Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Who Started the 1967 Arab-Israeli War and the Invasion of Lebanon
In 1967, Israel launched the war. Now
you could say it was a legitimate pre-emptive strike if you like, but there is just no question that Israel attacked. Okay? That is
not even a matter of debate. As for 1973, no, Israel was not attacked. What was attacked was Israeli occupied territory.
Egypt attacked Egyptian territory that was held by Israel under the conditions that I described, after Israel refused a peace
treaty. The fact of the matter is, there is not one case in which Israel was attacked.
you could say it was a legitimate pre-emptive strike if you like, but there is just no question that Israel attacked. Okay? That is
not even a matter of debate. As for 1973, no, Israel was not attacked. What was attacked was Israeli occupied territory.
Egypt attacked Egyptian territory that was held by Israel under the conditions that I described, after Israel refused a peace
treaty. The fact of the matter is, there is not one case in which Israel was attacked.
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky_qa.html
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
New Questioner, #5:
I just felt that there were a few facts that you didn’t mention and I wonder why. For instance, if I go back to the ’67 war, it’s a fact that Israel was attacked. It was a self defense war and it wasn’t mentioned. If we are talking about the Lebanon war, I mean, the life of the Israelis who lived in the Galilee were hell for years, attacks and children in shelters, children murdered at schools, you didn’t mention it. And recent things, like the killing in Gaza, which I am against violence and I don’t justify any kind of violence, but the Gaza event in Netzarim, you didn’t mention and it happened one month ago, the school bus of Israeli children who went to school that was bombed by Palestinians, and this creates the reaction. You didn’t also mention what happened after the parade. I think it is a mistake to bring so many policemen to where people go out from the Mosque, but what really started it, and I read it in the newspaper because I live here right now, it was when the Arabs finished praying, they just threw stones at the Jews who were praying downstairs on the Western Wall. I mean, you didn’t even mention it. You know, I don’t think that violence is justified but I think that also the Jews in Israel have the right not to be murdered and not to live in shelters and not to live - I remember myself in shelters for so many years. I mean, all of these events not mentioned by you, even a hint, and this is what bothers me.
Noam Chomsky:
Okay, well you are absolutely right, I didn’t mention the atrocities committed against Jews and I didn’t mention the vastly worse atrocities committed against Arabs. For example, in discussing this kind of Intifada, I said absolutely nothing about the atrocities. So, you’re right. I didn’t mention the few cases in which atrocities were committed against Jews, or the many cases in which atrocities were committed against Arabs. And the same in the past. I barely mentioned them, because I was talking about other things. However, we could, but then we will balance it. I mean, for example, it is simply not a fact that the Palestinians coming out of the Mosques started throwing stones down below, and if you read Ha'aretz, you’ll see that it’s not a fact. That happened after the border guards were shooting.
Same Questioner, #5:
Was the killing of the children who went to school, is that a true fact or not?
Noam Chomsky:
Yes, it was. That is a true fact as was -
Same Questioner, #5:
Why did you choose among these true facts, just to mention the fact that people were killed by the American helicopters– and you didn’t mention the children who were murdered on their way to school -
Noam Chomsky:
For a simple reason, because the overwhelming mass of the atrocities are by Israel and the United States. I am talking about the United States and our supply of military helicopters. If we were providing guns to the Palestinians to kill Israelis and the Palestinians were carrying out 90 percent of the atrocities, I’d talk about that. But I’m talking about our providing military helicopters to the Israelis to carry out 90 percent of the atrocities. That is why I mentioned it, but barely.
(Same Questioner, #5, but inaudible)
May I continue?
Let’s go back to 1967 and 1982. In 1967, Israel was not attacked and nobody even pretends that. I mean, back at the time, Abba Eban, it was his job at the UN to claim that Israel was attacked. He knew it was a lie, and what he was saying were total lies. And you can’t even get this in Israeli –
Same Questioner, #5:
And about the attack in ’73, ’72?
Noam Chomsky:
You want to go back to that? Let’s take a look at ’67. I’ll come then next to ’73. In 1967, Israel launched the war. Now you could say it was a legitimate pre-emptive strike if you like, but there is just no question that Israel attacked. Okay? That is not even a matter of debate. As for 1973, no, Israel was not attacked. What was attacked was Israeli occupied territory. Egypt attacked Egyptian territory that was held by Israel under the conditions that I described, after Israel refused a peace treaty. The fact of the matter is, there is not one case in which Israel was attacked.
In 1982 - you’ve got your dates mixed up.
There was a time when people were hiding in the Galilee but not in 1981. 1981 was an extremely peaceful year, there were no attacks from the North to the South, zero.
Same Questioner, #5:
I lived in the – in the 80’s children lived in shelters every weekend-
Noam Chomsky:
In the 80’s, that is after, right? May I continue?
Same Questioner, #5:
Also the - university - and all the media, the CNN, are in the territories, and you get all the information through the media, and you say there was no university, no media, no attacks on Israelis. I mean, we were in the shelters and you stand here and said that there were no shelters.
Noam Chomsky:
No, I didn’t say that. I said in 1981, up until the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, there were no attacks from the North. There were plenty of attacks from the South. Israel was regularly bombing Lebanon, trying to elicit some kind of PLO response, which would be a justification for the planned invasion. And they were bombing fishing boats, they were attacking villages, they were killing all sorts of people and there was nothing in response. Israel attacked in 1982 (and they were pretty frank about it) because they were afraid of PLO moderation. They were afraid that the PLO was abandoning terrorism and was moving toward a political settlement, and that is what Israel does not want. They made it pretty clear. Like, if you were there at the time, and you were reading the papers, you would have read it. For example, a couple of weeks after the,- right after the invasion - you heard of Yehoshua Porath – who is, as I’m sure you know, the leading Israeli academic expert on the Palestinians, a pretty conservative guy incidentally, wrote an article in Ha'aretz, in which he pointed out that we had to invade Lebanon because what was happening was what he called a veritable catastrophe. The PLO was refusing to carry out terrorist acts. They were becoming a kind of a moderate force. For Israel this is impossible, we want them to go back to terrorism, and Israel tried to elicit terrorism. Now take a look at what happened after that. I mean, if you want, I’ll direct you to Israeli sources, but right after that period, Israel was regularly provoking attacks inside Lebanon, and when they would bomb somewhere in Lebanon, there would be a response in which Kiryat Shemona would get a Katyusha attack. That was happening consistently, and in fact, it mostly happened after 1982.
Same Questioner, #5:
Why would they attack now when Israeli already withdrew? It’s not true. In the 1980’s, we were in the shelters.
Noam Chomsky:
May I continue?
Same Questioner, #5:
You read only the articles that serve your point.
Noam Chomsky:
No, I don’t. So we agree, I presume, that everything you have said so far is false. Now, lets look to the present. Let’s take a look at the present case. Finally Israel withdrew after 22 years of illegal occupation in which it killed about 45,000 people, kind of trivial, right?
Same Questioner, #5 Nobody of course from the Israeli –
Noam Chomsky:
A few dozen were killed in Israel. Count it up. And almost every case was retaliation for an Israeli attack in Lebanon. There was a standard cycle, what happened over and over. It’s very well documented. The Israeli forces in southern Lebanon, the occupying forces in southern Lebanon or their mercenary army, the SLA, would be attacked by the resistance, Hizbollah, and then Israel would retaliate by bombing Beirut or some refugee camp and so on, and then Hizbollah would send rockets to northern Israel. That was the regular cycle, almost invariant. And, in fact, that cycle began in an interesting way. It began in 1992. From 1981 right through 1992, there was almost nothing except Israeli attacks in Lebanon of which there were numerous ones, like Shimon Peres’ 1985 iron fist operations right in the middle of Lebanon were murderous and it was well reported in the Israeli press. There was almost no retaliation. In 1992, something changed, and it was described very accurately, for example, by Moshe Arens, nice, right-wing Minister of Defense, you know, you don’t have to worry about his politics. He explained that in 1992, the rules of the game changed. How did they change? Well, Israel had carried out an assassination of a Shi'ite cleric, and they killed him and his wife and child and then bombed an ambulance that was trying to come and pick them up. And you say, well okay, that changed the rules of the game. From now on, after this period in fact, what happened is what I just described, the cycle that after Hizbollah attacks on Israeli forces or their mercenary army, Israel would respond farther north, killing people, and then after 1992, Hizbollah would also attack northern Israel. Now if you go back to the early 70’s, what you are describing is at least partially true. But after that, it’s simply not true.
Same Questioner, #5:
The Lebanon War -
(inaudible voices of others)
Noam Chomsky:
It’s a very important question. If you like, I would be glad to give you the highest level Israel sources which discuss and describe the Lebanon War. What you are hearing is probably propaganda that you learned in Elementary School. Nobody believes this in the Israeli academic system. And the Lebanon war was a straight attack. Nothing had been happening except attacks from Israel to Lebanon for over a year.
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky_qa.html
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
New Questioner, #5:
I just felt that there were a few facts that you didn’t mention and I wonder why. For instance, if I go back to the ’67 war, it’s a fact that Israel was attacked. It was a self defense war and it wasn’t mentioned. If we are talking about the Lebanon war, I mean, the life of the Israelis who lived in the Galilee were hell for years, attacks and children in shelters, children murdered at schools, you didn’t mention it. And recent things, like the killing in Gaza, which I am against violence and I don’t justify any kind of violence, but the Gaza event in Netzarim, you didn’t mention and it happened one month ago, the school bus of Israeli children who went to school that was bombed by Palestinians, and this creates the reaction. You didn’t also mention what happened after the parade. I think it is a mistake to bring so many policemen to where people go out from the Mosque, but what really started it, and I read it in the newspaper because I live here right now, it was when the Arabs finished praying, they just threw stones at the Jews who were praying downstairs on the Western Wall. I mean, you didn’t even mention it. You know, I don’t think that violence is justified but I think that also the Jews in Israel have the right not to be murdered and not to live in shelters and not to live - I remember myself in shelters for so many years. I mean, all of these events not mentioned by you, even a hint, and this is what bothers me.
Noam Chomsky:
Okay, well you are absolutely right, I didn’t mention the atrocities committed against Jews and I didn’t mention the vastly worse atrocities committed against Arabs. For example, in discussing this kind of Intifada, I said absolutely nothing about the atrocities. So, you’re right. I didn’t mention the few cases in which atrocities were committed against Jews, or the many cases in which atrocities were committed against Arabs. And the same in the past. I barely mentioned them, because I was talking about other things. However, we could, but then we will balance it. I mean, for example, it is simply not a fact that the Palestinians coming out of the Mosques started throwing stones down below, and if you read Ha'aretz, you’ll see that it’s not a fact. That happened after the border guards were shooting.
Same Questioner, #5:
Was the killing of the children who went to school, is that a true fact or not?
Noam Chomsky:
Yes, it was. That is a true fact as was -
Same Questioner, #5:
Why did you choose among these true facts, just to mention the fact that people were killed by the American helicopters– and you didn’t mention the children who were murdered on their way to school -
Noam Chomsky:
For a simple reason, because the overwhelming mass of the atrocities are by Israel and the United States. I am talking about the United States and our supply of military helicopters. If we were providing guns to the Palestinians to kill Israelis and the Palestinians were carrying out 90 percent of the atrocities, I’d talk about that. But I’m talking about our providing military helicopters to the Israelis to carry out 90 percent of the atrocities. That is why I mentioned it, but barely.
(Same Questioner, #5, but inaudible)
May I continue?
Let’s go back to 1967 and 1982. In 1967, Israel was not attacked and nobody even pretends that. I mean, back at the time, Abba Eban, it was his job at the UN to claim that Israel was attacked. He knew it was a lie, and what he was saying were total lies. And you can’t even get this in Israeli –
Same Questioner, #5:
And about the attack in ’73, ’72?
Noam Chomsky:
You want to go back to that? Let’s take a look at ’67. I’ll come then next to ’73. In 1967, Israel launched the war. Now you could say it was a legitimate pre-emptive strike if you like, but there is just no question that Israel attacked. Okay? That is not even a matter of debate. As for 1973, no, Israel was not attacked. What was attacked was Israeli occupied territory. Egypt attacked Egyptian territory that was held by Israel under the conditions that I described, after Israel refused a peace treaty. The fact of the matter is, there is not one case in which Israel was attacked.
In 1982 - you’ve got your dates mixed up.
There was a time when people were hiding in the Galilee but not in 1981. 1981 was an extremely peaceful year, there were no attacks from the North to the South, zero.
Same Questioner, #5:
I lived in the – in the 80’s children lived in shelters every weekend-
Noam Chomsky:
In the 80’s, that is after, right? May I continue?
Same Questioner, #5:
Also the - university - and all the media, the CNN, are in the territories, and you get all the information through the media, and you say there was no university, no media, no attacks on Israelis. I mean, we were in the shelters and you stand here and said that there were no shelters.
Noam Chomsky:
No, I didn’t say that. I said in 1981, up until the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, there were no attacks from the North. There were plenty of attacks from the South. Israel was regularly bombing Lebanon, trying to elicit some kind of PLO response, which would be a justification for the planned invasion. And they were bombing fishing boats, they were attacking villages, they were killing all sorts of people and there was nothing in response. Israel attacked in 1982 (and they were pretty frank about it) because they were afraid of PLO moderation. They were afraid that the PLO was abandoning terrorism and was moving toward a political settlement, and that is what Israel does not want. They made it pretty clear. Like, if you were there at the time, and you were reading the papers, you would have read it. For example, a couple of weeks after the,- right after the invasion - you heard of Yehoshua Porath – who is, as I’m sure you know, the leading Israeli academic expert on the Palestinians, a pretty conservative guy incidentally, wrote an article in Ha'aretz, in which he pointed out that we had to invade Lebanon because what was happening was what he called a veritable catastrophe. The PLO was refusing to carry out terrorist acts. They were becoming a kind of a moderate force. For Israel this is impossible, we want them to go back to terrorism, and Israel tried to elicit terrorism. Now take a look at what happened after that. I mean, if you want, I’ll direct you to Israeli sources, but right after that period, Israel was regularly provoking attacks inside Lebanon, and when they would bomb somewhere in Lebanon, there would be a response in which Kiryat Shemona would get a Katyusha attack. That was happening consistently, and in fact, it mostly happened after 1982.
Same Questioner, #5:
Why would they attack now when Israeli already withdrew? It’s not true. In the 1980’s, we were in the shelters.
Noam Chomsky:
May I continue?
Same Questioner, #5:
You read only the articles that serve your point.
Noam Chomsky:
No, I don’t. So we agree, I presume, that everything you have said so far is false. Now, lets look to the present. Let’s take a look at the present case. Finally Israel withdrew after 22 years of illegal occupation in which it killed about 45,000 people, kind of trivial, right?
Same Questioner, #5 Nobody of course from the Israeli –
Noam Chomsky:
A few dozen were killed in Israel. Count it up. And almost every case was retaliation for an Israeli attack in Lebanon. There was a standard cycle, what happened over and over. It’s very well documented. The Israeli forces in southern Lebanon, the occupying forces in southern Lebanon or their mercenary army, the SLA, would be attacked by the resistance, Hizbollah, and then Israel would retaliate by bombing Beirut or some refugee camp and so on, and then Hizbollah would send rockets to northern Israel. That was the regular cycle, almost invariant. And, in fact, that cycle began in an interesting way. It began in 1992. From 1981 right through 1992, there was almost nothing except Israeli attacks in Lebanon of which there were numerous ones, like Shimon Peres’ 1985 iron fist operations right in the middle of Lebanon were murderous and it was well reported in the Israeli press. There was almost no retaliation. In 1992, something changed, and it was described very accurately, for example, by Moshe Arens, nice, right-wing Minister of Defense, you know, you don’t have to worry about his politics. He explained that in 1992, the rules of the game changed. How did they change? Well, Israel had carried out an assassination of a Shi'ite cleric, and they killed him and his wife and child and then bombed an ambulance that was trying to come and pick them up. And you say, well okay, that changed the rules of the game. From now on, after this period in fact, what happened is what I just described, the cycle that after Hizbollah attacks on Israeli forces or their mercenary army, Israel would respond farther north, killing people, and then after 1992, Hizbollah would also attack northern Israel. Now if you go back to the early 70’s, what you are describing is at least partially true. But after that, it’s simply not true.
Same Questioner, #5:
The Lebanon War -
(inaudible voices of others)
Noam Chomsky:
It’s a very important question. If you like, I would be glad to give you the highest level Israel sources which discuss and describe the Lebanon War. What you are hearing is probably propaganda that you learned in Elementary School. Nobody believes this in the Israeli academic system. And the Lebanon war was a straight attack. Nothing had been happening except attacks from Israel to Lebanon for over a year.
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky_qa.html
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$190.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
This is the kind of stuff you won't see in textbooks or the mainstream media and cuts straight through the web of lies that inculcates us all.
Let's try an experiment. Replace all references to Muslim above with Jew and mosque with synagogue.
Now, how does that statement sound?
I think it sounds racist.
I personally dislike all forms of fundamentalism -- christian, jewish, islamic, and hindu. The only religion that seems to have any worth whatsoever is Buddhism with its philosophy of "do no harm" (it even includes animals).
Why should I? Most, if not all terrorist acts were perpetrated by Muslims. You should convince me that Judaism does as much harm as Islam. I'm aiming for the truth not for some fake politically-correctness.
http://resistance.jeeran.com/members/resistance/massacres/
http://www.ummah.com/inewsletter/massacres/palestine/
links to Arab hate and propaganda sites will surely do the trick.
Can you prove they did take place?
"Why should I? Most, if not all terrorist acts were perpetrated by Muslims. You should convince me that Judaism does as much harm as Islam. I'm aiming for the truth not for some fake politically-correctness. "
Strange word Terrorism, any resistence against Israel's occupation is Terrorism in the eyes of the Zionists. Whether it be a 7 year-old Palestinian kid throwing a stone or whether a Palestinian Miliant shots an Israeli Soldier or a fundamentalist Talmudist Hebrew settler who lives on Occupied Territory.
Where as the Stern Gang, Irgun and Hagadah terrorists, murderous and cowardly campagins against the British Army and Civilians, such a the King David Bombing or Deir Yassin massacres are perfectly legitimate in the mind of the Zionists. Zionists whether theybe secular Jewish Nationalists or Fundamentalist Talmudists all believe the Goyim are inferior and their lives are worthless.
Educated people across Europe and the US,Canada and the rest of the World. Are beginnning to see Israel and Zionism for what it is. Israel claims to be a democracy, compare Israeli Democracy to the US or any European country, the differences are obvious and subtantial. No one buys that crap anymore, independent people need only look at Israeli Laws that stipulate that discriminate against Non-Jews.
Zionism is incompatible with democracy, it won't be to long before people in Europe who symapthized with Israel because of the Holocaust guilt, completely abandon it because of Irsael's despicbale behaviour. Israel's media lies are becoming more and more obvious all the time. No one is buying Ra'aan Gissin or Dore Gold's crap anymore.
Zionist Israel wither away like Apartheid South Africa
1) blame 9/11on a Jewish conspiracy
2) incite hatred for ALL Zionists by portraying every Zionist to be a murderer
3) deny the existence of peaceful Zionists and Zionist organizations
4) denegrate Judaism as an immoral, racist religion
5) imply that Judaism demands that Jews must seek control of your future
6) The US government is run by Jews, Zionists & Israel
7) Western media is run by Jews, Zionists & Israel
8) End all US funding to "Terroist" Israel
9) Use the internet to push forward all of these ideas as a package and if possible, to take over sites with disrupitve, conflict-aggitating hate
10) Finally, make it acceptable to hate Jews (as in most Jews, if not all Jews)
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-global/2002-August/000846.html
2. [IMC-Global] Re: [imc-winnipeg] Hate Literature Blitz Planned (c;ick to read)
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-global/2002-August/000845.html
3. [IMC-Global] Re: [imc-winnipeg] Hate Literature Blitz Planned
David Henry
Fri, 30 Aug 2002 00:51:56 -0500
I've gotten a few comments on the "Hate Blitz" posting, and will herein attempt to respond (briefly) to them all. If any further concerns arise, please report on your own efforts to answer them.
1. Geoffrey is right about Namebase, and I recommend spending an entire weekend exploring the available background information on any organization or person of your choice -- a great service: http://www.pir.org/
I use all sorts of sources for news, some of which are more controversial than the ADL (in my opinion). For even more fun, try the Intel Forum mail list archive: http://archives.his.com/intelforum/
What I try to do is evaluate the quality of the information: Does it make me spill my coffee? Is it the best article on the topic (of the three I've just read)? Is this something that at least a few people will want to read?
I don't confuse the message with the messenger. Although I often detect bias in an article, I expect most people on the lists I send to will have pretty sophisticated media literacy skills. I don't qualify a report unless I have some very serious concerns about the validity.
2. The National Alliance is one of the most well-funded (white power record
sales!) racist/hate groups in North America (unless you count the U.S.
government). These neo-Nazis are promoting themselves and recruiting with
renewed energy since last year. I have been forwarding more articles on NA
activities than usual for that reason alone. Know thine enemy!
3. I hoped, with the posting, to inform anti-racist / anti-hate activists of a
likely increase in NA activity during the week of September 5-11. Nothing more
than a warning from what I consider a fairly mainstream source.
I think this warning might also be taken to heart by owners of businesses which
clearly serve the Jewish community, by Synagogues, and perhaps by individual
Jews who might have a high degree of public exposure or live in areas which have
already experienced increased hate-crime activity. This opinion is pure
conjecture on my part, based largely on the sense of alarm I get from reading
the ADL article, and the many reports of increased anti-Semitic activity in
North America and in Europe.
While many people suggest that the NA is small and insignificant, they and thier
ilk can often be quite dangerous and have been known to cause harm to
individuals. Please be vigilant, and contact your local police for information
on the reporting of any hate-crimes (and see #5 below). Discuss your concerns
with neighbours and community groups. Find out if there are organizations near
you which are working to fight hate-crime. Involve yourself, and discuss
privacy and security measures with your family.
4. I do not confuse any one target 'group' of hate activity with another, nor do
I pick and choose which hate-targeted 'group' to defend. I simply oppose all
persons and organizations which advocate hate.
For some theoretical discussion of fascism, please see David Ranton's site:
http://www.dkrenton.co.uk/
If you have never visited the Internet Anti-Fascist, you should:
http://www.anti-fascism.org/
5. The following is adapted from my (now defunct) e-newsletter, including an
article on reporting hate-crime from the Council on American-Islamic Relations
CANADA (CAIR CAN) and a contribution from a local hate-crime expert. The CAIR
CAN Alert was addressed to Muslim communities in Canada, but has valuable
information for everyone concerned about the rising tide of hate crimes against
any other communities.
Mad'Nuf -- September 21, 2001
==================================
HATE-CRIME INCIDENTS
Protect your community by reporting acts of hate.
The following are examples of the types of incidents that need to be reported:
* Hate calls or death threats to individuals, community centres, businesses, or
homes
* Verbal or physical harassment at school or at work
* Threats or verbal abuse by strangers in public places
* Refusal of service from a place of business
* Defacement, vandalism or damage of religious centres, businesses or homes
--------------------------------------------------
REACTING TO HATE CRIMES
If you believe you have been the victim of a hate crime, you should:
1. Report the crime to your local police station immediately. Speak to the "Hate
Crime Section." Ask that the incident be treated as a hate crime. Follow up with
investigators.
2. Inform a prominent anti-hate or anti-racism organization, even if you believe
it is a "small" incident. Document the incident by making a detailed written
description. Save evidence. Take photographs.
3. Act quickly. Each incident must be dealt with when it happens, not when
convenient.
4. Decide on the appropriate action to be taken. Consider issuing a statement
from community leaders, holding a news conference, organizing a protest, meeting
with officials, or starting a letter writing campaign.
5. Mobilize community support. Contact community leaders, a local religious
centre or other organization.
6. Stay on top of the situation.
7. Announce results. When the incident is resolved, make an announcement to the
same people and organizations originally contacted.
--------------------------------------------------
REPORTING RACIST GRAFFITI
If you comes across racist graffiti of any kind, please document extensively
(photos, if possible; detailed description of materials used; size; wording;
symbols; date/time seen; location, etc).
Before such graffiti is removed, the incident should be reported to the police.
When doing so, ensure that you get the receiving officer's name and ask for an
incident number. Request follow-up from the police and, to that end, call the
officer for follow-up. Such pressure sends the signal to the police that these
incidents should be seriously treated.
If a business/home/mosque is targeted, call to express solidarity and ask how
you/we may be of assistance. Victims of such hate incidents feel vulnerable and
alone and need the assurance that others will stand by them.
If you see racist posters, document them and, if there multiple copies,
carefully remove them and keep copies for anti-racist groups and the police; but
it is important to temporarily keep at least one untouched copy at the original
location for police to assess (also make sure that that copy does not have your
fingerprints on it; police need an uncorrupted copy for analysis).
---------------------------------------------------------
I sincerely hope that this is helpful.
All the very best of the good things, and the time to enjoy them,
David Henry
The Palestinians on the other hand are set on killing Israeli civilians and that is the reason they are categorized as terrorists.
As for the Israeli experience with 15 year old Palestinian suicide bombers, there are 2 ways to look at this. First, how many of them would there be if Israel stopped denying the Palestinian people the right to self-determination? Second, this is illogical. It is like saying, look here in the news, a 15 year old Frenchman has murdered an English person - so I guess all 15 year old Frenchman are now terrorists and if we see any Frenchmen in the US they are open game for the military. Ridiculous. Or for a better example. A 15 year old Catholic detonates a car bomb in Belfast. Now, is the British army to determine all 15 year old Catholics are terrorists and shoot them and that is just OK and you will defend it?
Absurd. The world is NOT going to put up with this sort of logic in the long run. One historical absolute is that tolerance for such things is very temporal.
"denying the Palestinian people the right to self-determination?", hamm, they did not want any self-determination when they were governed by Egypt and Jordan before 1967, did they? Just a thought.
Well, it depands, if you mean - let 2,000,000 Palestinians enter Israel, than no, there would be no more suicide bombers since there would be no more Jews left.
"Second, this is illogical. It is like saying, look here in the news, a 15 year old Frenchman has murdered an English person - so I guess all 15 year old Frenchman are now terrorists and if we see any Frenchmen in the US they are open game for the military."
If it's a one time incident, than no, but if it happens more than once, and many other french 15 year olds claim they too want to kill english people, Then, as an english person i would have to say - yes.
"One historical absolute is that tolerance for such things is very temporal"
I don't think so - i don't see Iraq, Syria and Iran taking any heat for human rights violations.
You are saying - if Israel would lay down and surrender to the Palestinians, there would be no more 15 year old suicide bombers. So according to your logic, a woman can avoid a rape by agreeing to have sex with her rapist.
Thats pretty racist. Israel lets millions of Russians into Israel and settle many of them in the West Bank and Gaza. But if Palestinians return to their homes suddenly thats dangerous?
You sound like some KKK member in the early 1900s claiming that giving minorities any rights would destory the white race. Most rabid proIsrael types also supported aparthied South Africa (remember Israel was one of the few countries that traded and armed that state in the last years before freedom); where did you stand in that conflict and dont you feel ashamed now?
Israel is acting outside the bounds of acceptable behavior and bringing up past wrongs makes no sense (and is historically inacurate). Is genocide ok because nobody did anything about Rwanda? Is human slavery ok because few complain about South Sudan? The West Bank and Gaza MUST either become seperate states or part of Israel (with all Palestinians being given the right to return and citizenship). Its been way too long and anything else is clearly wrong.
The it all started in 1920, 1921 & 1929. Look it up (if you can, many palestinian oriented sites are purposefully vague on the events or have no information at all)
Here's a good one for you: http://www.cactus48.com
Here's another one: http://www.ussliberty.com
Why not do a Google-search on "1946 bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem" where you will find out how the future prime minister Menachem Begin was the master-mind behind a terrorist bombing of hotel killing 92 people, mostly civilians?
Why not go to http://www.discovery.com and buy the tapes (series of 3) "Behind the Hatred" , all about the Palestine-Israel conflict, where it shows footage of massacres of Palestinians by Israeli terrorists on day one of the creation of the immoral state of Israel in 1948, and chasing over 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in terror when this happened? The 4 million Palestinian refugees today are the descendents of these orginal refugees, many still alive today.
YOU are the one who is trying to cover up the truth about Israel and Zionism. YOU ARE A SELF-CENTERED LIAR!
I thought you'll find these links useful:
http://www.jcrcphila.org/alerts.htm
http://www.edume.org/reports/5/17.htm
Screw that.
1921 - instigators become permanent factor in palestine
1929 - things go from bad to worse
1936 - the straw the breaks the camels back
-------------------------------------------------------------
???? - body count for 16 years of violence
???? - £ amount lost in property damage and theft
???? - number of people who lost their homes
look it up
You're living in the past and you refuse to reappraise
Your ridiculous commitment to an outmoded ideal
Are you honestly that stupid or will these wounds never heal
(Chorus:)
You can keep your flags and emblems I don't need them anymore
So just take your age-old hatred and then walk out of the door
I hope that you die and burn tonight
I hope that you die and burn tonight
You think of all your neighbors as just scum upon the earth
And you live inside a bubble where a badge is all you're worth
All your dreams are built on loathing
All your hopes are built on hate
I can't see any way out of this hell that you create
(Chorus)
I wish you could see yourself as others all see you
Then maybe you'd realise that you seem such a fool
(Chorus)