 sj |
||
|
||
BS: War crimes - continuing discussion
|
|
|
Subject: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:05 AM At the request of mg who can't load the old thread which can be found here... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:55 AM Sorry. Should've posted my long message to troll on this one, I guess... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 01:37 AM Here you go, LH...
Subject: RE: BS: Israeli soldiers charged with war crime
troll - I understand what you are saying, for sure, although I would partially disagree with much of it. You are viewing it all through a certain prism, and probably have not read some of the articles I have, representing the more progressive forces in the Muslim community (I'm assuming that you haven't read them...I may be wrong).
Yes, the Arab oil states are extremely wealthy...for the few at the top. One of the reasons why the wealth is not shared with the general populace is this: the USA and Britain have traditionally supported autocratic rule by compliant dictators in many Muslim countries (and elsewhere in the 3rd World too), supplying them with weaponry in return for oil and military bases.
Some examples: Saudia Arabia, Egypt (not for oil, but for other strategic reasons), Kuwait, Pakistan, Indonesia, and until fairly recently, Iraq. Iran when the Shah was in power. There have been some genuine initiatives toward democracy in some of those places from time to time...crushed by people on an unofficial USA payroll.
Britain did the same thing when they were ruling the roost in the Middle East. They talked democracy, supported autocracy and feudalism.
Neither the USA nor the dictators they support have any intention of allowing democracy to develop in those countries. Democratic regimes are way too hard to control. (When they do arise of their own accord, as happened in Chile and Nicaragua and began to happen once in Iran, they are ruthlessly destroyed by whatever means possible...a war, a coup, an assassination, an economic blow, whatever it takes.)
The Saudi government spends millions on religious facilities...yes...to distract its people and keep them in line while a few rich people live like emperors...in collusion with their rich western friends who own the multinationals. They get together in places like Monaco and Paris and gamble or play polo. A lovely time is had by all. The building of more religious facilities is a cynical exercise, meant to shore up popular support, and it works...for a while.
It is precisely because collusion between the West and the local sheiks and bully boys have rendered the development of local democracy impossible that fanatical Islamic revolutions have occurred, like that in Iran. The common people see it as the only avenue left to them to institute change and achieve real national sovereignty. This further imperils the chances of liberalizing and modernizing those societies, and is a great tragedy for the Islamic moderates who dream of achieving a peaceful, progressive, modern society. There are many such moderates, but you don't hear much about them on the news, because they aren't killing people.
Is there any reason why the USA should not support Israel? Well, sure there is...a host of reasons. The USA should not support either aggressor in this useless conflict, they should show no favoritism at all, but bring all possible influence to end the fighting by negotiation and equivalent concessions from both sides, and by not arming or funding the combatants on either side. This, of course, would be VERY bad for business, so it absolutely ain't gonna happen! It would likely also help lead to the collapse of several compliant Arab regimes in fairly short order...it's US supplied armaments that keep them in power.
Yes, the Arabs have been beaten badly again and again...but they might well have won in 1973, had not the USA massively resupplied Israel with new tanks in a matter of a few days. This is not lost on the Arabs. They had to go it alone. Israel did not.
Israel has precisely the advantage in battle that a thoroughly modernized military has over a half-modernized one every time. I've played very accurate simulations of many Middle Eastern battles with tanks, etc....the Arab armies are so technologically outclassed by both the USA and Israel that all they can do, generally speaking, is show that they know how to die bravely. This is what has happened again and again when colonial European forces, a generation or 2 ahead of their opponents in the techniques of war, slaughtered Africans, Asians, or Arabs with more advanced weaponry. It's not really something to be particularly proud of...it's rather like shooting fish in a barrel. This is why you see suicide bombers these days. They feel it is the only way they can strike back effectively and do real damage. For them to fight openly with tanks, etc. is basically suicidal in any case, just as it was for the Japanese after 1943, which is why they too adopted planned suicide tactics on a large scale.
The Arabs are not going to stop fighting unless they are all killed, and that is not going to happen...or until there is real substantial negotiation and positive change in the status quo...give and take on both sides. Israel is not particularly interested in that, because they figure they have the power to get what they want by force. They may change their minds if the suicide bombings continue indefinitely.
I agree that Israel wants and needs defensible borders, and I understand that concern, particularly as regards the Golan heights. I think that those areas should be demilitarised and strongly occupied for at least a generation (or longer than that, if necessary) by not Israel but a multinational peacekeeping force of well-armed soldiers from neutral countries...but Israel would not hear of it...(nor, perhaps would the Arabs) and the world community is too probably too fractured to agree on how to do it anyway. Too bad. The fighting will go on until something like that is done or until there's a nuclear conflict and everybody in the region gets fried.
If Israel was not expansionist, they would not be putting Israeli settlements into various of the occupied areas. Sounds like "lebensraum" to me....remember that? It's on a much smaller scale of course...but the intention is rather similar, I think. "We took this land, so let's use it. Well, now that we live here, we aren't leaving. Too bad for you!" That's expansionist. The same thing happened in America with the Indian lands. They were also outgunned.
Lastly, Osama Bin Laden was a rich kid...yes. So? So was Fidel Castro. Most of Castro's rich family repudiated him and fled to Florida when he threw out the Mafia and the multinationals and divided the land up among the farmers who had worked it for generations, on a starvation wage. Why did he do that when he was already a rich kid with a guaranteed easy life at the top of the heap?
Well, it happens. Rich people are not necessarily immune to acquiring social ideals, and some of them become fervent revolutionaries despite putting themselves in personal danger and risking losing everything. Washington and Jefferson did. It often happens. What is so surprising that it happened in Bin Laden's case? His religious viewpoint is his form of social conscience. You don't agree with it. I doubt that I do either. But for him, it is a high ideal that is synonymous with having a social conscience. He was an exception to the rule among his peer group. Most of his foot soldiers come from the poor, and I trust that most of his rich relatives have disinherited him. He is a noble who decided to opt out of the club...and that is unforgivable when you're in that club, I believe, but it still happens. Revolutions are often led by the sons of the rich, because rich people have the time and the educational opportunities to read in depth, to think, to philosophize, and to develop theoretical passions and ideals of every kind...if they are so inclined. A few of them always are. Buddha was the son of a king. He chose complete renunciation of all that luxury and privilege, and launched a philosophical revolution that changed the world.
But the real key to all of this is that the West (and Russia as well) have pursued foreign policies which pretty well guaranteed that democracy would have no chance of developing in the oil-producing countries, but that they would remain obedient clients of Big Business, ruled by autocrats, and keep their poor people superstitious, helpless, poor and oppressed.
It is precisely that which has led to the rise of ever more fanatical and dangerous muslim religious extremists. The West sometimes has used those extremists to fight its dirty wars in places like Afghanistan in the 80's...but later discovered that the scorpion they created will not stay quietly in its box.
It's a long, twisted, and sad story. Power has been served. Money has been served. Privilege has been served. Business has been served. Democracy has never been served. There are no good guys among the major players in this Middle Eastern fiasco. Not one. They all have the blood and misery of millions on their hands. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 06:43 AM Little has been said about the three palestinians who were accused of being Informers for the Israeli forces, two days a go they were dragged into the street and murdered by their own people, the bodies then hung from pylons for all to see, and for those of you who didn't had access to uncensored tv /press pictures, it was very ugly, Will those killers be bought to justice.
I think this one is worth answering here. troll asked a similar question on another thread.
I think the Israeli government would probably treat people who are informers for any entity with whom they are at war pretty harshly also. I'd bet they would first torture them, and then the informers would probably be either imprisoned or executed.
I think a lot of people are operating with an incredible double standard here. Things they wouldn't give a second thought to if the side they favor does it ("because my guys have good reasons") and they condemn the very same things when practiced by the side they don't favor.
You might want to think that there is something barbaric about doing it in the streets or something. Remember that the Israeli military destroyed all of the Palestinian infrastructure for handling things like that in a civilized way. And furthermore, I think torture is pretty barbaric, not to mention illegal. But my understanding is that the Israeli government practices it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: sledge Date: 26 Apr 02 - 07:10 AM Carol, compared to your previous posts there is a lot of "I think" but very little reference. Thats not enough for me. We could all do that and some have but it means little in the real world. As for lack of infrstructure, the palestinians courts, the other day sent four of their own to prison for up to 13 years with hard labour for their part in the murder of the Israeli tourism minister, so the ability is still there. The Israelis thought the sentences light and want them handed over for trial in their courts, I can't see that happening as these men have now been dealt with. It show a certain reasonableness on the part of the Palestinians that they went through with it and produced a guilty verdict. Sledge |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:09 AM LH, you said:Yes, the Arabs have been beaten badly again and again...but they might well have won in 1973, had not the USA massively resupplied Israel with new tanks in a matter of a few days. This is not lost on the Arabs. They had to go it alone. Israel did not." You help your allies. Thats what the word means. I don't know of any country who has ever given back land which they had conquered in war without a quid pro quo. Why shouldn't Israel build settlements on its own land? They didn't start the war that gave them the land, so why should they give it back? When the British Mandate of Palestine was divided in 1948, creating the independent State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, it was intended that Jordan be the palestinian homeland. If I am wrong on this I am sure that someone will correct me. Part of the division was -including Jerusalem- was to remain in British hands but when the fighting ended, Jordan held Jerusalem along with Samaria and Judea. They owned the land by right of conquest and held it until the 1967 war. Why should Israel not do the same? Otherwise, a well thought-out post. Wrong, pig-headed, knee-jerk, and starry-eyed perhaps, but well thought-out. Why can't you see it MY way? troll***BG*** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:13 AM I'll see what documentation I can find. The court that you refer to happened in the office where Arafat is under seige. They had to slap the court together with the people they had on hand, and it was far from adequate. However, I heard some of the peope who used to have positions high up in the former government in the Palestinian authority saying that there is nothing they can do. They have no means to carry out their jobs, and they said they were afraid that the streets would revert to mob rule, as any place with a lot of people crowded together with no civil systems in place would do. They don't like it either, but that's what happens when all systems upon which civil society depends are destroyed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:38 AM I think Israel may be out of luck on this one. The PA , or what's left of it, appear to have abided by the interim agreement. The following is off the AP Wire. "As a condition to lifting the siege, Israel is demanding that Arafat turn over the assassins of Israeli Cabinet Minister Rehavam Zeevi, gunned down in Jerusalem on Oct. 17. Instead, the four suspects were put on trial in Arafat's office, with police serving as lawyers and judges. After a one-day makeshift session, they were sentenced to terms ranging from one to 18 years, Palestinian officials said. Israel rejected the procedure. Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer called it "the best show in town," and Sharon said, '"They will anyway be brought to trial in Israel."
According to interim peace accords, Palestinians must extradite suspects to Israel unless they are put on trial by the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinians have never turned over a suspected militant to Israel." troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:43 AM Has Israel ever turned over any of their people who have assasinated Palestinian officials to the Palestinians for prosecution? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:56 AM I don't believe so. Is that a part of the interim peace agreement? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:58 AM While much of this thread has made for excellent reading, it is difficult for anyone of you....and indeed anyone at all....to voice an opinion, no matter how well documented, without being labeled in some way. It is the basic problem in all Middle-East affairs. Middle ground doesn't seem to exist even when thoughtfully and logically laid out. Perhaps it can't. We are currently at the lowest point that I can remember. No one can promote one position or another on either "side" of this without stumbling across the well known atrocities of the past.....from both sides, across the spectrum. There are Arab/Israeli communities living in peace in Israel and in them and the people who make them up are the only solutions. If I were Hawk, I would not post another word because his last paragraph is a gem. A complete explanation in a nutshell. Until all are willing to draw a different "line in the sand" and one that relegates history and blame to a back seat position, I doubt that anything will be achieved. And that line will be virtually impossible to draw for the reason that Hawk's post so beautifully sums up: It's a long, twisted, and sad story. Power has been served. Money has been served. Privilege has been served. Business has been served. Democracy has never been served. There are no good guys among the major players in this Middle Eastern fiasco. Not one. They all have the blood and misery of millions on their hands. .........and not a one will admit it. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 09:11 AM I don't know troll. But why should only one side be expected to turn over their assasins?
I think I'll answer this one on this thread instead of the other one...
The well-meaning people who give my wife tracts are stunned too. They just can't conceive that anyone could not believe as they do. Especially when they have shown them proof. My wife is not wicked because she doesn't believe as they do and you are not foolish because you don't agree with me. There are several sides to almost every question and one mans Mesiah may be another mans Prophet. I think you misapprehend the emotions that motivated both my statement that I didn't think you had read the links as well as the statement that I found it stunning that you could have read the links and still hold the views that you do. It has nothing to do with whether or not we agree with each other. It's more that I have been so deeply and profoundly effected, emotionally, by the things I have read in those links, I just wasn't prepared for the possibility that someone else might not be similarly effected. It just took me by surprise, is all. I don't expect you to believe as I do, or to agree with me. I just was unprepared for a different emotional response by others, from the one I experienced myself. This doesn't happen very often for me. I usually don't have any expectations about what other people should or shouldn't feel. Maybe that's why I was so unprepared for my reaction to your response to the links. What I experienced was just a very strong, visceral, gutwrenching sort of inability to comprehend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:16 AM "I don't know of any country who has ever given back land which they had conquered in war without a quid pro quo." The quid pro quo in this kind of situation is peace.
That's why powerful countries pull out of places they have been occupying, not because they have been militarily defeated, but because they realise that they can never win, and that the war is causing unacceptable damage to their own country.
That's why the Americans pulled out of Vietnam. That's why the British pulled out of most of Ireland. That's why, sooner or later, Israel will pull out of the occupied territories.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:22 AM Ok, sledge. These three links (among 163,000 that came up when I did a search with the words "Israel" + "torture"), say that Israel does practice torture, and in the first link, an example is given of someone who is tortured for espionage (that's a bit like collaborating I guess)... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:26 AM Thae actions of the jews makes really makes you wonder about all the so called "persecution" they've supposedly faced over the years. Maybe the so called "chosen people" business means they just can't get on peacefully with anyone else. Just think of all the trouble that could have been avoided had they not taken over Palestine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,paolaitaly Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:48 AM I am one who think that (rougly said) in the Middle east situation most of the "rights" are by the side of the Palestinian population, and most of the "wrong" is on the Israely Governement, mostly on Ariel Sharon; but I think that is AWFUL find the eternal anti-semite use this orrible situation for spittin his/her poison like in the last post. Shame on you, whoever you are! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Wolfgang Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:10 AM Just for the balance of it: torture link #4 Wolfgang
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,mg Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:13 AM My understanding, and of course it could be wrong, is that the original split was 3 ways..Jordan and then the remaining land into Israel and Palestine. Palestine was never supposed to be Jordan, and Jordan has given citizenship rights to the Palestinians and of course their new queen is Palestinian. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:22 AM Carol, I have never claimed that the Israeli Government was kind and gentle and what I am about to say is in no way condoning their use of torture. It is rather an attempt to explain the mind-set that allows such things to happen. The Nazis marched millions of Jews to their deaths and they went, for the most part, without protest. It was best, their leaders felt, not to cause trouble, but to go to the "work camps" peacefully. They could not concieve of men so evil that they would murder innocent women and children. They were wrong. The Israelis decided early on to whatever was necessary to protect their security so that another Holocaust would never happen again. Considering that they have been under threat of attack from their closest neighbors for all of their existance and have, in fact, beaten off several major attacks over the years from an enemy whose avowed intention has been the total eradication of Israel, I am amazed that they have not been even more excessive than they have. I do not agree with the policy. I feel that it dehumanizes both the victim and the perpetrator. But I can understand why they are doing it and it saddens me deeply that they should feel that torture is necessary to insure the survival of their country. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: sledge Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:10 PM Yep, the evidence of torture seems to go both ways, another sad indication that both sides are as capable of being as bad as the other. No search however has given me anything on Israeli mob justice/lynching. Lets hope they can dignify their nation by demonstrating restraint in that respect. Sledge |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:43 PM Shame on you Wolfgang! What are you trying to do? Level the playing field? :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,paolaitaly Date: 26 Apr 02 - 01:19 PM If you search "Israel" on the same place where Wolfgang made a link ( Human rights ) you'll find a lot more stuff on torture. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:02 PM I suspect Carol has already posted that, paolaitaly. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:37 PM I suspect that last ostensibly anti-semitic GUEST was probably either someone trying to colour critics of Israel as anti-semitic, or just a shit-stirrer seeing an opening. Either way nothing to reply to. (Commenting on it like this is closer to replying to it than I care to get, but I'm actually responding to paolaitaly's post.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,Feder Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:52 PM McGrath, You may be correct, maybe not. What disturbs me is that anti-Semites do use the Middle East conflict as a medium to advance their hatred of Jews. It happens here at Mudcat with too much regularity. Witness the beginning of this discussion when RO1SIN started the initial thread by blaming "the jews" (sic) for the alleged actions of some Israeli soldiers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 03:16 PM Feder, I think what you mean is that the anti-semites try to use the Middle East conflict as a way to justify their hatred and to convince others of its' rectitude. Yes? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 26 Apr 02 - 04:06 PM Troll, I do mean what I said. Anti-Semites are using the Middle East conflict as a medium to advance their hatred of Jews. But, you're right too. They are using the conflict to justify their hatred and convince others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:41 PM True enough. And perversely enough the activities of anti-semites are used as a way of deflecting criticism of the actions of the Israel government.
Here is a link to a recent article by a Jewish writer reminding people who are appalled at Sharon's policies that they need to be particularly active in attacking anti-semitism in all its forms.
"When anti-semitism is no longer treated as Jewish business, to be taken care of by Israel and the rightwing Zionist lobby, Sharon is robbed of his most effective weapon in the indefensible and increasingly brutal occupation. And as an extra bonus, whenever hatred of Jews diminishes, the likes of Jean-Marie Le Pen shrink right down with it."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:48 PM Feder, is it more wrong to be an anti-semite than it is to be racist against Arabs? I don't see you complaining about the regular occurance of racism against Arabs in this forum. And with far greater frequency than anti-semitism, I might add. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:55 PM Now, for the rest of you who think the playing field needed to be leveled after I posted links to sites about Israel's use of torture...
You guys are so biased against the Palestinians, you didn't even notice that my posting those links was a direct response to accusations made against Palestinians relating to the way they dealt with people they thought were collaborators.
It was I who was leveling the playing field when I posted that since two people, troll and sledge, were using that episode as an example of why we should hate Palestinians.
And troll, if you can justify anything the Israelis do because of extreme circumstances, why can't you understand that Palestinians could be acting out of the same basic human impulses. They've not had the same exact experiences as the Jews, but their experiences have been horrific in their own way. If there is any racism or bigotry being practiced here it's much more the case against Arabs and Palestinians than it is against Jews. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:08 AM April 27, 2002 -- NEW YORK TIMES Anti-Semitism Is Deepening Among Muslims By SUSAN SACHS Stay in a five-star hotel anywhere from Jordan to Iran, and you can buy the infamous forgery "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." Pick up a newspaper in any part of the Arab world and you regularly see a swastika superimposed on the Israeil flag. Such anti-Semitic imagery is now embedded in the mainstream discourse concerning Jews in much of the Islamic world, in the popular press and in academic journals. The depictions are not limited to countries that are at war with Israel but can be found in general-interest publications in Egypt and Jordan, the two countries that have signed peace agreements with Israel, as well as in independent religious schools in Pakistan and Southeast Asia. Arab leaders, for their part, have long rejected the accusation that their state-controlled press, universities and television stations promulgate anti-Semitic views. Islamic history, they say, contains nothing like the anti-Semitic horrors that occurred in Christian Europe, and Islam as a religion accepts many of the revelations embodied in Judaism. The use of Nazi imagery, the newspaper caricatures of Jews with fangs and exaggerated hook noses, even the Arab textbooks with their descriptions of Jews as evil world conspirators — all of that, Arab leaders often insist, reflect a dislike for Israelis and Zionism but not for Jews and Judaism. Yet in many Muslim countries the hatred of Jews as Jews, and not only as citizens of Israel, has been nurtured through popular culture for generations. Take for instance an official Jordanian government textbook for high school students. It describes Jews as innately deceitful and corrupt. "Up to the present," it states, "they are the masters of usury and leaders of sexual exhibitionism and prostitution." In the view of many scholars of Islam, such texts are a sign that the Arab-Israeli conflict has been transformed in Muslim culture from a political, nationalist and territorial battle into a cosmic war between religions and, indeed, between good and evil. The length of the Middle East conflict has contributed to this shift. "You see a certain level of anti-Semitism that you look at and think, how can smart people really believe this?" said John L. Esposito, a professor of religion and international affairs at Georgetown University. "Part of the explanation is that they grew up with this, but part is also that they grew up in a confrontational situation. You make the world into `us and them,' and therefore you buy into every possible caricature of the other." Both Jews and Muslims engage in hatemongering based on skewed readings of their holy books, said Professor Esposito, author of the recent book "Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam." Islamic fundamentalists frequently refer to Jews as either the sons or the grandsons of apes and monkeys. These sorts of descriptions can sometimes be heard in sermons at mosques in the Palestinian territories as well as from some Saudi religious leaders. The reference is drawn from a verse in the Koran that, taken in context, refers to Jews and Christians who break the Sabbath and who mock the early Muslims for their beliefs. The Koran says that God made those people as despicable as monkeys, pigs and idol worshipers. "In all faiths, more exclusivist or militant verses are taken out of context by some and amplified in popular culture," Professor Esposito said. The Koran also contains complimentary verses about law-abiding Jews, at one point saying that the "believers and the Jews" who do right will be rewarded by God. Islamic doctrine concerning Christians has also been reinterpreted in recent decades in an effort to forge a bond between Muslims and Christians against the Jews. Literal Islam recognizes Jesus as a prophet but does not believe that he was crucified. The Koran says that Jews tried to crucify him, but that God rescued Jesus and that the Jews instead killed only a likeness of Jesus. Yet a common charge from Muslims these days is that the Jews did indeed kill Jesus. When Pope John Paul II visited Damascus last year, President Bashar al-Assad greeted him with a speech accusing Jews of just that. Mr. Assad's minister of religion affairs, Muhammad Ziyadah, later embellished the remarks, saying, "We must be fully aware of what the enemies of God and malicious Zionism conspire to commit against Christianity and Islam." The pope did not respond directly but called for reconciliation and peace. That Jews would be demonized by some Arabs, and Arabs demonized by some Jews may not be surprising after nearly a century of conflict over Palestine. Even in less enduring wars, nations have engaged in vicious and sometimes racist wartime propaganda against the enemy. And since Israel was founded as a Jewish nation, the issue of religion has always been an element in its relations, or lack of relations, with its Arab neighbors. Still, the breadth and viciousness of the anti-Semitism is striking. Recent attacks on Jewish centers in France and an ancient synagogue in Tunisia have been attributed to Arabs or Muslim fundamentalists. Last month the Saudi daily Al Riyadh published an article that accused Jews of consuming the blood of Christian and Muslim children during the holiday of Purim. The author, a lecturer at King Faisal University in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, called this medieval fiction a "well-established fact." After the article was translated from the Arabic and publicized by an Israel-based group called the Middle East Media Research Institute, the editor of the newspaper repudiated the article, saying it was nonsense and should not have been published. The recycling of such stories has become a fixture of Muslim discourse, said Bernard Lewis, a historian of Islam and the Middle East, who has called this trend the "Islamization of anti-Semitism." Its literature, he has written, includes classic European anti-Semitic writings like "Protocols," introduced to the Middle East in the late 1800's and now easily available in Arabic throughout the region and in English. In recent decades this material has been supplemented by a home-grown body of work, ascribed to Islamic teachings, that describes what it calls the innate wickedness of the Jewish people throughout the ages. Yet Jews were minor players in Islamic theological writing for centuries, Professor Lewis wrote in "Semites and Anti-Semites." They figure in the Koran, which Muslims call the final and perfect revelation of God, as obstinate antagonists to the prophet Muhammad's efforts to bring Islam to the people of the Arabian Peninsula. Of the tribes he encountered, the Jews were the most hostile to his message. But in the end, the Jewish tribes were defeated, and the Koran refers to them as a people whose rebelliousness had always been punished by God. In more modern Islamic teachings, which can be found in Arab textbooks and mainstream newspaper articles, the Koran's description of the Jews' opposition to Muhammad takes on monumental importance. The Jews corrupted the word of God from the start, the more recent interpretations say, and their scheming against the prophet was an expression of their innate wickedness. "Some people confuse certain verses of the Koran attacking the Jews of that day, as an attack on Judaism," said Seyyed Hossein Nasr, a professor of Islamic studies at George Washington University. "It's not innocent confusion. It's deliberate confusion, and it happens on both sides." This is a modern development, less theological than emotional, and leaves as its casualty a long tradition of amity between Islam and Judaism, he added. "If religious authorities in both religions put the demands of God above nationalistic and ethnic feelings," Professor Nasr said, "then maybe something can be done."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Apr 02 - 01:25 PM Anti-semitism in Europe creates Zionism, and this in turn is used a pretext to generate anti-semitism in the Islamic world. And that in turn helps empower extremist versions of Zionism. It's a vicious circle.
In all places and all times the enemy are those who preach hatred of other peoples, whatever the excuse - and whether the "other peoples" are Jews, Arabs, Palestinians, Israelis...
It's a good idea to focus on the fact that the neo-Nazis like Le Pen hate both Jews and Arabs. Two sorts of anti-semitism rolled into one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:07 PM The interesting (and sad) thing I've noticed is that when people use hateful language about Jews, they are quite rightly called "anti-semites". But hateful language toward Palestinians or Arabs is completely overlooked, or if it's noticed at all, it's considered the right thing to do. And when someone does speak out against hateful language toward Palestinians or Arabs, the person speaking out often regarded as being anti-semitic. That shows how completely marginalized and de-humanized Palestinians have become in the US and Israel. And I also think it shows that racism toward Palestinians has become institutionalized in the US and Israel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:11 PM Here's an interesting example of this...
Last month the Saudi daily Al Riyadh published an article that accused Jews of consuming the blood of Christian and Muslim children during the holiday of Purim. The author, a lecturer at King Faisal University in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, called this medieval fiction a "well-established fact."
And yet when troll states the idea that Palestinians hate Jews more than they love their children, he states it as a well-established fact. Can't see much of a difference myself.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:26 PM Carol: It appears to me that you are going overboard a bit with your accusations. I don't recall either troll, sledge, or anyone else encouraging people to hate Palestinians. You made the charge, could you back it up by referring us to a post where anyone did that? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,mg Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:52 PM I think that statement about peace coming when Palestinians (I think it is usually worded Arabs) needing to love their children more than they hate Jews/Israelis/occupation in general should be removed from civilized discourse. It has no purpose other than to insult and inflame. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 27 Apr 02 - 06:43 PM troll - Yeah, yeah... :-) Glad to see your sense of humour is still intact, as is mine, despite the passions aroused by this discussion. You said: "You help your allies. Thats what the word means." (referring to the USA helping Israel) Okay, fine. But why exactly IS Israel a US ally? What for? That's what I don't get. (It certainly isn't because Israelis are born as sweeter, better, and godlier people than the other Semites who happen to live on that area of land.) The USA might just as well pursue a neutral policy between Israel and the Arabs, after all. Several Arab states have themselves been US allies at one time or another...when it was deemed expedient! Alliances are nothing but arrangements of convenience, masquerading under the flag of righteousness. I think the only thing that separates you and me is this: you see Israel as essentially "the good guys", and I don't. I don't think ANY of the combatants in the Middle East are the good guys...they are all out for what they can get. Israel is better equipped, more modern, and has more powerful backers...so they usually get more. I am cynical about Israel and about the Arabs. I see nothing but naked self-interest on both sides. In a better organized world, an international justice system would disarm BOTH Israel and the Arabs, put peacekeeping troops in there and FORCE them to stop fighting each other and to share the land peacefully with one another...as they once did (not too long ago, historically). That's what the Communists did in Yugoslavia, which was FAR better off that way. They insisted that everyone be a YUGOSLAVIAN first, and function as social equals, regardless of ethnic differences. That is social responsibility...just as is practiced, for example, in the city of Toronto or the country of Canada. The moment the Communists were gone, all the old ethnic hatreds arose and shattered the country into Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, and various other fragments, and we all know the horrific results of that. This was supposedly done to achieve "freedom". Ha! I laugh. It was done to break up a competing power bloc and sieze key strategic and economic advantages for the West. It was done for the most cynical and opportunistic of reasons, and it has caused the utter ruination of that whole area of Europe. The real problem in the world is that it is still the Wild West out there...no real international justice system, no international human rights system, no neutral international security forces with the power to prevent regional warfare and massive inequality. All that is out there is the greedy scheming of the powerful, rich and well-armed...and the desperation of the powerless and impoverished. Human disunity is rampant...and the strong are taking advantage of that in many more places than just the Middle East. Until all citizens of the world can wake up in the morning feeling safe, having equal political representation, equal economic opportunity, and equal social rights...then these tragedies will just keep on happening. The reason Canada, for example, is a peaceful place at present (despite long term disputes between French & English or Native people & whites) is that there is one coherent society here, with basically equal rights for all citizens, regardless of their background, and a pretty good standard of living for most of them as well. People feel that they can cope, and live normally. That results in a stable, workable, peaceful situation. That is not at all what you have in the Middle East. You have prearranged and enormous inequalities, many poor and disenfranchised in refugee camps, and many people whose basic human rights are denied on a daily basis and who are NOT treated as equals. Warfare and terrorism are inevitable under such conditions. The same circumstances are true in most of the African continent and in much of Latin America. Systemic poverty and denial of human equality creates war. Does a little child, born to either Jews or Muslims, hate a little child born from the other group? No. Not until his parents, his teachers, and his government tell him to. Those parents, teachers, and governments are the ignorant architects of a terrible future, forever repeating the errors of a tragic past...because they do not have the wisdom to look upon one single Humanity...and see nothing but brothers and sisters. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 27 Apr 02 - 08:27 PM mg: That statement, I believe mg, was made by Golda Mier (sp?), as you probably know, and I think that it does have legitimate use in this discussion. After all, how would one describe the thinking of a parent who willingly, or perhaps even encourages, one of their children to strap bombs to their body and go to a public place and blow themselves, and everyone within reach to smithereens? They do that, I believe, because they hate Jews, and want to kill as many as they can. If they loved their children more than they hated Jews, they never would condone that, would they? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:23 PM Maybe your're right, DougR. Maybe I have gone overboard. But instead of re-posting all of the things that hit me as being hateful toward Palestinians or inciting hatred of Palestinians, I'm going to put the shoe on the other foot and see how it looks there... _______________________________________________
I pity the fool who thinks that the Jewish extremists are ever going to permit a Palestinian state in their holy land.
Any truly objective observer must see that nothing, but nothing, will appease the Israeli hardliners except the total desrtuction of the Palestinian state.
Israel is not going to stop its incursions when a treaty is signed. The sad truth is, they increase the attacks in response to peace talks. If you guys can tell me how to get those Zionists out of the way (without a second holocaust), you will have my full support. Until they are neutralized, however, the status will stay quo.
Because Israel wants nothing less than the elimination of the Palestinians. Their own words have proved it time and again. Take a good look at how they treat them (the displaced palestinians) now. They keep them in refugee camps and give them no opportunities to start a new life.
They do that, I believe, because they hate Palestinians, and want to kill as many as they can. These can't be translated in that way, but I would ask what point there was in posting them except to encourage the perception that Palestinians are bloodthirsty savages. These were not posted as a response to any similar accusations made against Israelis. They were posted independently of anything anyone else said. And yet when I posted the links about Israeli torture in response to these two posts, several people felt that there was a need to "level the playing field" and include something about Palestinian terrorism. Which suggests to me that if someone posts anything incriminating about Israel, it is seen as gratuitous. But posting the same sort of thing about Palestinians is ok.
I noticed in the post on the Canadian group that they spoke of Israeli peace activists demonstrating in front of settlements ,sometimes with Palestinian friends. I was wondering, are those peace activists still alive or have they been killed by the IDF. I ask this because Palestinian Arabs who are suspected of complicity with Israelis have been killed and their battered bodies put on public display in the past. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:26 PM Correction: when I said "and include something about Palestinian terrorism", I meant to say, "and include something about Palestinian torture". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:45 PM I guess I have to correct myself again. The second to last quote in my 27-Apr-02 - 09:23 PM post was losely connected to a link I posted. But still, I would ask what the point of that post is except to promote a stereotype of Palestinians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:52 PM Justice? Justice is to have the same laws and legal protections for all people, the same opportunity to earn a good living wage for all people, the same voice in electing political representation for all people, the same access to free medical treatment and education for all people, the same right of dignity and respect given to all people, regardless of their race, religion, nationality or other distinguishing characteristics. And...freedom from poverty, freedom from discrimination, freedom from FEAR. Those things are justice. Punishment is not justice, and it never will be. Justice is achieved through love put into action, not through the appeasment of someone's fear, rage, and desire for vengeance. It is customarily the destroyer of human life who most loudly cries for what he terms "justice" in the way the word is commonly used. The guy yelling from the lynch mob. The inquisitor applying the thumbscrews. The officer commanding the death squad. These are the monsters who delight in striking one more blow for what they term.... "justice". They lie. The monster they endlessly pursue is their own reflection looking back at them from the silent mirror of life. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: artbrooks Date: 27 Apr 02 - 11:13 PM It is clear, after going through the posts, that no one has said anything hateful about Arabs or Moslems. The comments about Palestinians are clearly aimed at the extremists, such as the ones who killed a five year old child at close range in his bed yesterday. On the other hand, Jews and Israelis are considered to be the same thing, which is totally untrue, and all Israelis are blamed for the unproven acts of a few. It is very clear to me where the hate is in this thread, and I will choose to no longer participate in either this one or in the other one that was hijacked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 28 Apr 02 - 12:43 AM artbrooks, that is your own interpretation, and it shows your own bias. I haven't seen anyone suggesting that all Israelis are to blame for anything. And in the examples I gave, only two people specified that they were only talking about Palestinian extremests. And to answer further the posts by Sledge and troll, I can name one Israeli Jew who was publicly executed by an Israeli Jew for being too cozy with the Palestinians... Yitzhak Rabin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 28 Apr 02 - 03:47 AM Rabin was murdered by a right-wing extermist as was Anwar Sadat. In neither case were the bodies beaten and put on public display and THAT'S what I was talking about. The killing is understandable, the barbaric actions of the crowd is not. Again I say, the Koran speaks against the desicration of bodies -even those of an enemy. DougR answered my repeat of Golda Meiers statement very well. I never said that it was an established fact. Perhaps I should preface each sentence with an "F" or an "O" for "fact" or "opinion" to prevent confusion. I have never cliamed to hate the Palestinians or, for that matter, to love Israel. As I have said before, I think that Israel has the right to exist and to have secure, defensible borders and I think the Palestinian Arabs deserve the same. To close, I try not to post opinions as facts."...if someone posts anything incriminating about Israel, it is seen as gratuitous. But posting the same sort of thing about Palestinians is ok." The stories about Israeli torture remain, as yet, unproven. I say unproven because they are based on hearsay evidence. The story about the murder and desecration of the three suspected collaborators is cold hard fact and was reported as such in Arab media with, although I have not seem them, pictures of the event. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 28 Apr 02 - 04:17 AM Saying "Palestinians hate jews more than they love their children", even when expressed as an opinion, is still the promotion of a negative stereotype. So Golda Meier was the first one to promote that particular stereotype. That doesn't make it any more correct.
When people promote negative stereotypes of Jews, even if they are stating them as an opinion, they are called anti-semites. Why should it be any different the other way around?
And when you use an expample of the people who killed someone in a mob action because the person was suspected of being a collaborator, in the absence of any particular context, what comes across is that you are saying that they did it because they are Palestinians, and because Palestinians just do that sort of thing. That is also the promotion of a negative stereotype. If someone did the same sort of thing, like for instance making it a point to tell you that their Jewish neighbor is miserly, in the absence of any particular context, it would probably be taken as anti-semitism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 Apr 02 - 08:38 AM Lynching and mobbing of people seen as collaborators is likely to happen in the wake of any occupation, in all sorts of countries. France, Italy, Ireland, the USA.
That doesn't make it right, but to see it as something that is peculiar to Palestinians is wrong headed.
In a country where the whole structure of civil administration and communal life has just been devastated, it's hardly realistic to expect too much in the way of law and order. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 28 Apr 02 - 02:46 PM So that type of behaviour should be expected then? Is that your point, McGrath? And those who participate in lawless acts such as hanging alleged collaborators, or shooting them and dragging their bodies through the rubble, should be expected and go unpunished? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Apr 02 - 02:53 PM Lynching, mobbing, and abuse of bodies happens in the absence of a well-organized and strong law enforcement system...and it can happen among any population which is experiencing a temporary state of partial or complete anarchy, as McGrath indicated above. North American Indians did horrific things to prisoners in wartime. Whites did horrific things to the Indians. They both thought of themselves as good, decent people and of the others as vicious barbarians. Obviously, this is a very subjective type of judgement, based on emotional responses and viewpoints particular to each person's background. The Israelis have a well-organized society with an intact and higly effective police and armed forces, and that is why you don't see so many mob scenes happening on their side of the line. Remove the cohesiveness of their society and its security forces, and you would see plenty of mob scenes and mob violence. You would also see them violating their holy scriptures, as Christians have been doing regularly for the past 2,000 years. Why then get so worked up when Muslims do it? As if it was anything unusual.... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 Apr 02 - 03:28 PM Bit of threads drift, but it's worth remembering that Palestinians aren't all Muslims. You've got Christians as well. There are still some Samaritans, and they count as Palestinians as well. Probably a few Buddhists as well.
Yes Doug, my point was that in this kind of situation that kind of behaviour is quite predictable. It'd happen in your part of the world just as readily, given the same circumstances, just as it happened in the most civilised and settled countries in the world within living mmory. That doesn't make it right, it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be treated as criminal. But when all the police stations have been flattened, and the police shot or interned, enforceing the law gets a bit tricky. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Apr 02 - 03:36 PM If not downright impossible. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,NH Dave Date: 28 Apr 02 - 05:11 PM In answer to Troll's question The USA has had a policy of returning captured territory that goes back to the 19th Century. We "captured" and returned to self government both Cuba and the Phillipines after the Spanish American War, and after some period of US governorship. During WWI all of our fighting was done in France, so the matter is moot for this war. In WWII we captured many of the Pacific Islands including Guam, Okinawa, and Japan, and all but Guam have reverted back to their original, but no longer war-like, governments/self rule. Guam remains a US protectorate, but could become its own country if they chose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,Pancho Villa Date: 28 Apr 02 - 05:37 PM NH Dave tells good American lies. The examples he cites, unlike Israel and the Palestinian territories, are not contiguous to the USA. Let me know when the USA is going to return Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and California; all conquered from Mexico. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 28 Apr 02 - 05:42 PM Hey Pancho! Had you been a better shot, you might have been able to get Arizona back yourself! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Apr 02 - 08:22 PM Well, Pancho was a pretty good shot, but he had to deal with Zapata, Carranza, Obregon, and the Federales too. Too many opponents can wear a bandido down after awhile. Personally, I always liked Zapata the best of the lot. The man was absolutely extraordinary. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 28 Apr 02 - 11:40 PM As a matter of fact. NH Dave, the US did not return Cuba and the Philippines to their original owner, Spain, so that example won't do. We never captured Japans main islands, only Okinawa which was returned by treaty. The Pacific Islands which we captured on the way north to Japan were, by and large, owned by our allies and had been occupied by the Japanese, so, while we "gave them back", in reality we had only liberated them for their former owners, our allies. Little Hawk, when the Palestinians rant about driving the unbelievers from sacred Arab land and of how they are willing to die as martyrs for Islam and they name one of their terrorist groups for the El Aqsa Mosque, then it is -to me at least- a little bizarre to see them do something that is so much against the religion they claim to defend. You cannot excuse barbaric behavior simply because there has been a breakdown of law and order. The fact that it could happen anywhere still does not make it ok. It is my opinion that the suspected collaborators were murdered so the people who did it could feel that they were still in charge of something and still capable of striking a blow at their enemies. And there weren't just a few of them, there was a mob -as I recall- of several hundred people. That is a reasonably large sample on which to base an assumption. What I reported was a verifiable fact, based on an actual event,and the context of my reporting it was in answer to heresay stories of Israeli torture (which, if true, I deplore). It was not made to promote a "negative stereotype", it was to report a true,verifiable event to be used as a counter to a heresay story. If you did not post the links on the Israeli torture stories to give negative impressions of the Israelis, Carol, why DID you post them? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:02 AM troll, you say that you think the Israeli government is as guilty as the Palestinians in what's going on in the middle east, and yet in every case, when someone has brought up a criticism of the Israeli government or military, you have come up with an excuse, reason, or denial, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. But every single time someone tries to show the human side of the Palestinians, you find a way to de-humanize them again. It's like you've got two different types of score card that you're using for the two groups. The score card for the Palestinians only has places for negative marks, and the score card for the Israelis only has places for positive marks. Please tell me in what way this is not a double standard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:04 AM Opinions and Questions to ponder, troll. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:08 AM troll - Well, yeah...I certainly wasn't excusing it...just indicating that it is something that often happens when law and order breaks down. I would be the first to agree with you that the statements of fanatical Muslim extremists are quite repugnant, as are the statements of fanatical Israeli, Serbian, or Kosovar extremists, likewise. I would not wish to be within easy reach of any of them, if they considered me their enemy. You said: "It is my opinion that the suspected collaborators were murdered so the people who did it could feel that they were still in charge of something and still capable of striking a blow at their enemies." Exactly right. I couldn't agree more. That's why some of them become suicide bombers too, and it's why many Japanese pilots volunteered for kamikaze missions in '44 and '45. That...and sheer pride and a sense of duty in the face of defeat, impotence, and catastrophe. Some American pilots made suicide dives on ships in damaged planes too during World War II...it was their one last attempt to show they could still strike a blow at a hated enemy, and still exert some control over the situation. I think Carol feels she is simply evening up the odds in the media propaganda war...which she thinks has been unfairly tilted against Arabs and Palestinians. Whether someone else agrees with that depends more on his or her acquired prejudices than on any particular set of facts. People are naturally attracted to facts that support their chosen position. For example: I disagree with almost every opinion expressed by the Toronto Sun about anything, because it's very right-wing and very lacking in "class". It's a truly vulgar rag with very slim content and a ton of advertising. Accordingly, I seldom read the Sun, and I look upon it with contempt. I like the Toronto Star...so I often read it. This is typical. People are just naturally more inclined to seek out info they already agree with, and to ignore, reject or discount info they don't already agree with. It's entirely possible that some valuable info WILL surface in the Sun, and I will miss it, because I basically don't think the Sun is worth reading. We are all like this. It's human nature. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:19 AM If you did not post the links on the Israeli torture stories to give negative impressions of the Israelis, Carol, why DID you post them?
Sledge asked me to provide documentation for this post of mine...
I think the Israeli government would probably treat people who are informers for any entity with whom they are at war pretty harshly also. I'd bet they would first torture them, and then the informers would probably be either imprisoned or executed.
And yes, it was an attempt to level the playing field after what you and Sledge posted about what the Palestinians did. And if Wolfgang's post providing the torture link #4 and subsequent posts from others is any indication, leveling the playing field is viewed as a good thing to do. And Little Hawk is right. I'm also quite dismayed with the one-sidedness of the way the media is handling this issue here in the US. And with the one-sidedness of the posts of you and some other people here. At least when I criticize the Israeli side of the equation, I'm criticizing the government and military. You're consistantly making the Palestinian people out to be sub-human.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,mg Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:34 AM I think it is important to look at who the Palestinian people are that were of age in say, 1920 to 1940. What did they do? Were they by nature violent? My stereotype of them is the "humble peasant", which may or may not be accurate. But certainly many of them were farmers, either tenant or landowners of small holdings. They raised the famous Jaffa oranges; they had olive orchards that had been tended by their families for centuries. They had sheep and donkeys, just like in the Bible...The women were known for their needlework..I have not ever read anything that suggests that they were by nature warlike, aggressive, etc...now, some people/cultures are..no getting around it..but I don't think these people were. So you take these fairly passive, and probably gentle people, take their land, legally or quasilegally or just take it, drive them literally into the sea (is that where that expression came from?) in Haifa and Jaffa, rape the women, which is one of the main reasons they said they fled, and crowd them into leaky tents in a bitter cold and wet desert (or hot and dry)...eventually move them into camps with bad sewage problems...these are not city people...it's like when the Irish were forced by cruel fate out of Ireland and into New York tenements...bad behavior ensued...that I don't think was innate to the Irish character..who knows..it might be...anyway, that is my stereotype in a nutshell. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:44 AM And where is your scorecard Carol? The one with the positive marks for the Israelis. Before you accuse me or anyone else of using a double standard, you had better make very, very sure that you are not guilty of the very thing you are so quick to accuse others of. The Palestinians do not need another cheerleader or apologist, at least not on this forum. You seem to me to portray the image of the Plaestinians as beleaguered but noble withall and the Israelis as the bully who is beating up on the little guy for no reason other than because he can. Everything that I post as fact can be verified from several independent sources and I try to stay away from the "tearjerker" stories since I find that they serve little purpose other than to demonize one side or the other and to polarize the discussion group. Perhaps you feel that the Palestinians need better PR since most people in this country are not aware of some of the basic problems they face. Fine. The only problem is that you build them up by tearing the other side down and then complain when someone says "Yeah, but they do it too." Is it your contention that no one should be allowed to criticize the Palestinians because they're having a rough time right now? You post links to stories that are mostly heart rendering accounts of how some individual soldier(s) killed a palestinian and then get all bent out of shape when someone counters with a story of a 5-year-old child shot while lieing in her bed, asleep. Your story is meant to show the "human side" of the Palestinians but mine is to foster haterd, negative stereotypes and "de-humanize" them. ..."when someone has brought up a criticism of the Israeli government or military, you have come up with an excuse, reason, or denial, even in the face of overwhelming evidence." Please cite some of these ocassions and if your "overwhelming evidence" is something like Amnesty Internationals clain that they had evidence of war crimes in Jenin, don't bother. Until the evidence has been presented for all to see, it's heresay. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:45 AM Thank you, mg, for letting some fresh air into the room. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:49 AM troll, I have made several posts in which I have stated my support of Israelis. Just check out my posting history. Yossi Beilin, Neta Golan, Yitzhak Rabin, Amos Oz, and the conscientious objectors currently being held Israeli prisons. They just don't happen to be Israelis with whom you agree. Now, show me where you have said anything in support of Palestinians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,mg Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:54 AM I looked up Jaffa oranges under google. Here is a little story..first one I found. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Jaffa/Jaffa/Story153.html I worked for a Palestinian professor at the U.W...(it was a long time ago and I doubt he would remember me). I didn't realize until a few days ago that he had lost an orange orchard. If we Irish are still mourning the loss of a quarter acre of moldy potatoes our ancestors had, how much fresher is this? His name is Farhat Ziadeh. If anyone is in the Seattle area, there is an inaugural lecture at the University of Washington (I think...) on April 30..Tuesday. It is about poetry or something..but there is going to be a series of lectures in his name. I believe he has established a foundation. You can find more information doing a google search under his name and lecture I presume..or I will post it later... mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 12:55 AM Oh yeah, and that Israeli guy who married a Palestinian woman and went to live in a town in the Palestinian occupied territories. Can't remember his name just now. Now that was a person who was willing to put his principles into practice in real life. And I've posted plenty of evidence that comes from many sources, including people from all over the world, and even some Israeli Jews themselves. But you won't eccept anything that doesn't come directly from Ariel Sharon himself. So I'm not about to repeat the excercize. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 01:08 AM One last thing. I repeat what I said on the Peace in the middle east thread. I have never, not once, posted any criticisms gratuitously about Israel. In every single case, if I have posted a criticism of any aspect of Israel, it has been in response to something someone has posted that I felt put an unfair burden of blame on the Palestinians. I have not once posted anything to build the Palestinians up by tearing the Israelis down. What I have been doing is responding to people who are building Israel up by tearing the Palestinians down. And if you think you can find any posts of mine in which I have done what you accuse me of doing, you show them to me, and I will show you the posts preceding them that I was responding to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 29 Apr 02 - 01:11 AM To the best of my knowledge, I have, to date said nothing in support of the Palestinians. I do not support them. The Israelis whom you mention are either dead, anti-war or peace activists, or political enemies of the present government. In short, they support your POV. I do not think that they can qualify as ordinary Israelis. To the best of my knowledge, many of the CO's in jail in Israel right now are there because they have refused military service and they were there before this whole recent round of violence started. Israel,as you may know, has universal service. Refuse service, go to jail. Understand, I have nothing against peace activists or conscientious objectors. I have a good friend who was a CO during Viet Nam and did alternative service. But to use those people from the "other side" who agree with your stance to try to prove how even-handed you are is laughable at best and a little insulting as well. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 01:27 AM In short, they support your POV. I do not think that they can qualify as ordinary Israelis. Oohhh!!! What a giveaway!!! Thank you for that one, troll! I couldn't have asked for a better one! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Apr 02 - 01:30 AM Well, like I said, it all depends on whether you think one side in this conflict is "the good guys". I don't. But I do think that all people are essentially more good than bad in their original true nature. Trouble is, their original nature is under a constant barrage from outside, and they don't react well to that. It brings out the worst in most of them. I think that the Sharon government is carrying out a mistaken policy of regional aggression that is not in the true interests of Israelis. Sharon thinks otherwise. That's his privilege. If I were an Israeli, I would be assisting his political opponents, looking for ways to achieve peace, and hoping for a change in government ASAP. The guy who killed Rabin must be the happiest man in Israel...he's gotten exactly what he wanted. Violence on a small scale has produced violence on a grand scale. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 01:31 AM I guess my mother didn't qualify as an ordinary American when she was a civil rights worker here in the US in the '60s either. So I suppose the fact that I gravitate to extraordinary Israelis is something I come by naturally. (Ohh!! What a giveaway!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 02:30 AM But to use those people from the "other side" who agree with your stance to try to prove how even-handed you are is laughable at best and a little insulting as well. I'm not using those people on the other side because they agree with my stance. Those are the people who shaped my stance! troll, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Apr 02 - 05:12 AM Trying to explain something is not the same as seeking to excuse it. That seems a remarkably easy concept to understand, but people who are quite clearly capable of understanding much more difficult ideas genuinely seem to have real difficulty with it. And that difficulty is something I really find difficult to understand
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 29 Apr 02 - 08:08 AM That dog won't hunt. You were already acting as a PR agent for the Palestinians when you started quoting some of the people you mentioned, Yossi Bielin in particular. In fact, I seem to recall a post wherein you said that you saw him on TV and that, "he's a cutie." Although, in all fairness, I know that you wouldn't support Arafat because of his good looks. It is also indicative of prior bias to note that the "extraordinary Israelis" that you are attracted to are all from one end of the political spectrum. You don't seem to have any affinity for those who think that Sharon hasn't gone far enough and that all the Arabs should be expelled from "the river to the sea." Most Israelis do not agree with that stance but neither are they in favor of appeasment. What a shame that you seem to feel that the ideas of ordinary Israelis are unworthy of your consideration: that only those ideas that parallel your own are valid. I'm quite sure that Bielin and Co. didn't have to do much shaping to solidify your stance. Kevin, I agree with you 100%. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 29 Apr 02 - 08:29 AM Looking over the posts of the last couple of days, it appears that only four or five of us have been posting more than once and we seem to be beating a dead horse.As none of us are lokely to change our minds, I suggest that we let it die a natural death, Accordingly, this will probably be my final post on this subject. We seem to be moving into places that I don't really care to go but I find myself inexorably drawn there as the discussion progresses (or regresses). So i'm outta here. See you 'round the Forum. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Apr 02 - 10:33 AM Imagine that in the days of apartheid someone had been criticised for being anti-Afrikaner, and they had responded by giving examples of Afrikaners who were opposed to apartheid, whom they admired.
And then the person they'd been arguing with came back saying that Afrikaners who were opposed to apartheid didn't count, since most Afrikaners supported the apartheid system, and that, unless they could come up with examples of advocates of apartheid whom they admired, they must clearly be biased against Afrikaner.
Well, I'd feel there was something wrong with that argument.
And one reason that example came to mind is this article, in today's Guardian by Archbishop Tutu of South Africa - here's a taster:
"Israel will never get true security and safety through oppressing another people. A true peace can ultimately be built only on justice. We condemn the violence of suicide bombers, and we condemn the corruption of young minds taught hatred; but we also condemn the violence of military incursions in the occupied lands, and the inhumanity that won't let ambulances reach the injured.
The military action of recent days, I predict with certainty, will not provide the security and peace Israelis want; it will only intensify the hatred.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 29 Apr 02 - 03:55 PM I, for one, do not question Tutu's right to an opinion. I agree with troll, though. I think we are beating a dead horse in this thread. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Apr 02 - 04:14 PM Well, Mudcatters who don't get the Guardian or the Church Times probably wouldn't have had the chance to read the Archbishop's article otherwise. That makes this a worthwhile thread in itself. And here's another quote from it, and another blue clicky to it as well.
"If our madness could end as it did, it must be possible to do the same everywhere else in the world. If peace could come to South Africa, surely it can come to the Holy Land?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 05:20 PM troll, I never thought I would be saying something like this, but I have to say, respectfully, that you are full of shit.
I didn't even have a stance on this issue until a few weeks ago. I didn't even know much of anything about it until a few weeks ago. In fact, troll, if you research my posting history a little more carefully, you'll find that in the beginning, mostly all I did was ask questions rather than state opinions. And it was in doing the research I have in the past few weeks, much of which I have posted to the Mudcat, that I came to the stance that I have.
I didn't support segregation in the United States when that was the system we had here. That didn't mean I was against white Americans. I was against apartheid in South Africa (did you support apartheid in South Africa, troll?), and that didn't mean I was against white South Africans. There is absolutely no reason on earth why I should have to support apartheid in Israel. And the fact that I am against it doesn't mean I'm against Israeli Jews. Give it up. It's a losing proposition. Trying to demonize me because I disagree with you, the way you're demonizing the Palestinians, just isn't going to work. And I don't think it's a dead horse as long as apartheid is still in effect in Israel, and people in the the US and Israel are accepting it without question (and blaming it on the Palestinians). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 05:22 PM (btw. when you call me a PR agent for the Palestinians, somehow it comes across as sounding like "nigger lover".) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 29 Apr 02 - 11:27 PM When my mother was involved in the civil rights movement, back when we had segregation here in the US, she had some difficult decisions to face.
We lived one house away from the beach. There were no black families living in any of the neighborhoods that had beaches. There was no parking allowed in the street, so only people who lived withing walking distance from the beach could use it.
My mother used to invite her black friends to park in our driveway so they could use our beach. She was concerned that they might be hassled by people who didn't know why they were there. So she would stand on the front porch talking with them for a while so everyone could see who had invited them.
I reckon my mother knew she stood to lose some friends because of that. Maybe the thought of it made her sad. I don't know because she never said. But when she had to make a choice between her conscience and her friends, she chose her conscience. I know that my position on what's going on in Israel has the potential to cost me some friends, both Jewish and non Jewish. The thought of that makes me sad. But when it boils down to a choice between my conscience and my friends, I'm sorry, but I have to go with my conscience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Apr 02 - 12:03 AM As you should, Carol. I consider you one of the world's least likely candidates for being guilty of anti-semitism, but that won't stop people from accusing you of it. There is a lot of fear out there, and fear does not encourage rationality or even-handedness. It also shuts up a lot of people who secretly agree with you, because they are genuinely afraid to speak out about it. I wouldn't doubt that a few of them are Jews too...not many, but a few. Remember how the black community treated Christopher Darden (a black man) when he dared to prosecute O.J. Simpson? When he dared to suggest that massive forensic and circumstantial evidence was more important than race? The toughest thing of all is to see beyond the usual viewpoints of one's one peer group or cultural or political group, and most people are virtually incapable of doing so. Which is to say...most people are unconscious bigots. They mean well, they think of themselves as believing in freedom, peace, and justice for all, but they are still bigots. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 30 Apr 02 - 01:06 AM My my, L.H., if I didn't know better, I might think you are a pessimist! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Apr 02 - 01:16 PM Yeah, Doug, I'm a very cautious optimist. - LH |