Your non-sequitor began when you assumed (I'm guessing) that I was basing the Palestinians' murderous behavior on the fact of their inferior race or religion. I'm basing my assertion (which I concede is something of an overgeneralization) on the historical and contemporary actions and beliefs of Palestinians as a distinct social group.”

“You are aware of the comments Arafat's aide made a few weeks ago?”

“Whatever..."

Translation: I was wrong regarding my racist comment - sorry Mutt.

You are aware of the comments Arafat's aide made a few weeks ago?"

Yes, so here's an idea for you, Violin: Make Your Point.

That the terrorist groups want to replace the largely secular Arafat regime with an islamofascist govt is not news. They're gaining power. Arafat is struggling to survive. That's why I doubt the shift in public opinion reported by the Arafat admin.”

“You're right. I'm sorry its been so long since you got laid.”

“Like other conflicts over land through the ages, I don't think this will ever be settled until both sides have an all out war and the winner dictates terms to the loser and to the victor goes the spoils. The way it's going now is similar to the U.S. versus the Indians and that took 400 years.”

“"You're right. I'm sorry its been so long since you got laid."

translation: "I'm an intellectual and emotional adolescent who has lost the debate."”

“I simply brought this up because I was unaware (as are many Americans) that it is such an uneven fight. I heard a lecture on alternative radio last week that gave 10 (very good) reasons why most Americans are ignorant of basic facts about the conflict, yet there is strong support for Israel. Why?
Here's a recap:
1. There is a propaganda war going on - led by the U.S. media and encouraged by the American government - Americans are being taught to believe that if we just gave both sides weapons and let them have it out a 'fair winner' would emerge. Ummm, only one problem with that. Isreal has an Army. Palestine doesn't (and can't afford one). Isreal spent billions of dollars on defense last year (with weapons provided primarily by U.S. companies), Palestine spent $500,000. An accurate picture that pretty much sums this up is the one showing Palestine children shooting at Israeli tanks with sling shots. This image, more than any other, probably best tells the real story.

2. Whenever the U.S. media reports an altercation between Isreal and Palestine, Palestines are always reported to 'attack' and Isrealis to 'respond to the attack.' The truth is, both sides attack. Also, the occupation of Palestine by Israel is always left out of these reports. This is ludicrous. Without the occupation, nothing makes sense and the reporting is biased. ABC's Peter Jennings is the only U.S. newsreporter to unbiasedly report the facts, every other U.S. news reporter surveyed biases and distorts facts by their use of language (for example, NPR correspondent Nina Tottenberg routinely reports it as a 'calm day' when no Isrealis are killed and only 30 Palestinians are killed). How can it be considered a calm day if any people are killed? Isn't the media supposed to be objective?

3. Without the basic facts regarding the occupation of Palestine, suicide bombers are seen (and probably rightly so) as crazed lunatics. The reason why Americans have trouble understanding what drives these people to become a suicide bombers is because they don't know the basic facts.

4. European news agencies do not bias the news when they report Isreali/Palestinian coverage. European media coverage is neutral.

There was a lot more which I can't remember right now.
Interesting. Anybody else think there is a conspiracy/propaganda war occuring? Why or why not??”

“Ah, I remembered

5. The U.S. is afraid to not support Isreal because it would be seen as antisemitic (sp?)”

“btw, the Isreal occupation of Palestine violates International Law”

“Uh, I have to disagree with the lecturer, biz. There is no propaganda conspiracy in the media I'm aware of. Refering to the "media" as a single entity with parts so closely connected that a true conspiracy is possible is a non-starter. Every media source has its own biases - and they're in competition. It's not difficult to discern bias and ferret out fact from editorial. That there's a big split in public opinion is no secret, but to call it a conspiracy is, well, very much a conspiracy theory. Here's my critique of the lecturer's points:

"Americans are being taught to believe that if we just gave both sides weapons and let them have it out a 'fair winner' would emerge."

Where in the world did he get this. Americans are being taught that a land for peace agreement will solve the conflict, which is bunk, because any state the palestinians receive will just serve as a stronger launching ground for futher aggression. Palestinians are not interested in their statehood or peace (they've been offered this already) - their goal is to drive the Jews into the sea.

"Isreal spent billions of dollars on defense last year (with weapons provided primarily by U.S. companies)"

This brings up an interesting point, actually. How badly does Israel actually want peace? Their military-industrial complex is so runaway that peace in the ME might cause their economy to collapse.

Palestines are always reported to 'attack' and Isrealis to 'respond to the attack.' The truth is, both sides attack.

This is crap, too. The Palestinians are always the first to aggress. Whenever a stretch of semi-peace ends, it's always because the Palestinians start murdering innocent Israeli noncombatants. Israel is a decent democracy - the only decent country in the ME, really - Israel does not break the peace by murdering Palestinian noncombatants.

ABC's Peter Jennings is the only U.S. newsreporter to unbiasedly report the facts, every other U.S. news reporter surveyed biases and distorts facts by their use of language

This is risible nonsense. Of COURSE abc's news is biased toward the left. That's not a bad thing, one just has to recognize it. One only has to go to fox news, for example, to balance it out. And the following is extremely stupid:

European news agencies do not bias the news when they report Isreali/Palestinian coverage. European media coverage is neutral

OF COURSE there's bias in European press. Just lumping "European news angencies" into one group like they're all homogeneous is a stupid overgeneralization which completely invalidates his argument.”

“Palestines are always reported to 'attack' and Isrealis to 'respond to the attack.' The truth is, both sides attack.

This is crap, too. The Palestinians are always the first to aggress. Whenever a stretch of semi-peace ends, it's always because the Palestinians start murdering innocent Israeli noncombatants. Israel is a decent democracy - the only decent country in the ME, really - Israel does not break the peace by murdering Palestinian noncombatants.


What is semi-peace mutt? During the six-week stretch when there were no successful suicide bombs, Israeli troops killed 69 Palestinians. Of those killed, 13 were children and nine were direct assassinations.

Settlers attack and savage Palestinian civilians daily.

Neither side can win by force. As we approach the third year of the intifada, reasonable people on both sides have found their voice and are beginning to convince others that a negotiated settlement is the only way. There is a faint glimmer of hope that a way out of this bloody mess may finally be at hand.


For anyone looking for somewhat unbiased sources of information, try these:

http://www.ipcri.org/index1.html" target="_blank"> Israeli/Palestinian Center for Research and Information

http://www.fmep.org/" target="_blank">INSERTFoundation for Middle East Peace”

“Richb: I hope you are wrong and fear that you are right. BTW: Who gets cast in the role of the Indians?

Biz: I think the alternative radio lecture was slanted. I believe that there is some anti-semitism in the European press and a big anti-Israeli bias. Most of the US Press has a huge pro-Israel bias. The truth is so much messier than any partisan group wants to acknowledge...

The occupation and the settlement policy in Israel is out and out wrong as far as I am concerned. A number of early Zionists warned agains ambitions to control Jerusalem, and many others warned against settlement and prolonged occupation of the West Bank.

When Israel took control of the West Bank after war, the Israelis in power wanted a humane stewardship and hoped to develop warm relations with the Arabs on the West Bank. They hoped that understanding could flourish and that eventually the land could be exchanged for peace. However, within Israel, there was a very substantial and militant faction that wanted the Arabs out of the West Bank and wanted it incorporated into Israel. They have regretted that the Arabs were allowed (even encouraged) to stay and have been scheming ever since to find ways to drive them out.

Many of these Israeli extremeists were in the right wing Likud coalition which came to power with Begin. They strongly encouraged Jewish settlement in West Bank - and put in place a much more hostile and repressive regime for Arabs in the West Bank. Their aim was to drive Arabs out and move Israelis in. I know this from having read the Jerusalem Post during those years and having visited Israel and met (and dined and traveled) with Settlers and people in the Begin administration (my in-laws were Zionists, my father in-law was a Zionist hero who has a street named after him in Jerusalem). I believe that this repression and settlement expansion lead to the tensions that sparked the first intifada.

The extreme Zionist underground has a long history of terror. Throughout the occupation of the West Bank (even dating back to the time of the British mandate) extemist Zionists have attacked UN officials, civilians and civilian authorities (esp. West Bank Mayors).

Under Sharon, evey time there seemed to be peace - he would find a way to stir the pot.”

“The Arab/Palestinian side doesn't exactly have clean hands either. We have had almost a century of pograms against Jews in Palestine. The Mufti of Jerusalem (a relative of Arafats) sided with Hitler.

Arabs at one point argued that Palestine was one nation which included most of what is now Jordan, as well as the West Bank and Israel. Now, Jordan is no longer the Palestinian nation - because it serves a rhetorical purpose. The government controlled Arab press circulates the most vicious anti-semetic slanders against jews. For example, last year, a Saudi paper published an article explaining how the Jews had to use the blood of murdered non-Jews in order to make their holiday pstries. Lies and slanders against Israel and Jews (including the Protocols of The Elders of Zion, a forgery much loved by Hitler) are propagated and taught as fact in the Arab world.

Until Sadat's trip to Israel, the Arab world was united around the the notion of no peace, no recognition and no negotiations with Israel.

There are good people on either side. The late King of Jordan seemed to acquire a remarkable level of wisdom in his last decade of life. Rabin of Israel with his formula of "negotiate as if there were no terrorism and fight terrorism as if there were no negotiations" set a fine example of how peace should be pursued (until he was murdered by a rabid Zionist in the context of vicious hate mongering by many of the extreme right wing Zionists).

Too much said, I know. This all comes close to my heart (I am also half Jewish). Mebbe I shoulda stuck with spelling goofs (yours and mine).”

“During the six-week stretch when there were no successful suicide bombs, Israeli troops killed 69 Palestinians. Of those killed, 13 were children and nine were direct assassinations.

Here you go again assigning a disgusting moral equivalency between the careful defensive actions of the IDF and the purposeful murdering of schoolchildren by the Palestinians.

Why do you think that there were no successful bombings during that time, Violin? It's because Israel chose to put an end to it by using its military to root out and kill the terrorists. Sharon's policy that dictated the clearing out of Jenin terrorism, was to be conducted house to house, sacrificing Israeli soldiers' lives, so as to minimize Palestinian casualties. It could have been done as simply as carpet bombing, with no Israeli casualties. But Israel is a decent country concerned with the loss of innocent life. The Palestinians celebrate murdering innocent Israeli children. Do you understand the difference?

It is clear to all honest people that Israeli responses have been invariably reactions to Arab attacks. The routine is always the same: Israel stands down, Arabs attack Israel, Israel defends. Any other description is just laughable.”

“The occupation and the settlement policy in Israel is out and out wrong as far as I am concerned.

The Jews have as much historical right to be there as the Arabs, and the Jews ended up with an arid, worthless piece of land that is less than 1% of the entire Middle East. The Arabs couldn't deal with even that and have tried several times to annihilate Israel from the map. They failed, and Israel, after being repeatedly attacked on its completely indefensible original borders, was forced to seize strategic land. Jordan occupies 80% of the land that made up the original Palestine Mandate. The PLO should be MUCH angrier at Jordan than Israel, since Jordan took far more of Palestinan land than Israel did, and with far more real violence. But the PLO isn't slaughtering Jordanian women and children.

PedXing, you address why Israeli "oppression" is objectionable but you skip over Jordanian oppression. Why is that? Perhaps because then the whole tissue of lies falls apart, and we see that it is the extermination of Israel that is the goal, not any pursuit of confiscated land. When we examine the ostensible grievances and see that Israel has done less of them than other countries, we soon see that the ostensible grievances are lies, uttered by the PLO to cloak the real goal (annihilation of Israel), and then those lies are retailed by the foolish and gullible here in this country. Hmm, can any intelligent person conclude that the problem the palestinians have with Israel is the settlements or occupation? No.

Under Sharon, evey time there seemed to be peace - he would find a way to stir the pot

The Palestinians are master of this. Israel offered 90% of what Arafat wanted. Arafat walked away from the table, not even willing to engage in good faith bargaining. Obviously, a person who walks away from 90% of his alleged goal, and refuses even to bargain, does not truly want that goal in the first place. Which brings us back to the fact that the palestinians' true goal is to push the Jews into the sea.”

“Stop putting words in my mouth mutt. I haven’t stated or implied moral equivalency between attacks on civilians and targeted assassination anywhere on this thread or at any other time or place. I was merely pointing out that your notion of provocation is extremely one-sided. Recall that many of Israel’s acts of extrajudicial killings have been condemned around the world and even by the US administration. Remember last summer’s missile attack on a three-story apartment building in which innocent children were known to be staying?


Ped – Thanks for your very informative and thoughtful posts.

You mentioned The Elders of Zion forgery. Not everyone may be aware that Egyptian television is airing a 41-part mini-series based upon this thrash.”

“I haven’t stated or implied moral equivalency between attacks on civilians and targeted assassination

You mean to say you didn't MEAN to imply. Certainly your comment concerning Israel killing innocent children can be taken to mean a moral equivalency betwen that and terrorism.

Remember last summer’s missile attack on a three-story apartment building in which innocent children were known to be staying?

The IDF followed a defensive policy and some innocent people were killed. Tragic? Sure. But in NO way equivalent to someone blowing up a bus filled with schoolkids. On one hand you have the military making a mistake, based on standing orders. On the other hand, you have terrorists deliberately murdering children. Once case is a flaw in rules of engagement, the other the deliberate seeking out of child victims.

I expect that most honest people know the difference.

But some people, for motives that are best not explored, rush to define all of Israel by isolated incidents, while giving a pass to the Palestinians, who use terror and murder of innocents as the rule, the MO, the norm.

The question is, looking at the whole, what is the nation about? Is it about terror as a rule, or is about democracy, rule of law, tolerance -- as a rule. Look at the US. Is it defined by such incidents as Waco or Ruby Ridge? Is that the norm? Or is that the exception, and the country is, when all is weighed and balanced, a good one?

Naturally, you can look at any country, and if you are predisposed to hate it, you can select those incidents that support your view -- for ANY country. Every country has baggage. Every country has skeletons in the closet. Every country has done shameful things. Thus all countries are evil. Or are they?

Israel is a just, tolerant democracy. All its actions are played out in full view of the entire world. Israel has to respond to the terrorism. There's no neat way to do it.

Recall that many of Israel’s acts of extrajudicial killings have been condemned around the world and even by the US administration.

See above. Here again, you IMPLY (even if unintended) a moral equivalency. tsk. tsk.

BTW Israel DOES punish combatants who operate outside the law (war criminals). Here's one right off the bat: Ami Popper, sentenced to 7 life terms.

Now, you name the war criminals that the PA has punished.

Do you see the difference here?”

“It's really kind of silly to talk about "The Palestinians" wanting violence, or "The Israelis" wanting peace. There are many Israelis who have worked to prevent peace and many Palestinians who work for peace. It does seem, however, that the peace camp is louder, larger and more free to speak in Israel.”