ForumGarden

And you are trying to prove...what? A 'Palestinian' website is not a contemporary bookstore or newsstand. I'm referring to current, politically accurate publications, not propaganda material or historical artifacts.

I`m trying unlike you, to prove nothing....

You asked to see a modern map that lists Palestine....Quote, there ain`t no such place, it never existed

Then you say when Israel was created Palestine became non existent. :-5

When shown a MODERN map, you refute the source as being propaganda and from a Palestinian website.

http://www.mideastweb.org/misrael.htm is NOT a palestinian website, it is a website dedicated to ALL the middle East and that includes Israel.

2. A Palestinian state that would be nothing more than a haven for murderous terrorists from all over the Islamic world is a non-starter. That will NEVER happen. A Palestinian state can ONLY be established with Israel's help and support. Will that happen? It's up to the Palestinians.

Bollocks...just keep taking the medicine.

Crikey! you lot must spend half the night posting.

Bronwen wrote: And you are trying to prove...what? A 'Palestinian' website is not a contemporary bookstore or newsstand. I'm referring to current, politically accurate publications, not propaganda material or historical artifacts.

I hope that the 'Palestinains' do eventually get their own Israel-protected state in the West Bank. What they CALL it is beside the point. They can call Arafatia for all I care.

At the risk of being repetitious, here are the two key points:

1. The Palestinians had their state served to them on a silver platter in 1948. It was Jordan, not Israel, who disputed the land allotted to them. Since then they have had several chances to re-establish their claim legitimately and have squandered every one by continuing acts of wanton terrorism against Israeli civilians.

2. A Palestinian state that would be nothing more than a haven for murderous terrorists from all over the Islamic world is a non-starter. That will NEVER happen. A Palestinian state can ONLY be established with Israel's help and support. Will that happen? It's up to the Palestinians.


1) I suggest you do a little more research. Maybe actually read a book or two and you might understand why contemporary maps don't show a country called palestine.

http://www.salaam.co.uk/themeofthemonth ... x.php?l=11

After World War II, Britain was unable to maintain control over Palestine and transferred responsibility to the United Nations (UN). The UN decided that the only means of resolving the escalating conflict between Jews and Arabs was to partition the land into two states. Although Jews constituted only one-third of the population and owned less than 7 percent of the land, the UN partition plan assigned 55 percent of Palestine’s territory to the Jewish state. In March 1948, Zionist forces launched major operations throughout Palestine. Their attacks were brutal. Through terror, psychological warfare, and direct conquests, Palestine was dismembered, many of its villages destroyed, and many of its people expelled as refugees. By the time the British withdrawal had been completed, Palestinian resistance had been largely broken. British evacuation and the Zionist leaders’ proclamation of the Israeli state on 15 May 1948—forcibly created beyond the area allotted to the Jewish community in the UN partition plan—prompted military intervention by the neighboring Arab states, precipitating the first Arab-Israeli war.


2) A palestinian state will only be established when Israel accepts that Palestinians have a right to exist in the first place and accepts that it's own actions have done much to make a bad situation worse. Freedom and justice is something others desire not just israeli's

Terrorism is the only means of resistance palestinians have, whatever you may think of terrorists there is often a good reason why terrorist/freedom fighter are two sides of the coin. One man's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter and constant warfare is not going to make this problem going away. Sooner or later Israel is going to have to talk to Hamas and Hezbollah because like it or not they have popular support and after this little episode are gaining even more and you will never win a guerrila war when the guerillas have popular support. Fasr from ending attacks on Israel it is guaranteeing another generation of children are growing up with good reasons to hate Israel and those who stand back and let them do what they want.

You can't change the past but if you don't understand what happened the same mistakes happen over and over again.

posted by anastrophe

fair enough. i think sovereign nations should work out their own differences.

this will bring the inevitable 'well then mr. smarty pants, what about iraq'.

let me put it this way. for all of our moral outrage, and taking of sides, the actual, dumbfounding fact and reality is this:

for the overwhelming majority of people on forumgarden, for the overwhelming majority of people in the US, canada, the UK, australia, china, etc etc etc - for the vast majority of people on earth: you could live your entire life, from cradle to grave, and never ever have your life affected in any tangible way by what goes on in the middle east.

i'm not kidding. with the exception of oil, which is truly little more than "look who won that lottery", we could all be blissfully ignorant of the millenia of infighting in the middle east, and it wouldn't challenge how we get up in the morning, pull our on our trousers or skirts (i prefer pleated, myself), and go about our daily lives.

that doesn't mean we shouldn't care about it. but with the exception perhaps of golem, who may at this very moment be taking his life into his hands in the actual grit of war, few of us, or our opinions, really matter.


I find myself in almost total agreement with you, except for the latter point. Our opinions do matter. Both the US and UK govts take action in our name, if the people in those countries can't call our govt's to account then who else is going to?

Because of oil what happens in the middle east does matter a great deal. Our economies are so dependant on it that if anything affects the supply then it will affect our daily lives good style.

What your govt does in the middle east may not affect the everage american at the moment but it may very well do so soon. After 911 did no one wonder why or do most just accept that all terrorists are mindless morons without reason?

TB is rapidly becoming an isolated figure in UK politics don't expect him to be around for very much longer. Politicians can ignore public opinion, and most do so, but at the end of the day it it is our opinions that matter the most.

Bronwen wrote: At the risk of being repetitious, :yh_giggle

gmc wrote:

2) A palestinian state will only be established when Israel accepts that Palestinians have a right to exist in the first place and accepts that it's own actions have done much to make a bad situation worse. Freedom and justice is something others desire not just israeli's


why is everybody so quick to forget that israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank and gaza, in the hopes of appeasing the palestinians and keeping peace? this was a huge, positive move on israel's part. they were thanked for giving land back to the palestinians with rockets lobbed at them.





Terrorism is the only means of resistance palestinians have, whatever you may think of terrorists there is often a good reason why terrorist/freedom fighter are two sides of the coin. One man's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter and constant warfare is not going to make this problem going away.
sorry, i can't accept that equivocation. there is a huge, massive difference between a 'freedom fighter' who is engaging with military forces, and an inhuman zealot who straps dynamite to his or her body and gets on a commuter bus. the former may be fighting for something; the latter has only random, senseless slaughter in mind, and 93 virgins or whatever waiting in paradise. **** that.







I find myself in almost total agreement with you, except for the latter point. Our opinions do matter. Both the US and UK govts take action in our name, if the people in those countries can't call our govt's to account then who else is going to?


my comment regarding opinions was more on the phenomenological level. if one chooses, one can make one's voice heard; if one chooses not to have an opinion at all, they can live their life free of the agony of knowing what goes on in the world. i believe the amish here in america do not in any way ever read newspapers or watch television or listen to radio. i don't know whether they learn of news from the outside world from in-person communication with others outside the faith, but by and large they live their lives separate from the travails of the world beyond their small communities.





Because of oil what happens in the middle east does matter a great deal. Our economies are so dependant on it that if anything affects the supply then it will affect our daily lives good style.


well, i can't speak for the UK or the european union in general, but a rather surprising fact for most people is that the US gets less than six percent of its energy resources from the middle east. the rest comes from the US itself, mexico, canada, venezuela, etc etc.. Now, of course, if the US lost six percent in one fell swoop, it would indeed cause hardship. not quite as severe as some expect though. including what i used to think on the matter.





What your govt does in the middle east may not affect the everage american at the moment but it may very well do so soon. After 911 did no one wonder why or do most just accept that all terrorists are mindless morons without reason?


any idiot can blow things up. so yes, i'd characterize most as mindless morons. warped beyond humanity with crazed ideology (see '93 virgins' above).





TB is rapidly becoming an isolated figure in UK politics don't expect him to be around for very much longer. Politicians can ignore public opinion, and most do so, but at the end of the day it it is our opinions that matter the most.


um, you were saying not long ago before the last elections that he wouldn't be around long. elections he won again. kind of like bush won the second time around. predicting how long the latest leader will last based upon opinions that aren't conterminous with impending elections doesn't really stand up. back during bush the first, after the first gulf war, his approval ratings were over the moon. barely a year and a half later, he was out of a job; people's pocketbooks mattered more at that point, and the recession doomed him.



so, we shall see how long TB is around. we know bush won't be around after the next election. i'm hoping lieberman makes it through his state primary. i disagree with him on a lot of things, but he's a hell of a guy in other respects.



but i digress.

anastrophe wrote: why is everybody so quick to forget that israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank and gaza, in the hopes of appeasing the palestinians and keeping peace? this was a huge, positive move on israel's part. they were thanked for giving land back to the palestinians with rockets lobbed at them.




What percentage of the land and of the settlements was handed back? The Israelis gave back those settlements that lay outside the proposed wall and were indefensible or that were, even for the Israeli government, a step too far by the extremists. A drop in the ocean that made no practical difference.

Also, could we have a sense of timing here – and of intervening events? You make it sound as though one followed directly on the other with no other activity between and this is just not true.

anastrophe wrote: why is everybody so quick to forget that israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank and gaza, in the hopes of appeasing the palestinians and keeping peace? this was a huge, positive move on israel's part. they were thanked for giving land back to the palestinians with rockets lobbed at them.


Sorry, but you make out that Israel gave something back, it wasn`t your land to start with, you had occupied territory, how can you give something back that you forcefully took and call it a good deed.?

You occupy Palestine and now Lebanon.

What would you call the people who blew up the British ? Israeli freedom fighters no doubt.

Why should Israels crimes perpetrated for the cause of establishing a state be any different than the Palestinians.?....

Israel is ethnic cleansing, violating UN resolutions and commiting war crimes with the aid in the form of 6 billion dollars a year from the USA....and you whinge when they throw a rocket at you....most of the rockets hezbollah have aimed at Israel could have been taken out in mid air, but it serves your propaganda war to let them land.

Suicide bombers have nothing to live for, living in Palestine is worse than living in hell, you cut them off from their crops, water, bulldoze their homes down and keep them in stinking camps, while you build settlements for jewish people only, who splash around in swimming pools, yet across the wall are people with 2 hours a WEEK running water that the Israeli`s allow them.

How can you call this defending yourself and then accuse the palestinians of terrorism when it is retaliation for the crimes you commit daily.?



Do you know what p*sses me off the most, when you jews say that we have a right to be in Israel, Israel has a right to exist.....

Neither God, Moses, or Abraham gave you a right to live in Israel...the UN in 1947gave you the right after your acts of terrorism... Eastern European "Jews" are neither Israelites nor "Semites," but are instead Khazars, Mongols, and Huns

Ever heard of the Thirteenth Tribe.?

At last we have a politician with the b@lls to speak out....this was immediately taken off air and not repeated on TV today....just like the American media is filtered.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/video ... 06,00.html

Issie wrote: Sorry, but you make out that Israel gave something back, it wasn`t your land to start with, you had occupied territory, how can you give something back that you forcefully took and call it a good deed.?

You occupy Palestine and now Lebanon.


i'm afraid you're confused. i don't occupy palestine. israel is definitely not 'occupying' lebanon.



What would you call the people who blew up the British ? Israeli freedom fighters no doubt.


if they attacked civilians, i call them terrorists. if they attacked british military - any military - then they're engaging combat, essentially. 'terrorism' is implicitly waged against civilians.





Why should Israels crimes perpetrated for the cause of establishing a state be any different than the Palestinians.?....


because the palestinian terrorists are killing civilians for the sake of killing civilians.





Israel is ethnic cleansing,


ridiculous on its face. if israel wanted to eliminate the palestinians, a couple of days of carpet bombing the gaza strip would suffice for that region. the west bank would be harder, as well as the border with lebanon now.



do you even know what ethnic cleansing is? clearly you don't.





violating UN resolutions and commiting war crimes with the aid in the form of 6 billion dollars a year from the USA....and you whinge when they throw a rocket at you....most of the rockets hezbollah have aimed at Israel could have been taken out in mid air, but it serves your propaganda war to let them land.


okay. cool. so you're from the tinfoil hat crowd. that simplifies matters significantly.





Suicide bombers have nothing to live for, living in Palestine is worse than living in hell,


if that were the case, as you describe it, then there wouldn't be any palestinians left, as they'd have all killed themselves in trying to kill israelis.





you cut them off from their crops, water, bulldoze their homes down and keep them in stinking camps, while you build settlements for jewish people only, who splash around in swimming pools, yet across the wall are people with 2 hours a WEEK running water that the Israeli`s allow them.
make no mistake. i do not defend everything that israelis do. militant/extremist israelis are as culpable as militant, extremist palestinians in fomenting violence.





How can you call this defending yourself and then accuse the palestinians of terrorism when it is retaliation for the crimes you commit daily.?


as things stand now, it's a pathetic two-way street. the israelis try to contain the palestinians, because the palestinians try to kill innocent people. containing the palestinians cause hardship and enmity, only increasing their desire to kill more israelis.



too bad the palestinians can't make ANY gestures towards peace. the israelis have. significant. and the zealots respond with more bombs, more missiles - because the insane mullahs have made this a jihad. peace is not desired by the islamofascists. that's very clear.







Do you know what p*sses me off the most, when you jews say that we have a right to be in Israel, Israel has a right to exist.....


woohoo! ding ding ding ding ding! we have a winner alex! we have a frothing anti-jew here, ladies and gentlemen, don your tinfoil hats!



get a clue you bigoted anencephalic: i'm not jewish.

you, however, have just shown that you're a goddamned bigot.





Neither God, Moses, or Abraham gave you a right to live in Israel...the UN in 1947gave you the right after your acts of terrorism... Eastern European "Jews" are neither Israelites nor "Semites," but are instead Khazars, Mongols, and Huns

Ever heard of the Thirteenth Tribe.?


i'll just sit here quietly until the spittle stops flying, thanks.





At last we have a politician with the b@lls to speak out....this was immediately taken off air and not repeated on TV today....just like the American media is filtered.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/video ... 06,00.html


all i need to see is the name galloway. gorgeous george. one of the most sickening excuses for a human being i've ever had the displeasure to watch perform in a debate.



birds of a feather do flock together.

anastrophe wrote: i'm afraid you're confused. i don't occupy palestine. israel is definitely not 'occupying' lebanon.


Are you seriously trying to clain thwe the Israeli army is not occupying any Lebanese terratory?



anastrophe wrote: if they attacked civilians, i call them terrorists. if they attacked british military - any military - then they're engaging combat, essentially. 'terrorism' is implicitly waged against civilians.


They, by their own admission, used terror to drive the Pallestinians out of their homes - That makes them terrorists, They bombed civilian targets, both when attacking the British army and afterwards - that makes them terrorists.



anastrophe wrote: because the palestinian terrorists are killing civilians for the sake of killing civilians.


and an Israeli warship shelling a public beach is not!



anastrophe wrote: ridiculous on its face. if israel wanted to eliminate the palestinians, a couple of days of carpet bombing the gaza strip would suffice for that region. the west bank would be harder, as well as the border with lebanon now.



do you even know what ethnic cleansing is? clearly you don't.


Within the confines of what they can get away with in the international arena that's exactly what they are doing, and have been for years - they are already being threatened with War Crimes Tribunals as it is.



anastrophe wrote: okay. cool. so you're from the tinfoil hat crowd. that simplifies matters significantly.


Personnal abuse does not become you



anastrophe wrote: if that were the case, as you describe it, then there wouldn't be any palestinians left, as they'd have all killed themselves in trying to kill israelis.


A specious argument if ever I've heard one - people will endure and it is a measure of what they endure that so many take the ultimate recourse.



anastrophe wrote: make no mistake. i do not defend everything that israelis do. militant/extremist israelis are as culpable as militant, extremist palestinians in fomenting violence.


Then admit that there is some culpability! This disproportionate response only suggests that the Israelis were looking for any excuse to invade yet you paint them whiter than white.



anastrophe wrote: as things stand now, it's a pathetic two-way street. the israelis try to contain the palestinians, because the palestinians try to kill innocent people. containing the palestinians cause hardship and enmity, only increasing their desire to kill more israelis.



too bad the palestinians can't make ANY gestures towards peace. the israelis have. significant. and the zealots respond with more bombs, more missiles - because the insane mullahs have made this a jihad. peace is not desired by the islamofascists. that's very clear.


Count the death rate on each side and square that with your descriptions or the Israelis "containing" and the Palestinians as Zelots killing innocent people.



anastrophe wrote: woohoo! ding ding ding ding ding! we have a winner alex! we have a frothing anti-jew here, ladies and gentlemen, don your tinfoil hats!



get a clue you bigoted anencephalic: i'm not jewish.

you, however, have just shown that you're a goddamned bigot.



i'll just sit here quietly until the spittle stops flying, thanks.






and I'm neither - I started out in 67 supporting the Israelis against the Arab hoards but I've watched what happened since with rising horror. Read you history and see what is being done - not just this week and last week but over the last hundred years.



anastrophe wrote: all i need to see is the name galloway. gorgeous george. one of the most sickening excuses for a human being i've ever had the displeasure to watch perform in a debate.



birds of a feather do flock together.


I'm no fan of his but did the Sennate Committee manage to produce any evidence against him rather than accusations?

you, however, have just shown that you're a goddamned bigot.

That`s just made me p*ss my pants with laughing...especially after the crappola that has been posted on here and the racist views.

I`m dissapointed that you didnt wave the anti-semetic card at me.

israel is definitely not 'occupying' lebanon.

You`re a little confused, Israel occupied Lebanon in 1982 and has never completely left.....people have been arrested by an occupying force in their own land ever since.

It was during Israel's bloody invasion of Lebanon in 1982 that a young Osama bin Laden watched the destruction of high-rises in Beirut and first resolved to take down the towers of the World Trade Center.

make no mistake. i do not defend everything that israelis do. militant/extremist israelis are as culpable as militant, extremist palestinians in fomenting violence.

That at least is something we can agree on.

Quote:

What would you call the people who blew up the British ? Israeli freedom fighters no doubt.

if they attacked civilians, i call them terrorists. if they attacked british military - any military - then they're engaging combat, essentially. 'terrorism' is implicitly waged against civilians.

Considering civilians died, then I call them terrorists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing



Just in case you are confused, when I refer to you as in you Israel, it is not you as you the man behind the keyboard, don`t delude yourself that you can be that important in my life... but hey, if my attention floats your boat.

You must be the forum commedian that comes to the forefront when the truth is stated and dismisses every god dam thing that doesn`t fit your views.

Pity. you let me down.:wah:

Bryn Mawr wrote: Are you seriously trying to clain thwe the Israeli army is not occupying any Lebanese terratory?


in the current context of the military intrusions into lebanon, that's not what's typically termed 'occupation'. if you're referring to the disputed shebaa farms area, well, i blame the french for that mess.







They, by their own admission, used terror to drive the Pallestinians out of their homes - That makes them terrorists, They bombed civilian targets, both when attacking the British army and afterwards - that makes them terrorists.


while i know it'll sound like equivocation - if civilians commit acts of terror, and the armed forced of those they attacked attack the civilians, it gets into an awfully grey area. israelis do not go into the gaza strip, climb on buses, and blow themselves up.







and an Israeli warship shelling a public beach is not!


i admit ignorance on this. i'm just not familiar with it. i'll look into it. if an israeli warship shelled a public beach (presumably in the gaza strip), without provocation, then that would be savage act, and one of terrorism.





Within the confines of what they can get away with in the international arena that's exactly what they are doing, and have been for years - they are already being threatened with War Crimes Tribunals as it is.


sorry. i'm not buying into it. we'll have to agree to disagree. are palestinians who martyr themselves on israeli commuter buses not engaging in ethnic cleansing? they don't board buses in lebanon and blow themselves up.







Personnal abuse does not become you


on the contrary, mon frere, i wear it quite well, some might say dashingly so, with a roguish tilt to my fedora.







A specious argument if ever I've heard one - people will endure and it is a measure of what they endure that so many take the ultimate recourse.




i could go for that argument - if they were slitting their wrists in despair. unfortunately, they kill innocent people who have done nothing to harm them when they go. there's a difference between attacking those who are attacking you, and attacking people on a bus going to work.







Then admit that there is some culpability! This disproportionate response only suggests that the Israelis were looking for any excuse to invade yet you paint them whiter than white.


sorry, no, that's a load of hogwash. hezbollah drew in the israelis. they've said as much! they kidnapped an israeli soldier, ostensibly to bargain for release of prisoners. then they started lobbing missiles, before israel had begun any response at all.



there's no such thing as 'disproportionate response' when those who are attacking you believe they have a mandate from god to wipe every last jew off the face of the earth.







Count the death rate on each side and square that with your descriptions or the Israelis "containing" and the Palestinians as Zelots killing innocent people.


death rate...since when? as i said, i don't deny that israel's attempt at containing the palestinians has resulted in inhumane conditions for them. it is, once again, not a black and white issue.





and I'm neither - I started out in 67 supporting the Israelis against the Arab hoards but I've watched what happened since with rising horror. Read you history and see what is being done - not just this week and last week but over the last hundred years.


i'm serviceably familiar with the history of the region, however that familiarity goes back about 4,000 years, rather than just the last few hundred.



regardless, anyone who tosses out the phrase 'you jews' in the context of this topic clearly falls into the crackpot spittle-flinger column for me..











I'm no fan of his but did the Sennate Committee manage to produce any evidence against him rather than accusations?


had he actually answered even one, single, solitary question that was posed to him, they might have had a chance of pursuing the matter. he is nothing if not capable of smothering discussion with free-ranging tirades lasting well into the night. but that's a side-issue.



he flung more spittle than you have, i'll give him that.

anastrophe wrote: in the current context of the military intrusions into lebanon, that's not what's typically termed 'occupation'. if you're referring to the disputed shebaa farms area, well, i blame the french for that mess.


The Israeli Army is occupying Lebanese territory - as they did in 82.



anastrophe wrote: while i know it'll sound like equivocation - if civilians commit acts of terror, and the armed forced of those they attacked attack the civilians, it gets into an awfully grey area. israelis do not go into the gaza strip, climb on buses, and blow themselves up.


No - they drive in in tanks and bulldose houses onto the families occupying them!

anastrophe wrote: i admit ignorance on this. i'm just not familiar with it. i'll look into it. if an israeli warship shelled a public beach (presumably in the gaza strip), without provocation, then that would be savage act, and one of terrorism.


Luckily only one woman and her two children killed - it could have been far worse.



anastrophe wrote: sorry. i'm not buying into it. we'll have to agree to disagree. are palestinians who martyr themselves on israeli commuter buses not engaging in ethnic cleansing? they don't board buses in lebanon and blow themselves up.


No. It is you that does not understand the consept of ethnic cleansing - it is the systematic removal of an ethnic group from a geographical area. That cannot be achieved by a few individuals killing even 10 or 20 random people each - it is done by driving people out by their hundreds of thousands as per the subject.



anastrophe wrote: on the contrary, mon frere, i wear it quite well, some might say dashingly so, with a roguish tilt to my fedora.


Sad - not funny.



anastrophe wrote: i could go for that argument - if they were slitting their wrists in despair. unfortunately, they kill innocent people who have done nothing to harm them when they go. there's a difference between attacking those who are attacking you, and attacking people on a bus going to work.


Try to see life from their point of view - I do not condone it (or agree with it in any weay shape or form) but I can see why they resort to it.



anastrophe wrote: sorry, no, that's a load of hogwash. hezbollah drew in the israelis. they've said as much! they kidnapped an israeli soldier, ostensibly to bargain for release of prisoners. then they started lobbing missiles, before israel had begun any response at all.



there's no such thing as 'disproportionate response' when those who are attacking you believe they have a mandate from god to wipe every last jew off the face of the earth.


For every one of our people harmed we will kill 100 of yours - there is no such thing as a disproportionate resposnse. Give me a break!



anastrophe wrote: death rate...since when? as i said, i don't deny that israel's attempt at containing the palestinians has resulted in inhumane conditions for them. it is, once again, not a black and white issue.


buit you have not once allowed any just cause on the Palestinian side nor any blame on the Israeli



i'm serviceably familiar with the history of the region, however that familiarity goes back about 4,000 years, rather than just the last few hundred.



regardless, anyone who tosses out the phrase 'you jews' in the context of this topic clearly falls into the crackpot spittle-flinger column for me..


The fact that the Jews ruled the area over 2000 years ago does NOT give the Israelis a God give right to rule it now - sorry, find some other justification!







anastrophe wrote: had he actually answered even one, single, solitary question that was posed to him, they might have had a chance of pursuing the matter. he is nothing if not capable of smothering discussion with free-ranging tirades lasting well into the night. but that's a side-issue.



he flung more spittle than you have, i'll give him that.


Had the Senate Committee managed to prove even one, solitary, accusation that was made against him I'd accept your argument.

and I do not spit!

Bryn Mawr wrote:

No. It is you that does not understand the consept of ethnic cleansing - it is the systematic removal of an ethnic group from a geographical area. That cannot be achieved by a few individuals killing even 10 or 20 random people each - it is done by driving people out by their hundreds of thousands as per the subject.


the primary objective of ethnic cleansing is killing, not displacement. great displacement usually accompanies it, however.







Sad - not funny.


Life does not cease to be funny when people die

any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.

-G.B. Shaw



Try to see life from their point of view - I do not condone it (or agree with it in any weay shape or form) but I can see why they resort to it.


i can "see" why they do it too. but it takes a monster to do so.





For every one of our people harmed we will kill 100 of yours - there is no such thing as a disproportionate resposnse. Give me a break!
speaking of give me a break, how about those cowards in hezbollah, who launch their rockets from civilian apartment buildings. purpose: to accumulate higher civilian death tolls on their side. for what purpose? it should not be a mystery.





buit you have not once allowed any just cause on the Palestinian side nor any blame on the Israeli


really? you're not reading very closely then.





The fact that the Jews ruled the area over 2000 years ago does NOT give the Israelis a God give right to rule it now - sorry, find some other justification!


excuse me? what justification was i proposing? don't put words in my mouth. go back and read my post regarding the hashemite king's pathetic argument against the jews. if we are to get into 'who ruled longer' pissing matches, then the palestinians themselves lose, because they have never ruled the area.



i'm sorry, all i have to do is look at a wide-view map of the middle east. israel has this teeny, tiny little sliver of land, surrounded on all sides by religious extremists who feel they have a mandate from god to wipe the stain of the jews off "their" land. well, bugger that.



i'd like to see the palestinians given a chance at deciding their own destiny. i'd like to see the people of the region live in peace. so long as radical, extremist islamofascist mullahs continue to preach hate for the jews, and the destruction of the jews, what chance is there? the jews are begrudged this minute strip of land. the jews do not say "death to all arabs". oh, okay, let me modify that. there are some extremists who do feel that way. talk about ratios - millions and millions of muslims ready to martyr themselves to eliminate israel - and a few handfuls of militant israelis who think the same way.











and I do not spit!


that was meant for issie, i got my correspondents mixed up.

posted by anastrophe

sorry, i can't accept that equivocation. there is a huge, massive difference between a 'freedom fighter' who is engaging with military forces, and an inhuman zealot who straps dynamite to his or her body and gets on a commuter bus. the former may be fighting for something; the latter has only random, senseless slaughter in mind, and 93 virgins or whatever waiting in paradise. **** that.


Don't misunderstand I do not condone terrorism but I can inderstand why people feel driven to it. Many in America seem to think the IRA are some kind of freedom fighter and the deliberate targeting of civilians nasty propoganda put about by the british oppressors. It's a talent for ignoring or glossing over incomfortable realities. All that is different between the IRA and Hezbollah and hamas is the suicide bombing. The basic tactics are the same.

Irgun were a terrorist organisation just as much as Hamas or Hezbollah are today.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/geo ... g_dav.html

I'll be marching this Saturday, along with many thousands of others. By a striking coincidence tomorrow also marks the 60th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel by the Irgun acting under the umbrella of the overall Zionist force, the Haganah. The attack killed 92 people, most of them civilians, some 17 of whom were Jewish.

It was organised by Irgun leader, Menachem Begin, who went on to be twice prime minister of Israel. His second period of office saw Israel's "limited" 1982 invasion of southern Lebanon, which quickly become an assault on the whole country and claimed many thousands of lives.

I recalled all this when I read that Binyamin Netanyahu, former Israeli prime minister and darling of CNN, attended a commemoration this week of the Irgun's actions, saying, "It's very important to make the distinction between terror groups and freedom fighters, and between terror action and legitimate military action." Well, quite.


Perhaps you will try and dismiss it as anti semite propoganda but it is a fact that the early political leaders in Israel were terrorists, just as much as Hamas and Hezbollah are today, that deliberately targeted civilians to achieve their ends and that went on to drive from their homes and take the lands of those already living in palestine.

Ethnic cleansing is when a particular group or race or tribe are removed and their llands taken. It happened to the jews two thousand years ago, what is remarkable is that as a people they actually survived. Ethnic cleansing is nothing new but rather the norm throughout history. Religious conflict is hardly new either what is going on in the middle east now is an age old style of conflict in a modern guise.

What is done cannot be undone and there is blame to be heaped on all sides. Israel are most definitely not innocent victims in all of this.

posted by anastrophe

i'd like to see the palestinians given a chance at deciding their own destiny. i'd like to see the people of the region live in peace. so long as radical, extremist islamofascist mullahs continue to preach hate for the jews, and the destruction of the jews, what chance is there? the jews are begrudged this minute strip of land. the jews do not say "death to all arabs". oh, okay, let me modify that. there are some extremists who do feel that way. talk about ratios - millions and millions of muslims ready to martyr themselves to eliminate israel - and a few handfuls of militant israelis who think the same way.


If there really were millions ready to annihilate Israel it would have already ceased to exist just from sheer force of numbers. Just as if Saddam had really had WMD's he woud have used them.

In reality if there was peace most would just accept things and two generations later no one would be too bothered. Now a new generation in Lebanon are learning to hate Israel all over again. Just as in Egypt and Jordan a new generation are being politicised and attracted to extremism by what they see happening around them.

The way Israel is dealing with the Palestinians and Hezbollah is not solving the problem and is not going to solve it. Every one of Israel's previous invasions of Lebanon has been a failure and done little for their security.

anastrophe wrote: the primary objective of ethnic cleansing is killing, not displacement. great displacement usually accompanies it, however.


That's called Genocide. The primary objective of Ethnic Cleansing is "the systematic removal of an ethnic group or groups from a region or society as by deportation or forced emigration" - great killing usually accompanies it, however.





anastrophe wrote: excuse me? what justification was i proposing? don't put words in my mouth. go back and read my post regarding the hashemite king's pathetic argument against the jews. if we are to get into 'who ruled longer' pissing matches, then the palestinians themselves lose, because they have never ruled the area.


QUOTE

i'm serviceably familiar with the history of the region, however that familiarity goes back about 4,000 years, rather than just the last few hundred.



/QUOTE

No, I have not read all 200+ messages in this thread from before my return, I was responding to your implied justification

anastrophe wrote: i'm sorry, all i have to do is look at a wide-view map of the middle east. israel has this teeny, tiny little sliver of land, surrounded on all sides by religious extremists who feel they have a mandate from god to wipe the stain of the jews off "their" land. well, bugger that.


That "teeny little sliver of land" is how many times the size of the land allocated to them during the partition which was even then out of all proportion to their presence in the area and includes all of the prime real estate in the region.

As for being surrounded on all sides, they've proven that they can take on all of the Arab states at once and wipe the floor with them - boo hoo, lets all feel sorry for the poor downtroden Israelis.

posted by anastrophe

um, you were saying not long ago before the last elections that he wouldn't be around long. elections he won again. kind of like bush won the second time around. predicting how long the latest leader will last based upon opinions that aren't conterminous with impending elections doesn't really stand up. back during bush the first, after the first gulf war, his approval ratings were over the moon. barely a year and a half later, he was out of a job; people's pocketbooks mattered more at that point, and the recession doomed him.

so, we shall see how long TB is around. we know bush won't be around after the next election. i'm hoping lieberman makes it through his state primary. i disagree with him on a lot of things, but he's a hell of a guy in other respects.

but i digress.


O.K. wishful thinking perhaps. Thank to the vagaries of our electoral system TB and labour got back in despite hving less than a third of the overall vote. Many don't bother voting because it seems to make little difference. We need electoiral reform, but I digress as well so I'll stop it.

gmc wrote: 1) I suggest you do a little more research. Maybe actually read a book or two and you might understand why contemporary maps don't show a country called palestine.

2) A palestinian state will only be established when Israel accepts that Palestinians have a right to exist in the first place and accepts that it's own actions have done much to make a bad situation worse. Freedom and justice is something others desire not just israeli's

3) Terrorism is the only means of resistance palestinians have, 1. That post is total nonsense. That's why I specified that those interested in the history of the area consult a RELIABLE source. The 55% figure is correct but misleading since the Arabs, in addition to their 45%, got ALL of Trans-Jordan.

2. Hogwash. They have always accepted that. Israel's actions have always been in response to Palestinian terrorism.

3. Resist? Why not live in peace with Israel as Egypt and Jordan do? Only one reason: They wouldn't be able to murder Jews!

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI Index: MDE 15/054/2006 (Public)

News Service No: 158

21 June 2006

Israel/Occupied Territories: Call for international investigation of Gaza strikes

Amnesty International today called for the establishment of an international investigation to examine the circumstances in which scores of Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip in recent months.

The growing number of victims and the unwillingness of the Israeli authorities to ensure that thorough, independent and impartial investigations are carried out into the actions of their armed forces make the need for an international inquiry all the more urgent.

The killing of seven members of the Ghalia family on 9 June on a beach in the North of the Gaza Strip (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150492006 ) is only one example of Israel’s unwillingness to conduct a full and impartial inquiry to establish the truth. In spite of a growing body of evidence indicating that the victims were killed by Israeli army shelling, the authorities continue to deny all responsibility and have failed to take the necessary measures to adequately investigate the killings.

The internal inquiries the Israeli army says it has carried out in this and other cases that attracted international media attention fail to meet even the most basic requirements of an independent and impartial investigation. Such procedures, in which the Israeli army effectively investigates itself, have tended to exculpate Israeli soldiers and seem to have been aimed more at fending off international criticism than at establishing the truth. Most killings of unarmed Palestinians, including children, are not even mentioned -- let alone investigated -- by the Israeli authorities (also see: http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150312006 ).

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT

Israel: Further information on house demolition/forced eviction/medical concern

PUBLIC AI Index: MDE 15/052/2006

19 June 2006

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Thousands of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem are at risk of being

demolished for lack of building permits. The Israeli authorities frequently

demolish Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem and elsewhere in the Occupied

Territories on the grounds that they have been built without a permit. Yet it

is impossible for most Palestinians in East Jerusalem to obtain a permit to

build a home on their own land.

In the past two years the Jerusalem Municipality has stepped up its demolition

of Palestinian homes. Some 200 Palestinian homes have been demolished in East

Jerusalem since the beginning of 2004, leaving more than 600 people homeless.

In the five years from 1999 to 2003 a total of around 230 homes were

demolished.

Since Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, the Israeli authorities have

pursued a policy of limiting new construction in the Palestinian

neighbourhoods. The expropriation by Israel of large areas of Palestinian land

left most Palestinian areas in and around East Jerusalem with little or no land

on which to build. Much of the privately owned land has been zoned as "green

land", where nothing can be built. Attempts by Palestinians to have their land

re-zoned so that it can be used for building homes have invariably failed. At

the same time Israel has been building large settlements (which are illegal

under international law) on expropriated Palestinian land in the area, for the

exclusive use of Israeli Jewish citizens. While Palestinians' homes are still

being demolished because they were built without a permit, illegal Israeli

settlements continue to be built and expanded in East Jerusalem. Demolitions of

homes of Israeli Jewish citizens built without permit are unheard of.

Thank you Koan, two facinating articles.

This is really scary:

Ministry of Health report on toxic Israeli weapons confirmed by Gaza City medical sources

Director of Public Relations at Gaza City’s Al Shifa Hospital, Dr. Juma Al Sakka, confirmed the Palestinian Ministry of Health’s report from earlier this week which stated that Israeli forces are using toxic weapons in the Gaza Strip.

The doctor spoke on Thursday, giving the death count at 85 Palestinians in the Strip since the latest Israeli attack began. Among the dead are 34 children under the age of 13. And as of Thursday afternoon, 300 Palestinians are injured.

Dr. Al Sakka told Voice of Palestine Radio that the Israeli army is using new types of non-conventional weapons against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip during the recent attacks. He said, “They are targeting the Palestinian body with unconventional weapons and with that comes a phenomena we have not seen before in any Israeli bombardment we have lived through for many years.

He continued, “The hospital is central and sees almost all cases of injuries and deaths as a result of Israeli against the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip. These Israeli bombings are entering the body and fragmenting, causing internal combustion leading to up to fourth degree internal burns, exposing the bone, and affecting the tissue and skin.

The doctor added, “These tissues die, they do not survive, which obliges us to perform arm or leg amputations, and there are fragments which penetrate the body and do not show up on X-rays. When entering the body they spark like a combustion firearm, but not chemically. They seem radioactive.

anastrophe wrote: why is everybody so quick to forget that israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank and gaza, in the hopes of appeasing the palestinians and keeping peace? this was a huge, positive move on israel's part. they were thanked for giving land back to the palestinians with rockets lobbed at them.You need calling on the occasional howler, dear boy. What do you mean by "israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank"? What bit of the west bank? When? How many did they remove, vis a vis those they left in situ? If we can put your claim into some context here it might help us greatly.

West Bank, remember. What bit, when and how many.

Thank you.

Bronwen wrote: 1. That post is total nonsense. That's why I specified that those interested in the history of the area consult a RELIABLE source. The 55% figure is correct but misleading since the Arabs, in addition to their 45%, got ALL of Trans-Jordan.

2. Hogwash. They have always accepted that. Israel's actions have always been in response to Palestinian terrorism.

3. Resist? Why not live in peace with Israel as Egypt and Jordan do? Only one reason: They wouldn't be able to murder Jews!


You are not one to let facts get in the way of a good belief system. Clearly their fellow arabs were not averse to stitching them up as well but the fact remains the palestinian state never got off the ground from the get go.

Palestine was divided into three parts. The 1949 armistice agreements gave Israel control over 78 percent of the territory of British Mandate Palestine. Jordan occupied and annexed East Jerusalem and the hill country of central Palestine, thereafter known as the “West Bank of the Jordan River. Egypt took temporary control of the coastal plain around the city of Gaza, later referred to as the Gaza Strip. Both Jordan and Egypt held on to these respective territories until the 1967 war, during which Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian Arab state provided for in the United Nations partition plan was never established.


I don't have any solutions to this but I do believe more war is not the answer. Israel cannot win by war alone. No matter how much other muslims may oppose fundamentalists in their midst and condemn Hezbollah if the only choice offered is warfare then that is what you are going to get.

Perhaps if America stopped supplying Israel with missiles Iran might stop supplying Hezbollah with missiles as well. At least they might both run out of ammunition

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cct ... 211817.htm

Last Sunday, history repeated itself with grisly precision when Israel, in the midst of another war with Hezbollah, bombed a residential apartment building in Qana, killing as many as 56 civilians, 37 of them children. Once again, Israel insisted that it had made a "mistake" for which Hezbollah was responsible because it was launching rockets toward Israel from the village of Qana.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, in a speech Monday announcing that Israel would not adhere to the 48-hour cease-fire to which it had agreed under American pressure, said, "I am sorry from the bottom of my heart for all deaths of children or women in Qana. ... We did not search them out ... they were not our enemies, and we did not look for them."

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that Israel did, in fact, make the same mistake twice in Qana -- or, to take another recent example, in Gaza, where a family of eight spending an afternoon on the beach was killed by an errant Israeli shell in June.

If Israeli assertions are true that these killings of scores of civilians were unintentional, does that mean that Israel can claim the high ground in its battle with Hezbollah and Hamas?


Good question I think. There is no such thing as a good or a just war there is just war. This needs to stop and soon.

posted by anastrophe

all i need to see is the name galloway. gorgeous george. one of the most sickening excuses for a human being i've ever had the displeasure to watch perform in a debate.

birds of a feather do flock together.


Ah gorgeous George. Tell me, the factual points he makes. Are you saying he is inaccurate if so where specifically? Does he annoy you because he has a valid point to make?

After the senate commitee appearance I was hoping someone would try taking him to court to face charges over the allegations made against him. They clearly they don't think there is a case to answer-or at least not one that will stand up in court.

He's great fun to watch in action, as adebater he is streaks ahead of his opponents.

Coalition of Women for Peace is an organization of Jewish women in Israel fighting to end the occupation of Palestine.

What Are They Fighting For / Tanya Reinhart

2006-07-13 16:49

Whatever may be the fate of the captive soldier Gilad Shalit, the Israeli armys war in Gaza is not about him. As senior security analyst Alex Fishman widely reported, the army was preparing for an attack months earlier and was constantly pushing for it, with the goal of destroying the Hamas infrastructure and its government. The army initiated an escalation on 8 June when it assassinated Abu Samhadana, a senior appointee of the Hamas government, and intensified its shelling of civilians in the Gaza Strip. Governmental authorization for action on a larger scale was already given by 12 June, but it was postponed in the wake of the global reverberation caused by the killing of civilians in the air force bombing the next day. The abduction of the soldier released the safety-catch, and the operation began on 28 June with the destruction of infrastructure in Gaza and the mass detention of the Hamas leadership in the West Bank, which was also planned weeks in advance.

spot wrote: You need calling on the occasional howler, dear boy. What do you mean by "israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank"? What bit of the west bank? When? How many did they remove, vis a vis those they left in situ? If we can put your claim into some context here it might help us greatly.



West Bank, remember. What bit, when and how many.



Thank you.


not sure i'm following you. is your beef that fewer have been removed from the west bank than from the gaza strip? acknowledged. so what? aren't some better than none? is positive effort to be condemned because 'it's not good enough'?

Since no post-withdrawl map can be shown as previously stated then some numbers might suffice.

it is your contention that is under question, anastrophe.

anastrophe wrote: why is everybody so quick to forget that israel forcibly removed its own settlers from the west bank and gaza, in the hopes of appeasing the palestinians and keeping peace?


this point has been reiterated by you many times. perhaps the point is being neglected because you fail to show how important and efficient this action proved to be. I'd also like to see the percentage of settlers that had to be "forced". I'd also like to see what the actual resolution wording was.

koan wrote: Since no post-withdrawl map can be shown as previously stated then some numbers might suffice.



it is your contention that is under question, anastrophe.







this point has been reiterated by you many times. perhaps the point is being neglected because you fail to show how important and efficient this action proved to be. I'd also like to see the percentage of settlers that had to be "forced". I'd also like to see what the actual resolution wording was.


perhaps i didn't word the claim carefully enough. i was not intending to suggest that israel has pulled out all of its settlers. that should be obvious, because many remain.



i don't think anyone can provide you with a percentage of how many were forced, however your choice of putting "forced" in quotes is rather execrable. many were most definitely forced to leave, escorted out by the military.



it's funny - i never have contended that israel does not make mistakes, has not done bad things, has not killed civilians. i don't think i've read a single word from you koan acknowledging that hezbollah kills civilians, for the sake of killing civilians. not once. you're an apologist for them.



it should also not be overlooked that - whatever hopes we have for a peace between israel and the palestinians, and the establishment of a palenstinian state - the west bank is disputed territory. period. jordan gave up all claim to the region. it is not recognized by the UN as israeli territory, or jordanian territory, or anyone else's territory. it is officially a non-entity, not a nation.



is that a good thing? not in the slightest.

Bryn Mawr wrote:

That "teeny little sliver of land" is how many times the size of the land allocated to them during the partition which was even then out of all proportion to their presence in the area and includes all of the prime real estate in the region.


it should be pointed out, that taken out of context, the notion of "prime real estate in the region" is deceptive. perhaps you've never heard the saying that the jews made the desert bloom. what is now prime real estate is so specifically because the israelis worked damned hard to make barren desert into 'prime real estate'. it's not as if the israeli's took over all this absolutely wonderful, lush land. they turned it into a wonderful, lush land. they took no 'prime real estate' away from anyone.

New and unkown deadly weapons used by Israeli forces

'direct energy' weapons, chemical and/or biological agents, in a macabre experiment of future warfare

Professor Paola Manduca, GlobalResearch.ca





August 7, 2006



By now there are countless reports, from hospitals, witnesses, armament experts and journalists that strongly suggest that in the present offensive of Israeli forces against Lebanon and Gaza 'new weapons' are being used.

New and strange symptoms are reported amongst the wounded and the dead.

Bodies with dead tissues and no apparent wounds; 'shrunken' corpses; civilians with heavy damage to lower limbs that require amputation, which is nevertheless followed by unstoppable necrosis and death; descriptions of extensive internal wounds with no trace of shrapnel, corpses blackened but not burnt, and others heavily wounded that did not bleed.

Many of these descriptions suggest the possibility that the new weapons used include 'direct energy' weapons, and chemical and/or biological agents, in a sort of macabre experiment of future warfare, where there is no respect for anything: International rules (from the Geneva Convention to the treaties on biological and chemical weapons), refugees, hospitals and the Red Cross, not to mention the people, their future, their children, the environment, which is poisoned through dissemination of Depleted Uranium and toxic substances released after oil and chemical depots are bombed.

Right now, the Lebanese and Palestinian people have many urgent and impellent problems, yet many people believe that these episodes cannot and must not pass ignored. In fact several appeals have been launched to scientists and experts with a view to investigating the issue.

With the intent of responding to such appeals, we have set up a team to investigate the testimonies, the images, and possibly the material evidence that delegations and NGOs will be able to bring from the affected areas. We want to offer support to the health institutions of Lebanon and Palestine, which ask constantly for help and external verification and monitoring, and we are examining all available materials in order to formulate hypotheses which can be verified or disproved.

We ask for the active participation of our (Italian) scientific institutions, and, following the request from medical personnel in the conflict area, we are requesting that the UN set up a international independent verification and investigation committee, with a view to facilitating entry into conflict zone, as well as collecting material and testimonies directly in the field, and undertaking inquries and verificaitons concerning the various claims regarding these new kinds of weapons of mass destruction being used by Israeli forces in Lebanon. We request that such investigating teams be set up immediately, and that procedures be defined and implemented with a view to supporting future investigations. Of particular concern is the issue of how to collect and store samples from the different theatres, with a view to preserving important information regarding the various impacts of these weapons.

We ask that the international committee have access to all sources of information, that is be fully operational, while abiding by relevant investigative procedures, including cross-checking of information between different laboratories. The international committee is to report to the competent authorities, including Human Rights tribunal and international courts, if appropriate..

As people and as scientists, we are offering our time and expertise in order to reach an understanding of the underlying facts, in the belief that a perspective of justice, equity and peace among people can be reached only with the respect of the rules defined up to now within the international community of nations. The issue pertains to the behavior of the parties in an armed conflict.

We ask that the respect of these rules be verified in the context of the present conflict.

We invite scientists to contribute to this effort by offering their specific competences. In particular we seek collaboration of toxicology experts, pharmacologists, anatomy pathologists, doctors with an expertise in trauma and burns, chemists.

They can reach the working group at the E-mail address: nuovearmi@gmail.com Paola Manduca, Professor of.Genetics, University of Genova, Italy

http://www.uruknet.com/?p=m25559&hd=0&size=1&l=e

August 8, 2006

"Israel Has Made Itself the Least Safe Place in the World for a Jew to Live"

Into the Valley of Death

By TIM LLEWELLYN

I am in blood

stepp'd in so far that,

should I wade no more,

returning were as tedious

as go o'er."

Macbeth

Israel's capacity to shed Arab blood has remained undiminished since its creation, winning it territory but no real friends or security and promising it a violent and unrewarding existence. One main lesson of the past three weeks---the first Middle East conflict fought on Israeli rather than Arab lands---is that Israel's aggression can no longer be conducted with impunity.

The tragedies of Jewish history may explain Israel's leaders' actions, perhaps, their endemic paranoia and inability to deal with their neighbors in any other manner than aggressive superiority. What is hard to explain is why the United States and the United Kingdom, this latter newly and firmly in the pillory as Israel's second most loyal and uncritical supporter, and their media, for the most part, fail to ask most of the correct questions about the roots and nature of the horror that has been revisited on Lebanon, and to a much lesser extent on northern Israel (no false equivalence here).

It is not surprising the nascent UN Security Council resolution is being endlessly kicked around like a soggy medicine ball in a back alley. The Shapeless Thing will find itself added to the pile of similar failed discards that have been deployed to try to simultaneously evade, avoid and solve the Lebanese-Israel problem. One stands back in awe as at Balaclava while the French volunteer to lead this latest ride into the Valley of Death.

Consider UN SC 1559, of 2004, which called, inter alia, for "the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias." This unique interference by the Security Council in Lebanon's internal affairs, was jointly sponsored by the US, anxious to diminish Syria, and France, equally keen to reassert itself in an old possession it has never got out of its sentimental old post-colonial heart, to punish Syria for doing in Lebanon what France nor anyone else could, bring security, and to rejoin the top table of nations, as France saw it, after its spat with Washington over Iraq.

The Lebanese Government, Russia and China all opposed (but did not vote against) Resolution 1559, the Lebanese Foreign Ministry representative of the time pointing out presciently that if there were a threat to Lebanon it did not come from Syria. If UN Security Council resolutions are so sacrosanct, we might well ask why all the enthusiasm for 1559 and its successors when somehow interest in 242 and 338, of some 39 years vintage, calling for Israel's withdrawal from Arab territories occupied in 1967, and condemning the acquisition of territory by force, has waned to the point of vanishing?

Any new resolution acceptable to the US and therefore Israel, and which places foreign troops-especially the French, co-authors of 1559---on the Lebanese side of the border only, thus consolidating and promulgating gains Israel has made, will be unacceptable to Hezbollah. Hezbollah will remain after this Israeli onslaught the single biggest and best-armed construct in the fragile consensus of warlords and fiefdoms that holds Lebanon together at the best of times. These are not the best of times. If it does not wish the Lebanese Army to deploy south to the Israeli line, in collaboration with foreign forces there with an enemy's permission and co-operation, such deployment will not happen, certainly not to effect.

If it is tried, in the ensuing chaos Israel will tire of the arrangement and the clashes with Hezbollah will continue at some early future stage in among or over the heads of the unfortunate peacekeepers. Any army volunteering for this mission should dust off the 1983 files, when Hezbollah-inchoate blew the US Marines and the French paras to kingdom come.

Another question no-one asks: is Lebanon a nation-state in the sense the US , the UK and France would have us believe? Is it not rather a provenly frail arrangement that holds together when the going is good (as it was, mostly, under Syrian aegis between 1990 and 2005), with the reluctant co-operation of all the sectarian movements, interest groups and chiefs? And that as the most powerful players in this game, Syria and Hezbollah can build or wreck as they see fit? It may not be a Good Thing or a Nice Thing but it is a long, observable fact of the Levant. Long after Israel has decided to take a rest and/or hand over for a while to some unfortunate patsy of a peace force, Hezbollah and Syria, together and separately, will be at the heart of Lebanon's future.

More questions, rarely asked: we hear this one, a lot: why should Israel tolerate a burgeoning armed force with rockets on its northern approaches? We do not hear asked back, why should Arabs tolerate the most powerful state in the Middle East's history clanking its armor and peering through its intrusive lenses into their territory and sending over bombs, troops and jet-fighters at will?

It can be argued the Arabs have no choice in the matter, but they have now -- Lebanon has chosen how it wishes to resist Israel, quite effectively over the past 10 years or so, and the Arabs of the region are pleased that at last someone has registered with Israel that aggression is no longer dressed with impunity. The Arabs cannot win, they will suffer, but at last it is not without damaging retaliation.

More importantly, what business is it of anyone's how Lebanon defends itself, given its neighbor to the south and its record since 1948?

We hear, from such experts as Fergal Keane of the BBC, writing in The Spectator of August 4, that Iran and Syria "meddle" in Lebanon. Indeed they do, Fergal. The resistance that finally cleared Israel out of South Lebanon after 22 years would not have been formed without them, and would not be sustained today. Do not then the US in strident particular and the West in general "meddle" in the region, by sustaining Israel as the military master of the Middle East? Are we are right to castigate the indigenous peoples of the region for taking a lively interest in their own futures? Does anyone look at maps or read history?

Hezbollah miscalculated three weeks ago (so did Israel). It had not gauged the momentum that had built up behind 1559, especially after Syria so badly overplayed its hand in Lebanon, was deeply implicated in the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri, in February and was forced out of Lebanon. Weakness was perceived and the train of war was fired up and set in motion.

By the mid-2000s, Syria was overplaying its hand in Lebanon and it deserved its comeuppance; but anyone who thought Syria would or even could go away was staring into a mirror distorted by wishful thinking. Syria's role in Lebanon is crucial and everlasting, whether the rest of the world likes it or not; Hezbollah IS Lebanon, is OF Lebanon, and cannot be quelled or removed or subsumed: it is not an alien body, like the PLO, which was removed from Lebanon by Israel and Syria, which delivered the coup de grace to Yasir Arafat in 1983. Hezbollah fighters, even if reduced, and so far not much sign of that, grow in Lebanese homes on Lebanese soil. There are tens of thousands of boys now aged ten to fourteen who in five years time will make up numbers and will have been forged in the fury that Israel has so mistakenly and shortsightedly administered.

You do not have to support this view to know its truth and hope that American and British politicians might absorb it, if only in the pragmatic interests of their own citizenry.

Hezbollah and Hamas, beyond Lebanon, have become the voice of the Arab world in lieu of the nation states, kingdoms and republics who dropped the interests of their peoples long ago. Though these Arabs of the Street and their new heroes cannot turn soon the tide of American-Israeli-Western military and political pressure, they have put us and Israel on notice that for the first time in modern history the Middle East conflict is being fought on Israeli as well as Arab land, and that the highly mechanized delivery of death by machine that has been the fate of the Arabs since 1917 -- yes, 1917 -- comes no longer without cost, human and economic, for everyone.

Israel has made itself the least safe place in the world for a Jew to live, a terrible reflection on the calamity of Zionism for its own people and others.

Tim Llewellyn, a former BBC Middle East Correspondent, based in Beirut and Nicosia in the 70s,80s and early 90s, covered his first Middle East story in Southern Lebanon in May, 1974. Lebanese Shi'ite villagers were shrieking at Lebanese Army soldiers to protect them from Israeli shells,which were falling all around, and the PLO guerrillas who were provoking those attacks. They could not then and cannot in the future. The lesson of thirty-two years is that these people's only effective protectors were and will remain Hezbollah, whatever hasty arrangements the UN tries to make this week on Israel's behalf. Without Hezbollah, and without a solution to Israel's seemingly irreversible expansion across the region, there will be no solution in Southern Lebanon or anywhere else nearby. He can be reached at Timllew@aol.com

http://www.counterpunch.org/

You reap what you sow. :yh_shame

anastrophe wrote: it should be pointed out, that taken out of context, the notion of "prime real estate in the region" is deceptive. perhaps you've never heard the saying that the jews made the desert bloom. what is now prime real estate is so specifically because the israelis worked damned hard to make barren desert into 'prime real estate'. it's not as if the israeli's took over all this absolutely wonderful, lush land. they turned it into a wonderful, lush land. they took no 'prime real estate' away from anyone.


So all of the major ports and most of the seaboard does not constitute prime real estate?

In the 7 months before partition 300,000 arabs had been driven out of their homes by Irgun and the Stern Gang acting to (in their own words) instill terror into the native population. This was deliberately aimed at extending their domain into what they considered to be prime real estate.

I've heard the saying and I've seen the maps. I grant you that they've worked damned hard with what they have - but they took the best to start with.

anastrophe wrote: perhaps i didn't word the claim carefully enough. i was not intending to suggest that israel has pulled out all of its settlers. that should be obvious, because many remain.


perhaps you didn't, repeatedly. why is it intentional when my wording is in question and accidental when it is yours? obviously, in your mind, I have and agenda and you don't.



i don't think anyone can provide you with a percentage of how many were forced, however your choice of putting "forced" in quotes is rather execrable. many were most definitely forced to leave, escorted out by the military.
I've seen some numbers and it appears to be about 10-12% that didn't want to leave. Execrable? quotation marks? What are you? The grammar police. The quotations are to emphasis your use of the word forced and to ask why it is important. Unless, of course, my poor wording is intentional where yours is accidental.



it's funny - i never have contended that israel does not make mistakes, has not done bad things, has not killed civilians. i don't think i've read a single word from you koan acknowledging that hezbollah kills civilians, for the sake of killing civilians. not once. you're an apologist for them.


I have never contended that hezbollah does not make mistakes, has not done bad things, has not killed civilians. I don't think I've read a single word from you, anastrophe, acknoweldging that israel kills civilians, for the sake of killing civilians. not once. you're an apologist for them.

I think we are both defending something. I've never made an apology.



it should also not be overlooked that - whatever hopes we have for a peace between israel and the palestinians, and the establishment of a palenstinian state - the west bank is disputed territory. period. jordan gave up all claim to the region. it is not recognized by the UN as israeli territory, or jordanian territory, or anyone else's territory. it is officially a non-entity, not a nation.



is that a good thing? not in the slightest.


so here you are saying what? That palestine is free for the taking? Do you now deny the use of the word "occupation"? I'm unsure of what you are trying to say here.

where are the terrorists in this video?

stoning of children and humanitarian workers

these are the children of such innocent, peaceful people:

Israeli children throwing stones at human rights workers

Here's some footage regarding that terrorist gathering at the beach:

Israel retaliates against picnic party at beach

Bryn Mawr wrote: Thank you Koan, two facinating articles.


Thank you. You inspired me to look.

Unfortunately it's hard to stop.

Thank you to Issie for this link that I suggest watching so strongly I'm starting another thread on it's behalf

Documentary

koan wrote: I've never made an apology.


...for believing this is a two sided war.

...for believing the fault doesn't lay with the Arabs alone.

see, poor wording again.

I bet, if anyone embarked on an extensive database search, I've apologised for personal error far more often than anastrophe. But I don't believe I'm wrong on this topic.

So much for Ehud Olmert's "humanitarian corridors". Two weeks after the Israeli Prime Minister's comforting assertion - which no one in Lebanon believed - the Israeli air force has blown up the last bridge across the Litani river, in effect ending all humanitarian convoys between Beirut and southern Lebanon. Requests from humanitarian organisations for clearance from the Israelis are now being refused. Even the Red Cross admits there is now, in effect, a blockade on a vast area along the Lebanese border where thousands of civilians are still cowering in their homes.

source

of course the award winning journalist, Robert Fisk, is just an apologist :rolleyes:

'they ask what they have done to anybody to deserve what's happening to them'.



indeed. as do the israeli civilians as well.

since it seems loan is determined to somehow make a point by posting as many videos as possible condemning israeli injustice and inhumanity - which condemnation i share - it seems only fitting to present another side of the story, no?





failed suicide bomber - wanted to kill the israeli doctors who were treating her





14 year old suicide bomber has change of heart





innocent victims of successful suicide bombings





child zealots





more zealotry madness





hamas thugs snatching children to use as shields







so - there you go. both sides do things that are wrong.



the palestinians suffer. the israelis suffer. innocent people die.

We've already seen lots of coverage about Arab terrorist and dead Israelis. The point is that the dead Palestinians don't have names.

Your obsession with suicide bombers (because they kill way more civilians than air raids? or because beaches are terrorist sites and only one side of this war that targets civilians?) made me look into it a bit more.

Suicide attacks began in Lebanon in 1983 (some say 1981, when a sole suicide attack hit the Iraqi embassy in Beirut), at the instigation of Hizbollah, a Lebanese Shiite terror organization. Six months after an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, simultaneous truck bombings killed 241 U.S. Marines and 58 French paratroopers; just four months later, U.S. troops left Lebanon. Five other organizations (most of them not religious) in Lebanon carried out about 50 suicide attacks before this modus operandi was exported to other areas of the world. The use of suicide attacks garnered considerable prestige for the perpetrators and their organizations -- particularly in light of the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon, which many attributed to the bombings -- and turned the act into a symbol of martyrdom and a source of inspiration for other terror organizations worldwide.


Now is your chance to tell me what is wrong with PBS

so...what happened in 1982 that might have brought the palestinians to this?

there were a few massacres at refugee camps, weren't there?

gee scrat. maybe she was burned by italian mafia. or she could have been burned by a laser death ray. or she could have been burned by her fiance. or she could have been burned by knocking over a pot of boiling water. or she could have been burned in a house fire. or she could have been burned by other palestinians. or she could have been burned by allah.



anything's possible, in the wild, wacky world of pure conspiracy theory.



as for the hezbollah using the children as human shields, maybe you missed the point. for one thing, there's no way to identify who is who in the video. the guys grabbing the kids don't have "hezbollah" stitched on the back of their jackets. neither do we know who the kids are. or where it takes place.



interestingly, there's little evidence of who the children were who were throwing rocks at the 'human rights workers' in the other video. very little was spoken other than english, and i'm afraid i can't tell on one listening the difference between palestinian and israeli spoken voices. there's some shots that show architecture which might be useful in placing where it occurred. we don't know what, if anything, the ostensible 'human rights workers' were doing before the video starts. we don't know why they were where they were. there's all kinds of things we might assume depending on our point of view. i could suggest that before the video started, they may have been yelling 'you ****ing jew kids get out of our shot'. prove me wrong!



same for the video where the palestinian children describe having stones thrown at them. we can take them at their word - or we can assume otherwise depending on our point of view. those kids could have been coached. the one of them sitting in the shot of three sure looked like he was trying to remember his lines, rather than remembering a scary incident that happened to him. we don't ever see the settlers throwing stones, and for that matter we never see the settlers. another point of view is to take the kid's word for it. settlers threw stones at them.



rather touches on the matter of stripping out propoganda from fact, doesn't it.



the video regarding suicide bombing victims is also propoganda. loan's inability to muster even the faintest expression of outrage at that speaks volumes to me.



some of the things that have happened to palestinians have been utterly horrible. there are injustices aplenty for everyone involved. it's possible to support the causes, and rights, of both sides, while condemning bad acts by both sides as well. a refusal to even acknowledge that there is horror and pain on both sides is despicable.

some interesting comments by an israeli journalist regarding the policy of disengagement.

Scrat wrote: Truly worthy words. But why haven't we found a solution to this?



I'm going to go kill someone in EVE. Don't worry, it's just a game.


i'm strongly in favor of violent video games. i believe overall they reduce the expression of physical violence in society.