|
24 May 02 - 02:23 PM (#716895) Subject: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,Barbara When Canada had two people kidnapped by the FLQ in 1970, Canada's government -- not a particularly militaristic one -- declared the War Measures Act and sent the tanks onto the streets of Montreal. If those streets had been booby-trapped the way Jenin was, civilian casualties would have been huge. In Russia, when Chechens and Russians fight over the same piece of land, the reaction of Moscow is brutal. When 42 people, including 17 children, died recently in the southern Russian republic of Dagestan (next-door to Chechnya) after a bomb was planted along a parade route, President Vladimir Putin called the terrorists "Nazis" and promised they would take the consequences. Those consequences are unlikely to make many waves in the UN or NGOs. But like the NGOs and the UN, most media throughout the world when talking about terrorism in Israel adopt a tone so different to that used when talking about terrorism anywhere else that you have to make the assumption a completely different yardstick is used. Israel is now like Orwell's Emmanuel Goldstein, a hate figure for virtually every progressive special interest group regardless of its connection to Israel. But why? The United Nations hates Israel and Jews because the UN is the club for and run by the Third World. The Third World, its supporters and Europe hate Israel because Israel is the stalking horse of America and in their eyes America's symbol. Moreover, Israel is the only truly democratic country in the Middle East and a representative of the very Western ideas that both traditional dictators and the quasi-Marxist and theocratic dictators of the Third World despise. In addition, there is a genuine element of sympathy for the Palestinians in a conflict that has been going on over the same piece of land for most of the 20th and now into the 21st century. Then, of course there is genuine anti-Semitism. That virus is alive and kicking. |
|
24 May 02 - 05:23 PM (#716985) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Deda Thanks, Guest Barbara, it's good to hear another voice -- What happened to the earlier version of this thread? I haven't had time to keep up with it, nor the energy /inclination to argue it lately -- though it's always on my radar screen. |
|
24 May 02 - 05:24 PM (#716987) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow I think most people, apart maybe from Bush, would see what Putin's army has done in Chechnya as state terrorism of the worst kind. And there are grave suspicions, based on some convincing evidence, that the terrorist attacks in Moscow that helped launch the second Chechen war, and propelled Putin to power, may have been set up by the theirs of the KGB.
If there is more attention paid to Israel than to Russia in the media and in other places, that largely reflects the fact that Israel is widely seen as a counter where there is more hope of people taking some notice of criticism.
As Barbara says it is "a democracy". Indeed, there is an manufactured air to this democracy, since it was founded on an ethnically cleansed population, analogous in some ways to the majority created in Northern Ireland by means of partition, or the apartheid dream of a white nation with its black population living in Bantustans - but it is still a democracy, and votes count.
It is probably truer today to say that anger at Israel is a major factor in generating anti-Jewish anti-semitism rather than the other way round. That doesn't make it any prettier or less inexcusable when it surfaces, but it fuelled by different sources than the kind of anti-semitismn that played such a crucial part in bringing Israel into existence.
|
|
26 May 02 - 04:18 PM (#717636) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,BOY COTT ZIONIST COMPANIES The following zionist-controlled companies should be boycotted: AOL Time Warner Apax Partners & Co Ltd Coca-Cola Danone Delta Galil Disney Estée Lauder IBM Johnson & Johnson Kimberly-Clark Lewis Trust Group Ltd L'Oreal Marks & Spencer Nestle News Corporation Nokia Revlon Sara Lee Selfridges The Limited Inc Home Depot Intel Starbucks Timberland Any patronizing any of these companies is contributing to the genocide of the Palestinian people. |
|
28 May 02 - 12:38 PM (#718841) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF A Palestinian suicide bomber struck yesterday at a restaurant beside a shopping mall in Petach Tikvah, near Tel Aviv. The restaurant is a popular place for small children. Among the murdered was an 18-month old girl and her grandmother. Credit for the attack was claimed by the Al-Asqa Martyrs Brigade, a branch of the Fatah movement. Two weeks ago, Arafat praised the Al-Asqa Martyrs Brigade as heroes. Who are the terrorists? |
|
28 May 02 - 07:35 PM (#719089) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,leveller There are a lot of terrorists, and they are on both sides. They feed on each other. They need each other.
There is also an awful lot of mis-information around. Remember that wonderful offer that the Palestinians are supposed to have been crazy to reject, giving them almost everything they wanted? Only a few bits of the Wesrt Banlk to be annexed?
If you click on this link to a site with a Crescent, a Cross, and a Star of David at the top of it, you will see a map that shows where those few bits of the West Bank were situated - chopping the country into a set of reservations. This was an offer which it was intended should be rejected. |
|
29 May 02 - 01:45 AM (#719271) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: michaelr They're the ones who burned Auchindoun! |
|
18 Jun 02 - 10:09 AM (#732182) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF This morning in Jerusalem, a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus murdered 19 Israelis and seriously injured 55 others. Who are the terrorists? |
|
18 Jun 02 - 11:21 AM (#732217) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC When my son was a baby, his father had responsibility for entertaining him while I cooked dinner. My ex-husband would shake a rattle in my son's face, and that would keep my son interested for about two minutes. Then he would start to cry. My son was crying because he was tired of the rattle. But instead of switching to a new toy or diversion, my ex-husband would just shake the rattle harder. The results were pretty predictable. When my ex-husband shook the rattle harder, my son would simply cry louder. My ex-husband never figured out that he needed to try something new.
Some number of years later, I was living with a guy in an area with a lot of really twisty roads. One day we were taking one of his daughters to a friend's house. The friend lived at the end of one of the twistiest roads in the area. My S.O. was driving about fifteen miles and hour above the speed limit. We hit a hairpin turn and slid all the way over to the other side of the road before we came to a stop. We had narrowly avoided rolling over into a ditch.
So when the van finally came to a stop, and we all had a chance to start breathing again, my S.O. got really red in the face and said, quite angrily, "That stupid sonofabitch road does the same damn thing every single time!" I asked him if he expected the road to straighten out in between trips out there, or if he thought he might someday try handling the curves differently. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 02:41 PM (#732357) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST It was reported on CNN that most of the murdered Israelis were high school students. The terrorists can now claim that this bombing was in self defence. These teenagers now won't grow up to be Israeli soldiers. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 02:54 PM (#732363) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow Terror feeds on terror. That doesn't ever make it justified, it just means that the attempt to justify it by claiming that it is a way of putting an end to terror just does not work, and is based on a lie.
The effect of terrorism is to entrench the terrorists in control on both sides. Consciously or not, the people who marshall terrorists on both sides are in alliance with each other, at the expense of the ordinary people who are their victims.
|
|
18 Jun 02 - 04:32 PM (#732424) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor I'm sure that there is little I can add to this discussion by way of arguement. I only say that I am against Israel's policies and actions toward the Palestinians. And I am neither anti-Jewish or a part of a third world conspiracy. If the Israeli's wanted peace they would withdraw the settlements from the west bank and stop bulldozing houses. But they think that God is on their side and will step in before they really have to compromise. A lot of people here feel the same way. But I don't. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 04:43 PM (#732431) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR And the Palestinians don't believe that Allah is on their side, Jack the Sailor? Good post Barbara. DougR |
|
18 Jun 02 - 04:47 PM (#732437) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: greg stephens God appears to be on both sides, very gung-holy too. That seems to be what is making the problem so intractable.What does happen when two omnipotent beings collide? |
|
18 Jun 02 - 05:07 PM (#732452) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor DougR They don't believe they can do whatever they want and still count on the Messiah to come and smite their enemys. An more importantly they don't act that way. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 06:25 PM (#732500) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Bobert Hey, the American ruling class gets richer from war and they got one of their store-bought guys right where they want him. Plus, they realize that voters (especially when not presented with the whole story...) tend not to change presidents in the middle of wars so they're going to have their boy keep the war hammer down until the American people wake up and vote out folks who are the henchmen of the ruling class. So on and on and on we go. We need a fundamental change. CarolC is right. Keep doing the same stupid stuff expecting different results is collective insanity. And for anyone keeping score, God ain't on either side of this evil behavior and for those who think that God pulls all the levers and makes all this evil stuff happen, forget that fundamental crap. That is nothing but a cop out for folks who say they are of Faith one one hand and think blowing up folks is okay on the other. That dog don't hunt... Think peace Vote Green Bobert |
|
18 Jun 02 - 07:06 PM (#732547) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Right on Bobert, I sincerely hope everybody on mudcat votes Green! The Palestinians don't believe they can do whatever they want and Allah won't come to smite their enemy? That includes sending suicide bombers in to Israel to kill innocent civilians too, I suppose. From accounts I read, the Palestenian terrorists think they are doing what they do with the blessings of Allah. I can assure you, though, the Israelis are not looking to the Messiah for anything. I think maybe you have your religions a bit confused. Christians believe in the Messiah (Jesus Christ) the Jews believe that the Messiah is yet to come. DougR |
|
18 Jun 02 - 07:15 PM (#732553) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians? It's the same God. Essentially the same religion, more especially when it comes to Judaism and Islam.
This conflict isn't about religion, any more than the wars in America between the settlers and the original inhabitants were about religion. It's about territory, with religion being used as a way of making what people do to other people seem right. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 11:09 PM (#732680) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor Of couse the Jews are waiting for the Messiah. Jesus fulfilled the old testement prophecies. But the Jews didn't believe. American settlement is a good parallel, The settlers justified the slaughter by deamonizing the Natives. Calling them pagans and savages. |
|
18 Jun 02 - 11:57 PM (#732695) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Oh, come on Jack, "Slaughter?" The native peoples were not delt with fairly, that's true, and they experienced some slaughters, but there were also slaughters committed by them too! Not all of the native people were submissive to the palefaces you know. Or perhaps you don't. Geronimo tied up the whole Army of the west for years, and was never really defeated. The settlers deamonized the natives? Jack, I'm beginning you don't know much about western history. DougR |
|
19 Jun 02 - 12:59 AM (#732718) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC I think if you look at the numbers, DougR, what the European newcomers to the North American (and South American) continents did to the people who were already here could only be categorized as genocide. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 02:29 AM (#732736) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Click here if you require some documentation. I found it with a Google search using the key words "Native American" + "Genocide". For some legal definitions of Genocide as applied to indigenous peoples in the US and Canada, click here. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 12:04 PM (#732965) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Carol, I'm not going to get into a spitting contest with you over the treatment of Native Americans by those terrible Europeans (from whom both of us I assume are decended). Somewhere along the way (a few posts up) the subject of who the terrorists are got diverted into a reference about the treatment of native americans. If you want to start a new thread about their treatment, I'll check out your sources and we can go at it there. There have been new developments in the Middle East since this thread started, and the subject of this thread is still very pertinent. It appears to me that Israel's response to the latest suicide bombing is the beginning of what I prophsied months ago, and I repeat: the problems between Israel and the Palestinians will not be resolved until one has defeated the other. DougR |
|
19 Jun 02 - 12:20 PM (#732971) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,Ard Mhacha And all you UK catters may get an insight into state terrorism if they watch Panarama on BBC 1 to-night at 9pm. British security forces aided and abetted loyalist gunmen to "kill Catholics with impunity" the words of English police Inspector John Stevens. Ard Mhacha. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 12:32 PM (#732979) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Bobert Thank you, McGrath. I didn't think that the oneness aspect of God had to be explained but I reackon there are folks who think their God can beat up the other guy's God, which only demonstrates an absolute lack of Faith. And you are right in that a lot of folks hide behind religion as the go about justifying bad behavior... |
|
19 Jun 02 - 12:57 PM (#733002) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Wolfgang Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians? I could be mistaken and it could be different in English and German, but the main reason I see for that use is politeness. German Muslims get very upset if one uses the word 'Gott' when 'Allah' is meant. They see it as a kind of Western arrogance expressed in language and don't feel taken serious. May be next time Tony Blair just addresses Bertie Ahern in a letter as 'prime minister'. Basically the same thing is meant and spelling errors are less likely than with 'Taoiseach'. Wolfgang |
|
19 Jun 02 - 01:28 PM (#733014) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Wolfgang I liked Carol's picture: The Palestinians are as uncompromising and unable to reason as the bends of a road are. Wolfgang |
|
19 Jun 02 - 02:00 PM (#733035) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR I agree with your comments re God and Allah, Wolfgang. I believe that a Muslim would make the same point you did, and might believe that the writer was a bit arrogant when not differentiating between the Christian's God, and the Muslim's Allah. DougR |
|
19 Jun 02 - 02:08 PM (#733044) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Just reported: another suicide bomber in Jerusalem. Who are the terrorists? Pretty clear to me. DougR |
|
19 Jun 02 - 02:38 PM (#733077) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Bobert Well, Danged, Dougie! Iz been reduced to "the writer". Now that's kind of mean spirited, ain't it? Nevermind. The point is well taken on the name or word one man uses for the higher spirit, supreme being or whatever term one can think of that doesn't make someone else want to blow you up fir using but this does not change, in "this writer's" opinion the existence of a single _______________ (fill in your own name) rather than two or more__________________'s. Bobert. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 03:03 PM (#733095) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF Another terrorist suicide bombing today in Jerusalem. At least seven Israelis murdered and at least another 35 seriously injured and maimed. According to the Hezbollah's Al Manar television station in Lebabonon, credit for today's terrorist suicide boming is being claimed by the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a group that is part of Arafat's own Fatah group. Who are the terrorists? |
|
19 Jun 02 - 03:15 PM (#733099) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF McGrath of Harlow wrote: Why use Allah when you're talking about Muslims and God when you're talking about Jews or Christians? It's the same God. Essentially the same religion, more especially when it comes to Judaism and Islam. "The same God?" Yes, that's true. However, using the term "Allah" when referring to God in an Islamic context is proper. When I studied the basics of Islam, from an Egyptian Muslim professor, at SUNY, that is what we taught to do. I have studied basic Islam and Judaism in depth. I am a practicing Reconstructionist Jew. Despite some similarities, including aspects of kashruth/hallal, to suggest that they are "essentially the same religion," is to demonstrate a profound ignorance of both. However to suggest that Judaism and Islam are " |
|
19 Jun 02 - 03:19 PM (#733102) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF Please ignore the last line of my previous message. I rewrote it into the preceding paragraph. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 03:55 PM (#733133) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,greg stephens McGrath, in your posting about Allah and God you're are confusing the issue by using the wordGod in two different senses in consecutive sentences. yes, they are all the same God (in the sense of an omnipotent being, a deity or whatever). But "God" is also the name of that God as used by Christians. ie "Allah" and "God" are both names of the same God. And as other posters have pointed out, it is only common politeness to use whichever term is appropriate for the people you are talking about. It's also worth pointing out that the essential oneness of the three deities of these three religions may be familiar to educated adherents, but it is by no means so well known to the more rank-and-file adherents. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 05:23 PM (#733176) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC I liked Carol's picture: The Palestinians are as uncompromising and unable to reason as the bends of a road are.
Well, Wolfang, you're certainly entitled to interpret my words in whatever way you like, since I left them open to interpretation. However, when it comes to the question of being willing to compromise and reason, with Israel's track record in that regard, and considering the stance they are taking and sticking to like glue, I see no alternative for them but to kill all of the Palestinians in Israel and the Occupied Territories, or chase them out of the country. But then they're going to have to deal with the other countries in the region that they are going to destabilize if they do that, so I guess that means they're going to have to kill an awful lot of Arabs in other countries as well. They might even have to use some of those nuclear weapons they've got before they feel completely secure.
DougR, I never get into spitting contests with you over anything. Being the scholar that you are, I have always assumed that you wanted to have a good grasp of the facts of any subject that is being discussed, and that is what I sought to provide for you in my last couple of posts. By the way, it wasn't my ancestors who did that to the Indians. My ancestors weren't here then. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 05:35 PM (#733183) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: greg stephens Dont lets get nit-pickin about whose ancestors did what to the Indians. It would good if we all reflected that (a)some of our ancestors undoubtedly did it to others. (b) some of our ancestors undoubtedly had it done to them. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:02 PM (#733198) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC No problem Greg. I'm sure some of my ancestors are guilty of something. Just not that. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:12 PM (#733202) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,greg stephens Dont be too confident, Carol. lets assume Indian massacring started happening about 1500AD, and one generation per 25 years. That gives you anything up to a little over 2 million ancestors in the relevant period (hope I've got my maths right, its not my strong point).Are you sure you know where they all were, and what they were up to? Damn sure I don't, about mine. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:13 PM (#733204) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Fadac I havn't been here for a while, but I thought I'd toss in my $0.02 worth. A good example of how terrorism really works. Where terrorism is really working is right here in the old US of A. After the tragic events of 9/11, Americans were jumping up and down to "Do Somethng". We know what happend then. Now some "reliable source" of that group only has to say something like, "We hate your American Hamburgers", then what? Tanks at MacDonalds? For a terrorist to be really successfull, they need a big reaction from little imput. I think they are just bringing stuff up to watch us jump through hoops. Their laughing their butts off at us. All they have to do is say "Boo!" and we jump out of our skins. I also think we need to (colectivly) calm down and do some serious thinking, before we give up every freedome we ever had, so the bad boogy man terrorist dosn't get us in our sleep. It seems like what is desired (I have no idea by whom) that we should have heavy shutters on our windows, lock all the doors, hide in the dark, have the police portect us, there is nothing more secure that a self built prison. Ok, I rambled a bit. Best wishes to all -Fadac |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:15 PM (#733206) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Oops Wolfgang. Sorry about misspelling your name. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:18 PM (#733208) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Who's nitpicking now, greg? |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:50 PM (#733237) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,greg stephens On the names pf God subject, I just rung up my Afghan pal Azizi for a bit of background. He says he knows Muslims, Jews and Christians have the same God, and in his home language s of dariand Pashtun he uses the terms Allah(of Arabic origin) or "khouda" for all three.(cognate, as linguists say, with God, Dari and Pashtun are like English, German, Gaelic etc Indo-european languages, Arabic isnt).I asked ih e had a general word for a god, as "something to be worshipped, as opposed to Allah". He said he might use "khouda" in that sense,but not Allah. He might use the Arabic word maboud with that meaning, if discussing theology. He was a bit vague when I asked what word he would use to describe what a Hindu worshipped, say.First he said, "I would use the name of the thing, like Cow. I said they had a lot of Gods, cows were just sacred". Then he suggested bagwan, or possibly khouda. Then he came up with a real gem, and said that in the Bollywood movies he watches the Indians say "Upperwallah" for a god.At that point we had a laugh and moved onto to gossip. Just thought I'd share that with everybody. Azizi is very wise, especially about Americans and Osama and the minutiae of politics East of Suez, he is my big teacher. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:51 PM (#733238) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Why not, Fadac, that's your right! Carol: I did not imply that I had a problem with the sites you provided, I just felt that a discussion of the mistreatmetn of the Native Americans would veer this thread a bit off subject. I think it would be a good subject for a separate thread though. As to whose relatives did whatever, I have no idea whether mine did or not. They were here in time to do so, but I have no idea. Back to the subject: Carol, I don't believe it would be necessary for Israel to go on a killing rampage such as the one you suggest. All they have to do is continue to occupy the Palestinian areas they are taking over now. Two suicide bombers killed numerous Israelis (and perhaps several Palestinians) in Jerusalem over the past two days. How many Palenstinians have the Israelis killed over the past two days? I haven't read or heard of any. The Israelis are taking land, the Palestinians are taking lives. Which is the most important? And where is the outrage about people killing people usually voiced by those of you who consider yourselves to be liberals? Who are the terriorists? DougR |
|
19 Jun 02 - 06:58 PM (#733248) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Just because you haven't heard of the Israelis taking Palestinian lives in the past few days doesn't mean they didn't happen. That sort of information (how many Palestinians are killed by Israelis) doesn't seem get covered much in this part of the world. Although if there have been Palestinians killed by Israelis in the last few days, and I do some research on it and post some links about it, I'm sure somebody will accuse me of anti-semitism or having hidden agendas or something. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 07:20 PM (#733266) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow In an Arabic language Bible, Allah is what you would find where an English language Bible would have God.
My understanding is that Mohammed always said that the religion he was preaching was the same religion as that of Abraham and Isaac and so forth. And also the same as that of Jesus. Essentially he saw his mission as one of reformation and completion of a religious project that he believed had gone astray into Jewish tribalism, and Christian superstition.
I'm sure that many Muslims prefer to use the term Allah, because for them it is important to give a special place to the Arabic language. But their central belief is that there is no God but Allah. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 07:30 PM (#733272) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow "Somewhere along the way (a few posts up) the subject of who the terrorists are got diverted into a reference about the treatment of native americans." (Doug)
That was me, and it wasn't meant as a diversion. I think that a major reason why many Americans seem to have a different slant on the tragedy in the Holy Land probably relates to a perceived parallel with what happened in the settlement of America.
And that doesn't mean I think this thread is a place to discuss the ins and outs of what actually did happen in the conquest and settlement of America. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 09:01 PM (#733317) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,mg I think the Palestinians have to be saved from themselves and from their leadership....I am very sympathetic to their overall situation, but would do what it takes to suppress the terrorism. And part of what it takes is occupation. The key question is by whom, and with what constraints on the behavior of the occupiers. People who are less involved in the whole mess must be the occupation force. You can have good security without harassment. Much of the occupation force must be female and a lot of the problems with a predominantly male force will be avoided. As well, women who must go through invasive or embarassing searches must have this done by other women, especially where there is a very traditional culture. I won't ask these women to do what I wouldn't do myself, so therefore, I will volunteer, as I have mentioned before. mg |
|
19 Jun 02 - 09:02 PM (#733318) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: robomatic I think that people here are working off of existing agendas/ attitudes which then lead to their differing answers of 'who is the terrorist'. If you believe that Israel has the right to exist, then it follows that Israel has the right to defend itself. Most of the attacks are occurring on territory that is recognized by most signatories of the U.N. as Israel proper. As to the 'right' of Palestinians to have their own country, which would be something new on the scene as the territory now comprising Israel has been 'occupied' by one or another power since biblical times, this has long been a matter which should be negotiated, rather than fought. The U.N. tried to partition the area in 1948 and a war instigated by the Arab nations resulted. Israel with or without the United States has sought negotiated settlements at various junctures, and been rebuffed out of hand. This is a roundabout way of saying that we do not have a balance of terror. We have a nation state being attacked by interests who wish nothing less than its destruction. The act is the very message. The title of this thread is pure bait. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 09:20 PM (#733326) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC robomatic, there has been quite a lot of discussion here in the Mudcat in recent months about what you are asserting in your post here. There has been quite a lot of very credible information presented that, at best, casts considerable doubt on your assertions. I'm not going to rehash those discussions here, but if you want to get a more balanced perspective on what's happening in the middle east, those discussions would be a good resource for you to check out. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 09:27 PM (#733331) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow "Most of the attacks are occurring on territory that is recognized by most signatories of the U.N. as Israel proper."
But most of the attacks by Israeli forces are occurring in territory that is recognized by most signatories of the UN as being illegally occupied by Israel.
Arguing about legalities just means going round in circles, getting nowhere.
The fundamental first principle when you are stuck in a hole is stop digging it deeper. And if your friend is stuck in a hole the way to help is not by encouraging that friend to dig away more energetically, and providing nice shiny new spades. |
|
19 Jun 02 - 10:23 PM (#733354) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR How anyone could question who the real terrorists are is beyond me. That does not mean that I am anti-Palestinian! The Palestinian terrorists are hoodlum gangs that operate independent of the population. They are led, I believe, by Yassar Arafat. If he were truly a Palestenian leader, he would seek peaceful means to achieve a state. Instead, he and his terrorist thugs are bent on only one thing in my opinion: destroy Israel, and kill as many Israelis as possible, including innocent men women and children. Carol, your comment that the news services only report Israeli deaths and not Palestenian deaths (or words to that effect) just boggles my mind. The news services, I think, would LOVE to report that Israeli forces killed 20, 30, 50, or more Palestinians. Look what they did when the Palestinian propaganda machine promoted the report that there was a massacre in Jenen(Sp). They had a media feeding frenzy, and as it turned out, there was no massacre at all. Palestinian terrorists killed more civilians in the past two days than was killed in that action, and I ask again, where is the outrage those of you who consider yourselves to be liberals, about what has happend in Jerusalem the past two days? If the news was reversed (Israeli forces killed almost 50 innocent Palestinians), you would be on it like flies on you know what. DougR
DougR |
|
20 Jun 02 - 12:54 AM (#733406) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor Doug, your perspective confuses me. If the Israeli's or anyone else kicked you out of your home, Buldozed it and started building a "settlement" on it as if it were unoccupied, Wouldn't that be terrifying? I guess from your point of view, when terror is a biproduct it isn't terrorism. If you were in the shoes of the Palestinians, YOU would be the terrorist. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 01:07 AM (#733418) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Jack did a pretty good job of answering your question for me, DougR. I don't think I want to add too much else right now, except to say that if the Israelis want to live in peace with the Palestinians, they can. And as I have been able to show in some of the other threads, there have been many, many more Palestinians killed than Israeli Jews since the creation of the state of Israel. So where is your riteous indignation about that? |
|
20 Jun 02 - 02:18 AM (#733438) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC I think I'm going to try to remove myself from this conversation now. These threads give me anxiety attacks. DougR, or anyone else, if you have any more questions of comments that you want to address to me, I'd appreciate it if you would put them in a PM instead of posting it here. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 03:06 AM (#733451) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR This is an open forum, Carol, and therefore one is free to post whatever they think and believe. I see no reason to PM opinions. Jack may have satisfied you with his reply to my post, but I think his post makes little sense at all. Israel is a country. It was established by a world body that you liberals love to point to as the arbiter of all things civil (when it suits your purpose), the United Nations. There is no Palestinian state. There could be one, but the hoodlums running things over there don't really want one. They only want to kill Israelis, and erase from the face of the map the country the U.N. established. It is still a puzzelment to me that liberals, such as yourself, are so reluctant to condem the violence that the Palestinian terrorists are carrying out in Jerusalem and have vowed to continue. A two year old child was killed today, as well as a five year old child. Does that mean nothing to my liberal friends? Obu, Bobbert, Carol C., McGrath, Jack the Sailor, what say? DougR |
|
20 Jun 02 - 03:34 AM (#733466) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Ok, DougR. Let me rephrase...
DougR, or anyone else, if you have any more questions or comments that you want to address to me, I'd appreciate it if you would put them in a PM instead of posting it here.
As I have said before, I condemn any attacks on innocent people on both sides of the conflict. But I will also say again, that I believe that if the government of Israel will correct what I believe to be a disasterous policy with regard to not only the Palestinians, but the whole region, the suicide bombings and killing of innocent civilians will stop.
Jews and Palestinians were living in peace in the region until the Palestinians started getting kicked out of their homes and villages in the early part of the 1900s, and a policy of brutal repression was begun against them by the founders of the state of Israel. The brutal repression has not stopped to this day. The situation in the middle east is not surprising when viewed in this light.
It's time for the Palestinians to be allowed to live like human beings. Just like we do. I don't think this is too much to ask. And once again, it would relieve me greatly if I could now remove myself from this conversation with a clear conscience that I have contributed everything I have to offer on this thread. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 04:14 AM (#733473) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Let me correct part of my last post... Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs were living in peace in the region... (etc.) |
|
20 Jun 02 - 05:37 AM (#733485) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Wolfgang Carol, the pictures you use to describe the situation tell a lot about how you see it (and that's where I strongly disagree). In your pictures, Israel is likened to a man who has to change his behaviour to avoid further damage. The 'opposition' (a road, a small baby) cannot be expected by anybody to change its (her, his) behaviour. No move to change will ever come from that side. McGrath's picture (a man in a hole) is similar in that respect: Any change of the situation has to come from a change in the behaviour of the man (Israel). Nobody in the right frame of mind should expect a hole to change its ways. I do not see the deadlock so one-sided. Both sides are led by grown-up men (though it doesn't look so all of the time), both sides can do something that could lead to a change. I do not see the onus for a change only on Israel's side as your pictures seem to imply. Yesterday, a group of 55 leading Palestinians made a plea for stopping the suicide bombings. I saw an interview with one of them. He said they had wanted to say that much more early but many of them are afraid to speak out for fear of being murdered as 'collaborators'. Such an initiative gives me as much hope as Israelis speaking out loudly against the politics of settlements (without fear of being murdered for that, by the way). Carol, your riteous indignation made me grin, for there is more truth in that misspelling than you may have meant. Much too often the indignation from supporters of both sides seems to be a mere rite to me, so that to call it 'riteous indignation' often hits the nail. To aks, as Doug does, where is your indignation about XY, why don't you speak out against..., is not helpful at all in such a discussion, as long as only the dead on one side are used to try to embarrass someone else. Doug, as for the number of dead on both sides, there have been periods of days, even weeks in which more Israelis have been killed than Palestinians, but on the whole and on longer periods, listen to Carol (or read her lnks in other threads). She's right here without any doubt. Wolfgang |
|
20 Jun 02 - 05:56 AM (#733492) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC I take your point, Wolfgang, but here's where I disagree with you: I don't think human beings will ever submit willingly to repression. And that is what I was alluding to as being unchangable with my references to the baby and the road. As far as my spelling is concerned, I know it's atrocious, but I'm afraid there is nothing inspired about it. I'm just a bad speller. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 06:10 AM (#733500) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,JTT What baffles me is how stupid two intelligent groups are being. It must be obvious to the Palestinians that every suicide bombing arouses increased Israeli agression; it must be obvious to the Israelis that every state-sponsored invasion arouses increased suicide bombings. Obviously the two sides' violence is feeding emotionally off each other's responses. If they're not going to end up in a nuclear war - and I'm speaking literally here - both sides are going to have to realise that they must find agreement, compromise and respect for each other's needs. The Palestinians need their own country - the Israelis came in and stole their land, after all! - and the Israelis also need theirs. There could be advantages on both sides if they co-operated: the Israelis agreeing to * *stop* building settlements * withdraw from the land invaded in 1967, and help the Palestinians to set up a State of Palestine * help the Palestinians with education and training and money, in the way that the Americans helped the Israelis when they were setting up their country * respect the Palestinians' borders and culture while the Palestinians agreed to * *respect* the Israelis' borders of 1967 * respect and help the Jewish culture * work to make Palestine as great a country as Israel And so on. It can be done. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 06:13 AM (#733501) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Wolfgang My spelling is at least as bad as yours, Carol. I never would have mentioned spelling without the opportunity to make a point about rite-like indignation. Wolfgang |
|
20 Jun 02 - 06:42 AM (#733507) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow The man in a hole analogy applies to everyone in this in of situation. I wasn't specifically directing it at Israel. Terrorism or counter-terroprism, call it what you will, the effect is to make things worse in either case.
And Doug, at no time have I ever said or implied that Palestinian suicide bombers are not terrorists, or that what they do is right. The slaughter of innocent people, including children is horrible, and it is terrorism, an should not be prettied up by words like "freedom fighter." But it is horrible and it is terrorism whoever does it, including governments, and it should not be prettied up by words like "national self defence" or "just retribution". |
|
20 Jun 02 - 09:22 AM (#733579) Subject: RE: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Bobert Thank you, GUEST JTT. I've been singing this tune for months now but there are a lot of folks still stuck in the "yeah, but..." mode much like a stuck record. The Saudi proposal offered much of what you have suggested. If the US had gotten behind that proposal, this cycle of unacceptable behavior between these folks would been broken and real progress would be underway. Thank you for your thoughtful post. Peace Bobert |
|
20 Jun 02 - 10:40 AM (#733645) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST This guy makes some very valid points. Blicky |
|
20 Jun 02 - 11:45 AM (#733693) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Fadac More Rambles, Just another angle to think about. Who gains with all the paranoia about terrorists? If all the terrorisim stopped today, would anyone loose money? Just suppose the Israelies and Palistines all sat down and made friends. A big garden party. Would we (as Americans) still send Israel as much money for defense? I know this is a bit unsetting, but remember Nixon, "Follow the money.". Somewhere I think there is profit in the terrorism. Perhaps the way to settle this is to simply close the country. Nothing in or out. No news, food, oil, chewing gum, nothing. Just one phone line, with a sign. "Call us when you have your problems resolved." Both Palistine and Isreal have demanded that the whole world clean thier dirty dipers for fifty years. Every one has tried to make peace there. None of them has worked. So if they want to blow the crap out of each other, they don't need my money to buy the stuff, and I'm tired of watching it on TV. Either that, or let the UN with enough troops to simply squash anyone that resists. Hmmm, there is one other thing...This is not PC, but just suppose we sent all the ileagle alians there. By the time they got about 15 million folks from Mexico and points south, Isreal would just be another little Catholic country, with great tacos and beer. The general IQ would go up, and we would have more room in our schools....Naaaa, but an intresting thought. Perhaps we should teach them the Hokey Pokey. :) Fadac
|
|
20 Jun 02 - 11:52 AM (#733701) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow Well, by the time you get to the second paragraph he is seriously twisting the truth. "Two years ago at the Camp David summit, in the presence of the president of the United States, the Palestinians were offered an end to the occupation--a total end, a final end--by the prime minister of Israel." That is simply not true, and the man wrote it must know it's not true. At no stage has there ever been an offer by Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders.
The Internet makes it possible to dig behind superficial articles like that, and with a little work get a much clearer understanding of the facts about things like that. That doesn't mean that people can be expected to agree about how to interpret them or about what is desirable or possible; but it does mean we don't have to settle for sound-bite thinking. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 12:35 PM (#733725) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,mg I think that despite the violence, there needs to be a Palestinian state...very very regulated. No Arafat, no Hamas, etc. A constitution with limits...as in the recognition of Israel, with specific borders, a denouncing of terrorism and spelling out of consequences..part of the fuel for the fire has been the PLO charter as it stands. It has to go. And people around the world have to find a way to talk directly to the Palestinian people and tell them, as they don't seem to understand, that there will be an Israel, there will not be the Palestine they dream of, but there will be an infinitely better situation for all. mg |
|
20 Jun 02 - 02:42 PM (#733810) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Wolfgang, I'm with you on everything you said, except ...I do think that it is reasonable to expect liberals to be consistent when they talk about violence. McGrath certainly follows that line, and Carol has too, with a proviso. GUEST mg: If I read your post correctly, you are saying there will not be a Palestinian state. I believe there will be, but as GUEST JTT has pointed out, it will not happen so long as both Israel and the Palestinian terrorists feed off each other's violence against the other, it will not happen. DougR |
|
20 Jun 02 - 03:48 PM (#733864) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Deda As I have said before, I think there has to be an eventual Palestinian state, as well. However, I think that the following figures and data should just be noted for the record: The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees FROM Arab countries is estimated to be the same, but they get no air time at all, and no coverage is ever given to the expulsion of Jews from Arab and non-Arab countries, which happened over and over throughout history. Does anyone on this thread know when the Jews were expelled from Spain? from England (oh, yes, they were)? It wasn't recent. We'll just skip the subject of pogroms, because we might have to concede that the Jewish people actually NEED a homeland, and needed one long before Hitler was conceived. Arab refugees (i.e., Palestinians)were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own peoples' lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than Wales, a little bigger than Rhode Island. All the Arab countries combined have a land mass about 1 1/2 times the size of the USA. The Arabs are represented by at least eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won. (The two intifadas, including the current one, are not included in this count.)
The P.L.O.'s Charter still calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. Every Palestinian letterhead, uniform and national symbol includes a map of "Palestine" in the shape of Israel -- meaning that Israel has to cease to exist. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank and autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, at least until the violence got entirely out of hand, and has supplied them with weapons.
I am at work and I really don't have time for this. I've made myself take a break from reading this thread, but I broke my rule here, obviously. Some of this data I've cut & pasted from other sources, some of it is my own. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 03:59 PM (#733870) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor GUEST mg: If I read your post correctly, you are saying there will not be a Palestinian state. I believe there will be, but as GUEST JTT has pointed out, it will not happen so long as both Israel and the Palestinian terrorists feed off each other's violence against the other, it will not happen. Again we seem to be agreeing. YES both sides are the terrorists.
|
|
20 Jun 02 - 05:25 PM (#733913) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow THere was a letter in the Guardian today which it seems to me eloquently makes a point which is all too often blurred. It was written in the context of a current media "controversy" about an off-the-cuff remark by Cherie Blair, the wife of the Prime Minister: My sympathy is with Cherie Blair. As a psychologist I have always found that if I offer an explanation as to why a certain injury to the brain leads to severe dementia, I am not accused of being on the side of dementia. Yet if I offer an explanation as to why the conclusions a person drew from certain experiences led that person to become a paedophile, or a thief, or a suicide bomber, I am likely to be accused of promoting paedophilia, or thieving, or suicide bombing. These accusations arise because my accusers cannot make the distinction between an explanation and an excuse.
Cherie Blair quite correctly stated that if people feel that their situation is hopeless, they may choose to make one last gesture to assert that their existence should be acknowl edged. This explains their behaviour. It does not excuse it.
|
|
20 Jun 02 - 07:45 PM (#733989) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: robomatic Why should Israel feel any motivation to withdraw to pre-1967 borders. Those borders were determined by war and defensive positions from the 1948 cease fire. The taking of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights were also acts of war precipitated by Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, aided and abetted by Iraq and other states. The U.N. under U. Thant also helped instigate the war by withdrawing their peacekeeping troops when directed to do so by Gamal Abdul Nasser. What is in the long term interest of Israel AND the Palestinians is to have well defined and defensible borders, and viable economic systems, which will not come out of a West Bank State with current borders. Pre-1967 borders are not particularly 'lawful'. On the other hand, if the Palestinians were to adopt borders with the full knowledge that there was a substantial Jewish minority therein, it would make an equivalence with an Israel that has long had Muslim and Christian inhabitants. The two states could judge each other by how each treated its minorities. There is nothing pre-destined about the sufferings of the Palestinian people to necessitate them being driven to suicide bombing. The Kurds, Armenians, Bosnians, and Jews have all suffered far more horrendous fates at the hands of organized governments. Suicide bombing is a conscious policy by well organized and well financed bodies outside of Israel proper. You can call it terror, you can call it war. But the Arab-financed media of the Middle East have fanned flames of anti-semitic hysteria over a wide region, and it has found a resonance in Europe. Israel has done nothing more than defend herself, and has shown quite a lot of forbearance in so doing. Frontline (American Public Broadcasting) did a special on the recent hold-off around the Church of the Nativity. The Israelis brought in a negotiating team, and even after the exit of the Palestinians who were to be deported, they had to use negotiating skills to control the three main Christian groups, each of which wanted to be first back into the structure. McGrath, I've tried to make the digging a hole analogy work for me, but it hasn't. I see a lot of wall building going on by both sides (and in this thread). To me the greatest tragedy is these two groups which are at loggerheads could potentially be of great benefit to each other, if they weren't ideologically bound. And of the two, I think the Palestinians are by far the greater slaves of their preconceptions. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 08:06 PM (#734002) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC I know I said I didn't want to post to this thread any more. And I really don't. But I need to say one thing and ask one question.
Deda, I don't think anyone is quesioning whether or not Jews need a homeland here on this thread. It's how they went, and continue to go about, makeing a homeland for themselves that is in question. And it wasn't the Palestinian Arabs (or Palestinian Christians)who kicked the Jews out of their homes in other places. I don't understand why so many people think the Palestinians should be held responsible for what was done to Jews by other people. This makes no sense to me at all. Here's my question: Why do people get so righteously indignant if the Palestinians don't accept the state if Israel (which, by the way, many of them do), when Israel doesn't even acknowlege the existance of Palestinians as people, or their right to exist as a people? This seems like one hell of a double standard to me. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 08:21 PM (#734010) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow "Why should Israel feel any motivation to withdraw to pre-1967 borders?"
The point I was making was that the columnist to which a link had been given had blithely asserted that Israel did in fact offer to do exactly that. "Two years ago at the Camp David summit, in the presence of the president of the United States, the Palestinians were offered an end to the occupation--a total end, a final end--by the prime minister of Israel."
This wasn't in fact true, and he was therefore clearly not someone to rely on too much as a source of information. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 09:01 PM (#734029) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: robomatic Deda: Right on. The missing people in this one sided 'equation' of false fairness are the refugees taken in by Israel from middle eastern lands. On the other side, the Arab states have refused to take on refugees from the losing side of the Israel War of Independence and sustained the war on Israel thereby. I find this as cynical a view as ever there was. CarolC: Your question is over a position of your own making, sometimes called putting up the straw man. I think that Israel has acknowledged the existence of Palestinians all along. You may have discovered them, but they knew they existed, and Israel knew they existed. The questions are over whether there should be a Palestinian State on the West Bank, and its actual contours and resources and I raised questions as to the viability of same. There already exists a Palestinian state in the Middle East. It's called Jordan. Check out its population and history. McGrath: My opening sentence stands on its own. I didn't write it in response to you, and I don't know which columnist you are referring to. I was trying to use your man digging a hole analogy, and I couldn't get it to work, sorry. Israel has gone to great efforts to make concessions toward a Palestinian State (including right after the Six Day War of 35 years ago) and there are several reports out there by reliable journalists as to who was conceding what, and when. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 10:09 PM (#734047) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Your question is over a position of your own making, sometimes called putting up the straw man. I think that Israel has acknowledged the existence of Palestinians all along.
Robomatic, your own words show that this is not the case. You, yourself, have illustrated exactly what I'm talking about with regard to the official stance taken by Israel regarging the Palestinians with this post...
As to the 'right' of Palestinians to have their own country, which would be something new on the scene as the territory now comprising Israel has been 'occupied' by one or another power since biblical times, this has long been a matter which should be negotiated, rather than fought. Why should it be negotiated if it is being recognized? And there are plenty of other examples, many of them from members of the Israeli government, that clearly show that the Palestinians' rights or legitimate claims to any part of what has always been their home, are not valid. Like the line that the Palesinians' homeland is Jordan. This is simply not true, but it's an important part of the official Israeli doctrine on this subject. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 10:32 PM (#734057) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,YMF According to CarolC, "Israel doesn't even acknowlege the existance of Palestinians as people, or their right to exist as a people." CarolC, that is an outright, baldfaced lie. Of course Israel recognizes the Palestinian people. Israel participated in negotiations with the Palestinians aimed at the creation of a Palestinian state. Negotiations that Arafat chose not to continue with; instead unleashing the current Intifada and its terrorist murders by suicide bombers. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 10:49 PM (#734064) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Jack the Sailor DougR I'm glad you agreed with me GUEST mg: If I read your post correctly, you are saying there will not be a Palestinian state. I believe there will be, but as GUEST JTT has pointed out, it will not happen so long as both Israel and the Palestinian terrorists feed off each other's violence against the other, it will not happen. Again we seem to be agreeing. YES both sides are the terrorists. |
|
20 Jun 02 - 11:00 PM (#734067) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST Every few days, Palestinians remind the world exactly why they can't yet be trusted with their own country. This week, we got two reminders. On Tuesday, a Palestinian blew up a Jerusalem bus, killing 19 civilians. The next day, another terrorist killed six more of the city's innocents. Just imagine what sort of atrocities these people could pull off from behind the borders of a sovereign Palestine. As William Safire wrote in The New York Times on Monday, a Palestinian state would give Yasser Arafat control of an airport. A plane taking off from the West Bank could hit a Tel Aviv skyscraper within minutes of entering Israeli air space. Palestinian apologists, like McGrath and CarolC, assure us that this would never happen -- because Arab hatred would be extinguished as soon as the West Bank and Gaza were cleansed of Jews. But that's not true. It's not the Israeli presence in the disputed territories that bothers Palestinians, but the very existence of the Jewish state itself. This was confirmed by a survey of 1,200 Palestinians conducted a month ago by the Jerusalem Media and Communication Centre. Like previous polls, this one found that more than two-thirds of Palestinians support suicide attacks against Jewish civilians. But more than half of respondents also said the goal of the current uprising is to conquer every inch of Israel -- not just the West Bank and Gaza. Remember this the next time you see a Palestinian talking head tell the world that it is the Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza that causes terrorism, not the other way around. George W. Bush, the U.S. President, should remember that too. For several days now, there have been signals that the President will soon endorse the creation of an interim Palestinian state as a sop to Arab leaders. The latest bombings have caused him to delay his announcement. Asked about the President's new Middle East policy at a press conference on Wednesday, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "I think in the immediate aftermath of these attacks, it's obvious that [this] is not the right time." Indeed it's not. And as we see it, it won't be the right time for a while. Terrorism is not a fringe phenomenon among Palestinians: It is a symptom of a mainstream belief among them that Israel can and should be destroyed by force of arms. So long as this view dominates, they should not have a sovereign platform from which to wage their murderous attacks.
|
|
20 Jun 02 - 11:03 PM (#734068) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Don't know about you, Sailor Jack, but our agreeing on two things makes me a bit nervous. :>) DougR |
|
20 Jun 02 - 11:56 PM (#734079) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC No YMF, I'm sorry. I'm not lying, and you're wrong. I have posted quite a bit of documentation that refutes what you are asserting. But I'm not going to call you a liar. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 12:06 AM (#734081) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Palestinian apologists, like McGrath and CarolC, assure us that this would never happen No, GUEST. I assured you that it would happen. I said that Sharon's policies (and Israel's policies) toward, and treatment of the Palestinians is creating a situation that is assuring the continuation of violence. (I was told by a GUEST to "burn in hell with Osama Bin Ladin" for saying that). But I was right. That is exactly what has happened. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 12:13 AM (#734084) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,mg Isn't Jordan the Hashemite Kingdom? They took in many many Palestinians and gave them Jordanian passports. I think most clear thinking people would agree that the Palestinians right now can not possibly manage a state on their own. There is too much internal as well as external terrorism...the thugs are terrorizing their own people and corruption is rampant. The thugs have to go. The state has to have limits, and a constitution approved by the U.N. The world should be involved in this. And what exactly have European nations done to make reparations to the Jewish people? Their lands should have been confiscated, not people who had nothing to do with it. I'd have given them a big chunk of Germany and Austria. That would make sense. And wasn't there a lot of shooting going on against the British forces in Palestine before 1948? Like terrorists shall we say? mg |
|
21 Jun 02 - 06:25 AM (#734186) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Looks like you're twisting the truth a bit there GUEST. According to the polls you mentioned, the recent incursions into the occupied territories actually caused an increase in radicalization among Palestinians. So the survey you cite shows pretty conclusively that the Israeli government's policies toward the Palestinians has caused the increase in terrorism.
Just as I said it would.
Effects of Israeli incursion policy on Palestinian public opinion
* The recent Israeli incursion policy influenced Palestinian public opinion on various levels. The Israeli incursions caused an increase in support for Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, Fateh Movement and Hamas Movement, while causing a decrease in support for the Palestinian Authority, security agencies and negotiations.
In answering a question on how did the incursion raids influence your position of the following,
* Those interviewed were divided on their opinions towards the performance of Palestinian Authority institutions during the incursions wherein 44.5 percent considered that within the limited capabilities it was not possible for the institutions to work better, while 43.3 percent considered the performance of these institutions during the incursion disappointing. Only 6.4 percent considered the performance at its best. There was a more positive evaluation of Arafat's performance during the incursion when 27.7 percent said his performance was good and 14.4 percent said it was bad. Meanwhile, 26 percent said Arafat's performance was medium (in between). |
|
21 Jun 02 - 05:49 PM (#734413) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: robomatic CarolC you seem to be wandering all over the place and asserting that anything you say is the truth because you assert it. There has never been a Palestinian state as such, and Jordan contains so many Palestinians that King Hussein had a small war against them to maintain political control of his country. And even if there is to be a Palestinian state of sorts in what is now called the West Bank, why not have it encompass Jews as a minority just the way Israel has Arab Christians and Muslims as a minority. By the way, I believe the previous government operating in that area as a nation-state, was a Jewish one, incorporating many minorities. It worked okay until invaded by a vastly more powerful empire. Whatever Palestinian public opinion might be (on the day of polling) the one thing Israel wanted them to KNOW was that Israel would defend herself. I suspect that Israel does not place as much emphasis on their opinion about it. (That of course was my opinion). |
|
21 Jun 02 - 05:57 PM (#734419) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC No, robomatic. I'm not asserting anything without documentation. But I've already posted so much documentation in this forum on this subject, I feel that it would be redundant for me to post it all again. If you want to see the documentation I have provided in other threads, I would suggest doing a search on my name and reading the threads with titles pertaining to this subject. Suffice it to say, there is a tremendous amount of credible documentation, much of it from Israeli Jews, and even declassified Israeli government documents, all of which proves that you have got your historical facts very, very wrong. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 06:10 PM (#734433) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC There has never been a Palestinian state as such
This is using words to make a point that is entirely irrelevant to the issue. Palestine is and was the home of the Palestinians for centuries if not millenia. Just because didn't have an established "state" does not in any way invalidate their rightful claim to the homes and farms they lived in and tended for so long.
A Jewish minority might not be a problem if it weren't in the form of an aparthied state in which the Palestinians are forced into tiny bantustans with most of their water taken by Israel for it's own use, and the use of the settlers, and with high speed access roads (accessible only to the settlers) cutting up the territory and rendering it extremely difficult if not impossible for the Palestinians to have any mobility at all. And with countless checkpoints where they are subjected to humiliation and even physical harm, and though which they are only allowed to pass at the whim of the guard at the checkpoint. Babies have died because as they were being born, the laboring mother was denied access to hospitals by virtue of being not allowed to pass through the checkpoints. Would you want to have to live like that? I can certainly understand why they wouldn't. I know I wouldn't like it at all. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 06:15 PM (#734437) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,Warren Webber From 1948 until 1967, the Palestinian territory of Gaza was part of Egypt. The Palestinian territories on the West Bank were part of Jordan. During that entire time, there was absolutely no effort by the Arabs to create a Palestinian state. They could have done so at any time until 1967 but did not. In 1967, in defence against the combined armies of numerous Arab countries, Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria, The West Bank from Jordan and Gaza and the Sinai from Egypt. Israel and Egypt made peace in the 1970's. Israel gave back the Sinai and dismantled its settlements there. Egypt did not want Gaza back. Israel and Jordan made peace in the 1990s. Jordan did not want the West Bank back. Egypt and Jordan could have reclaimed those territories and then created a Palestinian state. BTW, I've looked at many of CarolC's sites. Most of them are propaganda sites maintained by anti-Zionists, some are blatantly anti-Jewish. Warren Webber Milwaukee |
|
21 Jun 02 - 06:25 PM (#734444) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC No, Warren. That's not true. Most of them are by mainstream media outlets and Jewish human rights organizations. I don't think you serve anyone's interests by trying to conduct a smear campaign suggesting anti-Semitism against anyone who disagrees with you. After a while, the charge of anti-Semitism loses it's credibility if it is misused in this way. And, I would suggest that it is as racist as any other form of racism to suggest that anyone who disagrees with Jews is an anti-Semite. And it's just plain hateful, nasty, and evil-minded as well. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 07:32 PM (#734493) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC One last thing (I hope). It really doesn't make any sense to me that people are attacking me and others who are presenting a different picture of the reality in the middle east than the one that is officially sanctioned by the government of Israel. Do those of you who are attacking me really think I'm all that much of a threat? The truth is a scary boogyman as long as it's kept under the bed or in a closet. It's in setting the truth free that we set ourselves free. And it's only possible to go so far when we've got one foot planted firmly on the neck of another. If we hold others down, we also hold ourselves down in the process. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 07:52 PM (#734503) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR I think it's a question of what is truth, Carol. You feel very strongly that you are presenting a truthful report based on information you have researched. Your facts, however, are called into question by Warren, who has presented what he considers to be truthful facts. I have not done the extensive research you have done, but the facts, as Warren has presented them reflect the history of that region as I remember it, and he presented it without seemingly taking one side or the other. "Palestine is and was the home of the Palestinians for centuries, if not millenia." That is a statement you present as truth. However, isn't the establishment of Palestine as a state part of what this controversy is all about? So how could it have been in existence "for centuries if not millenia?" DougR |
|
21 Jun 02 - 08:01 PM (#734510) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Good night, Doug. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 08:13 PM (#734517) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: robomatic Carol: I suggest you are confusing the word 'truth' with 'opinion'. I do not claim to be 100% right nor to have 100% of the truth. But I have made several assertions of opinion based on my understanding (and interpretation) of some basic facts that we can all agree on. Among these are the facts that Israel has negotiated with nation states where it has been found possible to (Egypt and Jordan). I think you have either misunderstood my posts or simply ignored them as logical arguments. This is okay. I don't claim to have a 100% lock on logic either. That there have been negotiations between Israel and the putative government of the Palestinians. That for most of the last 2,000 years the land that was called Palestine, now Israel, was under somebody's boot, be it Babylonian, Roman, Ottoman, or British. I don't think it's right that so many Jews had to leave Arab lands to be resettled in Israel. But they did and they are there. I don't think it's right that so many Arabs had to leave Israel and have been refused settlement in Arab lands. Israel has in fact a substantial pre-1967 Arab population of Jews, Christians, and Muslims. There seems to be a one-sided view on the part of the Arab nations and many Europeans as well that everyone has the right to live in Israel, but Jews don't have a right to live anywhere else in the vicinity. You are not wrong to advocate basic human rights for the Palestinians. And you are correct that to this day there are Jewish Israelis still advocating for them. I suggest that you broaden your advocacy to end the campaign of hate and slander which is waged in the Arab world with a viciousness that is not matched on the Israeli side. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - My fairness parable: Almost immediately after 9-11, an incredible fiction began to circulate across the Islamic world (including the U.S.) claiming that the tragedy was the work of Israel, and that 4,000 Jews didn't show up for work on that fatal Tuesday. This is the extreme response: "That was a total fabrication. It is untrue. It didn't happen and those who assert that it did not happen are liars." Here is the 'fair' response: "Let's agree to call it 2,000." My point is that there is a sort of fairness which accepts and propagates lies. That is what we are facing in the Arab world (for the most part) and what we are seeing in Europe. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It is by accepting untruths that we open the door to the real terrorists. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 08:26 PM (#734523) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC All I can say robomatic, is that the "facts" as you understand them are not at all consistant with the documentation that I have seen on the subject. And my research has been quite extensive. Some of the most disturbing things I have seen, and that prove most of the prevailing rhetoric embraced by the government of Israel false, is in the form of de-classified Israeli government documents. I really am trying to stay out of a back and forth argument over the specifics. I don't see that it would serve any purpose at this time. |
|
21 Jun 02 - 10:53 PM (#734582) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Good night, CArol? It's not even 8:00 P.M. yet. It appears to me you have locked in on your position, and because your "research as been quite extensive," you are unwilling to listen to the opinions of others. Okie dokie. You're right. Feel better? DougR |
|
21 Jun 02 - 11:05 PM (#734585) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC DougR, I'll lay it out to you in the starkest terms I can think of, so maybe you'll understand and not give me a hard time about it.
In my research, I found a lot of things, many of them from sources no one can question, that I found very disturbing. I decided several weeks ago that I wanted to try to avoid posting links to these things to whatever extent I could, because I don't think it would be very constuctive for me to post them at this time. But it would be necessary for me to post them in order to answer you and robomatic. This information is available to anyone who makes the effort to find it, so you don't need me to do it for you. If you are a compassionate person as you say you think you are, you won't pressure me to post them. There's a big difference between carrying on a healthy debate and tormenting someone. Am I being clear enough for you? |
|
21 Jun 02 - 11:44 PM (#734605) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR I said I thought you were right! What more do you want? DougR |
|
22 Jun 02 - 09:28 AM (#734700) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC How about a retraction of this...
It appears to me you have locked in on your position, and because your "research as been quite extensive," you are unwilling to listen to the opinions of others. And then, try to understand that if I don't answer you to the extent that you would like, there's a reason for it. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 12:03 PM (#734737) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: DougR Anything that makes you happy, Carol. It is retracted. DougR |
|
22 Jun 02 - 12:24 PM (#734745) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Thanks Doug. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 12:45 PM (#734755) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,native I just heard a rumor that U.S. troops were with the Esrailis when then went into Jenin,and blocked theU.N. from going in. I would like info. on this |
|
22 Jun 02 - 02:24 PM (#734778) Subject: A limerick From: GUEST,Lawrence Lauriate There was a Mudcat woman named CarolC To her Israel was a heresy She posted her links And now we all thinks That CarolC and Yassir married will be |
|
22 Jun 02 - 02:33 PM (#734785) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Good night Lawrence. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 02:45 PM (#734790) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST Good one Lawrence. LOL! |
|
22 Jun 02 - 03:16 PM (#734796) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC It's pretty obvious to me that I don't stand a chance matching wits with two such towering intellects as yourself, GUEST, and our friend Lawrence here. I concede the playing field to you. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 05:37 PM (#734859) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: Deda Carol, I think that you and I come at this subject from extremely different positions, from nearly opposite corners many times, but I do appreciate being able to read your posts and post back, and I don't think we've ever picked at each other personally. Thanks for that. I think that is very valuable, one of the things that I treasure about the general discussion threads Mudcat threads. Because I have an Israeli daughter and grandson and many former in-laws living there, I get the Israeli perspective, and I understand it. It seems crystal clear to me that Israel is defending itself and its right to exist, and we can discuss that, and the history that got us where we are, and whose misbehavoiors or misconceptions are worse. But it is not about you, nor me, nor any of the posters. It behooves us all to remember that, imho. (Robomatic - I really like the fairness parable!) |
|
22 Jun 02 - 05:39 PM (#734861) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC Thanks Deda. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 05:56 PM (#734872) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: CarolC On the fairness parable, I would just like to say that that one cuts both ways. An untruth is an untruth whether it is uttered by Arabs or by Israelis. Fairness means that we all live by the same standards. We can't hold others to one standard and ourselves to an entirelly different standard. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 06:10 PM (#734878) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: McGrath of Harlow Like most parables, the fairness one can be applied in different ways. The point it's making is that changing the numbers in a lie doesn't stop it being a lie.
There are a lot of numbers thrown about in the stories about how things got to the state they are now in the Holy Land - numbers like the estimated number of people living in Palestine back in the 1920s, and the number of refugees who fled their homes in 1948, and the numbers who left "voluntarily", and the numbers of civilians killed on both sides over the last few years.
The numbers argued up and down and round and round. But in the last resort, they aren't important. |
|
22 Jun 02 - 08:24 PM (#734953) Subject: RE: BS: Who are the terrorists? Part 113 From: GUEST,mg check out this site: http://www.hcef.org/news/news/index.cfm/dsp/newsview/itemid/738.htm This is a story about how the new head of the Presbyterian Church in USA is a Palestinian...but there is a place to register for emails. It has more of a religious than a political focus, but of course politics is there. But it is from the Christian perspective and you do get a fairly good idea of what is going on in the Christian community there..which is highly diverse...including Greek Orthodox, evangelical Christians, Lutherans etc. mg |