Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Picture of slain Iain Hook and other victims of Israeli terror
....
Iman Jamjoun touches the face of her 14-year-old daughter Nizin before her burial in the West Bank town of Hebron, Monday, July 29, 2002. Armed Jewish settlers clashed with rock-throwing Palestinians as they returned home Sunday from the funeral of an Israeli soldier, shooting dead the girl and wounding several others. Nizin was standing on the balcony of her home when she was fatally shot in the head.(AP Photo/Enric Marti)
Shot In The Heart! Palestinian hospital personnel stand next to the body of Jihad Fareq, 8, who was killed during clashes with Israeli soldiers, at a hospital in the West Bank town of Nablus Monday Nov. 25, 2002. Hundreds of Palestinian youths defied an Israeli military curfew Monday and threw stones at soldiers who opened fire, killing Fareq and wounding seven people.
Iain Hook
Palestinian hospital staff show the body of Briton Iain Hook, director of the United Nations reconstruction project of Jenin refugee camp, at a hospital in the West Bank town of Jenin Friday Nov, 22, 2002. The U.N. official was hit by Israeli fire when the soldiers were shooting trying to disperse stone-throwing Palestinian youths. Israeli military delayed the arrival of paramedics by an hour and by the time the Israeli ambulance arrived, Hook no longer had a pulse, the officials said.
A Palestinian boy kneels to take cover while an Israeli tank fires after an Israeli army bulldozer demolished a Palestinian police post on a road near the crossing of the Jewish Netzarim settlement in southern Gaza, Friday June 21, 2002. He was killed shortly after this photo was snapped.
Palestinians, working in their family field, take cover while an Israeli tank fires near the crossing of the Jewish Netzarim settlement in southern Gaza, Friday June 21, 2002. A few seconds later, one of the boys was killed by the Israeli fire.
The cousin of eight year-old Abed al Samad Shamalakh, who was killed in the morning during Israeli gunfire as he was working in his family field, cries with his brother (L) with the blood of the boy on his T-shirt after he carried him to a hospital from the field in Gaza Strip June 21, 2002.
The mother of 10-year-old boy, Abdel Samad Shamalakh, looks in disbelief at her son's face during his funeral in Gaza City, Friday June 21, 2002. The boy, who was working in his family's field, was shot and killed when an Israeli tank opened fire while a bulldozer tore down a Palestinian police post near the Jewish settlement of Netzarim. This is the same boy from the above picture with his brother. Notice up above he was ducking and no threat to them yet they shot him in his head!
Moon over Bethlehem Almost symbolic...
An Israeli armoured personnel carrier takes position in front of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem November 22, 2002. The Israeli occupation army launched a massive invasion into the holy city early Friday morning.
Palestinian children lining up to get water. Palestinians don't have enough water to justify having running water while Israelis have enough for large swimming pools.
Armed Israeli settlers walk past Star of David graffiti on a Palestinian house at the site where Palestinian gunmen ambushed Israeli troops recently, adjacent to what is now the location of a makeshift Israeli settlement expansion outpost, in the Palestinian town of Hebron, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2002.
Homeless Refugee Cat! Palestinian Abeer Attalah, 10, carries her cat as she walks in front of her destroyed family house, demolished by Israeli occupation forces earlier in the day, in the outskirts of Balata refugee camp, adjacent to the northern Palestinian city of Nablus Sunday Nov. 17, 2002. The Israeli army destroyed two houses where 27 Palestinians were made homeless by the demolitions.
A view of Yanun, a Palestinian village in the West Bank, the day the families living here left under ongoing pressure from nearby Israeli settlers, Friday, Oct. 18, 2002. Once home to 25 families, the last of the Palestinians here said they were fleeing after four years of worsening attacks from Israeli settlers, who have erected outposts on hilltops overlooking Yanun.
New Refugees! Eight-year-old Palestinian boy Naseem Sobih, center, cries, as does his younger brother Hazim, 4, while other family members grieve queitly, as they crowd into their car, and vacate their village of Yanun, under ongoing pressure from nearby Israeli settlers, in the West Bank, Friday, Oct. 18, 2002.
A Palestinian youth tries to salvage some tomatoes as others watch an Israeli tank disappear after it destroyed a market stand when imposing a curfew in the West Bank town of Jenin Sunday Oct. 6, 2002.
Aim To Kill ! Palestinian hospital workers show the body of Palestinian Amar Hashem, 15, killed by a shot to the head while throwing stones on Israeli tanks in the Al Ein refugee camp in the northern West Bank city of Nablus Saturday Oct. 5, 2002. (AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis)
Crying Over Ruin! Palestinian Hajar Abu Laws, 55, cries in front of her family's destroyed house in the Khan Younis refugee camp August 21, 2002. Israeli tanks and helicopters raided the camp and destroyed several buildings. (Reuters/Oleg Popov)
A Palestinian girl walks with a window frame she has scavenged near the rubble of a five-story apartment building destroyed by Israel army explosives early Wednesday Aug. 21, 2002 in the Khan Yunis refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip. Israeli troops blew up the five-story and several houses nearby killing a 24-year-old Palestinian inside one of the houses. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Larma)
Death of a Grandchild. Shot in the forehead. Palestinian Salmah Ze'rob, grandmother of 15-year-old Ayman Ze'rob, faints when she sees his face at a morgue in Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis refugee camp in the Southern Gaza Strip, August 20,2002. Ayman was shot and killed by Israeli troops guarding the Jewish settlement of Morag, south of the camp.
MY BOY ! A Palestinian gestures at Israeli soldiers after they arrested his son in the West Bank city of Hebron August 17, 2002. Israeli soldiers combed the streets of the West Bank city of Hebron rounding up at least 100 people and injuring several more with stun grenades. (Reuters/Loay Abu Haykel)
Mourners carry the body of slain Palestinian boy Ayman Fares for his funeral in Khan Younis, August 16, 2002. The five-year-old Palestinian boy was killed by fire from an Israeli tank advancing to the edge of the Khan Younis refugee camp Thursday.(Reuters/Reinhard Krause)
Relatives of slain Palestinian five-year-old Palestinian boy Ayman Fares mourn as his body is carried out of his home for the funeral in the Gaza Strip town of Khan Younis, August 16, 2002.(Reuters/Reinhard Krause)
Palestinian children release balloons white, black, green and red, the colors of the Palestinian flag, during a demonstration for the release of Palestinian prisoners and for peace in the West Bank town of Bethlehem Tuesday Aug. 13, 2002.
Goodbye My Baby! Tahsin Ahmad kisses his dead nine year-old daughter Asmaa at Naser Hospital in Khan Younis Friday, Aug. 2, 2002. Israeli soldiers guarding a Jewish settlement in the central Gaza Strip shot dead the Palestinian girl while at home in the refugee camp.(AP Photos/Markus Schreiber)
Did Not Survive ! Palestinian children look at 6-year-old girl Neven Abu Slmuah during her funeral in the Gaza strip on August 1, 2002. Neven was wounded by Israeli soldiers during a raid on Gaza on July 21, 2002.(Reuters/ Ahmed Jadallah)
Iman Jamjoun touches the face of her 14-year-old daughter Nizin before her burial in the West Bank town of Hebron, Monday, July 29, 2002. Armed Jewish settlers clashed with rock-throwing Palestinians as they returned home Sunday from the funeral of an Israeli soldier, shooting dead the girl and wounding several others. Nizin was standing on the balcony of her home when she was fatally shot in the head.(AP Photo/Enric Marti)
David vs. Goliath? A Palestinian boy uses a slingshot against Israeli tanks during a raid in the north Gaza Strip, July 29, 2002.
Ten-year-old Khamees Hawayta lies in Shefah hospital, July 24, 2002, after he was injured during an Israeli missile strike in Gaza Strip. Like many of the 145 injured in the attack early Tuesday morning, the Palestinian boy was asleep when the one-tonne bomb targeted the house of a senior militant next door, blasting it to bits and destroying nearby houses in the crowded district. "The blast threw a cabinet on top of me and rubble on top of my little brother Subhi," said Khamees. "Subhi cried to me, 'I can't get out. Help me!'
WHO'S LEFT? Ten year-old Iman al Hewete (L) and her brother, 13 year-old Tareq, at the Shefah hospital in the Gaza Strip July 24, 2002, after they were injured during an Israeli missile strike a day earlier. The children's mother and two brothers were killed in the attack.
The hand and arm of a dead baby pokes out from the rubble of a building in Gaza, July 24, 2002. Debate raged in Israel on Wednesday over the wisdom of killing one of one man at the price of the lives of 14 Palestinians, nine of whom were sleeping children, and international condemnation of the devastating Gaza air raid. A day after the killing of Salah Shehada, it emerged that the U.S. made F-16 warplane that attacked his house used an American one-ton precision "smart bomb".
CHILD'S BODY Palestinian rescue workers pull the body of a child out of rubble on July 24, 2002, after the air attack on a block of buildings in Gaza by Israel.
Palestinian medical workers show the body of Alaa Matar, 10, to one of her relatives, Anwar Matar, second right, at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Wednesday, July 24, 2002.
The body of three-year-old Mohamed al Hewete lies next the body of his mother Mona in Gaza hospital, after they were killed in an overnight Israeli missile strike in the Gaza Strip July 23, 2002.
Palestinian rescuers hold the body of a dead baby, found in the rubble of destroyed houses in Gaza City, Tuesday July 23, 2002. An Israeli warplane blew up the house of a leading Hamas militant in the Gaza Strip early Tuesday, killing 14 civilians while sleeping, nine of which were children..
Palestinians remove the dead body of a Palestinian woman from her house after it was hit by fire from an Israeli warplane during an attack on Gaza City July 22, 2002.
TWO-YEAR-OLD NOOR Zakaria Hindi carries the body of his 2-year-old niece Noor, at the hospital in the Deir Balah refugee camp in Gaza Strip Saturday July 6, 2002. The baby and her 44-year-old mother Randa Hindi were killed Saturday morning while riding in a taxi in the Gaza Strip by Israeli tank fire.
A Palestinian boy throws stones at an Israeli tank patrolling the Deheishe refugee camp, near Bethlehem July 5, 2002.
A Palestinian girl searches for a balloon to buy in a downtown outdoors market in Bethlehem during a daytime lifting of the Israeli curfew Thursday July 4, 2002.
A group of Palestinian boys in the Deheishe refugee camp in Bethlehem throw stones at an Israeli Mirkava tank July 2, 2002.
BEHIND BARS ! Palestinian children look out of their house window after Israeli army imposed a curfew in Bettunia near the West Bank City of Ramallah June 21, 2002.
SALVAGE THE BEAR ! A Palestinian girl carries out a stuffed bear from her family's damaged house near a metal workshop in Jabaliya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, Thursday June 20, 2002. Israeli helicopters fired rockets at the shop injuring 13, two seriously.
Israeli Due Process ! An Israeli soldier (L) takes a swing at an arrested and blindfolded Palestinian man (second from left) in the Adduha area of Bethlehem June 20, 2002. The Israeli army reentered Bethlehem just before dawn searching houses and arresting several men and imposing curfew on the town.(Reuters /Magnus Johansson)
YOUNG REFUGEE Palestinian children kiss and take a last look at the body of Hussein al-Matwi, 9-year-old, who was killed by Israeli army forces as he stepped outside his home, a thatched hut, in the Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza Strip Wednesday, June 12, 2002.
HUSSEIN IS DEAD! The impoverished refugees sister and grandfather of Hussein al-Matwi, 9-year-old, who was killed by Israeli troops, cry as his body brought to their thatched hut in the Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza Strip, June 12, 2002.
A Palestinian man shows his sick baby to an Israeli soldier at the entrance to the Palestinian village of Al-Khader, north of Hebron, to allow them passage through the checkpoint Wednesday, June 12, 2002. (Reuters/Gil Cohen Magen) How can anyone hold up a parent with a sick child from getting to a hospital?
The body of Palestinian civilian Tareq el-Kharaz, 24, who was killed by stray Israeli gunfire, lies in a morgue in Nablus, Saturday, June 1, 2002. El-Kharaz, was among a group of men who defied the curfew and attended prayers at the mosque. An Israeli armored personnel carrier fired on them as they were leaving (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)
An Israeli soldier aims his M-16 assault rifle towards Palestinians waiting to cross a military checkpoint near the West Bank town of Ramallah May 29, 2002.
An Israeli Army jeep patrols along the barbed wire fence that Israel built to separate the northern outskirts of Jerusalem with the West Bank, near the Kalandia checkpoint Tuesday May 28, 2002.
WAITING TO CROSS An elderly Palestinian, waiting to be allowed to cross, sleeps next to the Kalandia checkpoint on the outskirts of the West Bank town of Ramallah, Tuesday May 28, 2002.
KILLING FIELDS ! Palestinian ambulance workers, lower right, prepare to retrieve the bodies of a Palestinian woman and her daughter as an Israeli tank and army jeeps look on in Al Bireij refugee camp, Gaza Strip, Saturday, May 25, 2002. Israeli troops shot and killed the Palestinian woman and her 14-year-old daughter, and also wounded another woman while all three were working in a farm field. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
NO HOME ! A Palestinian boy sits on his family's belongings in the remains of their home destroyed by Israeli authorities in the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Hanina Tuesday May 21, 2002.
A Palestinian woman holds her child in front of her house destroyed by Israeli soldiers after authorities claimed the house had no building permission, in East Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Hanina Tuesday May 21, 2002.
Palestinian twins Abla, left, and Faten make drawings of their memories on the ruins of their home in the refugee camp in Jenin, on the West Bank, Saturday, May 4, 2002. The European Union said it deplored the fact that the United Nations had been forced to call off a fact-finding mission into Israel's assault on the Jenin refugee camp. Israel initially supported an international probe to clarify events in Jenin but later decided not to let in the U.N. mission, which U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan eventually canceled.
Palestinian boys take a last look and kiss 2-year-old Hoda Shalof, killed after Israeli tank shelled her home, during her funeral in Rafah refugee camp in south Gaza Strip Wednesday, May 1, 2002.
An Israeli soldier lights a smoke grenade in front of Palestinian demonstrators near the entrance of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem Wednesday, May 1, 2002.
A Palestinian demonstrator, atop a barricade, waves a flag as international peace activists look on while covering their faces against a cloud of tear gas, during a protest in Ramallah, Friday, April 26, 2002.
Palestinian university students provide volunteer labor cleaning the streets of rubble and dirt, left over from recent Israeli Army incursions, in the West Bank town of Ramallah, Thursday, April 25, 2002.
Palestinian students inspect the damage made by the Israeli army in the library room of a school after the withdrawal of the Israeli troops from the West Bank city of Nablus April 24, 2002. The school was used as headquarters by the Israeli army during its incursion into the city.
A Palestinin girl plays in the destroyed Jenin refugee camp April 21, 2002. (Reuters/Reinhard Krause)
Doctors look at the bodies of three Palestinian children, who were killed in a car accident with an Israeli military jeep, at the Rafidya Hospital in the West Bank town of Nablus Saturday, April 20, 2002. Another child and the car's driver were injured in the accident in the village of Howara, near Nablus.
Palestinian photojournalist Nasser Shtayyeh weeps as he carries the body of his five day old baby daughter Dunya before her funeral in Nablus April 19, 2002. Shtayyeh, who works as a photographer with the Associated Press, said that Dunya was taken ill and died last night on the way to hospital after they waited three hours due to roadblocks for an ambulance to enter their home village of Salem.
Hospital workers prepare the body of a child for burial, outside a makeshift morgue in Nablus Thursday April 18, 2002. The bodies of over 70 Palestinians killed in Nablus during the Israeli incursion were being prepared for a mass burial.
A Palestinian girl searches for her family's belongings in the rubble of a damaged house in the destroyed Jenin refugee camp in the northern West Bank April 18, 2002. (Reuters/Goran Tomasevic)
A Palestinian covers body parts as others continue to search the rubble of a damaged house in the destroyed Jenin refugee camp in the northern West Bank April 18, 2002. Probably run over by a tank... (Reuters/Goran Tomasevic)
Palestinian Red Crescent volunteers cover the remains of a dead Palestinian woman killed in the Jenin refugee camp, Wednesday April 17, 2002. Palestinians pulled out more bodies Wednesday from the rubble in the camp, where the death toll remains unknown.
An Israeli soldier protects himself from the smell of death overwhelming the Jenin refugee camp Tuesday, April 16, 2002. Palestinians claim that hundreds of dead are buried in the rubble of the camp.
A foot sticks out from the rubble (L) of one of the homes destroyed by the Israeli Defense Forces in the Jenin refugee camp Tuesday, April 16, 2002. Palestinians claim that hundreds of dead are buried in the rubble of the camp. (AP Photo/Jerome Delay)
Cats roam through the rubble of the Jenin refugee camp Tuesday, April 16, 2002. (AP Photo/Jerome Delay)
An Israeli soldier tank is seen near demolished houses in the Jenin refugee camp, where the fiercest fighting occurred, in the northern West Bank, Sunday, April 14, 2002. (AP Photo/Gil Cohen Magen)
Smoke billows over the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem following several explosions as Israeli forces continue to surround the compound.
Draped in black, a Palestinian mother weeps over the body of her burned son at the refugee camp in the West Bank city of Jenin on Saturday, April 13, 2002. (Getty Images/Scott Nelsen)
BURNED BOY The burned remains of a Palestinian boy lay amidst toys in a house destroyed by Israeli soldiers in the Jenin refugee camp Saturday, April 13, 2002. (AP Photo/Jerome Delay)
The Israeli army erects a giant loudspeaker over the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem, April 13, 2002.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Thank you for sharing those photos. A picture says a thousand words and this is why our US mainstream papers avoid showing these photos to the American public, yet the mainstream US media will show the pictures and footage of the Israeli victims of the suicide bombers, over and over, the same ones even, for maximum impact. Yet we rarely see the damage and carnage that the Isarelis inflict on the Palestinians. If anything does get into the news, Zionist Jews try to censor it.
Please e-mail to me, since I am writing a book on exposing Israel for what it truly is, racist, apartheid.
I would like to include some of these photos (although it will be only black and white).
My e-mail is: truthaboutisrael [at] earthlink.net
Please e-mail to me, since I am writing a book on exposing Israel for what it truly is, racist, apartheid.
I would like to include some of these photos (although it will be only black and white).
My e-mail is: truthaboutisrael [at] earthlink.net
... this is just so, so, sad.
nothing justifies this. nothing justifies it.
these pictures show how much a failure the israeli occupation of palestine is. all the pain seen here is turned back on the israeli people. making israeli lives less secure, not more secure. as long as these kind of things happen, israeli's will be killed in suicide bombings. as long as suicide bombing happen, palestinians will be killed.
why do the palestinians hate and attack the israeli's? look at the photos above...
why do the israeli's hate and attack the palestinians? for the retaliation against the israeli civilians...
is there a way out? maybe if american politicians would come to grips with the fact that whether a dead body is israeli or palestinian, their deaths ARE EQUALLY TRAGIC AND POINTLESS.
nothing justifies this. nothing justifies it.
these pictures show how much a failure the israeli occupation of palestine is. all the pain seen here is turned back on the israeli people. making israeli lives less secure, not more secure. as long as these kind of things happen, israeli's will be killed in suicide bombings. as long as suicide bombing happen, palestinians will be killed.
why do the palestinians hate and attack the israeli's? look at the photos above...
why do the israeli's hate and attack the palestinians? for the retaliation against the israeli civilians...
is there a way out? maybe if american politicians would come to grips with the fact that whether a dead body is israeli or palestinian, their deaths ARE EQUALLY TRAGIC AND POINTLESS.
If you want to see the other side of the story, all you have to do is turn on CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, or CBS and you will get Israeli victims on there.
This is an attempt to balance things out and a small attempt at that at a site that hardly gets anyones attention anyway. Have any of these pictures ever been in US News and World Reports, for instance?
More importantly, on the video side you get plenty of videos of Israelis killed at bus stops etc., by Palestinian suicide bombers but you don't get the videos of Israeli soldiers and settlers abducting young Palestinian women which I have seen on Arabic satellite feeds. Not to mention the beatings caught on film or the reporters/cameramen shot while doing their duties. All this is caught on film but never shown on US networks. Why is that?
During Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 (in which it killed around 20,000 people), one brave photographer sent snapshots he had taken of the Lebanese victims to a US news magazine fully expecting that they would show them because he thought this was groundbreaking news. Not only did they refuse to show them, they refused to send him his negatives back so that he could send them to another magazine. Now those images are lost forever.
It's important to show Israeli victims, but Palestinian suffering must also be shown otherwise people would be left with the impression that Palestinians are the aggressors and deserve anything Israel does to them.
Most people in this country actually believe more Israelis have been killed than Palestinians in this conflict. Why do you think that is?
This is an attempt to balance things out and a small attempt at that at a site that hardly gets anyones attention anyway. Have any of these pictures ever been in US News and World Reports, for instance?
More importantly, on the video side you get plenty of videos of Israelis killed at bus stops etc., by Palestinian suicide bombers but you don't get the videos of Israeli soldiers and settlers abducting young Palestinian women which I have seen on Arabic satellite feeds. Not to mention the beatings caught on film or the reporters/cameramen shot while doing their duties. All this is caught on film but never shown on US networks. Why is that?
During Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 (in which it killed around 20,000 people), one brave photographer sent snapshots he had taken of the Lebanese victims to a US news magazine fully expecting that they would show them because he thought this was groundbreaking news. Not only did they refuse to show them, they refused to send him his negatives back so that he could send them to another magazine. Now those images are lost forever.
It's important to show Israeli victims, but Palestinian suffering must also be shown otherwise people would be left with the impression that Palestinians are the aggressors and deserve anything Israel does to them.
Most people in this country actually believe more Israelis have been killed than Palestinians in this conflict. Why do you think that is?
THE FUCKING ASSHOLES!
Fadia Rafeedie is a Palestinian-American who was the year 2000 recipient of the Berkeley's prestigious University Medal, and gave the student address at the University's commencement ceremony in May, 2000. She was scheduled to speak first in a convocation lineup that also included US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. After a last-minute schedule change placed Albright first and moved Rafeedie to the end of the program, Rafeedie decided to lay aside her prepared talk, and instead use her time to give an impromptu response to Albright's speech and to the protests that had been voiced from the audience while Albright was on stage.
She gave Madeleine "ThePriceIsWorthIt" Albright a piece of her mind during her convocation speech. You can just imagine what she said. If you want to read it, here it is:
Upstaged but Not Silenced
The speech below, however, is what I find truly inspirational.
AUDIO:
Forward to 20 minutes into this to hear Fadia's speech to 70,000 demonstrators gathered in DC last April
http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/demnow/dn20020422.ra&start=10:09.9
Server crashes because of 5000 jpegs posted. I wonder if you could crash the thing by posting a massive amount of propoganda, ironic.
People die in war. It sucks. Call off the intifada take the oslo land deal, move back to jordan, whatever. I'm sure there are plenty of pictures of exploded pizza eaters and club kids, spare me and the server...
People die in war. It sucks. Call off the intifada take the oslo land deal, move back to jordan, whatever. I'm sure there are plenty of pictures of exploded pizza eaters and club kids, spare me and the server...
I don't enought re computers, but a string of pictures, as you presented this, is much, much more powerful than a single photo could ever be.
ps (you did real good on this post) k.
ps (you did real good on this post) k.
I'll post it just like it is above.
Does anyone know if there is a way to post to multiple Indymedia sites at once?
Does anyone know if there is a way to post to multiple Indymedia sites at once?
There' isn't, and it's certainly a good thing that you can't. That would just enable various spammers who already attempt to do this in a malicious fashion. If you flip through a few indymedias, you will note examples.
Those are really great pictures. Looking at something like that, or a good map of Israel + Palestine and the location of settlements, is convincing proof that speaks for itself. http://www.indymedia.org is the highest traffic generic indymedia.
Those are really great pictures. Looking at something like that, or a good map of Israel + Palestine and the location of settlements, is convincing proof that speaks for itself. http://www.indymedia.org is the highest traffic generic indymedia.
--"You blame the Israelis because they are organized, have an army and use tanks and modern weapons."
I am trying to stop our giveaway of these weapons to Israel and which they use against a defenseless civilian population. Why should we endanger ourselves to protect Israeli colonialism? Israel is not some sort of "GOOD CAUSE" which most Americans have grown up believing--because they were lied to for so long. It is a state which robbed the original indigenous population of a homeland so that it's people could selfishly proclaim that same land their own.
Our spineless politicians have been bought off by Israel and fall over themselves to see who can request the most "aid" for this racist state.
--"I lay this entirely at the feet of Yasser Arafat, who uses his own people as pawns in his deadly game of power and influence."
I think Israel is to blame for the suicide bombings. They are waging a war against a civilian population in order to steal the rest of their land -- not being content with the 78% of Palestinian land they have already stolen. They have even refused to accept the Palestinians' and Arabs' capitulation because they are not finished stealing yet. They have forced this conflict on the Palestinians and continue to drive the conflict because if they made peace, they would no longer be able to steal more land and water.
--"and even catch children in the crossfire"
Crossfire is a euphemism to explain away Palestinians blatantly shot out in the open by Israeli soldiers or settlers.
I am trying to stop our giveaway of these weapons to Israel and which they use against a defenseless civilian population. Why should we endanger ourselves to protect Israeli colonialism? Israel is not some sort of "GOOD CAUSE" which most Americans have grown up believing--because they were lied to for so long. It is a state which robbed the original indigenous population of a homeland so that it's people could selfishly proclaim that same land their own.
Our spineless politicians have been bought off by Israel and fall over themselves to see who can request the most "aid" for this racist state.
--"I lay this entirely at the feet of Yasser Arafat, who uses his own people as pawns in his deadly game of power and influence."
I think Israel is to blame for the suicide bombings. They are waging a war against a civilian population in order to steal the rest of their land -- not being content with the 78% of Palestinian land they have already stolen. They have even refused to accept the Palestinians' and Arabs' capitulation because they are not finished stealing yet. They have forced this conflict on the Palestinians and continue to drive the conflict because if they made peace, they would no longer be able to steal more land and water.
--"and even catch children in the crossfire"
Crossfire is a euphemism to explain away Palestinians blatantly shot out in the open by Israeli soldiers or settlers.
"I'll post it just like it is above.
Does anyone know if there is a way to post to multiple Indymedia sites at once?"
This is really great, really amazing article and it should be featured across the network. Let's everyone work and help Pictures get it out to all the IMC's.
There probably is software to publish to all the IMC sites at once, the trolls seem to have it, but no one legitimate does ...
Does anyone know if there is a way to post to multiple Indymedia sites at once?"
This is really great, really amazing article and it should be featured across the network. Let's everyone work and help Pictures get it out to all the IMC's.
There probably is software to publish to all the IMC sites at once, the trolls seem to have it, but no one legitimate does ...
I've already posted this to most of the IMC's in the states. I'm not planning on going through the international ones, but if anyone wants to post this there or to other boards, here is a link to an html version:
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/263.php
I uploaded this to the Hawaii IMC as "plain text" by accident...
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/263.php
I uploaded this to the Hawaii IMC as "plain text" by accident...
good job, guy(?). I've checked and you seem to have hit most of the national sites. (god, these pictures are hard to look at, but very, very powerful and SAD!). I would post them at a couple of international sites: UK, Ireland, Australia, and surprisingly enough, Israel (actually, these are just the English speaking sites, but then these pictures don't need words so I guess I'd add some European countries). I don't know how & If you'd want to give me a quick tutorial, I'll do it.
I already posted them in Sydney.
Just go here:
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/263.php
And copy all of the html up to "add your comments." you can copy by right clicking and copying or go to edit on the browser which also includes copy and paste.
Then go to the sites you want to post this on and right click in the text area and choose paste. Or click on edit and paste. Make sure to choose "html format" instead of "plain text" if that option is available.
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/263.php
And copy all of the html up to "add your comments." you can copy by right clicking and copying or go to edit on the browser which also includes copy and paste.
Then go to the sites you want to post this on and right click in the text area and choose paste. Or click on edit and paste. Make sure to choose "html format" instead of "plain text" if that option is available.
"By your logic, the white European immigrants that settled most of the United States stole the land from the Native Americans. I presume you are living on some of the ill-gotten gains. Therefore, that makes you just as bad as you say the Israelis are. "
Sorry, that flies about as good as a garbage truck does. The children are not to blame for the sins of the parents. I think we can all agree on this. Although the extermination of natives was very tragic - and the American state bears responsiblity to this day - the American individual does not. He did not murder the natives and he does not do so now.
Israeli settlers on the other hand - this is not an issue of the 1700s. This is happening NOW. By your logic, no one should have spoke against the invasion of the Americas at the time it was happening, they should have waited 200 years after the fact and then it would be OK. What crap.
" However, I find it curious why everyone else who forcibly took over land originally belonging to others are somehow now legitimate landowners (Vikings, Celts, Spaniards, white European immigrants), but the Israelis are not considered by some to be legitimate."
Again, this has to do with the fact that children are not responsible for the sins of the parents. Many Israelis who stand up against the atrocities of the IDF and merely happened to be born in Israel are blameless. Others who support the current actions, are guilty. There is a troll around on this board - name of Tom - who futilely attempts to have everyone believe that *all* Israelis are responsible, this is not the case and needless to say, he is largely ignored, though he continues to beat the dead horse (without much success of course - but then again, trolls aren't really known for their skill at persuasion!).
It is of course rather unfortunate all the people who have been killed and had their land stolen in the past, but still, no one can be blamed for being born somewhere. The whole point of the effort to condemn things like the settlement of the Americas, lebensraum theoretics, etc etc etc, and make these concepts morally reprehensible was so that these things would not occur again. Not to justify doing it, as you have with your twisted logic. "Oh, well, it's OK if Israel does it now, because gee, didn't some Celts steal a bit of land off the Picts in 300 BC? And 2 wrongs = 1 right, right?"
Yeah, sorry, doesn't really wash, at least not with me.
Sorry, that flies about as good as a garbage truck does. The children are not to blame for the sins of the parents. I think we can all agree on this. Although the extermination of natives was very tragic - and the American state bears responsiblity to this day - the American individual does not. He did not murder the natives and he does not do so now.
Israeli settlers on the other hand - this is not an issue of the 1700s. This is happening NOW. By your logic, no one should have spoke against the invasion of the Americas at the time it was happening, they should have waited 200 years after the fact and then it would be OK. What crap.
" However, I find it curious why everyone else who forcibly took over land originally belonging to others are somehow now legitimate landowners (Vikings, Celts, Spaniards, white European immigrants), but the Israelis are not considered by some to be legitimate."
Again, this has to do with the fact that children are not responsible for the sins of the parents. Many Israelis who stand up against the atrocities of the IDF and merely happened to be born in Israel are blameless. Others who support the current actions, are guilty. There is a troll around on this board - name of Tom - who futilely attempts to have everyone believe that *all* Israelis are responsible, this is not the case and needless to say, he is largely ignored, though he continues to beat the dead horse (without much success of course - but then again, trolls aren't really known for their skill at persuasion!).
It is of course rather unfortunate all the people who have been killed and had their land stolen in the past, but still, no one can be blamed for being born somewhere. The whole point of the effort to condemn things like the settlement of the Americas, lebensraum theoretics, etc etc etc, and make these concepts morally reprehensible was so that these things would not occur again. Not to justify doing it, as you have with your twisted logic. "Oh, well, it's OK if Israel does it now, because gee, didn't some Celts steal a bit of land off the Picts in 300 BC? And 2 wrongs = 1 right, right?"
Yeah, sorry, doesn't really wash, at least not with me.
So what are you saying? Since European settlers killed native Americans we should all keep giving money and weapons to Israel so it can do the same? Elementary morality says that two wrongs don't make a right. I don't want blood on my hands because of the 5-14 billion dollars we give to Israel annually so that it can complete it's ethnic cleansing and create an ethnically pure country. I have a say as to how my tax money is to be used and therefore I have a responsibility to make sure it's not used to perpetuate wrongs. I cannot understand how anyone can support giving money and weapons to this state. This is not some sort of good cause. We are not protecting Israel's security. We are helping Israel ethnically cleanse its unwanted indigenous population. How do you give 14 billion dollars in aid to a country of people who are relatively rich compared to the poor Palestinians they are subjugating, killing, and dispossessing? I just don't get how that is a good cause (which is, I guess, what Israel's supporters would have us believe).
My dear Mr........Several reactions to your comments:
1. Jews historically predate everyone else in what is now Israel. Including written history. Not that there were no "Palestinians" back then. But comparatively very few. They were mostly random peoples with no common identity. Some would say they still are. So, it's not really "Palestinian" land in the first place.
2. While I agree fully that children should not pay for the sins of the fathers, I don't see too much difference here. The difference is that one took place in 1948, the other in the early 19th Century. The similarities are that both lands are STILL OCCUPIED by the "children of the fathers", and most or all of the "fathers" are dead. So, who alive today is responsible? The Israeli military? Accept it or not, the fact is they have a country to protect, and the right to do it. The Israelis are ready to get on with life, with or without the Palestinians. It is the Palestinians (Arafat, in particular) who choose to be at war.
3. Jews who emigrated to the new state of Israel in '48 did so out of necessity. They only had two choices: stay in Europe or Asia and potentially be killed or tortured then killed-- OR --emigrate to Israel. They settled in Israel with the full blessing of the UN. Can't say that about early settlers in the US.
4. I don't want my taxes going to pay "restitution" to Native Americans, or anyone else who refused to willingly assimilate into a welcoming growing population during the forming of this great country. Especially since my grandparents were all immigrants to America in the 1920's.
5. Why is it the short periods of relative peace are always shattered by an unexpected act of the Palestinians if Israel is at fault?
6. Who is it that has vowed to push the other into the sea? I seem to recall that was one of the early battle cries of a young Arafat, often repeated even today. He has admitted that his goal is the total destruction of Israel and the death of the Jews.
7. In several responses, you still haven't addressed the issue of the Israeli offer to create a Palestinian sovereign state and Arafat's utter refusal. That one episode betrays all the arguments blaming Israel. Arafat had exactly what he said he wanted right in the palm of his hand. Even his two closest advisors urged him to take it, and he steadfastly refused. Why? He can always blame Israel for his peoples' tragedies and poverty. With their own sovereign state, he has to be a real leader. And he doesn't know how to do that. He only knows how to foment hatred and inspire death and destruction. From both sides.
Toad
1. Jews historically predate everyone else in what is now Israel. Including written history. Not that there were no "Palestinians" back then. But comparatively very few. They were mostly random peoples with no common identity. Some would say they still are. So, it's not really "Palestinian" land in the first place.
2. While I agree fully that children should not pay for the sins of the fathers, I don't see too much difference here. The difference is that one took place in 1948, the other in the early 19th Century. The similarities are that both lands are STILL OCCUPIED by the "children of the fathers", and most or all of the "fathers" are dead. So, who alive today is responsible? The Israeli military? Accept it or not, the fact is they have a country to protect, and the right to do it. The Israelis are ready to get on with life, with or without the Palestinians. It is the Palestinians (Arafat, in particular) who choose to be at war.
3. Jews who emigrated to the new state of Israel in '48 did so out of necessity. They only had two choices: stay in Europe or Asia and potentially be killed or tortured then killed-- OR --emigrate to Israel. They settled in Israel with the full blessing of the UN. Can't say that about early settlers in the US.
4. I don't want my taxes going to pay "restitution" to Native Americans, or anyone else who refused to willingly assimilate into a welcoming growing population during the forming of this great country. Especially since my grandparents were all immigrants to America in the 1920's.
5. Why is it the short periods of relative peace are always shattered by an unexpected act of the Palestinians if Israel is at fault?
6. Who is it that has vowed to push the other into the sea? I seem to recall that was one of the early battle cries of a young Arafat, often repeated even today. He has admitted that his goal is the total destruction of Israel and the death of the Jews.
7. In several responses, you still haven't addressed the issue of the Israeli offer to create a Palestinian sovereign state and Arafat's utter refusal. That one episode betrays all the arguments blaming Israel. Arafat had exactly what he said he wanted right in the palm of his hand. Even his two closest advisors urged him to take it, and he steadfastly refused. Why? He can always blame Israel for his peoples' tragedies and poverty. With their own sovereign state, he has to be a real leader. And he doesn't know how to do that. He only knows how to foment hatred and inspire death and destruction. From both sides.
Toad
It's simply amazing how Israel's supporters incessantly weave lie upon lie in order to defend the indefensible. It's way past time for this mountain of lies to come tumbling down like a house of cards.
I should not leave you with the impression that I feel Isreael is completely blameless. They have made plenty of mistakes in this mess. But the fact remains, if Arafat had not created the Frankenstein's monster of his people, had he not worked them up into such a frenzy that he could no longer hold them back, had he not been so completely successful in convincing them that "the Jews" were the one and only cause of their centuries of suffering, there would be no violence from either side.
Israel has for years had the might to complete an ethnic cleansing if they so desired. Based upon your comments, that is their desire. So, why have they not done so?
I, too, find it curious why some use quite tortured logic, faulty analogies, and some pretty far-fetched assumptions to support the Palestinians and Arafat. Look, the world knows the facts. You and I won't change them. Simply denying those facts and attempting to fabricate justification for Arafat and revise history won't solve the problem, only prolong it. Eventually, he will be gone, but in the meantime, it will take many generations for the Palestinians to suppress the hate instilled in their hearts by Arafat and, frankly, the Israelis themselves.
You still haven't answered my #7 question.......
Nice try to deflect it to another subject, but self-governance and a separate state is what Arafat and the Palestinians said they wanted since 1967. That is not apartheid at all. Why did they blow it?
I'll give you a hint: Let's say you are the leader of the Palestinians. Let's say the whole world watched you gain your power by convincing your people that someone else was to blame for their problems. Let's say you have no friends in the world as a result because they all know you used your own people and tried to focus their anger away from your inability to lead peacefully. Let's say you would have no one else but yourself to blame for your peoples' problems if they had their own state; your people would soon discover that you were lying to them all along. What would YOU do if you wanted to stay in power?
If you're Arafat, you would refuse the deal!
So, let's not get into disputing the facts and revising history. Neither side is blameless, but the Israelis did their part to come more than halfway. Arafat is just a stubborn, idealistic old warhorse without a shred of decency. Don't see what you believe, instead believe what you see.
Toad out.
Israel has for years had the might to complete an ethnic cleansing if they so desired. Based upon your comments, that is their desire. So, why have they not done so?
I, too, find it curious why some use quite tortured logic, faulty analogies, and some pretty far-fetched assumptions to support the Palestinians and Arafat. Look, the world knows the facts. You and I won't change them. Simply denying those facts and attempting to fabricate justification for Arafat and revise history won't solve the problem, only prolong it. Eventually, he will be gone, but in the meantime, it will take many generations for the Palestinians to suppress the hate instilled in their hearts by Arafat and, frankly, the Israelis themselves.
You still haven't answered my #7 question.......
Nice try to deflect it to another subject, but self-governance and a separate state is what Arafat and the Palestinians said they wanted since 1967. That is not apartheid at all. Why did they blow it?
I'll give you a hint: Let's say you are the leader of the Palestinians. Let's say the whole world watched you gain your power by convincing your people that someone else was to blame for their problems. Let's say you have no friends in the world as a result because they all know you used your own people and tried to focus their anger away from your inability to lead peacefully. Let's say you would have no one else but yourself to blame for your peoples' problems if they had their own state; your people would soon discover that you were lying to them all along. What would YOU do if you wanted to stay in power?
If you're Arafat, you would refuse the deal!
So, let's not get into disputing the facts and revising history. Neither side is blameless, but the Israelis did their part to come more than halfway. Arafat is just a stubborn, idealistic old warhorse without a shred of decency. Don't see what you believe, instead believe what you see.
Toad out.
"Israel has for years had the might to complete an ethnic cleansing if they so desired. Based upon your comments, that is their desire. So, why have they not done so? "
The truely fascist Israeli right that would support expuslions has only recently gotten enough power to get into the mainstream Israeli press... There was some pretty open ethnic cleansing in 49 and earlier (by Begin and company) but much of that was hidden from the Israeli public in the fog of war.
The truely fascist Israeli right that would support expuslions has only recently gotten enough power to get into the mainstream Israeli press... There was some pretty open ethnic cleansing in 49 and earlier (by Begin and company) but much of that was hidden from the Israeli public in the fog of war.
What about Sharon's first stint as PM? Netanyahu? Begin as PM? Those are the supposed hard right wing facists. They had just as much power then as now, and have had ample opportunity, haven't they?
What do you call what they are doing right now? It is full-fledged, racist ethnic cleansing.
Any worse and it would be called genocide.
Any worse and it would be called genocide.
"I daydream--if only! If in 1948, 1956, 1967 or 1973 Israel had acted like the Third Reich then today Israelis today would shop, marry, eat pizza and play unmolested. And of course Jews, not sheiks, would have that Gulf Oil."
-David D. Perlmutter
-David D. Perlmutter
To see a VIDEO of the above speech by Fadia Rafeedie, forward to 29 minutes into this video:
http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/ramfiles/DN042202_vid.ram
http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/ramfiles/DN042202_vid.ram
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject".
-Sir Winston Churchill
"I'm outta this looney bin".
-Toad
-Sir Winston Churchill
"I'm outta this looney bin".
-Toad
"I should not leave you with the impression that I feel Isreael is completely blameless. They have made plenty of mistakes in this mess. But the fact remains, if Arafat had not created the Frankenstein's monster of his people, had he not worked them up into such a frenzy that he could no longer hold them back, had he not been so completely successful in convincing them that "the Jews" were the one and only cause of their centuries of suffering, there would be no violence from either side."
Ah, typical, we can't see the complexities of a problem so we have to invent some comic book supervillains to explain it. It is impossible that any one man could influence a society so much; rather, such figures are expressions of pre-existing attitudes within the society of which they are a part. The "bad guy" myth is created for several reasons. It simplifies the problem. It demonizes the other side. It disacknowledges widespread attitudes arising in a society from various roots.
The Palestinian society clearly feels - and who can blame them? - that Israelis are oppressing them.
Ah, typical, we can't see the complexities of a problem so we have to invent some comic book supervillains to explain it. It is impossible that any one man could influence a society so much; rather, such figures are expressions of pre-existing attitudes within the society of which they are a part. The "bad guy" myth is created for several reasons. It simplifies the problem. It demonizes the other side. It disacknowledges widespread attitudes arising in a society from various roots.
The Palestinian society clearly feels - and who can blame them? - that Israelis are oppressing them.
back to the top
First of all, NONE OF YOU KNOW WHETHER THOSE PHOTOS ARE REAL, none of you know whether those photos are really from israel or palestine, none of you know who did the killing behind those photos, for all you know those photos are from saddam killing kurds.
THOSE PHOTOS TELL YOU NOTHING, OTHER THAN THAT SOME PEOPLE DIED SOMEWHERE, YOU DON"T KNOW WHO, OR WHY.
Don't see a giant list of photos, have some random internet guy tell you they were all Israelis killing Palestinians, and jump to judgment or a conclusion.
I mean, what the hell, should I dig up a few hundred photos of semitic israeli jews dying and pile them all together, and make you jump to conclusions the other way? It's CRAP.
And, regardless of all that, if you do feel sorry for palestinians, maybe you should wonder why egypt and jordan and palestinians controlled the west bank, gaza and east jerusalem from 1948 till 1967 and CHOSE NOT TO FORM A STATE, instead just attacking israel over and over, and if you feel sorry for palestinians you should wonder why they were ok with their leader, the PLO/Arafat, from 1967 to the 1990's, always focusing more on destroying israel than agreeing for peace and a side by side 2 state solution. Israel HAD NO CHOICE but to continue to occupy as long as the LEADERS of the people continued to call for israel's destruction, something that went on for 45 straight years!
And now that arafat is old, washed up, and has realized he can't win by brute force so he better embrace the world media, and he's claimed to not want to destroy israel anymore, HAMAS, the MOST POPULAR PALESTINIAN ORGANIZATION, have kept the battle going, declaring EVERY jew in the region that dares call himself an israeli must die, hamas are against israel existing no matter what, that's a fact, they declare ALL of palestine/israel to be "jew-occupied territory."
And attention indymedia editors, DO NOT DELETE THIS, this is 100% VALID. Thank you.
THOSE PHOTOS TELL YOU NOTHING, OTHER THAN THAT SOME PEOPLE DIED SOMEWHERE, YOU DON"T KNOW WHO, OR WHY.
Don't see a giant list of photos, have some random internet guy tell you they were all Israelis killing Palestinians, and jump to judgment or a conclusion.
I mean, what the hell, should I dig up a few hundred photos of semitic israeli jews dying and pile them all together, and make you jump to conclusions the other way? It's CRAP.
And, regardless of all that, if you do feel sorry for palestinians, maybe you should wonder why egypt and jordan and palestinians controlled the west bank, gaza and east jerusalem from 1948 till 1967 and CHOSE NOT TO FORM A STATE, instead just attacking israel over and over, and if you feel sorry for palestinians you should wonder why they were ok with their leader, the PLO/Arafat, from 1967 to the 1990's, always focusing more on destroying israel than agreeing for peace and a side by side 2 state solution. Israel HAD NO CHOICE but to continue to occupy as long as the LEADERS of the people continued to call for israel's destruction, something that went on for 45 straight years!
And now that arafat is old, washed up, and has realized he can't win by brute force so he better embrace the world media, and he's claimed to not want to destroy israel anymore, HAMAS, the MOST POPULAR PALESTINIAN ORGANIZATION, have kept the battle going, declaring EVERY jew in the region that dares call himself an israeli must die, hamas are against israel existing no matter what, that's a fact, they declare ALL of palestine/israel to be "jew-occupied territory."
And attention indymedia editors, DO NOT DELETE THIS, this is 100% VALID. Thank you.
The comments by "UGH" are the same old denials and justifications based on fabricated history that one has come to expect from Israel's supporters.
Denials even in the face of evidence such as this is particularly repugnant and wreaks of the same sort of fascism as Holocaust denial.
Total loon.
Denials even in the face of evidence such as this is particularly repugnant and wreaks of the same sort of fascism as Holocaust denial.
Total loon.
There is no way of knowing what these photos are or where they came from.
For all we know, these photos are attacks on kurds.
Anyone can take a few dozen war photos and make up whatever captions they want for them.
For all we know, these photos are attacks on kurds.
Anyone can take a few dozen war photos and make up whatever captions they want for them.
has it occured to any of you morons that the text explaining the photos may be totally inaccurate and fabricated?
has it occured to you that the majority of those photos could be scenes of death from ANYWHERE in the middle east? For all you know those are dead pakistanis after fighting india or something
you don't care, you just froth at the mouth grabbing any bit of israel-hating crap you can find
has it occured to you that the majority of those photos could be scenes of death from ANYWHERE in the middle east? For all you know those are dead pakistanis after fighting india or something
you don't care, you just froth at the mouth grabbing any bit of israel-hating crap you can find
This just shows that sometihings needs to be done to stop the voilence Between the Palestinan and the Isrealis. This is not a fair battle, the palestinains are losing more, their kids are dying at a young age, they are being invaded and curfewed are breing imposed on them as if they were in prison, basically their rights of being palestinains are treated. All the other powereful nations that can assisted are turning a blind eye to this sitution. My question is where are all the human rights activists? Where are all the people that was speaking out about lack of human rights policies in places like China and the korean Countries? What more proof do we need to step in and correct these injustice. It really sick my soul to see these pictures because i was one of those persons who never sought to look deeper than the international news that was showned to me...! For that i thank whoever sent me this article. It is an eye opener!!
For more information:
http://N/a
Uh, Palestinians should call off their intifada. They were on the road to success 2.5 years ago, but they began their retarded intifada. Blame their leadership for attacking israel, which resulted in israel putting a lot more troops in palestinian territories, all while lunatic groups like islamic jihad and hamas have sworn to destroy israel no matter what israel does.
Another thing, you object to "foreign powers" carving up a country, well how come you don't object to foreign powers carving up and creating the boundaries for iraq, or kuwait, or jordan? How come the only country you focus your attention is the one run by jews?
And if you're against religious states, you should be against israel, saudia arabia, iran, and ALL the religious states. But you're only against the one run by the jews, even though there is more religious tolerance in that state than in saudia arabia or jordan or other places.
Are you against homophobia? Why aren't you out campaigning against US aid to Egypt, whose government will kill you if you committ homosexual acts?
Are you against religious discrimination? Why aren't you out campaigning against Saudia Arabia?
Are you against discrimination against women? Why aren't you out campaigning against Iran, Saudia Arabia, and other countries?
Are you against the aids epidemic? Why aren't you out campainging for aid being given to Africa?
Why the obsession with Israel, when it's the Palestinians who began their stupid lame intifada which made things a lot worse for them?
And if you're against religious states, you should be against israel, saudia arabia, iran, and ALL the religious states. But you're only against the one run by the jews, even though there is more religious tolerance in that state than in saudia arabia or jordan or other places.
Are you against homophobia? Why aren't you out campaigning against US aid to Egypt, whose government will kill you if you committ homosexual acts?
Are you against religious discrimination? Why aren't you out campaigning against Saudia Arabia?
Are you against discrimination against women? Why aren't you out campaigning against Iran, Saudia Arabia, and other countries?
Are you against the aids epidemic? Why aren't you out campainging for aid being given to Africa?
Why the obsession with Israel, when it's the Palestinians who began their stupid lame intifada which made things a lot worse for them?
As I said before, Israeli denials even when faced with evidence such as this is particularly repugnant and wreaks of the same sort of fascism as Holocaust denial.
Many people may not know the history of the region in detail, but many on here know when they smell a rat.
The reason I say it is important to learn the real history of what's gone on there is because Israel's supporters have in the past and will continue to weave lie after lie in defense of their favorite country. Not that that's necessary. The media and press does it for them, so I don't know why they even bother to post their crap except that they cannot tolerate even a modicum of dissent.
Please see Noam Chomsky's book "The Fateful Triangle" for the recent history of the region. This is certainly not the only accurate book on the subject (there are others by Edward Said, Ilan Pappe, and Simha Flapan) but it is one of the most comprehensive, covering most of the events that have taken place and, importantly, it documents and exposes the media's lies and distortions on these events.
For example, the guy above says "israel was being attacked for 19 years."
When you take a look at what actually happened you see that it is true but with one slight oversight -- Israel was being attacked (small-scale attacks) because it had conducted large scale terror attacks against whole towns and villages at will without any complaint from anyone.
For example, from "The Fateful Triangle":
"Immediately after the armistice agreements of 1949, Israel began encroachments into the demilitarized zones along with military attacks with many civilian casualties and the expulsion of thousands of Arabs, some of whom later formed terrorist bands that carried out what they presumably regarded as reprisals and what Israel and its supporters regard as unprovoked terrorism; the terms 'terrorism' and 'reprisal' are to a considerable extent terms of propaganda, not description. These actions set the stage for futher conflicts with Egypt and Syria. Israeli raids in the Gaza Strip led to fedayeen attacks that served as the pretext fo rhte 1956 invasion, though as is known from captured Egyptian documents and other sources, Egypt was attempting to calm the border region in fear of such an attack. The aggressors concocted an elaborate and largely successful propaganda campaign in an effort to show that it was Nasser who was planning an attack, not they, comparing him to Hilter while they effectively mimicked Goebbels."
-Noam Chomsky
Fateful Triangle, pg. 101
Chomsky goes on to describe in detail how the New York Times distorted events to make it look as though Israel's attack of Egypt was an Egyptian attack thereby inverting reality once again.
Another piece of fabrication:
--"Israel offered to unoccupy in exchange for peace. Israel received peace from egypt and jordan, and unoccupied sinai as a response."
Egypt offered Israel peace in 1971 and was rebuffed. Egypt then attacked Israeli positions in the Sinai in 1973 which was occupied six years earlier in a war Israel started. After that attack, which shook Israel up pretty bad because Egyptian and Jordanian tanks *voluntarily* stopped right at its border, Israel was finally ready to make peace.
History is important. Even if you do not accept Israel's claims that it needs to maintain its occupation for "security," there are plenty of Americans who do. And that is the reason activists need to be informed of the truth. Without that, Israel's supporters will always be able to whip people in line, even in the face of blatant atrocities, by simply repeating the old mantra we are all familiar with at this point.
Is Israel threatened? Yes, but so are Palestinians and Palestine has been destroyed and its remnants stolen from those few remaining. And Israel's predicament is entirely of its own making as even today they reject the hand of peace that was held out to them (as late as last March 2002 in the Arab League summit in Beirut) because they believe if they hold out they can acquire even more land -- even if that means more war crimes committed against Palestinians in the process.
Instead of admitting wrongs committed and attempting to right them, Israelis are piling mistake upon mistake and expect us to bail them out as usual. It's time (way past time actually) to cut the umbilical.
Many people may not know the history of the region in detail, but many on here know when they smell a rat.
The reason I say it is important to learn the real history of what's gone on there is because Israel's supporters have in the past and will continue to weave lie after lie in defense of their favorite country. Not that that's necessary. The media and press does it for them, so I don't know why they even bother to post their crap except that they cannot tolerate even a modicum of dissent.
Please see Noam Chomsky's book "The Fateful Triangle" for the recent history of the region. This is certainly not the only accurate book on the subject (there are others by Edward Said, Ilan Pappe, and Simha Flapan) but it is one of the most comprehensive, covering most of the events that have taken place and, importantly, it documents and exposes the media's lies and distortions on these events.
For example, the guy above says "israel was being attacked for 19 years."
When you take a look at what actually happened you see that it is true but with one slight oversight -- Israel was being attacked (small-scale attacks) because it had conducted large scale terror attacks against whole towns and villages at will without any complaint from anyone.
For example, from "The Fateful Triangle":
"Immediately after the armistice agreements of 1949, Israel began encroachments into the demilitarized zones along with military attacks with many civilian casualties and the expulsion of thousands of Arabs, some of whom later formed terrorist bands that carried out what they presumably regarded as reprisals and what Israel and its supporters regard as unprovoked terrorism; the terms 'terrorism' and 'reprisal' are to a considerable extent terms of propaganda, not description. These actions set the stage for futher conflicts with Egypt and Syria. Israeli raids in the Gaza Strip led to fedayeen attacks that served as the pretext fo rhte 1956 invasion, though as is known from captured Egyptian documents and other sources, Egypt was attempting to calm the border region in fear of such an attack. The aggressors concocted an elaborate and largely successful propaganda campaign in an effort to show that it was Nasser who was planning an attack, not they, comparing him to Hilter while they effectively mimicked Goebbels."
-Noam Chomsky
Fateful Triangle, pg. 101
Chomsky goes on to describe in detail how the New York Times distorted events to make it look as though Israel's attack of Egypt was an Egyptian attack thereby inverting reality once again.
Another piece of fabrication:
--"Israel offered to unoccupy in exchange for peace. Israel received peace from egypt and jordan, and unoccupied sinai as a response."
Egypt offered Israel peace in 1971 and was rebuffed. Egypt then attacked Israeli positions in the Sinai in 1973 which was occupied six years earlier in a war Israel started. After that attack, which shook Israel up pretty bad because Egyptian and Jordanian tanks *voluntarily* stopped right at its border, Israel was finally ready to make peace.
History is important. Even if you do not accept Israel's claims that it needs to maintain its occupation for "security," there are plenty of Americans who do. And that is the reason activists need to be informed of the truth. Without that, Israel's supporters will always be able to whip people in line, even in the face of blatant atrocities, by simply repeating the old mantra we are all familiar with at this point.
Is Israel threatened? Yes, but so are Palestinians and Palestine has been destroyed and its remnants stolen from those few remaining. And Israel's predicament is entirely of its own making as even today they reject the hand of peace that was held out to them (as late as last March 2002 in the Arab League summit in Beirut) because they believe if they hold out they can acquire even more land -- even if that means more war crimes committed against Palestinians in the process.
Instead of admitting wrongs committed and attempting to right them, Israelis are piling mistake upon mistake and expect us to bail them out as usual. It's time (way past time actually) to cut the umbilical.
hey ..., I'm sick of reading your fucking filth. I hate you so much you have no idea. I wish you were on the 100th floor of the WTC on sept 11. Fuck you, and fuck your whore of a mother for letting filth like you shit out of her cunt
hey ..., I wish your fucking whore of a mother had aborted you.
You are a LIAR, you are DISHONESt, you are UNBALANCED, you LEAVE FACT OUT that you don't like, you are an ENEMY.
You are a LIAR, you are DISHONESt, you are UNBALANCED, you LEAVE FACT OUT that you don't like, you are an ENEMY.
– Hanan is a Palestinian lawyer [with second-class Israeli citizenship], who works with the human rights group LAW. She told me, "I am against the attacks on Israeli civilians– but why does the media feature the victims of suicide bombings but says nothing about the Palestinian children who were just killed? Is our blood so cheap?"
-Penny Rosenwasser
For more information:
http://www.MECAforPEACE.org/penny02.html
being so bliend to see the truth is your fult .... lossing your tempper is the proph of the truth.
For all how claims that the pics are not real...... I will only say that YOU ARE NOT LIVING THERE....and palastenians DEATH dose not need a FACKED PICS it is going on day by day..... but you are not allowed to see it.....OR YOU DO NOT WANT TO ADMETT IT since your paricipation is already there....
For all how claims that the pics are not real...... I will only say that YOU ARE NOT LIVING THERE....and palastenians DEATH dose not need a FACKED PICS it is going on day by day..... but you are not allowed to see it.....OR YOU DO NOT WANT TO ADMETT IT since your paricipation is already there....
What do they expect when they try to ethnically cleanse the land of their original inhabitants shooting rioting children in the head and kill 20,000 people in Lebanon in an unprovoked attack in 1982.
What they expect is the entire world (or at least the US) to protect them.
Israel has an opportunity to right wrongs committed and make reparations but this is not on their radar screen at all. Instead, they have their sights set on stealing the remaining 22% of Palestinian land and yet cannot understand why they are under any threat at all. Unreal.
If you want to bemoan your predicament, go ahead. But don't cry to anyone else about it anymore.
What they expect is the entire world (or at least the US) to protect them.
Israel has an opportunity to right wrongs committed and make reparations but this is not on their radar screen at all. Instead, they have their sights set on stealing the remaining 22% of Palestinian land and yet cannot understand why they are under any threat at all. Unreal.
If you want to bemoan your predicament, go ahead. But don't cry to anyone else about it anymore.
--"I hate you so much you have no idea."
You're right. I had no idea. Now I do.
Thank you for your courtesy and politeness. Try not to burst a blood vessel, alright.
You're right. I had no idea. Now I do.
Thank you for your courtesy and politeness. Try not to burst a blood vessel, alright.
There barely WERE any original inhabitants, you fucking asshole. If you actually know anything about the early 1900's, hundreds of thousands of arabs immigrated to that land, while jewish immigration was limited. People got wind that Jews were trying to flock there, so the fucking british limited jewish immigration, while there was unlimited arab immigration. Meanwhile, Jews were building up cities like tel aviv that had jack SHIT to them beforehand. Jews were rushing to buy as much land and property as possible, and attacks were being waged against them. You have the whole thing twisted around, and I think yo're doing it on PUPROSE, because you, like the other sick rabid dogs that obsess about israel here, have an AGENDA, you want to IGNORE what bad shit other people did and focus all your blame on what holocaust and discrimination-fleeing jews did.
Fuck you, you dishonest lying sack of shit
Fuck you, you dishonest lying sack of shit
So this supporter of Israel above argues there were no Palestinians, that they just started to move there to pretend to live there so that newly arriving Jews would not be able to lay claim to the land.
What kind of crap is that.
What about the 750,000 Palestinians expelled in 1948 through massacres of several dozen villages which incorporated every horror imaginable including rapes and bayonetting of abdomens of pregnant women -- all in an attempt to make the remaining population flee in terror so that newly arrived Jews could take over their homes.
"By 1948, the Jew was not only able to 'defend himself' but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli army archives, 'in almost every village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes'...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that 'every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.'"
-Norman Finkelstein
"Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict"
http://www.cactus48.com/partition.html
What kind of crap is that.
What about the 750,000 Palestinians expelled in 1948 through massacres of several dozen villages which incorporated every horror imaginable including rapes and bayonetting of abdomens of pregnant women -- all in an attempt to make the remaining population flee in terror so that newly arrived Jews could take over their homes.
"By 1948, the Jew was not only able to 'defend himself' but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli army archives, 'in almost every village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes'...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that 'every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.'"
-Norman Finkelstein
"Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict"
http://www.cactus48.com/partition.html
back to the top
Hey "..." hitler didn't use vulgarity either, I guess that makes him a standup guy!
Neither did Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, or Nelson Mandela. So what's your point? You stupid fuck.
My point is that use of vulgarity, or lack of vulgarity, doesn't prove how intelligent someone is.
You, for example, haven't been vulgar, but you have taken every aspect of a situation and swayed it against israel. You and the other crazed zionist-conspiracy nuts are morons, but hey, at least you're not vulgar!
You, for example, haven't been vulgar, but you have taken every aspect of a situation and swayed it against israel. You and the other crazed zionist-conspiracy nuts are morons, but hey, at least you're not vulgar!
--"My point is that use of vulgarity, or lack of vulgarity, doesn't prove how intelligent someone is."
Hey. We might actually be in agreement on something. Imagine that.
--"You, for example, haven't been vulgar...You and the other crazed zionist-conspiracy nuts are morons, but hey, at least you're not vulgar!"
Another lie. I was vulgar. Take a look above.
In case you missed it. Fuck you, you stupid fuck.
Look. Peace is possible but not so long as people keep believing all the Israeli fabrications meant to keep them rich in our tax money, weapons, and diplomatic cover.
Israel is the one party rebuffing peace at this point and peace will never happen there till people in this country understand this and begin to act appropriately.
I've provided plenty of evidence of that but you obviously want to ignore it and blame it all on the Palestinians and Arabs presumably because Israel is your favorite country.
I for one am tired of this conflict and want to see it resolved peacefully but with justice and fairness to the Palestinians who are the victims here. You can't tell me that the occupiers are victims and that everything is the Arabs' fault as the media says because I know too much.
And, oh, fuck you very much. (you stupid fuck)
Hey. We might actually be in agreement on something. Imagine that.
--"You, for example, haven't been vulgar...You and the other crazed zionist-conspiracy nuts are morons, but hey, at least you're not vulgar!"
Another lie. I was vulgar. Take a look above.
In case you missed it. Fuck you, you stupid fuck.
Look. Peace is possible but not so long as people keep believing all the Israeli fabrications meant to keep them rich in our tax money, weapons, and diplomatic cover.
Israel is the one party rebuffing peace at this point and peace will never happen there till people in this country understand this and begin to act appropriately.
I've provided plenty of evidence of that but you obviously want to ignore it and blame it all on the Palestinians and Arabs presumably because Israel is your favorite country.
I for one am tired of this conflict and want to see it resolved peacefully but with justice and fairness to the Palestinians who are the victims here. You can't tell me that the occupiers are victims and that everything is the Arabs' fault as the media says because I know too much.
And, oh, fuck you very much. (you stupid fuck)
This is a lie: "Israel is the one party rebuffing peace at this point"
Please don't type lies. You're more than capable of making reasonable points that are against the israeli govt without having to resort to lies.
Hamas, Islamic JIhad, hezbollah and other very large palestinian organizations are also blatantly rebuffing peace.
And what's "Intifada 2?" that's not rebuffing peace?
See, if you and other people here would simply argue that israel needs to end their occupation, and then perhaps suggested additional solutions, then I and others wouldn't be able to attack you. I might disagree, or claim why it doesn't make sense to unoccupy people while many of them are still trying to kill you and they don't have the means of stopping those people, but then at elast we'd engage in a civil debate, based on reality. But beacuse you and others here lop every single aspect of the problem on israel's shoulders, and ignore actions taken against israel over the last 1-2 years, and/or 10 years ago, or 30 years ago or WHENENVER, you force people like me to respond accordingly.
There are tons of anti-israel people here who don't want the jews of israel to die, they just don't think the israeli govt is being fair (or wasn't fair originally, whatever). but there are also tons of anti-israel people here who lie and deceive and rant like crazy lunatics about how evil anything associated with zionism is, and they exaggerate and unfairly single one side out, etc., and that's a problem.
Please don't type lies. You're more than capable of making reasonable points that are against the israeli govt without having to resort to lies.
Hamas, Islamic JIhad, hezbollah and other very large palestinian organizations are also blatantly rebuffing peace.
And what's "Intifada 2?" that's not rebuffing peace?
See, if you and other people here would simply argue that israel needs to end their occupation, and then perhaps suggested additional solutions, then I and others wouldn't be able to attack you. I might disagree, or claim why it doesn't make sense to unoccupy people while many of them are still trying to kill you and they don't have the means of stopping those people, but then at elast we'd engage in a civil debate, based on reality. But beacuse you and others here lop every single aspect of the problem on israel's shoulders, and ignore actions taken against israel over the last 1-2 years, and/or 10 years ago, or 30 years ago or WHENENVER, you force people like me to respond accordingly.
There are tons of anti-israel people here who don't want the jews of israel to die, they just don't think the israeli govt is being fair (or wasn't fair originally, whatever). but there are also tons of anti-israel people here who lie and deceive and rant like crazy lunatics about how evil anything associated with zionism is, and they exaggerate and unfairly single one side out, etc., and that's a problem.
When the PLO formally recognized Israel within its internationally recognized borders and agreed to a two-state solution in 1993, like most Palestinians, I swallowed hard but accepted it. We believed that this unprecedented historic compromise, though bitter, was necessary to bring about peace. Those who completely rejected the creation of a state limited to the West Bank and Gaza Strip -- a mere twenty two percent of the country in which Palestinians were an overwhelming majority just fifty years ago -- were relegated to the margins of the Palestinian movement, both on the left and the Islamist right.
Israel gave everyone the impression that it would agree to a Palestinian state, and that it was only a matter of working out the technical formalities. But almost 10 years later, Israel has still never recognized the Palestinian right to statehood, much less agreed to the creation of such a state. On the contrary, in practice it has done everything to make the emergence of such a state impossible by continuing to furiously build colonies all over the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. The settler population in the West Bank has more than doubled since 1993, and not a day goes by without further colonization.
Because this policy has succeeded in solidifying Israeli control, and has, as intended, rendered a rational partition of the country virtually impossible, an increasing number of Palestinians, including some representatives of the Palestinian Authority, have started to talk once again about bi-nationalism -- the creation of a single democratic state for Israelis and Palestinians -- as the only viable solution to the conflict.
This idea is horrifying to many Israelis, who view it as a plot to "destroy Israel" since the vastly higher birth rate among Palestinians will soon make them a majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, just as they were until 1948.
None are more horrified by this prospect than Israel's traditional "peace camp," represented by the Labor and Meretz parties. And yet, because of its liberal values, the "peace camp" is unable to embrace formal apartheid or ethnic cleansing to "solve the demographic problem" as do Israel's right wing parties. The liberals want both the benefits of Jewish privilege that comes from living in a "Jewish state" while at the same time being faithful to their democratic values. They have shown themselves to be entirely bankrupt morally, intellectually and politically, and to have no serious ideas whatsoever for resolving the conundrum of their hypocrisy. They embrace Palestinian statehood warmly in theory but miss no opportunity to undermine and sabotage it in practice and to present proposals for meaningless and nominal statehood within a greater Israel.
I am one of those who accepted the two-state solution (although I opposed the Oslo Accords because I believed they could not lead to that goal) not enthusiastically, but because it offers Palestinians and Israelis a chance at normalcy from which they could one day -- like the European Union -- build a future of peace and prosperity from the ashes of war and hatred...
For Palestinians, giving up the seventy-eight percent of Palestine that became Israel in 1948 is giving up a part of themselves. It is gut-wrenchingly hard, and for some impossible. I respect that. For millions of Palestinians this is the land from which they, their parents or grandparents were expelled, in which homes and farms, shops and factories, churches and mosques, an entire society, was uprooted in exchange for decades of dispossession, misery in refugee camps, and demonization by Israel and its apologists. But, like millions of others, I was prepared to accept it for the sake of peace.
Palestinian private property remains inviolate and all property seized by Israel, even of those who choose not to return, must be returned to its owners or paid for at the fair market price, including use and interest. Clinton Administration Deputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat set out some sensible principles for dealing with property confiscated from European Jews and others by Nazi Germany, which could be adopted here. The same principles should apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
These conditions represent an enormous historic compromise. They call for two states, a Jewish Israel on seventy eight percent of the territory of historic Palestine and a State of Palestine on just twenty two percent. They call for full recognition of Israel within secure and recognized borders, the implementation of UN resolutions, sharing of Jerusalem and a just resolution to the refugee problem that respects refugee rights as well as Israel's needs.
From this basis, Israelis, Palestinians and later perhaps Jordanians, Egyptians, Lebanese and Syrians, might after a couple of generations feel they can join together in something like the European Union. That would be a choice freely made among sovereign peoples. I could live with this, and, though I do not speak for anyone but myself, I believe that other Palestinians could too -- indeed this is basically what millions of them thought they were endorsing when they elected Yasir Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority.
The problem is that there is not one major Israeli party or leader who is willing to put such a vision to the Israeli people. Even the most "dovish" want to keep most of the settlers where they are, annex large chunks of the West Bank, keep control of most of Jerusalem, and reject categorically any discussion of the right of return. No allowance is made for the massive compromises already made by the Palestinians, and more still are demanded. Israeli sociologist Jeff Halper argues that it is already too late and Israel's "matrix of control" in the occupied territories cannot, in effect, be dismantled. If Halper is right, then nothing any Israeli leader says will save the two-state solution. But if he is wrong and it can be saved, time is very short and we must hear a commitment to completely end the occupation from the Israelis now. After all, they are the principal beneficiaries of this solution.
The whole world is waiting, not least the Arab world which again held out its hand to Israel last March when the Arab League unanimously reaffirmed its commitment to a two-state solution.
Sadly, though, the political field in Israel looks unlikely produce anyone who will seize this golden opportunity. I believe, therefore, that Israel will likely miss the boat on the two-state solution, and we will have to think about what it will be like to live together in one state, and more importantly how to get there peacefully because no road map exists. For me, that is not a bad thing. I have no problem with the idea of living with Israelis, as long as we are equal before the law and in practice. I do not see the births or immigration of Jews as a "demographic time bomb" to be regarded with horror, nor am I frightened of having next door neighbors who speak a different language or worship in different ways. I embrace human and cultural diversity, no less in the land where my parents were born, than I do here in the United States.
I am prepared to accept two states as a practical solution to the conflict and do everything in my power to make it work. However, the mere trappings of nationalism -- flags, anthems, stately buildings, and passports -- mean absolutely nothing to me in themselves and I would just as soon do away with them. What matters is the content: does the flag represent true independence and sovereignty? Does the anthem represent common humanist values? Do the buildings enclose genuinely democratic institutions that do justice? Does a passport give its holder the freedom to travel the world and live securely in his homeland? These are the questions that matter.
Palestine/Israel could be two countries with a border between them that may one day lose its significance, just as the border between France and Germany has lost its power to divide people. Or, it could be one country for two peoples. I do not really care as long as we choose one path quickly and stick to it, and that, in the end, Israelis and Palestinians enjoy peace, democracy and human rights together, not at each other's expense.
True peace, whatever way we choose to achieve it, has a price. The powerful must give up some of their power and share it with the weak, or conflict is inevitable. Both a genuine two-state solution, as well as a single democratic state, would require that Israelis relinquish their monopoly on power in a manner they have never seriously considered thus far. Peace only came to South Africa when whites realized this and gave up their monopoly on power. Israel is far from that point and still seems to be looking for a way to avoid the choice. That means discussion about how to live together will remain only academic, while conflict and bloodshed rage on.
Israel gave everyone the impression that it would agree to a Palestinian state, and that it was only a matter of working out the technical formalities. But almost 10 years later, Israel has still never recognized the Palestinian right to statehood, much less agreed to the creation of such a state. On the contrary, in practice it has done everything to make the emergence of such a state impossible by continuing to furiously build colonies all over the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. The settler population in the West Bank has more than doubled since 1993, and not a day goes by without further colonization.
Because this policy has succeeded in solidifying Israeli control, and has, as intended, rendered a rational partition of the country virtually impossible, an increasing number of Palestinians, including some representatives of the Palestinian Authority, have started to talk once again about bi-nationalism -- the creation of a single democratic state for Israelis and Palestinians -- as the only viable solution to the conflict.
This idea is horrifying to many Israelis, who view it as a plot to "destroy Israel" since the vastly higher birth rate among Palestinians will soon make them a majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, just as they were until 1948.
None are more horrified by this prospect than Israel's traditional "peace camp," represented by the Labor and Meretz parties. And yet, because of its liberal values, the "peace camp" is unable to embrace formal apartheid or ethnic cleansing to "solve the demographic problem" as do Israel's right wing parties. The liberals want both the benefits of Jewish privilege that comes from living in a "Jewish state" while at the same time being faithful to their democratic values. They have shown themselves to be entirely bankrupt morally, intellectually and politically, and to have no serious ideas whatsoever for resolving the conundrum of their hypocrisy. They embrace Palestinian statehood warmly in theory but miss no opportunity to undermine and sabotage it in practice and to present proposals for meaningless and nominal statehood within a greater Israel.
I am one of those who accepted the two-state solution (although I opposed the Oslo Accords because I believed they could not lead to that goal) not enthusiastically, but because it offers Palestinians and Israelis a chance at normalcy from which they could one day -- like the European Union -- build a future of peace and prosperity from the ashes of war and hatred...
For Palestinians, giving up the seventy-eight percent of Palestine that became Israel in 1948 is giving up a part of themselves. It is gut-wrenchingly hard, and for some impossible. I respect that. For millions of Palestinians this is the land from which they, their parents or grandparents were expelled, in which homes and farms, shops and factories, churches and mosques, an entire society, was uprooted in exchange for decades of dispossession, misery in refugee camps, and demonization by Israel and its apologists. But, like millions of others, I was prepared to accept it for the sake of peace.
Palestinian private property remains inviolate and all property seized by Israel, even of those who choose not to return, must be returned to its owners or paid for at the fair market price, including use and interest. Clinton Administration Deputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat set out some sensible principles for dealing with property confiscated from European Jews and others by Nazi Germany, which could be adopted here. The same principles should apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
These conditions represent an enormous historic compromise. They call for two states, a Jewish Israel on seventy eight percent of the territory of historic Palestine and a State of Palestine on just twenty two percent. They call for full recognition of Israel within secure and recognized borders, the implementation of UN resolutions, sharing of Jerusalem and a just resolution to the refugee problem that respects refugee rights as well as Israel's needs.
From this basis, Israelis, Palestinians and later perhaps Jordanians, Egyptians, Lebanese and Syrians, might after a couple of generations feel they can join together in something like the European Union. That would be a choice freely made among sovereign peoples. I could live with this, and, though I do not speak for anyone but myself, I believe that other Palestinians could too -- indeed this is basically what millions of them thought they were endorsing when they elected Yasir Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority.
The problem is that there is not one major Israeli party or leader who is willing to put such a vision to the Israeli people. Even the most "dovish" want to keep most of the settlers where they are, annex large chunks of the West Bank, keep control of most of Jerusalem, and reject categorically any discussion of the right of return. No allowance is made for the massive compromises already made by the Palestinians, and more still are demanded. Israeli sociologist Jeff Halper argues that it is already too late and Israel's "matrix of control" in the occupied territories cannot, in effect, be dismantled. If Halper is right, then nothing any Israeli leader says will save the two-state solution. But if he is wrong and it can be saved, time is very short and we must hear a commitment to completely end the occupation from the Israelis now. After all, they are the principal beneficiaries of this solution.
The whole world is waiting, not least the Arab world which again held out its hand to Israel last March when the Arab League unanimously reaffirmed its commitment to a two-state solution.
Sadly, though, the political field in Israel looks unlikely produce anyone who will seize this golden opportunity. I believe, therefore, that Israel will likely miss the boat on the two-state solution, and we will have to think about what it will be like to live together in one state, and more importantly how to get there peacefully because no road map exists. For me, that is not a bad thing. I have no problem with the idea of living with Israelis, as long as we are equal before the law and in practice. I do not see the births or immigration of Jews as a "demographic time bomb" to be regarded with horror, nor am I frightened of having next door neighbors who speak a different language or worship in different ways. I embrace human and cultural diversity, no less in the land where my parents were born, than I do here in the United States.
I am prepared to accept two states as a practical solution to the conflict and do everything in my power to make it work. However, the mere trappings of nationalism -- flags, anthems, stately buildings, and passports -- mean absolutely nothing to me in themselves and I would just as soon do away with them. What matters is the content: does the flag represent true independence and sovereignty? Does the anthem represent common humanist values? Do the buildings enclose genuinely democratic institutions that do justice? Does a passport give its holder the freedom to travel the world and live securely in his homeland? These are the questions that matter.
Palestine/Israel could be two countries with a border between them that may one day lose its significance, just as the border between France and Germany has lost its power to divide people. Or, it could be one country for two peoples. I do not really care as long as we choose one path quickly and stick to it, and that, in the end, Israelis and Palestinians enjoy peace, democracy and human rights together, not at each other's expense.
True peace, whatever way we choose to achieve it, has a price. The powerful must give up some of their power and share it with the weak, or conflict is inevitable. Both a genuine two-state solution, as well as a single democratic state, would require that Israelis relinquish their monopoly on power in a manner they have never seriously considered thus far. Peace only came to South Africa when whites realized this and gave up their monopoly on power. Israel is far from that point and still seems to be looking for a way to avoid the choice. That means discussion about how to live together will remain only academic, while conflict and bloodshed rage on.
For more information:
http://www.electronicintifada.net/v2/artic...
nothing new my mother has always been plaiting hair de-tangling grape vines preparing plates of mahshi between prayers and sharpening machetes her breath has always been ancestry deep rooted in sun in land she raised children to songs of war and kept the rhythm of faith always on beat and i have always been the calamity nightmare come true problem with no solution backward dirty other these are not my words they have never been never left been here standing rush of race in my blood has quieted to this stillness and knowing i have always been my father always was refugee nuisance man without land still is his survival has always been and we exist as reminders museum quality exhibits of how spirits works through allah through christ through orisha through jinn we exist as families who argue women who sin men who hurt basic people mere spirits have always been never perfect and yes sometimes brothers cut each other to see if they still bleed still cry and yes sisters love each other sometimes just cause no one else does ever has always known different truths like how the number dead is always double the official like daughters were raped in front of mothers no matter what else was said always been i had almost forgotten believed the hype but look i look into my sister's eyes hear the way she says palestine palestinian and know this is nothing new we have always i have always been before and post zionism.
For more information:
http://www.smith.edu/poetrycenter/bios.php...
Israel is an appalling civil and human rights abuser, and runs a brutal, overtly racist, supremacist apartheid regime in the Occupied Territories - land that should decades ago have been ceded to the Palestinian people for the state promised them alongside Israel since its formation. It continues even as we speak to steal Palestinian land, and engage in slow ethnic cleansing by means of house demolitions and farm and livelihood destruction, and construction of Jewish-only settlements and roads. These are populated by racist, holy-book thumping religious fundamentalists, who think that God is their real estate agent.
Israel reacted with the most extreme violence and repression to the first Intifada, a civil rebellion and movement for Palestinian rights which used less violence and much more non-violent resistance than the current one. Israel's vicious response to the Palestinians' just demands insured that all-out violence would be employed in the second Intifada.
The violence, oppression and degradation of the occupation itself, not to mention the at least four times as many Palestinians slaughtered, is the reason for feelings of solidarity with the Palestinians rather than the Israelis – no matter how bloody the violence on either side, people tend to sympathize more with the ones being ground under a jackboot.
I wanted to make all of the above perfectly clear before answering your complaint; I will not mince words, or listen to you do so, about what exactly it is that Israel is doing. Don't like it? Suck it up, grow some balls, and face it, and stop whining about the UN's "unfair" targeting of Israel. Instead get to work and do something to help change what Israel is doing, the real source of legitimate and wholly justified international protestation. And any protestation anywhere. If the world were to suddenly turn all its attention and condemnation to Rwanda, would that make the perpetrators of the atrocities there one iota less guilty or less deserving of the negative attention? Complaints about Israel’s “security” are no excuse; Israel’s security does not morally outweigh the Palestinians right to a life of dignity, free from crushing oppression, or, for that matter, THEIR right to security. Any half sentient observer can see that Israel’s occupation and oppression of another people is undermining, rather than reinforcing, their security. Finally, it is hard to take seriously complaints about security when coming from the world’s fourth most militarily powerful state (“poor little Israel”? Pul-eeze.), and the only regional nuclear power. Which in addition has an almost symbiotic relationship with the worlds MOST powerful state. Again, the best thing it could do to keep it’s individual citizens safe would be to do the right thing, and thereby pull the necessary support
"rug" out from any Palestinian guerrillas unwilling to respond by also doing the right thing. Though I daresay, regardless of the stated aims of certain groups to destroy Israel, they would be more than happy to ceasefire if Israel were to actually show with actions, not just words, that this time, at last, it meant it.
No, Israel's regime in the Occupied Territories is not the worst in the world (only one of the worst). But, unlike the other human rights abusers in your list, Israel purports to be a westernized democracy. The contrast is particularly offensive to other westernized democracies (who, in at least some part, probably feel guilty about their own histories of colonization and occupation, and don’t like being slapped in the face with a particularly ugly, 20th century reminder), and the claim itself is irritating to third world dictatorships, who see Israel engaging in as terrible or worse human rights violations as their own. Also, the Middle East is much more visible than other regions, the world is more focused on it and the media is more focused on it, because of oil, the interest the US has in it, and so on. Which of course makes people more continuously and painfully aware of what is going on there, and more likely to get caught up emotionally in it and react to it. Not fair, you say? Well maybe not, but there you have it. Yet another factor is the fawning patronization of the world’s lone superpower, which arouses widespread anger, resentment and envy. Anti-semitism? I don't think so. I'm sure, however, that many people can't help but notice the terrible irony, given the Jewish people’s recent history. It reminds one eerily of that cycle of abuse thing that psychologists talk about.
Oh, here's an example for you of one of many, many fine Jewish American activists of guts, integrity and unwavering commitment to social justice, a man who refuses to compromise his own principles: Josh Ruebner:
http://www.counterpunch.org/ruebner1210.html
Israel reacted with the most extreme violence and repression to the first Intifada, a civil rebellion and movement for Palestinian rights which used less violence and much more non-violent resistance than the current one. Israel's vicious response to the Palestinians' just demands insured that all-out violence would be employed in the second Intifada.
The violence, oppression and degradation of the occupation itself, not to mention the at least four times as many Palestinians slaughtered, is the reason for feelings of solidarity with the Palestinians rather than the Israelis – no matter how bloody the violence on either side, people tend to sympathize more with the ones being ground under a jackboot.
I wanted to make all of the above perfectly clear before answering your complaint; I will not mince words, or listen to you do so, about what exactly it is that Israel is doing. Don't like it? Suck it up, grow some balls, and face it, and stop whining about the UN's "unfair" targeting of Israel. Instead get to work and do something to help change what Israel is doing, the real source of legitimate and wholly justified international protestation. And any protestation anywhere. If the world were to suddenly turn all its attention and condemnation to Rwanda, would that make the perpetrators of the atrocities there one iota less guilty or less deserving of the negative attention? Complaints about Israel’s “security” are no excuse; Israel’s security does not morally outweigh the Palestinians right to a life of dignity, free from crushing oppression, or, for that matter, THEIR right to security. Any half sentient observer can see that Israel’s occupation and oppression of another people is undermining, rather than reinforcing, their security. Finally, it is hard to take seriously complaints about security when coming from the world’s fourth most militarily powerful state (“poor little Israel”? Pul-eeze.), and the only regional nuclear power. Which in addition has an almost symbiotic relationship with the worlds MOST powerful state. Again, the best thing it could do to keep it’s individual citizens safe would be to do the right thing, and thereby pull the necessary support
"rug" out from any Palestinian guerrillas unwilling to respond by also doing the right thing. Though I daresay, regardless of the stated aims of certain groups to destroy Israel, they would be more than happy to ceasefire if Israel were to actually show with actions, not just words, that this time, at last, it meant it.
No, Israel's regime in the Occupied Territories is not the worst in the world (only one of the worst). But, unlike the other human rights abusers in your list, Israel purports to be a westernized democracy. The contrast is particularly offensive to other westernized democracies (who, in at least some part, probably feel guilty about their own histories of colonization and occupation, and don’t like being slapped in the face with a particularly ugly, 20th century reminder), and the claim itself is irritating to third world dictatorships, who see Israel engaging in as terrible or worse human rights violations as their own. Also, the Middle East is much more visible than other regions, the world is more focused on it and the media is more focused on it, because of oil, the interest the US has in it, and so on. Which of course makes people more continuously and painfully aware of what is going on there, and more likely to get caught up emotionally in it and react to it. Not fair, you say? Well maybe not, but there you have it. Yet another factor is the fawning patronization of the world’s lone superpower, which arouses widespread anger, resentment and envy. Anti-semitism? I don't think so. I'm sure, however, that many people can't help but notice the terrible irony, given the Jewish people’s recent history. It reminds one eerily of that cycle of abuse thing that psychologists talk about.
Oh, here's an example for you of one of many, many fine Jewish American activists of guts, integrity and unwavering commitment to social justice, a man who refuses to compromise his own principles: Josh Ruebner:
http://www.counterpunch.org/ruebner1210.html
Oh shut up, you dumb whore.
Palestinians should have accepted the peace offer israel made 2.5 years ago, or at least negotiated it slightly, instead of rejecting it and attacking with their stupid "intifada 2," blame them. Intifada 2 has made things 50 times worse for them. It's their own fault.
If you and your friends are a gang, and you attack a much bigger gang when the bigger gang is offering you peace, it's your own damn fault if you ignore hte peace offering and attack anyway and wind up getting hurt
Palestinians should have accepted the peace offer israel made 2.5 years ago, or at least negotiated it slightly, instead of rejecting it and attacking with their stupid "intifada 2," blame them. Intifada 2 has made things 50 times worse for them. It's their own fault.
If you and your friends are a gang, and you attack a much bigger gang when the bigger gang is offering you peace, it's your own damn fault if you ignore hte peace offering and attack anyway and wind up getting hurt
heard this song so i'm passing it on for others to sing out loud and strong
I heard a young woman sing this song at a dinky writer’s night (open mike) in Nashville, and when she finished you coulda heard a feather drop. Nobody said a word, or clapped, or nothing. Later I got the lyrics from her and she said someone had given them to her who had gotten them off the internet. Said it was a public domain song, using the same chord progression as Bob Dylan’s song ‘Chimes of Freedom Flashing’, with more or less the same melody, however that was up to the singer. So, hearing about so many Palestinians killed in the last couple of weeks I decided to repost the lyrics around. Hope some of you singer-songwriters start singing it like she did. It gave me goose-bumps to hear it all out in public.
Song For Palestine
Use Chord Progression from ‘Chimes of Freedom’ by Bob Dylan
In the burning streets of Bethlehem deserted and forlorn
Standing with our stones of freedom waiting
As prophetic swells of sirens ripped all silence from the air
We sang our freedom song and started throwing
Throwing at the soldiers, whose guns we do not fear
Throwing at the deadly tanks rumbling far and near
And at all the mindless money that put the soldiers here
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
In our city’s raging violence, undauntedly we threw
Our faces fixed on armored cars approaching
F-16’s echoing over bombed out neighborhoods
Steadfast we raised our stones and kept on throwing
Throwing at the Generals, War Criminals and Crooks
We throw at writers justifying murder in their books,
At racist settlers squatting on the land the soldiers took
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Five of us together, none more than twelve years old
We stood below the circling ‘copters cracking
Defying evil elements of hatred laced in steel
Then Israeli hidden snipers started shooting
Shooting at our fathers, kneeling on the ground
Blindfolded with the rags of peace, their hands obscenely bound
While our mothers search for water they hear the bullets’ sound
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Throughout the Territories, the name of Palestine
Is ringing from the tongues of angry children
Denied a child’s necessities, we claim our right to be
We claim our rights with every stone we’re throwing
Throwing at Americans who pay the Butcher’s bill,
Whose diplomats are Generals, they’re only trained to kill,
We throw at fat politicians who’ve never missed a meal
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Bulldozers crush our olive trees, our homes, our terraces, our fields
To eliminate all trace of our existence
But as the cactus that we planted is reborn on stolen land
Our freedom grows with every stone we’re throwing
Throwing at the newspapers, whose Truth is bought and sold
At talking television heads who keep our tale from being told
Throwing at reporters who ignore us dying in the cold
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying.
None dare to call us heroes, none dare to find out why
We risk our lives to throw these stones at our oppressors
Instead they call us terrorists to justify their terror war
In their world soldiers shooting children is not terror
We’re throwing at the bureaucrats in the United Nations’ Hall,
At world leaders doing nothing as the bombs of terror fall
Throwing at the whole wide world who refuse to hear our call
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
The U.S.A. is waiting, watching from on high
Pretending that their hands are clean and guiltless
But they provide the weapons, they prevent the Peace
Apartheid is the goal they are pursuing
We’re throwing at the hypocrites, the whole dishonest crew
At all those participating in what Israeli soldiers do
And American taxpayers, we throw our stones at you!
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying.
Occupation takes our innocence, we’re sacrificed for greed
We’re sacrificed for God and Gasoline
They shoot us ‘cause we have the nerve to demand our liberty
Freedom is now all we have to live for
We’re throwing for the future, for other children to be free
While Israel destroys our childhood with blind stupidity
We’re throwing stones at all you cowards doing nothing so silently
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
I heard a young woman sing this song at a dinky writer’s night (open mike) in Nashville, and when she finished you coulda heard a feather drop. Nobody said a word, or clapped, or nothing. Later I got the lyrics from her and she said someone had given them to her who had gotten them off the internet. Said it was a public domain song, using the same chord progression as Bob Dylan’s song ‘Chimes of Freedom Flashing’, with more or less the same melody, however that was up to the singer. So, hearing about so many Palestinians killed in the last couple of weeks I decided to repost the lyrics around. Hope some of you singer-songwriters start singing it like she did. It gave me goose-bumps to hear it all out in public.
Song For Palestine
Use Chord Progression from ‘Chimes of Freedom’ by Bob Dylan
In the burning streets of Bethlehem deserted and forlorn
Standing with our stones of freedom waiting
As prophetic swells of sirens ripped all silence from the air
We sang our freedom song and started throwing
Throwing at the soldiers, whose guns we do not fear
Throwing at the deadly tanks rumbling far and near
And at all the mindless money that put the soldiers here
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
In our city’s raging violence, undauntedly we threw
Our faces fixed on armored cars approaching
F-16’s echoing over bombed out neighborhoods
Steadfast we raised our stones and kept on throwing
Throwing at the Generals, War Criminals and Crooks
We throw at writers justifying murder in their books,
At racist settlers squatting on the land the soldiers took
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Five of us together, none more than twelve years old
We stood below the circling ‘copters cracking
Defying evil elements of hatred laced in steel
Then Israeli hidden snipers started shooting
Shooting at our fathers, kneeling on the ground
Blindfolded with the rags of peace, their hands obscenely bound
While our mothers search for water they hear the bullets’ sound
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Throughout the Territories, the name of Palestine
Is ringing from the tongues of angry children
Denied a child’s necessities, we claim our right to be
We claim our rights with every stone we’re throwing
Throwing at Americans who pay the Butcher’s bill,
Whose diplomats are Generals, they’re only trained to kill,
We throw at fat politicians who’ve never missed a meal
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
Bulldozers crush our olive trees, our homes, our terraces, our fields
To eliminate all trace of our existence
But as the cactus that we planted is reborn on stolen land
Our freedom grows with every stone we’re throwing
Throwing at the newspapers, whose Truth is bought and sold
At talking television heads who keep our tale from being told
Throwing at reporters who ignore us dying in the cold
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying.
None dare to call us heroes, none dare to find out why
We risk our lives to throw these stones at our oppressors
Instead they call us terrorists to justify their terror war
In their world soldiers shooting children is not terror
We’re throwing at the bureaucrats in the United Nations’ Hall,
At world leaders doing nothing as the bombs of terror fall
Throwing at the whole wide world who refuse to hear our call
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
The U.S.A. is waiting, watching from on high
Pretending that their hands are clean and guiltless
But they provide the weapons, they prevent the Peace
Apartheid is the goal they are pursuing
We’re throwing at the hypocrites, the whole dishonest crew
At all those participating in what Israeli soldiers do
And American taxpayers, we throw our stones at you!
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying.
Occupation takes our innocence, we’re sacrificed for greed
We’re sacrificed for God and Gasoline
They shoot us ‘cause we have the nerve to demand our liberty
Freedom is now all we have to live for
We’re throwing for the future, for other children to be free
While Israel destroys our childhood with blind stupidity
We’re throwing stones at all you cowards doing nothing so silently
We sang and sent the stones of freedom flying
If we can somehow convince the Palestinians to quit the sucide bombings for one year, halt their sniper attacks, and prove that the Palestinians are the better man, wouldn't that make the world stand up and take notice?
That's what Ghandi would have done....
That's what Ghandi would have done....
That's a good idea.
But they can always come back with:
"See the Occupation is working. We've stopped all the suicide bombings!"
Personally though, I think the onus is on the Israelis to stop the violence by evacuating the settlements in the Territories because they are the Occupiers (the invaders/aggressors in this conflict). This is something that has not been tried. And I don't believe they are there for just security but to grab more of the Palestinians' land.
You're right though, the Palestinians should try that.
But they can always come back with:
"See the Occupation is working. We've stopped all the suicide bombings!"
Personally though, I think the onus is on the Israelis to stop the violence by evacuating the settlements in the Territories because they are the Occupiers (the invaders/aggressors in this conflict). This is something that has not been tried. And I don't believe they are there for just security but to grab more of the Palestinians' land.
You're right though, the Palestinians should try that.
Not settling on palestinian land didn't prevent violence against israel in the 1960's, 1970's, or 1980's. Most of the settlements came in the 1990's, after it was evident to israelis that the main goal of the palestinians was destroying israel.
Israel offered to remove the settlements a few years ago, and the palestinian response was to start the latest "intifada."
And in the last few years, every time israel withdrew from most palestinian towns, terrorist attacks taking place inside israel increased. And every time israel responded by taking control over towns again, attacks against israel have mostly been limited to "settlements" outside of israel.
One curious question, how come it's acceptable that jordan and palestinians ethnically cleansed jews from their land, but it's not acceptable for israel to take military control of land being used to attack them? How come if jews want to live on palestinian land they are "settlers" but the muslims who live in israel are israeli citizens who vote and work?
Israel offered to remove the settlements a few years ago, and the palestinian response was to start the latest "intifada."
And in the last few years, every time israel withdrew from most palestinian towns, terrorist attacks taking place inside israel increased. And every time israel responded by taking control over towns again, attacks against israel have mostly been limited to "settlements" outside of israel.
One curious question, how come it's acceptable that jordan and palestinians ethnically cleansed jews from their land, but it's not acceptable for israel to take military control of land being used to attack them? How come if jews want to live on palestinian land they are "settlers" but the muslims who live in israel are israeli citizens who vote and work?
Israel itself is a settlement.
Really though, what the hell are the "paleostinians" going to do with the land. They'll just waste it.
The attacks that led to the destruction of the Oslo Accords
The attacks that led to the destruction of the Oslo Accords
Bellow is a list of the attacks that took place in the midst of the negotiations during the labor governments of Rabin and Peres and prior to the Likud
The suicide bombing in April 1994 was the first such suicide bombing by Palestinians.
And it came in response to a massacre in February 1994 by Baruch Goldstein in which nearly 50 Palestinians were killed.
And it came in response to a massacre in February 1994 by Baruch Goldstein in which nearly 50 Palestinians were killed.
For more information:
http://www.palestinehistory.com/mass07.htm
--"Not settling on palestinian land didn't prevent violence against israel in the 1960's, 1970's, or 1980's."
The fact is, violence against Israel is a result of Israel's violence against its neighbors and original inhabitants.
Israel was being attacked (small-scale attacks) because it had conducted large scale terror attacks against whole towns and villages at will without any complaint from anyone.
For example, from Noam Chomsky's "The Fateful Triangle":
"Immediately after the armistice agreements of 1949, Israel began encroachments into the demilitarized zones along with military attacks with many civilian casualties and the expulsion of thousands of Arabs, some of whom later formed terrorist bands that carried out what they presumably regarded as reprisals and what Israel and its supporters regard as unprovoked terrorism; the terms 'terrorism' and 'reprisal' are to a considerable extent terms of propaganda, not description. These actions set the stage for futher conflicts with Egypt and Syria. Israeli raids in the Gaza Strip led to fedayeen attacks that served as the pretext for the 1956 invasion, though as is known from captured Egyptian documents and other sources, Egypt was attempting to calm the border region in fear of such an attack. The aggressors concocted an elaborate and largely successful propaganda campaign in an effort to show that it was Nasser who was planning an attack, not they, comparing him to Hilter while they effectively mimicked Goebbels."
-Noam Chomsky
Fateful Triangle, pg. 101
Chomsky goes on to describe in detail how the New York Times distorted events to make it look as though Israel's attack of Egypt was an Egyptian attack thereby inverting reality once again.
The threat Israel faces is practically entirely of its own making. In addtion, Palestinians are under a very real threat.
Even now Israel rejects the hand of peace that was held out to them (as late as last March 2002 in the Arab League summit in Beirut) because they believe if they hold out they can acquire even more land -- even if that means more war crimes committed against Palestinians in the process.
The fact is, violence against Israel is a result of Israel's violence against its neighbors and original inhabitants.
Israel was being attacked (small-scale attacks) because it had conducted large scale terror attacks against whole towns and villages at will without any complaint from anyone.
For example, from Noam Chomsky's "The Fateful Triangle":
"Immediately after the armistice agreements of 1949, Israel began encroachments into the demilitarized zones along with military attacks with many civilian casualties and the expulsion of thousands of Arabs, some of whom later formed terrorist bands that carried out what they presumably regarded as reprisals and what Israel and its supporters regard as unprovoked terrorism; the terms 'terrorism' and 'reprisal' are to a considerable extent terms of propaganda, not description. These actions set the stage for futher conflicts with Egypt and Syria. Israeli raids in the Gaza Strip led to fedayeen attacks that served as the pretext for the 1956 invasion, though as is known from captured Egyptian documents and other sources, Egypt was attempting to calm the border region in fear of such an attack. The aggressors concocted an elaborate and largely successful propaganda campaign in an effort to show that it was Nasser who was planning an attack, not they, comparing him to Hilter while they effectively mimicked Goebbels."
-Noam Chomsky
Fateful Triangle, pg. 101
Chomsky goes on to describe in detail how the New York Times distorted events to make it look as though Israel's attack of Egypt was an Egyptian attack thereby inverting reality once again.
The threat Israel faces is practically entirely of its own making. In addtion, Palestinians are under a very real threat.
Even now Israel rejects the hand of peace that was held out to them (as late as last March 2002 in the Arab League summit in Beirut) because they believe if they hold out they can acquire even more land -- even if that means more war crimes committed against Palestinians in the process.
Uh, the "hand of peace" offered by the arab summit included the demand that hundreds of thousands of palestinians be allowed to move into israel and become citizens.
So, Palestinians would get a Palestinian state, AND thousands of hamas, hezbollah, islamic jihad, fatah terrorists would be allowed to move into israel, where they could proceed to have free reign on committing terrorist attacks in their efforts to scare as many jews away as possible.
Offering israel peace that includes allowing hundreds of thousands of palestinians to move into israel is no peace at all.
Since Jewish refugees of the war cannot ever return to where they left, it is ridiculous to try to force israel to accept arab refugees of wars, especially since a sizable portion of them want to kill every israeli jew they can to weaken the state and scare people away.
Those are the facts. Debate all you want, but you can't escape cold, hard reality.
So, Palestinians would get a Palestinian state, AND thousands of hamas, hezbollah, islamic jihad, fatah terrorists would be allowed to move into israel, where they could proceed to have free reign on committing terrorist attacks in their efforts to scare as many jews away as possible.
Offering israel peace that includes allowing hundreds of thousands of palestinians to move into israel is no peace at all.
Since Jewish refugees of the war cannot ever return to where they left, it is ridiculous to try to force israel to accept arab refugees of wars, especially since a sizable portion of them want to kill every israeli jew they can to weaken the state and scare people away.
Those are the facts. Debate all you want, but you can't escape cold, hard reality.
Allowing Palestinians who were expelled a right of return (like Jews currently have) is not only the right thing to do, but is backed up by international law.
Also, if Israel doesn't like that, than the very least they can do is compensate those who lost their homes and property.
In any case, Israel refuses to even discuss the offer made at the Arab Summit.
Also, if Israel doesn't like that, than the very least they can do is compensate those who lost their homes and property.
In any case, Israel refuses to even discuss the offer made at the Arab Summit.
Nice dishonest twist you just gave there.
Again, lets review facts, logically. If you can do that.
(1)
(a) Arab refugees from Israel do not have a "right of return."
(b) Jewish refugees from arab countries do not have a "right of return" either.
(2)
(a) Israel accepted the Jewish refugees.
(b) Arab countries should have accepted the arab refugees, OR set up a new state for them as they could have done from 1948 to 1967. They did not. Yet, years later, Israel several times offered the palestinians a state, something egypt and jordan did not do when egypt and jordan controlled the west bank, gaza and east jerusalem from 1948 to 1967.
(3)
As for the last few years, Israel did "listen" to the arab offer, and when they heard that the arab offer meant letting in hundreds of thousands of arabs who hate israel, some of those arabs being terrorists who will continue to try to scare jews out of israel, they turned it down. There was no choice in the matter.
Again, the facts are loud and clear. My arguments are based on facts, logic and history. Accept them and go from there, unless you intentionally want to waste everyone's time with half-truths and illogical nonsense.
Again, lets review facts, logically. If you can do that.
(1)
(a) Arab refugees from Israel do not have a "right of return."
(b) Jewish refugees from arab countries do not have a "right of return" either.
(2)
(a) Israel accepted the Jewish refugees.
(b) Arab countries should have accepted the arab refugees, OR set up a new state for them as they could have done from 1948 to 1967. They did not. Yet, years later, Israel several times offered the palestinians a state, something egypt and jordan did not do when egypt and jordan controlled the west bank, gaza and east jerusalem from 1948 to 1967.
(3)
As for the last few years, Israel did "listen" to the arab offer, and when they heard that the arab offer meant letting in hundreds of thousands of arabs who hate israel, some of those arabs being terrorists who will continue to try to scare jews out of israel, they turned it down. There was no choice in the matter.
Again, the facts are loud and clear. My arguments are based on facts, logic and history. Accept them and go from there, unless you intentionally want to waste everyone's time with half-truths and illogical nonsense.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Palestinians ethnically cleansed have a right to return under international law. Israeli law gives Jews who have never set foot there a so-called "right of return."
Jews who left Arab countries due to Israeli propaganda, Israeli provocations, or Arab resentment from what happened to Palestinians also have a right to return. I'm sure this would not be a sticking point on the Arab side who really do want peace. But this is something Israel doesn't even want to discuss.
Also, Israel is far from finished when it comes to *stealing* Palestinian property. They're still doing just that as we speak in the Occupied Territories.
Jews who left Arab countries due to Israeli propaganda, Israeli provocations, or Arab resentment from what happened to Palestinians also have a right to return. I'm sure this would not be a sticking point on the Arab side who really do want peace. But this is something Israel doesn't even want to discuss.
Also, Israel is far from finished when it comes to *stealing* Palestinian property. They're still doing just that as we speak in the Occupied Territories.
all of that blood and death on the hand's of the israeli people well not wash off so easy. there alway's well be the shame that comes afterward. by killing and terrorising the palestinian civilian's israeli's are killing and terrorising them self's as well and all of that death well come to be there own death. the death of there humantie. people without humanty are nothing more than animals and animal's they are as they are people of the dark age's. living here in america i have become an american that know's what is going on in israel/palestine unlike many of my neighbor's that think that israel is a poor nation fighting for there life's not knowing that israel is terrorising civilian's for there home's and land with american waepon's and support they have made the middle east into a killing grownd. they don't hate us for our freedom they hate us for the death of there children.
Israel's goal for 50 years now is to exist and be safe.
Had arabs not repeatedly attacked them, no additional land would have changed hands, and palestinians could have set their own state up in 1948 when israel set theirs up.
75% of the "historic territory of palestine" became the country now known as jordan. of the 25% left, half was going to be a newly-formed state called israel, half was going to be a newly-formed state called palestine. There was nothing stopping arabs from setting up palestine, and there would have been two perfectly functional countries for 50 years now, but arabs and palestinian leaders always cared more about destroying israel than setting up a new state.
Again, Israel's goal all this time has been to continue to exist. Had wars not been started against them, no additional land would have changed hands.
Also, when arabs had full 100% control of the west bank, gaza strip, golan heights and east jerusalem from 1948 to 1967, did they set up a state? No. All they did was keep trying to get at israel. And jews were banned from the wailing wall/temple mount during that time, that's the #1 holy site to jews in the entire world. Why didn't arabs set up a state then? The palestinians wanted one, apparently, but they didn't get one. Yet israel offered the palestinians a state several times, not 100% of what they asked, but they could have had the israeli settlements removed, and most of what they wanted. So arabs didn't offer the palestinians a state, yet israel has! But israel has just been met with terrorist attacks all this time.
Israel offered the palestinians a state 2.5 years ago. israel instead was met with another stupid "intifada" and terrorist attacks.
Jews bought homes and land in israel from the late 1800's all through the mid 1900's, yet the world yells that they "stole" it. Even though not arabs were made to leave at all, there were no "refugees" until the arab world teamed up to try to exterminate the jews in 1948.
And the main reason arabs left israel was because arab leaders told them to get the hell out of the way so they wouldn't die in attacks. Arab leaders promised their fellow arabs that after the jews were wiped out, they could have all homes and possessions of the jews and have full control of everything. but israel won teh war, the arabs that left weren't invited back beacuse when someone wants you to die, why would you let them back? Now, arab countries should have accepted those "refugees" as new citizens, but they didn't, because they didn't want them. Because palestinian leaders and main organizations are insane lunatics.
It'll be nice when massive amounts of jews aren't having to defend themselves, someday.
Had arabs not repeatedly attacked them, no additional land would have changed hands, and palestinians could have set their own state up in 1948 when israel set theirs up.
75% of the "historic territory of palestine" became the country now known as jordan. of the 25% left, half was going to be a newly-formed state called israel, half was going to be a newly-formed state called palestine. There was nothing stopping arabs from setting up palestine, and there would have been two perfectly functional countries for 50 years now, but arabs and palestinian leaders always cared more about destroying israel than setting up a new state.
Again, Israel's goal all this time has been to continue to exist. Had wars not been started against them, no additional land would have changed hands.
Also, when arabs had full 100% control of the west bank, gaza strip, golan heights and east jerusalem from 1948 to 1967, did they set up a state? No. All they did was keep trying to get at israel. And jews were banned from the wailing wall/temple mount during that time, that's the #1 holy site to jews in the entire world. Why didn't arabs set up a state then? The palestinians wanted one, apparently, but they didn't get one. Yet israel offered the palestinians a state several times, not 100% of what they asked, but they could have had the israeli settlements removed, and most of what they wanted. So arabs didn't offer the palestinians a state, yet israel has! But israel has just been met with terrorist attacks all this time.
Israel offered the palestinians a state 2.5 years ago. israel instead was met with another stupid "intifada" and terrorist attacks.
Jews bought homes and land in israel from the late 1800's all through the mid 1900's, yet the world yells that they "stole" it. Even though not arabs were made to leave at all, there were no "refugees" until the arab world teamed up to try to exterminate the jews in 1948.
And the main reason arabs left israel was because arab leaders told them to get the hell out of the way so they wouldn't die in attacks. Arab leaders promised their fellow arabs that after the jews were wiped out, they could have all homes and possessions of the jews and have full control of everything. but israel won teh war, the arabs that left weren't invited back beacuse when someone wants you to die, why would you let them back? Now, arab countries should have accepted those "refugees" as new citizens, but they didn't, because they didn't want them. Because palestinian leaders and main organizations are insane lunatics.
It'll be nice when massive amounts of jews aren't having to defend themselves, someday.
Israel's goal for 50 years now is to exist and be safe on *stolen land*. Before the formation of the State of Israel, Jews owned a tiny fraction of the land there. They seized control of the rest by force. They are still seizing land by force, and killing all who resist.
For nearly two thousand years, Jews were arguably among the most peace loving people on earth. Then a handful of them were given a state. Overnight, they turned into monsters. This is the evil of nationalism.
Down with all states. No maps but topo maps.
For nearly two thousand years, Jews were arguably among the most peace loving people on earth. Then a handful of them were given a state. Overnight, they turned into monsters. This is the evil of nationalism.
Down with all states. No maps but topo maps.
...for the last 50 years after they murdered me--that's what you get for rescuing thousands of Jews from concentration camps--has been:
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
--"Israel offered the palestinians a state 2.5 years ago."
This is a lie that Israel's supporters incessantly repeat (like so many others) in the hope that everyone will internalize it.
Israel offered the Palestinians Bantustans 2.5 years ago (nothing more) surrounded by Jewish settlements and settler roads which cut through and separated Palestinian communities and they offered it to them with a take it or leave it attitude.
This is a lie that Israel's supporters incessantly repeat (like so many others) in the hope that everyone will internalize it.
Israel offered the Palestinians Bantustans 2.5 years ago (nothing more) surrounded by Jewish settlements and settler roads which cut through and separated Palestinian communities and they offered it to them with a take it or leave it attitude.
Uh, everyone read what "get your facts straight" said about 2 or 3 messages up. Jews were nice for 1000 years, then "THEY" turned into monsters overnight.
Did all or even most Jews "turn into monsters" overnight, you jerk? Your statement implies that you're talking about "the Jews" (meaning, as an entire group).
Correct yourself, you pig.
And on a side note, I don't know how in hell you even believe that "just the israeli jews" did, unless you didn't actually study the immigration of jews to israel.
Anyone who doesn't have a problem with what he just said is disgusting.
Hey sf.indymedia.org editors, isn't it funny how one by one all your harsh anti-israel people accidently reveal their jew-hating as times goes on?
Did all or even most Jews "turn into monsters" overnight, you jerk? Your statement implies that you're talking about "the Jews" (meaning, as an entire group).
Correct yourself, you pig.
And on a side note, I don't know how in hell you even believe that "just the israeli jews" did, unless you didn't actually study the immigration of jews to israel.
Anyone who doesn't have a problem with what he just said is disgusting.
Hey sf.indymedia.org editors, isn't it funny how one by one all your harsh anti-israel people accidently reveal their jew-hating as times goes on?
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Zionists - please explain........
>Uh, everyone read what "get your facts straight" said about 2 or 3 messages up. Jews were nice for 1000 years, then "THEY" turned into monsters overnight.
>Did all or even most Jews "turn into monsters" overnight, you jerk? Your statement implies that you're talking about "the Jews" (meaning, as an entire group).
That's not what I said, as anyone with a mouse can scroll back up and see for themselves. I said, "Then a handful of them were given a state. Overnight, they turned into monsters."
Only a handful of Jews are montsters, the ones with a state. Zionists are to Jews what Nazis are to Germans, an embarassment to an otherwise admirable People.
But the State of Israel is an abomination. Down with Israel.
>Did all or even most Jews "turn into monsters" overnight, you jerk? Your statement implies that you're talking about "the Jews" (meaning, as an entire group).
That's not what I said, as anyone with a mouse can scroll back up and see for themselves. I said, "Then a handful of them were given a state. Overnight, they turned into monsters."
Only a handful of Jews are montsters, the ones with a state. Zionists are to Jews what Nazis are to Germans, an embarassment to an otherwise admirable People.
But the State of Israel is an abomination. Down with Israel.
The twentieth century saw the movement of tens of millions of refugees in connection with two world wars and the founding of dozens of new nations. Millions of Indians, Pakistanis, Germans, Frenchmen, Japanese, English, Jews, Arabs and dozens of African tribes left or were driven out of their former homes. Of all these groups only the Palestinians remain as refugees. There are no more Jewish refugees from Iraq, Russia, Yemen or Libya. There are no more German refugees from Poland and Hungary. there are no more Hindu refugees from Pakistan. Why are the Palestinians the only ones left festering in camps now 55 years later? He're a hint - why wasn't a Palestinian state formed in the West Bank and Gaza from 1948 to 1967 when these lands were controlled by Jordan and Egypt? The answer is that the Arab world hates the Palestinians and uses their suffering for domestic propaganda and geopolitic gain. Arabs support Palestinian terror because they know it will keep the war with Israel going strong. Arab dictators, monarchs and generals (there are no democratically elected Arab leaders) use images from this war to distract their populations from their own curruption and decay and justify continued repression. These Arab leaders also know that continued war with the Palestinians will weaken Israel. Unfortunately, Arafat has become a puppet of his people's enemies. It is only when new Palestinian leaders not beholden to Egypt, Syria or Saudi Arabia arise that there will be a chance for true peace in the region and an end to the grotesque spectacle of third and fourth generation refugees living in "temporary" camps.
answer the question - or it repeats
by Folke Bernadotte of the UN Sunday March 02, 2003 at 03:32 AM
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Zionists - please explain........
(yoany attempts to bury this in lies will fail - trust me)
by Folke Bernadotte of the UN Sunday March 02, 2003 at 03:32 AM
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Zionists - please explain........
(yoany attempts to bury this in lies will fail - trust me)
The jewhating loons here on Indymedia (e.g. zionists behind the WTC attacks) use the Palestinian issue as a means to express their bigotry. In the Arab world, dictators use the Palestinian issue as a means to deflect attacks on their own currupt regimes. When the Palestinian people learn that their supporters are not necessarily their friends, they will have an incentive to make peace.
answer the fucking question Jim
by Gilad Monday March 03, 2003 at 01:28 AM
answer the question - or it repeats
by Folke Bernadotte of the UN Sunday March 02, 2003 at 03:32 AM
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Zionists - please explain........
by Gilad Monday March 03, 2003 at 01:28 AM
answer the question - or it repeats
by Folke Bernadotte of the UN Sunday March 02, 2003 at 03:32 AM
kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama
********** War By Deception ************
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Zionists - please explain........
What is the point of that? No matter what the answer to those questions are, what does that have to do with the big picture? Zionism was a reaction to horrible treatment of Jews, it was a noble and necessary cause. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar or ignorant.
Answer MY questions - THEN and only then will I answer YOUR questions.
Justice = TRANSACTIONAL EQUITY.
learn to play
~ wa-l-muqbala ~
Noble Jews debunk your latest pile of sputum.
Now.......answer the questions, sweetie.
Don't call me sweetie, you fucking diseased piece of shit.
I don't want to talk to people who give evidence that they genuinely seek the death of the jews in israel. You're way over the line with your comments in other topics. you're like a sick rabid dog. Whem hamas successfully kill a jew, do you masturbate with pleasure? That's the impression you give. I'm not dodging your questions, you are simply so fucking repulsive that it angers me to even consider why I'm wasting time on the internet with you.
I don't want to talk to people who give evidence that they genuinely seek the death of the jews in israel. You're way over the line with your comments in other topics. you're like a sick rabid dog. Whem hamas successfully kill a jew, do you masturbate with pleasure? That's the impression you give. I'm not dodging your questions, you are simply so fucking repulsive that it angers me to even consider why I'm wasting time on the internet with you.
fuck you
by andDie
Why do wish death upon others?
Are such comments conducive to rational discussion of zionist policies and practices?
Don't call me sweetie, you fucking diseased piece of shit.
The discreet charm of the zionazi...
I don't want to talk to people who give evidence that they genuinely seek the death of the jews in israel. [my irony emphasis]
references or quotes - don't confabulate.
You're way over the line with your comments in other topics. you're like a sick rabid dog.
"Die", "diseased piece of shit" and "sick rabid dog" aren't over your line, but documented facts and mutually compatible non-contradictory reports are?
Whem hamas successfully kill a jew, do you masturbate with pleasure?
When the IDF shoot a Palestinian mother in front of her children and prevent medical assisitance from arriving in order to ensure that her children watch her die slowly, do you ejaculate? When the soldiers responsible tell reporters that they are supposed to "PURIFY THE (refugee) CAMP OF SOMETHING DIRTY", do you cum?
What is a strawman?
That's the impression you give. I'm not dodging your questions, you are simply so fucking repulsive that it angers me to even consider why I'm wasting time on the internet with you.
You certainly are dodging the question. Try answering them in a civil manner. And stop pretending that all Jews are zionists. 'kay?
If a bunch of terrorists and their asshole friends have to die so a permanent, lasting peace can be achieved, then so be it.
Who framed Arabs for Jewish attacks on U.S. targets in Egypt?
You want me to say "the jews"? seems this sentance in itself reeks of antisematism in its implication that jews are collectively responsible for some miscelanious event because they are "children of the corn". Ill say some dude who did not like egypt or the USA.
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
It was a mistake! geezzz if the palistinians had done it you would be telling them they had no business there.
A) it was obviously a mistake
B) there is no rational for attacking your allies ship anyway unlesss you are suggesting the us is secretly ploting to invade israel? some right wing plot?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Yeah just like the USS Liberty was illegal. um dont know who cares - how many were found to be complicit----probably zero. again its ridiculous to suggest someone would attack their ally for some nebulous gain when the us was able to find out who did the oklahoma city bombing from just the rubble.
You want me to say "the jews"? seems this sentance in itself reeks of antisematism in its implication that jews are collectively responsible for some miscelanious event because they are "children of the corn". Ill say some dude who did not like egypt or the USA.
Who murdered U.S. citizens during the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?
It was a mistake! geezzz if the palistinians had done it you would be telling them they had no business there.
A) it was obviously a mistake
B) there is no rational for attacking your allies ship anyway unlesss you are suggesting the us is secretly ploting to invade israel? some right wing plot?
How many illegal immigrant Mossad agents were arrested in connection with the September 11 "bombing plot" (Bergen Record) on September 11?
Yeah just like the USS Liberty was illegal. um dont know who cares - how many were found to be complicit----probably zero. again its ridiculous to suggest someone would attack their ally for some nebulous gain when the us was able to find out who did the oklahoma city bombing from just the rubble.
Israeli operatives blew up US and British property in Cairo and Alexandria in 1954. The hope was this would be blamed on Egyptians in order to drive a wedge between the US and Egypt. Unfortunately for them, the agents were caught...
Source:
http://www.mideastfacts.com/lavon_hirst.html
Also, Noam Chomsky mentions this fact among others in his lecture here (U.S. Middle East Policy and the American Peace Movement: Talk at UC Berkeley, May 14, 1984):
Part I
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast1.ram
Part II
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast2.ram
Q&A
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast3.ram
Source:
http://www.mideastfacts.com/lavon_hirst.html
Also, Noam Chomsky mentions this fact among others in his lecture here (U.S. Middle East Policy and the American Peace Movement: Talk at UC Berkeley, May 14, 1984):
Part I
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast1.ram
Part II
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast2.ram
Q&A
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/chom-mideast3.ram
Zionists wanted the same thing 50 and 80 years ago as they want now, a safe little Jewish state where Jews don't have to worry about being attacked just for being Jewish.
Jordan offered Israel a real, honest peace offer, and Israel accepted, and gave Jordan control of the massive Sinai, even though there is OIL in the Sinai. There has been peace between the two nations ever since.
Egypt offered Israel a real, honest peace offer, and Israel accepted. There has been peace between the two nations ever since.
There is ample evidence that Israel wants peace and is willing to make huge concessions to receive it, as evidenced by Israel giving the Sinai away, a MASSIVE chunk of land that would have served as a great buffer, and could have served as future homes once the land was cultivated (it's mostly desert, but it has oil, landing strips, and would have been extremely useful. It's bigger than israel, yet israel gave it away in return for peace).
Palestinians have offered Israel terrorist attacks, lies, and madness. Palestinians have waged an "intifada" against Israel. Israel has no choice but to kill those who are trying to kill them. Arafat should have taken the land for peace offer Israel made 3 years ago. Arafat should have locked up terrorists in the 90's when he had the power to do so and israel was not preventing him from doing so.
The "zionist agenda" is a safe home. But home isn't safe when the neighbors have sworn to kill you, so the only possible response is to take control of the neighbors and smack them around until the evil neighbors are gone and civil neighbors remain.
Jordan offered Israel a real, honest peace offer, and Israel accepted, and gave Jordan control of the massive Sinai, even though there is OIL in the Sinai. There has been peace between the two nations ever since.
Egypt offered Israel a real, honest peace offer, and Israel accepted. There has been peace between the two nations ever since.
There is ample evidence that Israel wants peace and is willing to make huge concessions to receive it, as evidenced by Israel giving the Sinai away, a MASSIVE chunk of land that would have served as a great buffer, and could have served as future homes once the land was cultivated (it's mostly desert, but it has oil, landing strips, and would have been extremely useful. It's bigger than israel, yet israel gave it away in return for peace).
Palestinians have offered Israel terrorist attacks, lies, and madness. Palestinians have waged an "intifada" against Israel. Israel has no choice but to kill those who are trying to kill them. Arafat should have taken the land for peace offer Israel made 3 years ago. Arafat should have locked up terrorists in the 90's when he had the power to do so and israel was not preventing him from doing so.
The "zionist agenda" is a safe home. But home isn't safe when the neighbors have sworn to kill you, so the only possible response is to take control of the neighbors and smack them around until the evil neighbors are gone and civil neighbors remain.
Don't these lies by people like "Frankie two-fingers" make people angry? Or is just that most people don't know enough about what's going on to see through this BS?
Israel took the Sinai in 1967 in a war Israel started. Sadat offered peace to Israel in 1971 but was rebuffed. Egypt then attacked Israeli positions in the Sinai in 1973 and Israel was shaken up so badly that it decided to accept Egypt's peace offer and then it gave back the Sinai.
Currently, all the Arab states have offered Israel peace in exchange for there exiting the Occupied Territories, but Israel refused.
It couldn't be clear now which party does not want peace. Israel is not interested in peace. It is interested in stealing more land.
Israel took the Sinai in 1967 in a war Israel started. Sadat offered peace to Israel in 1971 but was rebuffed. Egypt then attacked Israeli positions in the Sinai in 1973 and Israel was shaken up so badly that it decided to accept Egypt's peace offer and then it gave back the Sinai.
Currently, all the Arab states have offered Israel peace in exchange for there exiting the Occupied Territories, but Israel refused.
It couldn't be clear now which party does not want peace. Israel is not interested in peace. It is interested in stealing more land.
Maybe, "...," there's more to heaven and earth than is written your Chomsky books.
Your version of history -- that Israel was frightened into giving back the Sinai -- is hysterically funny. But I'll bet you really believe it, though, 'cuz Uncle Noam told you so.
@%<
Your version of history -- that Israel was frightened into giving back the Sinai -- is hysterically funny. But I'll bet you really believe it, though, 'cuz Uncle Noam told you so.
@%<
While ou state that the Lavon affair was organized by "jews" apparently that is in dispute as I have found other sources after a very short search (late at night)
that said It is indisputable by anyone with not blinded by their own prejudice that this attack was carried out by islamic extremists
Just saying that it is in dispute. Mostlikely its a hoax as anti jew hoaxes are the fastest to propigate (as opposed to anti anything else hoaxes).
by the way chomski is one of those blinded people it realy serves no purpose listening to what he has to say as he has long since abandoned critical thinking.
that said It is indisputable by anyone with not blinded by their own prejudice that this attack was carried out by islamic extremists
Just saying that it is in dispute. Mostlikely its a hoax as anti jew hoaxes are the fastest to propigate (as opposed to anti anything else hoaxes).
by the way chomski is one of those blinded people it realy serves no purpose listening to what he has to say as he has long since abandoned critical thinking.
Well, let’s go a couple of steps back further, to 242. Remember that UN 242, the basic document and the permanent settlement according to the current process, was strictly rejectionist, nothing for the Palestinians. It was taken really seriously. There was a threat of war at the time, nuclear war. It called for full peace in return for full withdrawal. There was a deadlock. Israel refused full withdrawal, the Arab states refused full peace. That deadlock was broken in 1971, when President Sadat of Egypt, who had just come into office, offered to accept the official U.S. position. So, he said, yeah, he’ll accept full peace with Israel in return for partial withdrawal, didn’t even go as far as 242, namely withdrawal from Egyptian territory. So, if Israel would withdraw from the Sinai, Sadat would agree to full peace. Didn’t say anything about the Palestinians, nothing about the West Bank. Israel recognized that officially in response as a genuine peace offer. Rabin in his memoirs later called it a “famous milestone on the path to peace”.
Internally in Israel it was understood that they could have peace at this point, general peace. One of the leading Labor Party officials, a retired general, Haim Bar-Lev, wrote in a Labor Party journal at the time, that’s okay, with this offer we can have full peace. The conflict’s over, if we decide it’s over, but I think we should refuse, because if we hold out, we can get more. This would require us to withdraw from the Sinai, and I don’t think we have to. So therefore, we should hold out and abandon peace, and that’s what Israel did. Its response was that it would not withdraw to the pre-June borders.
Well, the U.S. was then in a dilemma. Should it continue with its official policy, the policy which in fact it had initiated, UN 242, or should it abandon it, and that means siding with Sadat-Egypt against Israel, or should it abandon its policy and side with Israel against Egypt, but that means rescinding UN 242 in effect? And there was an internal conflict. The State Department was in favor of keeping to this policy. Kissinger, National Security Advisor, wanted what he called stalemate, meaning no diplomacy, no negotiations, just force. And in the internal conflict, Kissinger won out. The U.S. effectively rescinded UN 242, which no longer exists and people should understand that.
UN 242 now means what the United States says it means, as do other things, that’s the meaning of power. It means withdrawal, insofar as the U.S. and Israel determine, and that’s what it’s meant ever since. So when Palestinians or Arab states now complain that Israel isn’t living up to 242, they are just choosing to ignore the historical record and blindness is not a helpful position if you are in world affairs. You might as well have your eyes open. UN 242 since February 1971 does not exist. It exists only in the Kissingerian sense. Now, here you have to be a little nuanced, because officially the U.S. continues to endorse UN 242 in its original sense. So you can find statements by Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, or you know speechwriters, and George Bush, saying yeah, we insist on 242 in its original sense. You can’t find statements by Clinton. Clinton, I think, is the first president not even having given lip service to it. But the fact is that the lip service is pure hypocrisy, because while they are adhering to it for public purposes, they are also providing Israel with the wherewithal, the funds, the military support, the diplomatic support, to violate it, namely to act to integrate the occupied territories within Israel, so the endorsement of it is hypocritical and you should compliment Clinton on having the honesty simply to withdraw it, in effect.
Well, that brings us up to February 1971. The United States has also blocked all other UN resolutions, except for one, UN resolution 194, December 11, 1948, which called for the right of return of refugees, or a compensation. That was technically endorsed by the United States, like they voted for it at the UN every year, but pure hypocrisy. And again Clinton overcame the hypocrisy. He withdrew support for it. So the last vote was unanimous with Israel and the United States opposed, and the Clinton Administration also declared all other related UN resolutions null and void. It will now only be the Oslo process, so that’s honesty again.
Sadat in 1971 made it very clear, and continued for several years, to make it clear that if the United States refused to accept a negotiated settlement, he would be forced to go to war. Nobody took him seriously. A lot of racism here, it was assumed that Arabs didn’t know which end of the gun to hold and that sort of thing. Finally war came in 1973, and it turned out to be a very close thing, and it scared everyone. There was another near nuclear confrontation and Israel was in deep trouble for awhile. And it was understood that Egypt can’t just be written off. They’re not just a basket case. So, Kissinger moved to the natural fall back position, namely exclude Egypt from the conflict. It’s the only Arab deterrent, so we can’t just ignore it, so exclude it from the conflict, then you get shuttle diplomacy. In 1977, comes Sadat’s famous trip to Jerusalem, where he was hailed as a kind of a saint for being the first Arab leader to be willing to talk to Israel. In fact, in Jerusalem, if you look at his speech, it was less forthcoming than his offer in February 1971. In February 1971, he offered full peace, with nothing about the Palestinians. In his trip to Jerusalem, he insisted on rights for the Palestinians. But that’s allowed to enter history. February 1971 is out of history. I mean you can’t even find it in the scholarly literature. But, the trip to Jerusalem is in history because at that time the U.S. was compelled to accept the offer, whereas in February of 1971 it was able to reject the offer. So one is out of history, the other is in history. Sadat is a secular saint because of his trip in 1977, not because of his more forthcoming offer in February 1971.
Well, that goes on to Camp David in 1978 and 1979, under Carter, and it’s considered a grand moment of the peace process. Israel did agree to withdraw from Sinai as Egypt had offered seven years earlier, and the U.S. at this point had no choice but to agree. The result, however, was understood very clearly in Israel. One leading Israeli military strategic analyst, Avner Yaniv, pointed out right away that the Camp David settlement eliminates the only Arab deterrent and therefore allows Israel to continue at will to integrate the occupied territories into Israel and to attack its northern neighbor, to attack Lebanon, with massive U.S. support in both cases. The Carter Administration rapidly increased support to more than half of the total U.S. aid overseas, to make sure that these ends could be achieved.
Well, while all this was going on, there was another current. The international consensus on the issue had shifted. In 1967, there was nothing for the Palestinians, no Palestinian rights. By the early 70’s that was changing. By the mid-70’s there was an extremely broad international consensus, including just about everybody, calling for Palestinian national rights, alongside of Israel. It included the Russians, it included Europe, it included Asia, Latin America, virtually everyone.
That came to a head in January 1976, another very important event, crucial for understanding what’s happening now, but out of history, because it tells the wrong story. You can find it, but you know, it’s out of history, again even out of scholarship. In January 1976, the United Nations Security Council considered a resolution calling for a two state settlement. It included all the wording of UN 242, so everything about Israel’s rights and so on, but it added national rights for the Palestinians in the territories that had been occupied, from which Israel was to withdraw according to the original understanding of 242. Well, what happened to that? Well that resolution was actually brought by what are called the confrontation states, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. It was strongly supported by the PLO, though they may have forgotten that. In fact, I suspect they have. But in fact according to Israel’s UN representative, Chaim Herzog (later President), the resolution was actually prepared by the PLO. I don’t think that’s likely, but that’s what Israel perceives at least. Anyhow, it was certainly supported by them, and by the confrontation states, and indeed, by virtually the entire world. Maybe Khaddafi didn’t support it, I don’t remember, but essentially the whole world supported it.
And Israel and the United States had to react. Israel reacted in a typical way, by bombing Lebanon. It bombed Lebanon, killing 50 people in some village that was chosen at random. That was reported here, but considered insignificant. It was retaliation against the United Nations, in effect. The United States reacted in a simpler way, namely by vetoing the resolution, so it was vetoed by Carter, and that means vetoed from history. Remember, it’s very common for the U.S. to veto Security Council resolutions. In fact, it’s the champion of the world by a long shot. But they disappeared from history as well. Carter did the same thing in 1980, same resolution. But, meanwhile, the international consensus persisted.
To read the rest, go here:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky_lecture.html
Or better yet, see the entire lecture and Q&A session in the recorded video at:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
Internally in Israel it was understood that they could have peace at this point, general peace. One of the leading Labor Party officials, a retired general, Haim Bar-Lev, wrote in a Labor Party journal at the time, that’s okay, with this offer we can have full peace. The conflict’s over, if we decide it’s over, but I think we should refuse, because if we hold out, we can get more. This would require us to withdraw from the Sinai, and I don’t think we have to. So therefore, we should hold out and abandon peace, and that’s what Israel did. Its response was that it would not withdraw to the pre-June borders.
Well, the U.S. was then in a dilemma. Should it continue with its official policy, the policy which in fact it had initiated, UN 242, or should it abandon it, and that means siding with Sadat-Egypt against Israel, or should it abandon its policy and side with Israel against Egypt, but that means rescinding UN 242 in effect? And there was an internal conflict. The State Department was in favor of keeping to this policy. Kissinger, National Security Advisor, wanted what he called stalemate, meaning no diplomacy, no negotiations, just force. And in the internal conflict, Kissinger won out. The U.S. effectively rescinded UN 242, which no longer exists and people should understand that.
UN 242 now means what the United States says it means, as do other things, that’s the meaning of power. It means withdrawal, insofar as the U.S. and Israel determine, and that’s what it’s meant ever since. So when Palestinians or Arab states now complain that Israel isn’t living up to 242, they are just choosing to ignore the historical record and blindness is not a helpful position if you are in world affairs. You might as well have your eyes open. UN 242 since February 1971 does not exist. It exists only in the Kissingerian sense. Now, here you have to be a little nuanced, because officially the U.S. continues to endorse UN 242 in its original sense. So you can find statements by Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, or you know speechwriters, and George Bush, saying yeah, we insist on 242 in its original sense. You can’t find statements by Clinton. Clinton, I think, is the first president not even having given lip service to it. But the fact is that the lip service is pure hypocrisy, because while they are adhering to it for public purposes, they are also providing Israel with the wherewithal, the funds, the military support, the diplomatic support, to violate it, namely to act to integrate the occupied territories within Israel, so the endorsement of it is hypocritical and you should compliment Clinton on having the honesty simply to withdraw it, in effect.
Well, that brings us up to February 1971. The United States has also blocked all other UN resolutions, except for one, UN resolution 194, December 11, 1948, which called for the right of return of refugees, or a compensation. That was technically endorsed by the United States, like they voted for it at the UN every year, but pure hypocrisy. And again Clinton overcame the hypocrisy. He withdrew support for it. So the last vote was unanimous with Israel and the United States opposed, and the Clinton Administration also declared all other related UN resolutions null and void. It will now only be the Oslo process, so that’s honesty again.
Sadat in 1971 made it very clear, and continued for several years, to make it clear that if the United States refused to accept a negotiated settlement, he would be forced to go to war. Nobody took him seriously. A lot of racism here, it was assumed that Arabs didn’t know which end of the gun to hold and that sort of thing. Finally war came in 1973, and it turned out to be a very close thing, and it scared everyone. There was another near nuclear confrontation and Israel was in deep trouble for awhile. And it was understood that Egypt can’t just be written off. They’re not just a basket case. So, Kissinger moved to the natural fall back position, namely exclude Egypt from the conflict. It’s the only Arab deterrent, so we can’t just ignore it, so exclude it from the conflict, then you get shuttle diplomacy. In 1977, comes Sadat’s famous trip to Jerusalem, where he was hailed as a kind of a saint for being the first Arab leader to be willing to talk to Israel. In fact, in Jerusalem, if you look at his speech, it was less forthcoming than his offer in February 1971. In February 1971, he offered full peace, with nothing about the Palestinians. In his trip to Jerusalem, he insisted on rights for the Palestinians. But that’s allowed to enter history. February 1971 is out of history. I mean you can’t even find it in the scholarly literature. But, the trip to Jerusalem is in history because at that time the U.S. was compelled to accept the offer, whereas in February of 1971 it was able to reject the offer. So one is out of history, the other is in history. Sadat is a secular saint because of his trip in 1977, not because of his more forthcoming offer in February 1971.
Well, that goes on to Camp David in 1978 and 1979, under Carter, and it’s considered a grand moment of the peace process. Israel did agree to withdraw from Sinai as Egypt had offered seven years earlier, and the U.S. at this point had no choice but to agree. The result, however, was understood very clearly in Israel. One leading Israeli military strategic analyst, Avner Yaniv, pointed out right away that the Camp David settlement eliminates the only Arab deterrent and therefore allows Israel to continue at will to integrate the occupied territories into Israel and to attack its northern neighbor, to attack Lebanon, with massive U.S. support in both cases. The Carter Administration rapidly increased support to more than half of the total U.S. aid overseas, to make sure that these ends could be achieved.
Well, while all this was going on, there was another current. The international consensus on the issue had shifted. In 1967, there was nothing for the Palestinians, no Palestinian rights. By the early 70’s that was changing. By the mid-70’s there was an extremely broad international consensus, including just about everybody, calling for Palestinian national rights, alongside of Israel. It included the Russians, it included Europe, it included Asia, Latin America, virtually everyone.
That came to a head in January 1976, another very important event, crucial for understanding what’s happening now, but out of history, because it tells the wrong story. You can find it, but you know, it’s out of history, again even out of scholarship. In January 1976, the United Nations Security Council considered a resolution calling for a two state settlement. It included all the wording of UN 242, so everything about Israel’s rights and so on, but it added national rights for the Palestinians in the territories that had been occupied, from which Israel was to withdraw according to the original understanding of 242. Well, what happened to that? Well that resolution was actually brought by what are called the confrontation states, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. It was strongly supported by the PLO, though they may have forgotten that. In fact, I suspect they have. But in fact according to Israel’s UN representative, Chaim Herzog (later President), the resolution was actually prepared by the PLO. I don’t think that’s likely, but that’s what Israel perceives at least. Anyhow, it was certainly supported by them, and by the confrontation states, and indeed, by virtually the entire world. Maybe Khaddafi didn’t support it, I don’t remember, but essentially the whole world supported it.
And Israel and the United States had to react. Israel reacted in a typical way, by bombing Lebanon. It bombed Lebanon, killing 50 people in some village that was chosen at random. That was reported here, but considered insignificant. It was retaliation against the United Nations, in effect. The United States reacted in a simpler way, namely by vetoing the resolution, so it was vetoed by Carter, and that means vetoed from history. Remember, it’s very common for the U.S. to veto Security Council resolutions. In fact, it’s the champion of the world by a long shot. But they disappeared from history as well. Carter did the same thing in 1980, same resolution. But, meanwhile, the international consensus persisted.
To read the rest, go here:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky_lecture.html
Or better yet, see the entire lecture and Q&A session in the recorded video at:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html
The UN is somewhat unreliable being the home to many despotic leaders who seem to show a great lack of education. They say things such as
"Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make Matzoth."
and
"the Israeli Government had injected 300 Palestinian children with the HIV virus."
now who would challange such a well researched piece of information? Apparently no one except the US.... sometimes.
And the UN doesnt pass resolutions agaisnt the terrorists or the suicide bombers - why? because many of the leaders involved support the drive them into the sea philosophy however impractical. They dont just sympathise with hamas etc because they think they are suffering.. to them their suffering is actually part of a war gainst the people who would do the things mentioned above.
If the UN wanted to drive you and your family into the sea and insisted that you eat children, would you pay much attention to them when they asked you for things?
"Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make Matzoth."
and
"the Israeli Government had injected 300 Palestinian children with the HIV virus."
now who would challange such a well researched piece of information? Apparently no one except the US.... sometimes.
And the UN doesnt pass resolutions agaisnt the terrorists or the suicide bombers - why? because many of the leaders involved support the drive them into the sea philosophy however impractical. They dont just sympathise with hamas etc because they think they are suffering.. to them their suffering is actually part of a war gainst the people who would do the things mentioned above.
If the UN wanted to drive you and your family into the sea and insisted that you eat children, would you pay much attention to them when they asked you for things?
Don't these lies by "..." make you angry?
In 1967 arab countries had amassed many thousands of troops on israel's borders, and ushered the UN troops out of there, and prepared to attack Israel. Israel responded with a MUCH-NEEDED pre-emptive strike that basically saved Israel's existence.
And recent Arab peace offers to israel included the demand that hundreds of thousands of arabs, which would include hamas, hezbollah, islamic jihad and other lunatic terrorist organizations be given the "right of return" into israel.
ARab countries did NOT offer the "right of return" for jewish refugees who had to flee arab countries. But their peace offer was that a second palestinian state be formed (the first one was Jordan), AND palestinians (and hamas!) be allowed into israel as citizens, wehre the extremists could kill as many jewish israelis as they wanted. That's no peace offer at all.
Why "..." is obsessed with lying in support of crazed dictators who kill gays and beat women and crunch religious freedom I have no idea.
In 1967 arab countries had amassed many thousands of troops on israel's borders, and ushered the UN troops out of there, and prepared to attack Israel. Israel responded with a MUCH-NEEDED pre-emptive strike that basically saved Israel's existence.
And recent Arab peace offers to israel included the demand that hundreds of thousands of arabs, which would include hamas, hezbollah, islamic jihad and other lunatic terrorist organizations be given the "right of return" into israel.
ARab countries did NOT offer the "right of return" for jewish refugees who had to flee arab countries. But their peace offer was that a second palestinian state be formed (the first one was Jordan), AND palestinians (and hamas!) be allowed into israel as citizens, wehre the extremists could kill as many jewish israelis as they wanted. That's no peace offer at all.
Why "..." is obsessed with lying in support of crazed dictators who kill gays and beat women and crunch religious freedom I have no idea.
Why is "Frankie Twofingers" obsessed with lying in support of Israeli ethnic cleansing and territorial expansion.
Since 1971 Israel has been dodging peace offer after peace offer from the Arabs.
In 1971, Egypt offered Israel peace. This was rebuffed by Israel and Shimon Peres at the time called the offer "the destruction of Israel." This is documented in Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle." They were unwilling to contemplate peace until Egypt attacked Israeli positions in the Occupied Sinai which was in turn taken by Israel in a war Israel started in 1967. Even the 1967 war is constantly lied about and we are told Israel was attacked.
"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the Sinai in May [1967] would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it."
-Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin
Le Monde, February 29, 1968
"In June, 1967, we again had a choice. the Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him"
-Prime Minister Menachem Begin
New York Times, August 21, 1982
In 1981, both the Saudis and the PLO started making peace offers to Israel. Israel responded by attacking Lebanon in 1982 killing 20,000 people in order to put an end to any possible peace settlement.
The reaction to the peace offer was a "frightened, almost hysterical response of the Israeli government to the Saudi plan."
Israeli correspondent,
quoted by Noam Chomsky
The Fateful Triangle,
Chapter 3, part 3
"The Continuing Threat of Peace."
"From early 1981, Israel launched unprovoked attacks which finally elicited a response in July, leading to an exchange in which six Israelis and several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in Israeli bombing of densely populated civilian targets. Of these incidents, all that remains in the collective memory of the media is the tragic fate of the inhabitants of the northern Galilee, driven from their homes by katyusha rockets. After a cease-fire was arranged under U.S. auspices, Israel continued its attacks. The Israeli concern, according to Yaniv, was that the PLO would observe the cease-fire agreement and continue its efforts to achieve a diplomatic two-state settlement...Israel attempted with increasing desperation to evoke some PLO response that could be used as a pretext for the planned invasion of Lebanon, designed to destroy the PLO as a political force, establish Israeli control over the occupied territories, and -- in its broadest vision -- to establish Ariel Sharon's 'New Order' in Lebanon and perhaps beyond. These efforts failed to elicit a PLO response. The media reacted by urging 'respect for Israel's anguish' rather than 'sermons to Israel' as Israel bombed targets in Lebanon with many civilian casualties...the actual reasons and background for them [Israel's attacks] are completely foreign to the media, which assure us that the U.S.-Israeli search for peace has been thwarted by PLO terror. After the Israeli invasion, with perhaps 20,000 or more civilian casualties, Israeli terrorist actions in Lebanon continued, as they do today, though these are no part of 'the evil scourge of terrorism.' We may occasionally read that Lebanese farmers 'working in fields near Ain Khilwe were killed when the Israeli planes dropped incendiary bombs,' but nothing is suggested by this casual observation in the final sentence of a brief article on the shelling of the refugee camp at Rashidiye by Israeli gunboats, the day after forty-one people were killed and seventy wounded in the bombing of the refugee camp at Ain Khilwe."
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html
Just last March 2002, the Arab League again reiterated its call for peace and Ariel Sharon again called it "the destruction of Israel."
"Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia – he of the 'peace plan' so warmly embraced by the United States and Tom Friedman of The New York Times – spoke briefly and with some honour. 'I tell the Israeli people,' he said, 'that if their government gives up the policy of force and suppression and accepts genuine peace, we will not hesitate in accepting the Israeli people's right to live in security with the rest of the people in the region.' "
-Robert Fisk
http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles50.htm
--------------------------------------------------
"After a few wise words about Israel's 'interest' in the plan, Sharon told us that a right of return of refugees and a return to 1967 borders meant 'the destruction of the state of Israel.' "
-Robert Fisk
http://www.mafhoum.com/press3/92P32.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Israel's supporters constantly tell us that Israel is under threat and that we must continue to support their Occupation and ignore their crimes. What they never tell you is that Israel has created its own security problems by attacking and occupying its neighbors and destroying Palestine just as they are so concerned about Israel "being destroyed" and this is not over yet. Not content with their unapologetic theft of the Palestinians' homeland, they are trying to steal the rest of the Palestinians' land through settlements in the Occupied Territories that we all have the privilege/opportunity/obligation to pay for.
It is essential to learn the real history of what's gone on there not just the lies we have all been taught to keep us feeling good about our support for Israel. What most people "know" about the Middle East is more often than not pure fabrication.
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
In my opinion, the single most comprehensive text on the subject is Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle." Please obtain a copy of this book (buy it or check it out from a library) and learn the real history of what's gone on. Without that, Israel's supporters will always be able to point to fabricated history in order to undermine our support of the Palestinians' RIGHT TO EXIST.
Since 1971 Israel has been dodging peace offer after peace offer from the Arabs.
In 1971, Egypt offered Israel peace. This was rebuffed by Israel and Shimon Peres at the time called the offer "the destruction of Israel." This is documented in Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle." They were unwilling to contemplate peace until Egypt attacked Israeli positions in the Occupied Sinai which was in turn taken by Israel in a war Israel started in 1967. Even the 1967 war is constantly lied about and we are told Israel was attacked.
"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the Sinai in May [1967] would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it."
-Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin
Le Monde, February 29, 1968
"In June, 1967, we again had a choice. the Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him"
-Prime Minister Menachem Begin
New York Times, August 21, 1982
In 1981, both the Saudis and the PLO started making peace offers to Israel. Israel responded by attacking Lebanon in 1982 killing 20,000 people in order to put an end to any possible peace settlement.
The reaction to the peace offer was a "frightened, almost hysterical response of the Israeli government to the Saudi plan."
Israeli correspondent,
quoted by Noam Chomsky
The Fateful Triangle,
Chapter 3, part 3
"The Continuing Threat of Peace."
"From early 1981, Israel launched unprovoked attacks which finally elicited a response in July, leading to an exchange in which six Israelis and several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in Israeli bombing of densely populated civilian targets. Of these incidents, all that remains in the collective memory of the media is the tragic fate of the inhabitants of the northern Galilee, driven from their homes by katyusha rockets. After a cease-fire was arranged under U.S. auspices, Israel continued its attacks. The Israeli concern, according to Yaniv, was that the PLO would observe the cease-fire agreement and continue its efforts to achieve a diplomatic two-state settlement...Israel attempted with increasing desperation to evoke some PLO response that could be used as a pretext for the planned invasion of Lebanon, designed to destroy the PLO as a political force, establish Israeli control over the occupied territories, and -- in its broadest vision -- to establish Ariel Sharon's 'New Order' in Lebanon and perhaps beyond. These efforts failed to elicit a PLO response. The media reacted by urging 'respect for Israel's anguish' rather than 'sermons to Israel' as Israel bombed targets in Lebanon with many civilian casualties...the actual reasons and background for them [Israel's attacks] are completely foreign to the media, which assure us that the U.S.-Israeli search for peace has been thwarted by PLO terror. After the Israeli invasion, with perhaps 20,000 or more civilian casualties, Israeli terrorist actions in Lebanon continued, as they do today, though these are no part of 'the evil scourge of terrorism.' We may occasionally read that Lebanese farmers 'working in fields near Ain Khilwe were killed when the Israeli planes dropped incendiary bombs,' but nothing is suggested by this casual observation in the final sentence of a brief article on the shelling of the refugee camp at Rashidiye by Israeli gunboats, the day after forty-one people were killed and seventy wounded in the bombing of the refugee camp at Ain Khilwe."
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html
Just last March 2002, the Arab League again reiterated its call for peace and Ariel Sharon again called it "the destruction of Israel."
"Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia – he of the 'peace plan' so warmly embraced by the United States and Tom Friedman of The New York Times – spoke briefly and with some honour. 'I tell the Israeli people,' he said, 'that if their government gives up the policy of force and suppression and accepts genuine peace, we will not hesitate in accepting the Israeli people's right to live in security with the rest of the people in the region.' "
-Robert Fisk
http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles50.htm
--------------------------------------------------
"After a few wise words about Israel's 'interest' in the plan, Sharon told us that a right of return of refugees and a return to 1967 borders meant 'the destruction of the state of Israel.' "
-Robert Fisk
http://www.mafhoum.com/press3/92P32.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Israel's supporters constantly tell us that Israel is under threat and that we must continue to support their Occupation and ignore their crimes. What they never tell you is that Israel has created its own security problems by attacking and occupying its neighbors and destroying Palestine just as they are so concerned about Israel "being destroyed" and this is not over yet. Not content with their unapologetic theft of the Palestinians' homeland, they are trying to steal the rest of the Palestinians' land through settlements in the Occupied Territories that we all have the privilege/opportunity/obligation to pay for.
It is essential to learn the real history of what's gone on there not just the lies we have all been taught to keep us feeling good about our support for Israel. What most people "know" about the Middle East is more often than not pure fabrication.
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
In my opinion, the single most comprehensive text on the subject is Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle." Please obtain a copy of this book (buy it or check it out from a library) and learn the real history of what's gone on. Without that, Israel's supporters will always be able to point to fabricated history in order to undermine our support of the Palestinians' RIGHT TO EXIST.
Can you provide URL's to the original sources for these quotes?
I can make up quotes and attribute them to known sources too, you know. But you're the rabid crazed anti-israel loon who sways every aspect of history against the jews of israel.
Occupation," "occupiers," "occupied land": these words are the Palestinians' refrain, repeated incessantly by Palestinian propagandists as justification for their killing of Israeli women, children, old folks, recruits, as well as many visitors to Israel. I think it's time to get it straight, once and for all, about this whole notion of occupation, about who are the occupiers of the land of Israel and the West Bank (more correctly called Judea and Samaria), and who are the occupied.
For a start, it is Jews who are the extant aboriginal people of the territory that includes Israel, Judea and Samaria, and some of present-day Jordan. And it is the Arabs who are the invaders, conquerors and occupiers.
There were Canaanites who inhabited the land before the Jews settled there, but they are long gone. Amazingly, the Jewish people didn't vanish, despite Jew-hatred, pogroms, and massacres of Jews recurring through history. What defines Jewish indigenousness is the consistency of modern Jews with their ancestors of thousands of years ago. They live in a country with the same name as that which existed in 1312 B.C.E. Today's Israelis speak the same language that was spoken by Jews in that land more than 3000 years ago. They chant from the same Bible their ancestors used millennia past. Their Jewish law presently is derived from that found in their Talmud. Their Temple, which was destroyed twice, by invaders, can be archaeologically located in its original site in Jerusalem. And Jerusalem was founded by their biblical King David, which still stands as the centre of Jewish sovereignty, as it did when King David ruled the Jews. In reality, the Jewish people established a distinct civilization in their ancient homeland 3700 years ago, and the roots of that civilization is still much of the source of Jewish life in Israel.
On the other hand, there were no Moslems until 2000 years after Jews had already settled in Israel, because Islam was the religion that Mohammed founded (he died in 632 BCE). And Arabs, who are the ethnic peoples out of the Arabian peninsula, hadn't come to the region through their conquests until after Mohammed's death. No independent Arab or Palestinian state has ever existed in the region, which the Romans renamed Palaestina in the second century, after crushing the last Jewish revolt. When the Arabs did conquer and occupy parts of the land, they did so as occupiers of previously settled territories by Jews.
Well, never mind about ancient history and claims, some might say, what rights have modern Jews to land that had been owned and settled by Arabs, who were recently expelled by Jewish conquest? But here we have yet another set of falsehoods emanating out of a number of misguided assumptions.
First, it is not true that Jewish life was abolished by a series of conquerors - Roman, Arab, Crusaders - over the centuries. Jews retained and rebuilt communities in Jerusalem, Tiberius, Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa, Caesarea, Safed and elsewhere. Years before the Zionist migrations began in the 1870s, Jews lived continuously over time throughout the land of Israel.
Secondly, if one looks at the period when Jews began to immigrate to the region in large numbers in 1882, there were fewer than 250,000 Arabs living in the region, and the majority of these had arrived in recent decades. According to many observers and authorities, the vast majority of the Arab population in the early decades of the twentieth century was comparative newcomers, either late immigrants or descendants of persons who had immigrated into the territory in the previous seventy years. The name Palestine, a throwback to Roman usage, was adopted by the British during their period of mandated authority, in an attempt to blunt the connection of Jews with the land that was historical Israel.
Thirdly, the lands that are usually characterized by the media and other observers as "occupied," that is, those in the West Bank and Gaza, are in no legal sense occupied by Israelis, no more nor less than they are occupied by Palestinians. For example, those residents of the new Palestinian cities (in no sense are they camps), that now house four generations of so-called Palestinian refugees, could be branded as occupiers on the same basis that new Jewish settlements in the West Bank are so designated. The reality is that the West Bank and Gaza lands are unassigned lands, not awarded by the British as they had done with their creation of Jordan and Iraq post-WWI, nor designated by the United Nations which had offered these lands and more to the Palestinians in 1947 (UN Resolution 181, "Partition"), but which the Palestinians rejected.
Fourth, when Palestinians accuse Israel of being "occupiers" of the West Bank and Gaza land, let's examine how these territories came under the control of Israel. It is the direct result of Arab attacks on Israel in 1967: Israel not only repulsed the attacks but managed to overtake areas from which the attacks emanated. To make a comparison, Germany lost a large territory to Poland after the Germans were defeated in World War II, and yet no one now claims that Poland is occupying German land. Israel's position vis-a-vis these conquered lands is consistent with the historical record everywhere, including Canada in relation to Quebec.
Finally, we need to understand the Palestinians' own words and claims. They make no bones about the fact that what they regard as Israeli "occupation" is not merely that of the West Bank and Gaza, but that of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem as well. If one wants to look at the "root cause" of a conflict that is by now more than half a century old, it is the refusal by Palestinians and Arabs generally to accept not only the reality of the existence of a Jewish state, which is difficult to deny, but to recognize the legitimacy of Israel as the Jewish homeland. If, and only if, the Arabs finally come to recognize Jewish peoplehood, which includes Jews' right to live as a people among the nations of peoples, will peace be possible between Jews and Arabs.
I can make up quotes and attribute them to known sources too, you know. But you're the rabid crazed anti-israel loon who sways every aspect of history against the jews of israel.
Occupation," "occupiers," "occupied land": these words are the Palestinians' refrain, repeated incessantly by Palestinian propagandists as justification for their killing of Israeli women, children, old folks, recruits, as well as many visitors to Israel. I think it's time to get it straight, once and for all, about this whole notion of occupation, about who are the occupiers of the land of Israel and the West Bank (more correctly called Judea and Samaria), and who are the occupied.
For a start, it is Jews who are the extant aboriginal people of the territory that includes Israel, Judea and Samaria, and some of present-day Jordan. And it is the Arabs who are the invaders, conquerors and occupiers.
There were Canaanites who inhabited the land before the Jews settled there, but they are long gone. Amazingly, the Jewish people didn't vanish, despite Jew-hatred, pogroms, and massacres of Jews recurring through history. What defines Jewish indigenousness is the consistency of modern Jews with their ancestors of thousands of years ago. They live in a country with the same name as that which existed in 1312 B.C.E. Today's Israelis speak the same language that was spoken by Jews in that land more than 3000 years ago. They chant from the same Bible their ancestors used millennia past. Their Jewish law presently is derived from that found in their Talmud. Their Temple, which was destroyed twice, by invaders, can be archaeologically located in its original site in Jerusalem. And Jerusalem was founded by their biblical King David, which still stands as the centre of Jewish sovereignty, as it did when King David ruled the Jews. In reality, the Jewish people established a distinct civilization in their ancient homeland 3700 years ago, and the roots of that civilization is still much of the source of Jewish life in Israel.
On the other hand, there were no Moslems until 2000 years after Jews had already settled in Israel, because Islam was the religion that Mohammed founded (he died in 632 BCE). And Arabs, who are the ethnic peoples out of the Arabian peninsula, hadn't come to the region through their conquests until after Mohammed's death. No independent Arab or Palestinian state has ever existed in the region, which the Romans renamed Palaestina in the second century, after crushing the last Jewish revolt. When the Arabs did conquer and occupy parts of the land, they did so as occupiers of previously settled territories by Jews.
Well, never mind about ancient history and claims, some might say, what rights have modern Jews to land that had been owned and settled by Arabs, who were recently expelled by Jewish conquest? But here we have yet another set of falsehoods emanating out of a number of misguided assumptions.
First, it is not true that Jewish life was abolished by a series of conquerors - Roman, Arab, Crusaders - over the centuries. Jews retained and rebuilt communities in Jerusalem, Tiberius, Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa, Caesarea, Safed and elsewhere. Years before the Zionist migrations began in the 1870s, Jews lived continuously over time throughout the land of Israel.
Secondly, if one looks at the period when Jews began to immigrate to the region in large numbers in 1882, there were fewer than 250,000 Arabs living in the region, and the majority of these had arrived in recent decades. According to many observers and authorities, the vast majority of the Arab population in the early decades of the twentieth century was comparative newcomers, either late immigrants or descendants of persons who had immigrated into the territory in the previous seventy years. The name Palestine, a throwback to Roman usage, was adopted by the British during their period of mandated authority, in an attempt to blunt the connection of Jews with the land that was historical Israel.
Thirdly, the lands that are usually characterized by the media and other observers as "occupied," that is, those in the West Bank and Gaza, are in no legal sense occupied by Israelis, no more nor less than they are occupied by Palestinians. For example, those residents of the new Palestinian cities (in no sense are they camps), that now house four generations of so-called Palestinian refugees, could be branded as occupiers on the same basis that new Jewish settlements in the West Bank are so designated. The reality is that the West Bank and Gaza lands are unassigned lands, not awarded by the British as they had done with their creation of Jordan and Iraq post-WWI, nor designated by the United Nations which had offered these lands and more to the Palestinians in 1947 (UN Resolution 181, "Partition"), but which the Palestinians rejected.
Fourth, when Palestinians accuse Israel of being "occupiers" of the West Bank and Gaza land, let's examine how these territories came under the control of Israel. It is the direct result of Arab attacks on Israel in 1967: Israel not only repulsed the attacks but managed to overtake areas from which the attacks emanated. To make a comparison, Germany lost a large territory to Poland after the Germans were defeated in World War II, and yet no one now claims that Poland is occupying German land. Israel's position vis-a-vis these conquered lands is consistent with the historical record everywhere, including Canada in relation to Quebec.
Finally, we need to understand the Palestinians' own words and claims. They make no bones about the fact that what they regard as Israeli "occupation" is not merely that of the West Bank and Gaza, but that of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem as well. If one wants to look at the "root cause" of a conflict that is by now more than half a century old, it is the refusal by Palestinians and Arabs generally to accept not only the reality of the existence of a Jewish state, which is difficult to deny, but to recognize the legitimacy of Israel as the Jewish homeland. If, and only if, the Arabs finally come to recognize Jewish peoplehood, which includes Jews' right to live as a people among the nations of peoples, will peace be possible between Jews and Arabs.
First of all, why are you fighting? It's stupid. Almost every single religion and people have extremists, and as much as we all want to deny it, it will always be there. Jews, Muslims, Christians have killed for something they believe in. But it's more than most will accept, and its them who take it to a whole new level. If you want a religion that you can actually justify, be a Buddhist.
How could people be like that!!!! just in those picture there are mostly little kids who die .... what is that i was chock that is not the world. it is so bad now ........how could epople kill children innocent living been ......HOW? WELL THIS IS A HARD REALITY TO ACCEPT ...PEOPLE SHOULD STOP DOING THAT ......PEOPLE SHOULD STOP KILLING...................................................................................PEACE
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 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