SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
About Contact Subscribe Calendar Publish Print Donate

Palestine | International

Hamas wins overwhelming victory in Gaza vote
by Haaretz
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 8:25 AM
Hamas has won an overwhelming victory in Gaza Strip local elections, the final results showed Friday.
Hamas won control of seven of the ten municipal councils that held elections, including the three largest ones: Dir al-Balah, Bnei Siheileh, and Beit Hanun.

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party won the remaining three councils, including the Marazi refugee camp.

The first-ever municipal elections in Gaza, which were held on Thursday, were seen as a test of strength between the Islamic militant group and Abbas.

Hamas won 75 out of the 118 seats in the 10 local councils, while the ruling Fatah party won 39 seats.

"Our people have a consensus on the choice of jihad and resistance and the election has underscored that concept," Hamas spokesman Muhir al-Masri told reporters following the announcement of the results.

"We consider this victory as the victory of the Palestinian people," said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. "It's not the victory of somebody against somebody, the competition was to serve our people's interests."\

"Hamas's victory proves Islam is the solution," blared loudspeakers as thousands of supporters celebrated in the streets beneath fluttering green Hamas flags.

Voter turnout topped 80 percent for the poll, which was the second stage of Palestinian local elections. The first was held in 26 local councils in the West Bank in December. In the West Bank elections, the Fatah party won 12 of the councils, while the Hamas won eight and independent candidtates won the remainder.

Local Government Minister Jamal al-Shobaki, a Fatah member, said the high turnout showed that "Palestinian people understand that democracy and elections are the start to the end of occupation."

The Hamas victories reflected widespread support in Gaza for the violent Islamic movement, which provides welfare, schools and kindergartens to the impoverished people in the territory, alongside its attacks against Israel.

The Hamas is leaning towards participating in July elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council, and it is possible that Thursday's victory will impact the militant organization's decision.

"The results showed that our people are insisting Hamas take part in the upcoming ballot," said Abu Zuhri.

The Hamas boycotted the elections for the Palestinian Authority chairmanship held January 9, in which Abbas won a landslide victory.

A U.S. State Department official had no immediate comment on the poll, but said: "We'll follow this situation and see if it has any effect on President Abbas' moves to control the security situation and to eliminate violence."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/533106.html
by more
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 9:10 AM
Palestinian militant group Hamas has won a huge victory in local polls in Gaza, unofficial results indicate.

Seen in Israel as a terrorist group, Hamas appears to have won roughly two-thirds of the seats it contested.

Israel has meanwhile said it is ending "offensive operations" in parts of Gaza where Palestinian police are deployed.

Palestinian security forces are taking over in Gaza to curb militant attacks on Israel, as part of a series of moves to rekindle a peace process.

The police took up positions in central and southern Gaza, having already taken charge of the northern part of the territory last week.

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, elected in early January, has been calling upon Israel to respond to his efforts at reining in the militants.

He has so far secured a temporary, unofficial truce from the militant groups, with the promise of a more stable ceasefire if Israel agrees to end military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.

Following the arrival of thousands of Palestinian policemen in Gaza, the Israeli army's chief of staff, Moshe Yaalon said on Friday that offensive operations would cease where "there is calm and where there is no terrorist activity against Israeli civilians and soldiers".

Street credentials

In elections held in 10 districts of Gaza this week, Hamas appears to have won 77 out of 118 seats.

The ruling Fatah faction of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas won 26 seats.

While Hamas's international image has been fashioned by violence, its support in Gaza also stems from an extensive social welfare programme and a reputation for probity.

The BBC's Alan Johnston, in Gaza, says the results have to be kept in context - these were only local elections, for less than half of the councils in Gaza.

Nonetheless, he says, they give a clear indication of the real power of Hamas in the streets.

Gaza's large population centres of Khan Younis, Rafah and Gaza City did not vote this time.

A Palestinian electoral official said they would cast their ballots on 28 April.

'Rejection of corruption'

The elections - including recent votes in the West Bank - marked the first time Hamas fielded candidates in Palestinian elections.

Although the elections were for local councils only, correspondents say the results will be a blow to Fatah, and a step forward for Hamas.

Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri told the AFP news agency the results were a victory for democracy and showed that the "Palestinian people reject corruption".

Hamas militants are behind most of the suicide bombings inside Israel, and the attacks on Israeli forces and settlers in the occupied territories.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon praised Mr Abbas on Thursday, describing conditions as ripe for "a historic breakthrough" in relations with the Palestinians.

Mr Abbas has ruled out an armed crackdown on the militants in favour of negotiations.

Other measures include a ban on civilians bearing weapons in public.

The new US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is set to visit the region shortly to assess the peace process.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4214375.stm
by Prof
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 9:14 AM
The more Palestinians support the insane Hamas lunatics, the worse it is for both sides.

If they support attacking Israel forever, they will get nowhere forever.
by ?
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 9:36 AM
It took a right-winger like Sharon to be able to demand a dismantling of settlements in Gaza, perhaps it will take more power to Hamas for there to be an end to attacks on Israeli civilians. Hamas has been the major force behind bus bombingsbut Sharon was a leader of those who wanted settlements so one never knows.
by Critical Thinker
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 9:53 AM
Hamas is also a religious movement, not merely a Palestinian nationalist one. And Sharon... not only is he a secular Zionist, his political origins are actually in Labor (how many anti-Zionists have stumbled on this revelation?); he in a sense has returned to or revived the pragmatism that was one of Labor's hallmarks up to the mid 1970s, when it had an unmistakably more rightwing agenda than its current platform does.

by ?
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 10:27 AM
Since your differentiating religious Zionists from conservative Israelis like Sharon I would be inetested in your views on the politics of the settler movement since there seems to a be a lot of overlap. Religous Zionist settlers see the settlements as being needed to expand Israel to its former glory for religious reasons? Wheras Sharon saw the need to use those religious crazies as well as Russian immigrants who didnt know better as settlers to create a buffer zone? to make a Palestinian state impossible by having the West Bank and Gaza divided up by access roads? Facts on the ground to allow an eventual annexation (and expulsion of Palestinians to Jordan)? Settlements near the border areas make more sense as just Israelis not carrying what Palestinians think and needing land to build houses but Sharon was behind many of the settlements built in the heart of Palestinian areas... Please dont respond to each of these guesses I really just want to hear what proIsrael types think the motivations behind the settlers are (and the differences between the religious and nonreligious settlement movements)
by Sefarad
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 11:02 AM
Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
at the Center for Special Studies (C.S.S)
Special Information Bulletin
The Leading Palestinian Terrorist Organizations (August 2004)


Fatah (Tanzim /
Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades)
Hamas (Izzedine al-Qassam Battalions)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Jerusalem Battalions)
The Democratic Front for the
Liberation of Palestine
The Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine (The Martyr Abu ‘Ali
Mustafa Battalions)
The Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine – General Command
The Popular Resistance Committees
(The Salah al-Din Brigades)

Hamas – the Islamic Resistance Movement

1. Hamas was established in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank on Muslim Brotherhood foundations in
1987, at the beginning of the first violent confrontation . It reflects the decision of the radical
Islamists, headed by the late Ahmad Yassin, to add a Palestinian national aspect to the da'wah
(changing Palestinian society by means of indoctrination, preaching and education, the modus
operandi of the Muslim Brotherhood). That aspect advocates the destruction of the State of Israel as
their main goal and perpetrates acts of terrorism against Israel as the primary tool for advancing that
goal .

2. According to Hamas ideology, the Palestinian problem is basically religious and therefore cannot be solved by any political
compromise . Hamas claims that the land of Palestinian, “from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea” is consecrated
to Islam and none of it can be given up, especially Jerusalem. Thus Hamas denies the possibility of any political settlement
with Israel and objects to any and all agreements between the PA/PLO and Israel, and totally rejects the Oslo accords. For
that reason, Hamas has refused to accept the authority of and to join the PA.

3. Terrorism is one of the main tenets of Hamas ideology . As far as Hamas is concerned, as long as Palestinians (within
Israel and the territories) live under the “occupation” they are obliged to oppose it through a jihad (holy war), that is, an
uncompromising armed insurrection against Israel . However, Hamas also recognizes the necessity of temporary tactical
cease-fires ( hudnas ), especially to avoid confrontations with the PA (and with the Arab counties and the international
community), which might adversely affect its status and image.

4. The late Sheikh Ahmad Yassin was the founder of Hamas and its spiritual leader. The person currently in charge of its dayto-
day activities is the chairman of the Hamas Political Office, Khaled Mashal , who has held the post since 1996. The
Hamas leadership is geographically divided. The “ internal leadership ” is situated in three centers: the Gaza Strip, the West
Bank and Israeli prisons.There is the “ external leadership ,” made up of Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood members who
joined Hamas after its founding, and those from “ the inside ,” who were expelled from the PA-administered territories. That
branch of the leadership is located mainly in Syria (after having been ousted from Jordan in 1999) and also has
representatives in various Arab countries, such as Lebanon.

5. Hamas reaches decisions on matters of principle through dialogues among the various leaderships, although the “external
leadership” has the most influence and authority . Its position is usually more extreme and intransigent as a result of the
influence exerted on it by Syrian and Iran and the support they receive from those sources. In any case, the “internal
leadership” had its wings severely clipped by Israel's targeted killings of its senior members (particularly in the Gaza Strip)
and by the arrest of many of its members in the West Bank.

6. Hamas has an operational-terrorist infrastructure ( Izzedine al-Qassam Battalions ) in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and
abroad. Most of those active in the West Bank are directed by the “external leadership,” although its power base is in the
Gaza Strip, where it even founded a militia called the People's Army .

7. During the current violent confrontation, which began in September 2000, Hamas has been the leading organization in the
armed insurrection and responsible for an enormous number of terrorist attacks . They were perpetrated in the PAadministered
territories and Israel, none abroad. Hamas policy is sometimes determined by political expediency (thus at a
certain point the movement agreed to a temporary cease-fire, which was not honored).

8. Some of Hamas's more prominent attacks against Israel include :
a. The kidnapping and murder of Israeli soldiers Avi Sasportas (February 16, 1989), Ilan Sa'adon (May 3, 1989) and
Nissim Toledano (December 13, 1992).
b. The kidnapping of Corporal Nachshon Waxman (October 9-14, 1994). Waxman and Captain Nir Poraz were killed in
an exchange of gunfire.
c. A suicide bombing attack on the Number 5 bus in Tel Aviv (October 19, 1994); 22 Israeli civilians murdered.
d. Two suicide bombing attacks on the Number 18 bus in Jerusalem (February 25 and March 3, 1996); a total of 47
Israeli civilians murdered.
e. A suicide bombing attack at the Dolphinarium in Tel Aviv (June 1, 2001); 21 Israeli civilians murdered, most of them
teenagers.
f. A suicide bombing attack at the Sbarro Restaurant in Jerusalem (August 9, 2001); 15 Israeli civilians murdered.
g. A suicide bombing attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya during the Passover Seder (March 27, 2002); 30 Israeli civilians
murdered. The attack resulted in Operation Defensive Shield.
h. A suicide bombing attack in Rishon Le'tzion (May 7, 2002); 16 Israeli civilians murdered.
i. A suicide bombing attack at a major intersection in Jerusalem (June 18, 2002); 19 Israeli civilians murdered.
j. A suicide bombing attack on the Number 2 bus in Jerusalem (August 19, 2003); 23 Israeli civilians murdered. The
attack brought the temporary “cease fire” [ hudna ] to an end.

by Critical Thinker
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 11:25 AM
I will not just skip over misconceptions that originated in misinformation.

1. Most or all Jewish Russian speaking immigrants who've settled in the disputed territories went there of their own volition out of ideological motivation. At least some of them are religious.

2. Most religious Jewish residents shouldn't be confused for the "crazy" Kahanist circle in the disputed territories.

3. I've said it on multiple occasions but will repeat: the access roads weren't paved out of racist motives, but for security purposes, because Jewish commuters had been too easy a target on the other roads.


Both religious and secular advocates of resettlement of the disputed territories have drawn on the age-old Jewish attachment with the Land of Israel. The seculars have additionally always taken the view that Judea-Samaria is strategically important to Israel defense as Israel proper's width at its narrowest is a mere 9 km and could be easily split to two by an invader advancing down eastward from the mountainous Judea-Samaria to the coastal plain. Another danger to a lesser degree would be an enemy sweeping down northwards from Samaria into northern Israel.

Sharon and the religious settlers once shared the hope to render the creation of a Palestinian state impossible. The religious believe their residence in the disputed territories is the fulfillment of a commandment from the Torah as they consider these areas historically Jewish no less than the Galilee is, for example. The religious always hoped the territories could be annexed.

A mere fringe among these residents ideologically aspires also to revive ancient Jewish institutions such as the Temple and the Sanhedrin. These consist of the hardcore Kahanists (and their spiritual kin) and individuals dedicated to the creation of new Temple vessels.

In the late sixties and early seventies there was a far more substantial Whole-Israel movement. An important part came from the so-called Labor Movement (which hasn't always been interchangeable with Labor itself). So, it used to be both a rightwing and leftwing ideology. Gradually though, a serious of landmark events starting with the 1973 Yom Kippur war have reduced its leftwing component to zero.
by fred
Friday May 6th, 2005 8:17 AM
First Palestine doesn't have an army and security forces are weak so terrorist organisation are taking this free "space".
Second, water is a major concern in the Middle East and Israel is restricting the Palestinian water read this:

http://www.medea.be/index.html?page=&lang=&doc=260

and it's not a partisan point of view it's a fact!!

How can you build a society without access to basic needs?
by Sefarad
Friday May 6th, 2005 8:27 AM

The Palestinians DO have security forces.
by Sefarad
Friday May 6th, 2005 8:33 AM

They could have the problem solved, had the PA and many Palestinians stopped the war against Israel and had they worked to improve the living conditions of the people.

They could have it solved had the PA not used the international aid to became rich themselves, to fund terrorism and to build mansions for themselves instead of building houses for the poor.
by ANGEL
Saturday May 7th, 2005 11:11 PM
We should not make the settlements the problem....
There are 1,200,000 or so Arab setlers living inside Israel Proper....
Do we make them the problem....No....They are Arab settlers who happen to live inside Israel.

If we were to go ahead and make the Viable Palestinian State called for in the Road Map to Peace Now, in the whole of the West Bank and Gaza (only 22% of what is TODAY (forget the past, it is gone, gone, gone) Israel, West Bank and Gaza)....Some of the violence we see might come to an end.

Just like you have Israel with 1,200,000 or so Arab settlers.
You would have Palestine with 400,000 or so Jews.

By making it easy for the Jews to move to Israel proper and for Arab settlers to move to Palestine if they wanted to, perhaps you would not have to force anyone to move.

It might happen naturally, A Jewish family living in the State of Palestine in the West Bank decided they want to move to Israel. They put their house up for sale (just like a person would anywhere in the U.S. if lets say, they wanted to move from Ohio to Texas).....They sell their house...the Israeli Government has set up an agency to help them move to Israel Proper....The same should go for the Arab settlers inside Israel.

No one knows until it is done.......

Peace could be just around the corner......

""IF"" only 200,000 Jews decided to move to Israel.
""IF"" only 500,000 Arab settlers inside Israel decided to move to the new Palestinian State....once it was a Viable State with its own Government free from the Israeli Occupation.
You would end up with Palestine with a Palestinian majority and only 200,000 Jews.
You would end up with Israel with a Jewish majority and only 700,000 Arab settlers...
Of course this is not exact but it is a sample of what could happen.

But if you want any kind of Peace you have to start somewhere......

And there are some things that cannot be disputed.
In 1948 through 1967, the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza did not think of having a state of their own......They were part of Jordan and Egypt.
The Majority of the Palestinian People that lived in the West Bank and Gaza before 1967 were born there and had not lived their whole lives there.

It is true that the Majority of the Jews living inside Israel were born there and have lived their whole lives there but the majority (not all) of their ancestors came from Russia, Germany and other European Nations in the late 1800's and during and after World War II till it became the Nation of Israel in 1948.

The Jews decided to call their State Israel and their People in Israel Israelis.
The Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza should be able to call themselves Palestinians if that is what they want to be called.


by Sefarad
Sunday May 8th, 2005 12:13 AM

There have always been Jews living in Israel, Judea-Samaria and Gaza, while the Arabs living there are newcomers, who moved to the area because they could have much better living conditions thanks to the Jews.

The Jews who emigrated from Europe did it to escape the persecutions in Europe. And Israel has the right to take in the people it wants.

Why don't the other Arabs take the Palestinians in in their countries?




by ANGEL
Monday May 9th, 2005 12:28 AM
>>>Why don't the other Arabs take the Palestinians in in their countries?<<<

You do not want the Jews forced out of Israel where they now live and be taken in by the U.S. and Europe.

So why should the Palestinians be forced to leave the West Bank and Gaza where most of the Palestinians were born and have lived all their lives and taken to Arab nations.

Sounds a lot like ethnic cleansing and racism to me. How about to you?

The Road Map to Peace calls for the simple solution of a Viable Palestinian State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza.

22% for 4,000,000 or so Palestinian People who already live there anyway.

78% for the 5,000,000 or so Jews who already live in Israel Proper.
Do the Math....Who receives the most land per person??
Sounds pretty fair and balanced to me.
How come you do not want to be fair and balanced in the interest of Peace in the Middle East.

And an action that would also put a huge dent in World Terrorism and do much to bring World Peace.

Why do you want the greediness of some 5,000,000 People be the cause of such misery to all concerned in this conflict?
by ANGEL
Monday May 9th, 2005 7:52 AM
>>>Why don't the other Arabs take the Palestinians in in their countries?<<<

You do not want the Jews forced out of Israel where they now live and be taken in by the U.S. and Europe and Australia.

So why should the Palestinians not be forced to leave the West Bank and Gaza where most of those Palestinians were born and have lived all their lives and taken to Arab nations.

Sounds a lot like ethnic cleansing and racism to me? How about to you?

The Road Map to Peace calls for the simple solution of a Viable Palestinian State in Part of of the West Bank and Gaza.

More than 10% for 3,600,000 or so Palestinian People who already live there anyway.

At least 80% for the 5,000,000 or so Jews who already live in Israel Proper and beyond.
Do the Math....Who receives the most land per person??
Sounds pretty fair and balanced to me.
How come I do not want to be fair and balanced in the interest of Peace in the Middle East.

And an action that would also put a huge dent in World Terrorism and do much to bring World Peace.

Why do you want the greediness of some 3,600,000 People and the angel be the cause of such misery to all concerned in this conflict?
by Sefarad
Monday May 9th, 2005 8:20 AM
Israel took in all the Jews expelled from Arab countries. In the same way, it should be normal for Arab countries to take in their Arab brothers. So we will have the problem of the refugees solved, which has lasted for so long. No other group of refugees hasbeen living as such for so long time.

I would like all the Jews live in my country, which would be very convenient for us. But the question here is not what you and I would like, but what the Jews themselves would like. What if they want to stay in their country? It would be unfair to get them moved to other place by force. Doing so would really be ethnic cleansing.

The Palestinians have demonstrated many times that they don't want to have their own state. They didn't want it in 1947 and didn't want it afterwards. That's the reason why they have breached all the accords they have signed.

In its search for peace, Israel has always been making concessions to no avail. So it is hight time for the Palestinians to make an effort and demonstrate that they are willing to live as peaceful people, respecting Israel's right to exist and giving terrorism up.

Once they have made it clear , we can take other points into consideration and perhaps start talking.

The Jews don't have the obligation to leave their land, where they have been living for thousands of years.

Had the Palestinians wanted to solve the problem, there would not be so many "refugees" at these heights of history. But it is clear that they don't want to have the problem solve. Their authorities are making big busineses of the international aid, in addition to using the "refugees" as a weapon against Israel. Because the Palestinians want to make ethnic cleansing of the Jews and take the Jews' land.

No agreement can drive to a peaceful solution if one of the sides, the Palestinians, is always attacking the other, the Israelis.

Always blaming the Jews for the problems reminds me of a time I thought we had got over.
by Critical Thinker
Monday May 9th, 2005 10:49 AM
>>>"Why do you want the greediness of some 5,000,000 People be the cause of such misery to all concerned in this conflict?"<<<

Those happening on ANGEL's writings for the first time on this thread would be excused if they concluded he/she is either a neo-Nazi, a White Power supremacist or an anti-Jewish Muslim fanatic.

But others who've read his/her IMC posts for years now know ANGEL is neither of them. Alas still, such a statement can't be chalked up simply to utter foolishness, so I'm compelled to conclude that he/she experienced a slip of pen, accidently revealing him/herself as a "benign" antisemite. Why else would ANGEL accuse all Israeli Jews of being greedy?

Ironically, ANGEL previously took pains on numerous occasions to stress that he/she couldn't be an antisemite because he/she wasn't against all Israelis since some "do not agree with what their government is doing to the Palestinians" as he/she put it (or something to this effect). Now, however, ANGEL has shown that position as a fraud and revealed herself as a racist.

Expect ANGEL soon to protest that he/she isn't an antisemite, "otherwise how could I be for the existence of Israel and against the Right of Return for Palestinians inside the Green Line (1967 pre-border), yadda yadda yadda...
Only a complete incorrigible fool would buy into these protests.

You've seen a spectacular self-induced knockout by ANGEL.
by ANGEL
Monday May 9th, 2005 11:40 PM
>>>Why do you want the greediness of some 5,000,000 People be the cause of such misery to all concerned in this conflict?<<<

C.T. You are absolutely correct…. it was wrong of me to use the 5,000,000 number in this sentence and I do apologize and admit my mistakes when I make them.
I should have said the greediness of the Israeli Government and some of the extremist living in Israel, West Bank and Gaza. I like many others do realize that half if not more then half of the People living in this area of concern are against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People, as are many People and some Governments World Wide.

And you will have to agree that my writing’s (of course you will have to know the difference between mine from those of the ANGEL imposters) have always been for Israel to have a State inside the Pre 1967 (Green Line) Border, and Palestinians to have their State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza. Without the right of Refugees to return into Israel Proper….but helped the Refugees to settle in the New State of Palestine (The Viable Palestinian State called for in the Road Map to Peace). (This is not some strange concept that only I believe after all)


>>RE:
Ethnic cleansing
by Sefarad Monday, May. 09, 2005 at 8:20 AM<<

>>>You do not want the Jews forced out of Israel where they now live and be taken in by the U.S. and Europe.<<<ANGEL>

>>>So why should the Palestinians be forced to leave the West Bank and Gaza where most of the Palestinians were born and have lived all their lives be taken to Arab nations.<<<ANGEL>

""You do not want Jews"" as I also do not want Jews removed from Israel.
I do not want Palestinians...but why do you want Palestinians removed from their homes and land?
If you truly want Peace should you not be fair and just to both Groups?

by Sefarad
Monday May 9th, 2005 11:45 PM

It is not the same Israel and the Palestinians.

Israel has demonstrated it wants peace.

The Palestinians have demonstrated they don't want peace.
by Critical Thinker
Tuesday May 10th, 2005 7:31 AM
>>>"C.T. You are absolutely correct…. it was wrong of me to use the 5,000,000 number in this sentence and I do apologize and admit my mistakes when I make them.
I should have said the greediness of the Israeli Government and some of the extremist living in Israel, West Bank and Gaza."<<<

Also this statement is laughably wrong given that Sharon has already done much laying the ground for evacuating the Gazan Jews, which will be done even forcefully, plus the other "disengagement" supporters among the Likkud ministers, not to mention the Labor ministers who are all adamant on carrying out the evacuation from Gaza and part of Samaria. So to accuse the Israeli government (as a whole) of "greediness" is ludicrous.
by ANGEL
Tuesday May 10th, 2005 10:29 PM
>>>So to accuse the Israeli government (as a whole) of "greediness" is ludicrous<<<

But it is the Israeli Government that encouraged the building up of the settlements, and if this had not been done we would not have the problem we have had since the struggle for Palestinian Freedom began in Sept. 2000 (Intifada means struggle).
But now that these settlement are there, instead of trying to force the movement of the Jewish People, Make the State of Palestine in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza and let those who do not want to live in Palestine choose of their own free will to move to Israel with the assistance of the Israeli Government.
Why is it “O.K.” to have some 1,200,000 Arabs living inside Israel Proper and not “O.K.” for some 400,000 Jewish settlers living in the State of Palestine.
If it is their security that you are worried about, it would not hurt to have neutral U.N. Forces in there for a period of say ten years, till the hate of both Peoples subsided and/or
Till the movement of Jews who want to move to Israel and the movement of the Arabs who want to move to a stabilized Palestine is complete.
You cannot have Peace if you only look at the fault of one Group and ignore the fault of the Other. If you do not have an Occupation you cannot have a resistance to an Occupation. (Like many moderate Palestinian spokesperson have said it is the Occupation that is the Problem)
Since this latest struggle began in Sept, 2000
The number of Palestinian dead is 3606.
The number of Israeli dead is 1049.
So we cannot say that the Palestinians are killing more Israelis then there are dead Palestinians.

For details on these figures:
CLICK HERE > http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html
by Sefarad
Tuesday May 10th, 2005 11:08 PM

When the Palestinians started the intifada in 2000, they make it clear that they didn't want peace and to have their own country. This happened when, in Camp Davis, they were offered virtually everything they had said they wanted.
by Sefarad
Wednesday May 11th, 2005 8:17 AM
Recent media reports from Palestinian areas have emphasized some long-awaited positive developments such as democratization and financial reform within the Palestinian leadership.

These hopeful signs have been accompanied, however, by some disturbing scenes that are receiving almost no media attention. On Monday (Mar. 21), the Palestinian Authority's largest party, Fatah, held a rally for student leaders at Hebron University. At the rally, up-and-coming Fatah leaders collectively struck the 'Heil Hitler' salute that's universally associated with Nazi Germany (photo at left).

This salute also seems to have been recently adopted by the PA police force, as indicated by this February 10 AFP photo (below):

With momentum gaining to resume peace talks, the PA's identification with Nazi German practice ― even in a symbolic manner ― is cause for concern.

HonestReporting encourages subscribers to check your local media for coverage of these developments.

HonestReporting

by Critical Thinker
Wednesday May 11th, 2005 8:50 AM
>>>Why are the settlements there in the first place?"<<<

Why are the Arab/Palestinians settlements there in the first place?


CT: So to accuse the Israeli government (as a whole) of "greediness" is ludicrous.

>>>"But it is the Israeli Government that encouraged the building up of the settlements, blah blah blah"<<<

For the umpteenth time, when push comes to shove ANGEL demonstrates his/her inability to deal with the situation as is by reverting to complaining about what occurred in the past. In the process, he/she hangs all the blame on the Israeli side and gets the Palestinians out scot-free and apologizes for massacres and murder of innocents. Yawn.


>>>"(Intifada means struggle)."<<<

For someone who lived in Saudi Arabia 5 years, ANGEL's command of Arabic isn't all that. Intifada means "shaking off" or "uprising".


>>>"If it is their security that you are worried about, it would not hurt to have neutral U.N. Forces in there for a period of say ten years,"<<<

This idea's unfeasibility and absurdity were highlighted about a zillion times before. Yawn.
by ANGEL
Thursday May 12th, 2005 5:44 AM
C.T.
So what are your ideas on how to get from this never ending conflict with death on both sides to the Viable Palestinian State called for in the Road Map to Peace indorsed by the U.S., E.U, U.N. and Russia?

Like I said many times you have to start somewhere.

But ethnic cleansing or the removal of people from the land in which they were born and have lived all their lives does not seem like a very peaceful and just plan.

You are Critical of the ideas that could Possibly lead to a Peaceful and Just ((It is very important that the Solution is Just or it will just fall apart later on in the future)) Solution, but you do not give an alternate Solution that is Fair and Just for all concerned.
by Sefarad
Thursday May 12th, 2005 6:16 AM
Excuse me if I give my opinion.

To my mind, if we want to have a solution, the first thing to do is for the Palestinians to recognise the right of Israel to exist and so to stop their attacks.

by Critical Thinker
Thursday May 12th, 2005 9:40 AM
especially when it's too politically incorrect to gain even a second of rational examination by anyone.

>>>"But ethnic cleansing or the removal of people from the land in which they were born and have lived all their lives does not seem like a very peaceful and just plan."<<<

Neither do constant and incessant attempts to murder Jews wherever they are in the Land of Israel, nor does the PA's refusal to exert sincere efforts to arrest and sentence the terrorists to real prison terms rather than issuing capital punishment sentences for real or alleged collaborators with Israel.


>>>"You are Critical of the ideas that could Possibly lead to a Peaceful and Just ((It is very important that the Solution is Just or it will just fall apart later on in the future)) Solution"<<<

Just about all of ANGEL's ideas could NOT lead to a lasting peaceful and just solution. Sometimes this omission does the least harm to all parties concerned. Just like in medicine some ailments are best served by refraining from any form of medical intervention.

ANGEL is but one more individual that fails to distinguish between his/her personal views of what's ideal and a cold hard analysis of the present situation. Sometimes the latter necessitates a willingness to recognize that some conflicts might be, at least temporarily, insoluble. People like ANGEL are incapable of making such a concession as they're overly eager to "solve" the problem at the Israelis' expense.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday May 12th, 2005 9:42 AM
At times it's best to offer no alternative,
by Critical Thinker Thursday, May. 12, 2005 at 9:40 AM

especially when it's too politically incorrect to gain even a second of rational examination by anyone. Sometimes this omission does the least harm to all parties concerned. Just like in medicine some ailments are best served by refraining from any form of medical intervention.


>>>"But ethnic cleansing or the removal of people from the land in which they were born and have lived all their lives does not seem like a very peaceful and just plan."<<<

Neither do constant and incessant attempts to murder Jews wherever they are in the Land of Israel, nor does the PA's refusal to exert sincere efforts to arrest and sentence the terrorists to real prison terms rather than issuing capital punishment sentences for real or alleged collaborators with Israel.


>>>"You are Critical of the ideas that could Possibly lead to a Peaceful and Just ((It is very important that the Solution is Just or it will just fall apart later on in the future)) Solution"<<<

Just about all of ANGEL's ideas could NOT lead to a lasting peaceful and just solution.

ANGEL is but one more individual that fails to distinguish between his/her personal views of what's ideal and a cold hard analysis of the present situation. Sometimes the latter necessitates a willingness to recognize that some conflicts might be, at least temporarily, insoluble. People like ANGEL are incapable of making such a concession as they're overly eager to "solve" the problem at the Israelis' expense.
by Sefarad
Thursday May 12th, 2005 9:49 AM
"Neither do constant and incessant attempts to murder Jews wherever they are in the Land of Israel, nor does the PA's refusal to exert sincere efforts to arrest and sentence the terrorists to real prison terms rather than issuing capital punishment sentences for real or alleged collaborators with Israel. "

Furthermore, they are giving death sentences to Palestinians charged with cooperation with Israel. This cooperation, according to Palestinian sources, consisted of helping Israel search for terrorists.

Then is Abbas willing to stop terrorism?

by ANGEL
Friday May 13th, 2005 3:37 AM
>>>"Neither do constant and incessant attempts to murder Jews wherever they are in the Land of Israel,<<<

We keep bringing into the equation that Jews are being murdered but we forget that more than 3 times as many Palestinians have died since this latest struggle for Palestinian Freedom began in Sept. 2000. End their struggle by giving them their land and Freedom (The Viable Palestinian State called for in the Road Map to Peace) and then you can end the deaths on both sides because of this struggle for freedom.

C.T. If you do not have some Peaceful goal to look forward to, then how will the conflict ever be ended.

You have to have some kind of ground work to work on to get to a Peaceful Solution.

Tit for Tat gets us nowhere.
I.E. Palestinians we must continue to fight for our land and freedom or we will soon have nothing else left to fight for.
I.E. We have to find a Peaceful solution or we will continue to have Suicide Bombers.
The Palestinians are already living in the West Bank and Gaza so it is not like you are freeing People from another Country on the other side of the Earth.

Why do People who like and enjoy freedom the most want to deny those same freedoms to others. That in itself is pretty selfish.
by gees
Friday May 13th, 2005 11:56 AM
"To a significant degree it's a struggle for the "Palestinian Freedom" of their terrorists to murder all the Jews they can at whim and to sow as much destruction as they can within Israel proper."

How many people are dying on both sides? Even if you look at the periods with the highest number of suicide bombings the number of deaths was pretty small. A few days of suicide bombings in Iraq probably equala the total number of those killed by suicide bombings in Israel ever. The same is true on the other side. The number of Palestinians killed by Israelis over the past few years was less than a single day of US bombing in Iraq or Afghanistan during the start of those wars. In terms of oppression of people in the West Bank and Gaza that probably is worse than oppression of the local populations in Iraq or Afghanistan by the US but thats mainly because Iraq and Afghansitan are much larger and cant be fenced in as easilly.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is a real conflict that needs to be focued on since it drives US policy and views on the US in the Islamic world, but both sides like to make it out to be much larger and more violent than it actually is. A few deaths here and there doesnt make a genocide (or attempted genoicde) and its doubtful that even most militant Israelis and most miltant Palestinians really want to drive the other side into the sea or Jordan. Of course the people who argue for Israel or Palestine on this site might be filled with that much hate but Im guessing its partly a mixture of the tendency for people to sound more hyperbolic in web postings mixed with people far from the actual conflict having little real interest in it getting resolved since its an ideological issue not one of making life better for actual people.
by um
Friday May 13th, 2005 10:56 PM
"what could happen to other Jews who would be victimized if it weren't for the implementation of various Israeli measures"

Its a vicious circle. All the restrictions put on the Palestinians have increased poverty and empowered Hamas so even if more attacks would occur if there were less restrictions with everything else equal thats not the best thing to compare it to. Look at the recent violence in Egypt and you could argue that Mubarak was supressing Eyptian rights to prevent atacks by Islamists but if most reasonable analyses of the sutituation blames the recent attacks on the lack of freedom under Mubarak. Same goes for Uzbekistan. In Israel's case the fear that the real motive of the Palestinians is to destroy Israel is the reason some people dont equate the violence with the poverty and oppression of those in the W Bank and Gaza but the exact same public that is now being blamed for not being willing to accept Israel was pretty united in supporting peace when Rabin and Arafat were around. There were attacks back then that couldnt be prevented but decreasing freedoms in response to an attack is letting those carrtying out the atacks set the rules and once you do that your have already lost. I guess another response to this would be to blame Arafat but aside from arguments over what really happened during negotiations (and if the real momentum for peace died when Rabin did) there is the more important point that one should never use the blame of others to give up and claim it's impossible to move forwards. Chances for peace died because people on both sides gave up and used blame of the other side as an excuse to stop trying; ultimately the blame and unwillingness to keep moving is what stopped things from going forward not the people or events that were the focus of the blame.

In terms of the global effects of the recent restrictions Israel claims helps its safety take a look at public opinion and compare the activist attitude towards the Israel-Palestinians conflict now to five or ten years ago. While its easy to claim that world public opinion doesnt matter there is no chance of peace without peace between the actual peoples and with culture becoming global, global public opinion matters a lot. While many right-wingers still love Israel, support probably hit a low point in the last few years which will be hard for Israel to ever recover from. Ultimately it was this sort of public opinion pressure that brought down both S Africa and the Soviet Union so while it seems touchy feely to talk about the importance of public perception...
by ANGEL
Friday May 13th, 2005 11:17 PM
>>>"How many people are dying on both sides? Even if you look at the periods with the highest number of suicide bombings the number of deaths was pretty small. A few days of suicide bombings in Iraq probably equala the total number of those killed by suicide bombings in Israel ever. The same is true on the other side.<<<

The numbers mean nothing unless you ratio them out.

You have to consider that the number of dead in Iraq is:
How many (?) per the Population of around 24,000,000.

For Palestinians it is 3606 out of only some 4,000,000.
For Israelis it is 1049 out of some 5,000,000.

Even C.T. who does not agree with ANGEL, I am sure understands the concept of ratio and percentages.

And as I have said many times I am for Israel existing inside its Pre 1967 (Green Line) Border, where the majority of the Jewish People in the Area Live.

The idea of a Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza could very likely lead to Peace.

And with the U.S. Backing Israel, once this State is achieved it would be very stupid for the Palestinian to attack Israel, because Israel with the Backing of the U.S. could crush the Palestinians in one or two days.

But until we have this Palestinian State for the Palestinian People there is no real reason for the Palestinians to stop fighting for their Freedom.
by Sefarad
Friday May 13th, 2005 11:26 PM
The real motive of the Palestinians is to destroy Israel. Israel, for them, is the “occupied Palestine”.

“the exact same public that is now being blamed for not being willing to accept Israel was pretty united in supporting peace when Rabin and Arafat were around. There were attacks back then that couldnt be prevented “

However, it seems that they were not supporting peace, since the Palestinians went on killing Israelis, while Israel was making concesions to the Palestinians.

“There were attacks back then that couldnt be prevented but decreasing freedoms in response to an attack is letting those carrtying out the atacks set the rules and once you do that your have already lost


Who had freedoms decreased? I suppose you mean the restrictions for the Palestinians. It is not letting those carrying out the attacks set the rules. If they were attacking Israel and it didn’t make steps to prevent those attacks, what would have happened? I think a state has to protect their citizens.


by Sefarad
Friday May 13th, 2005 11:29 PM

Angel, you may be for Israel's existance, but the Palestinians' opinion is other.
by ANGEL
Saturday May 14th, 2005 11:03 PM
>>>"And with the U.S. Backing Israel, once this State is achieved it would be very stupid for the Palestinian to attack Israel, because Israel with the Backing of the U.S. could crush the Palestinians in one or two days."<<<

The reason for the Intifada is that the Palestinians are under Occupation and are being Oppressed.
That is why some People sympathize with them.
Once they have their State and are no longer under Occupation, you remove the reason for the sympathy.
If they were to attack Israel inside its pre 1967 Borders, I doubt that anyone even the Arab States who have said that they Would recognize Israel in it pre 1967 Borders would have much sympathy for the Palestinian if they were not satisfied with a totally free State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza.
The real reality is that you cannot just move the 5,000,000 Jews out of the area.
So let them have their State in Israel Proper.
The real reality is that you cannot just make some 4,000,000 Palestinians just up and disappear from the physical place in which they live (The West Bank and Gaza) so let them have their Viable Palestinian State called for in the Road Map to Peace.
It would be much easier for Israel to put its Military on their border and guard the protect that defined border, then to go into the towns and villages in the West Bank looking for law breakers.

by Sefarad
Saturday May 14th, 2005 11:23 PM
The intifada started when the Palestinians were offered virtually everything they said they wanted (98%), in Camp Davis. Far from accepting it, they left the talks and started that intifada.

Then do we have to believe them when they say they want to have their own state in the territories?

"It would be much easier for Israel to put its Military on their border and guard the protect that defined border, then to go into the towns and villages in the West Bank looking for law breakers."

What would happen if the Israeli Military went into the towns and villages of another state? Wouldn't it be called an invasion?





by ANGEL
Sunday May 15th, 2005 11:24 PM
This tit for tat is not getting us very far.

I refuse to believe that young people are willing to give up their lives via suicide for no reason, and I believe the reason is that they are under Occupation and Oppression and that some People believe in the concept of give me liberty or give me death.
Therefore militaries all over the world exist to protect such freedoms and there have always been uprising among those who are and have been oppressed and do not have the benefits of such militaries.
And you believe that the Israeli government and military is doing no wrong and the Occupation and Oppression being felt by the Palestinian People is imaginary and all in their mind.
The facts on the ground i.e. the Wall inside the West Bank, the demolished homes, the high number of Palestinian dead, the Confiscation of land, the destruction of olive trees and crops, seem to point in a different direction the limited supply of water for the Palestinian, while “some” Israelis use water for swimming pools and the list goes on.
I am just point out some of the problems and am not putting blame on all the Israelis because I like many know that half the Israeli people are against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People.

Sefarad: I will try to locate the reason the not so generous offer failed and repost it once again.
by Sefarad
Monday May 16th, 2005 6:29 AM
Angel:
<<I refuse to believe that young people are willing to give up their lives via suicide for no reason,>>

They are willing to give up their lives for one reason: since they are very young, they are taught it is honorable to kill Jews by doing so.

Angel:
<<and I believe the reason is that they are under Occupation and Oppression>>

That what they say, that the Jews are occupying their land, that is to say, Israel.

It is also true that they are oppressed, but not by Israel, but by their own government. Please don’t tell me that the Palestinian regime is a democratic one. When power was handed over to the PA , it supressed the human rights the Palestinians had been enjoying under Israeli rule. They closed up journals , and the newspapers, TV and radio stations left were put under PA’s control. Human rights organizations were dismantled and “law” became arbitrary.

Angel:
<<and that some People believe in the concept of give me liberty or give me death. >>

It is the other way round: the Palestinians are giving death to the Israelis.

Angel:
<<Therefore militaries all over the world exist to protect such freedoms>>

That’s what Israel is doing: protecting the Israelis’ freedoms and lives.

Angel:
<< and there have always been uprising among those who are and have been oppressed and do not have the benefits of such militaries.. >>

And there have always been people who have made war against others who hadn’t attacked them and there have been people committing acts of terrorism.


Angel:
<<And you believe that the Israeli government and military is doing no wrong and the Occupation and Oppression being felt by the Palestinian People is imaginary and all in their mind. >>

I think the Israeli government is doing what has to be done in cases like that: it is protecting its citizens and its territory.

Angel, I would like to know what you mean by “occupation”. The Palestinians call the very existance of Israel “occupation”.

Angel:

<<The facts on the ground i.e. the Wall inside the West Bank, the demolished homes, the high number of Palestinian dead, the Confiscation of land, the destruction of olive trees and crops, seem to point in a different direction the limited supply of water for the Palestinian, while “some” Israelis use water for swimming pools and the list goes on.
I am just point out some of the problems and am not putting blame on all the Israelis because I like many know that half the Israeli people are against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People. >>

The fact on the ground is that the Israelis have to install that defensive barrier because they are being attacked. The barrier can be dismantled when it is convenient, but the dead cannot be given their lives back.

Angel:
<<Sefarad: I will try to locate the reason the not so generous offer failed and repost it once again.>>

Which generous offer do you mean?
---------------------

There are many people in the world starving and being oppressed(the North Koreans or the Sudanese, among others) who don’t blow themselves up or teach their children to do so..

On the other hand, was bin Laden oppressed? Or the people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center?



by Sefarad
Monday May 16th, 2005 12:32 PM
Thus, even in the 1950s Israel used 93 percent of the Western Aquifer's water, and 82 percent of the Northeastern Aquifer's water. Today, Israel's share of these aquifers has declined to 83 percent and 80 percent, respectively. That is, under Israeli administration the Palestinian share of these aquifers has actually increased.

In addition, over 40 MCM (million cubic meters) of water per year from sources within Israel is piped over the Green Line for Palestinian use in the West Bank. Ramallah, for example, receives over 5 MCM annually from Israeli sources. Israel sends another 4 MCM annually over its border for Palestinian use in the Gaza Strip. Thus, it is the Palestinians who are using Israeli water.

And not just the Palestinians. Despite its own meager supply, Israel annually provides 600,000 CM of water to ten otherwise dry villages in South Lebanon, and, as a favor to the late King Hussein, more than 55 MCM annually to Jordan. Perhaps no other country, facing the severe shortages that Israel does, has shared so much water with so many of its neighbors.

http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/marapr00/water.html
by Sefarad
Monday May 16th, 2005 12:49 PM
This Week's Palestinian Authority Sermon: We (Muslims) Will Rule America

The following are excerpts from this week's official Friday sermon on Palestinian Authority (PA) TV. The preacher is Sheik Ibrahim a paid employee of the PA.

"Look at modern history. Where has Great Britain gone? Where has Czarist Russia gone? Where has France gone - France, which almost ruled the entire world? Where is Nazi Germany, which massacred millions and ruled the world? Where did all these superpowers go? He who made them disappear will make America disappear too, God willing. He who made Russia disappear overnight is capable of making America disappear and fall, Allah willing.

"We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again. The day will come when we will rule America. The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world ."
They were offered a state in name only, that was actually to be an archipelago of discontinuous Bantustans.
by another anti-Zionist lie
Monday May 16th, 2005 10:45 PM

What the Palestinians want is Israel.
by gehrig
Tuesday May 17th, 2005 5:57 AM
anonym: "They were offered a state in name only, that was actually to be an archipelago of discontinuous Bantustans."

This is the excuse Uncle Yassir gave for turning it down. Unfortunately, as as been demonstrated by Dennis Ross -- who published what the offer actually was as part of his recent book -- the "bantustan" thing has been shown up as a lie, although it's a lie I expect the anti-Zionists to continue to cling to.

@%<
by what does that mean?
Tuesday May 17th, 2005 8:49 AM
"has been shown up as a lie"

Calling the proposed state during the last negotiations Bantustans could mean a number of things.

In one case it could mean small states with bad economies containing an ethnic group that was forced out of the larger country. While a two state solution seems the answer its hard to see a Palestinians state being that viable without a lot of foriegn support and if what is meant by Bantustan is this being "proven wrong" would mean going back to debates over how those living in what is now Israe were forced out in 48.

But most poeple using the term mean more than that and Im guessing that when peopel say "proved wrong" they mean a specific allegation (or perhaps all allegations associated with the negotiations)/ These include questions of water right, whether the new Palestinian state owuld control its own airspace, whether the borders between the new Palestinians states and neighboring countries wouold be controlled by Israel, whether the new states woudl have been divided up with settlements and access roads etc... Some of those were true with regard to what was rejected by Arafat and some werent. It would be intersting to hear from those talkibng about how the problems with what was proposed deal with all the limits to the soverignty that were in whats was proposed rather than either vaguely calling the accusations lies or pointing to disagreements over the meaning of various things (Israeli overflight rights may or my not be a limit on Palestinian control of its airspace) and calling those lies.
by Sefarad
Tuesday May 17th, 2005 1:16 PM
Arafat never honestly admitted what was offered to the Palestinians—a deal that would have resulted in a Palestinian state, with territory in over 97 percent of the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem; with Arab East Jerusalem as the capital of that state (including the holy place of the Haram al-Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary); with an international presence in place of the Israeli Defense Force in the Jordan Valley; and with the unlimited right of return for Palestinian refugees to their state but not to Israel. Nonetheless, Arafat continued to hide behind the canard that he was offered Bantustans—a reference to the geographically isolated black homelands created by the apartheid-era South African government. Yet with 97 percent of the territory in Palestinian hands, there would have been no cantons. Palestinian areas would not have been isolated or surrounded. There would have been territorial integrity and contiguity in both the West Bank and Gaza, and there would have been independent borders with Egypt and Jordan.

by ANGEL
Tuesday May 17th, 2005 10:12 PM
>>>Arafat never honestly admitted what was offered to the Palestinians<<<

Well if you want to put all the blame on Arafat, so be it.
But since Arafat is now dead and he was to blame.
Then let us have that Viable Palestinian State Now in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza, Free from the Israeli Military and Government.
Then this Viable Palestinian State can have its own airport and have it own say on who can and can not come into their country to help them rebuild it. A Palestinian State where the people can live with dignity and in Peace will do much to end the hate and therefore the conflict that has caused deaths on both sides, (Israelis and Palestinians)
by Sefarad
Tuesday May 17th, 2005 11:14 PM

But if they had accepted what was offered to him the Palestinians would have their state. And it is not true that they wanted to give him bantustans.

Why didn't he accept the offer? Because he wanted everything, Israel included. And now it is not different.