Blaming "the Palestinians" for "breaking" the cease-fire

[Chris Alger]

What a surprise. Exactly what the road map critics predicted would happen has happened: the major terror groups stop bombing but Israel does nothing more than kill more Palestinians and steal more land, so the terrorists start the bombing, and the media and Israel apologists blame "the Palestinians" or "Palestinian militants."

The following is from Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting:

The deadly bus bombing in Jerusalem on August 19 was foreshadowed by a pair of suicide attacks a week earlier which killed two Israeli civilians.

While U.S. media tended to portray these attacks as a return to violence after a relatively peaceful period, there were numerous killings in the weeks leading up to the suicide bombings that underscore the lack of evenhanded attention given to loss of life in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

When the two Palestinian suicide bombers each killed an Israeli civilian along with themselves on August 12, U.S. news outlets immediately depicted the attacks as an apparent resurgence in Mideast violence. "Summer truce shattered in Israel," announced CBS (8/12/03), while NBC (8/12/03) reported that "the attacks broke more than a month of relative silence." The Los Angeles Times (8/13/03) wrote that the bombings "broke a six-week stretch during which the people of this war-weary land had enjoyed relative quiet."

During this six-week period of "relative quiet," however, some 17 Palestinians were killed and at least 59 injured by Israeli occupation soldiers and settlers, according to the Palestine Red Crescent Society. The dead included Mahmoud Kabaha, a four-year-old boy, who was sitting in the back seat of a jeep with his family at a checkpoint when an Israeli soldier shot him dead-- in a spray of bullets that the army simply called an "accidental burst of gunfire" (Associated Press, 7/25/03). Virtually none of the major U.S. news reports on the August 12 bombings alluded to the Palestinian death toll in this period, leaving out a key piece of the story: For Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, the violence had never ceased; while the Israeli attacks had decreased, there had never been anything like an Israeli cease-fire.

An Associated Press report on August 19 (filed prior to that day's bombing) did acknowledge that since June 29, "more than 20 people have been killed on the Israeli and Palestinian sides." What it didn't note was that of those "more than 20," at least 21 were Palestinian, according to the Red Crescent.

After a month and a half in which Palestinians were being killed several times a week and receiving relatively little mention, the Washington Post and New York Times both put the bombings on their August 13 front pages, each declaring the violence a break from weeks of "relative calm," and each including a front-page photo of the victims' relatives in mourning. USA Today also put grieving relatives on the front page, along with the headline, "Two Suicide Attacks End a Six-Week Lull in Conflict." One can empathize with the losses of those survivors while recognizing that the families of the Palestinians who died during the "lull" were virtually invisible.

On CNN, the August 12 bombings were a major story, with eight separate segments mentioning the attacks in a three-hour period. Anchor Wolf Blitzer declared a "grim return to the battle days in Israel and the Palestinian territories." His colleague Aaron Brown echoed that theme,
noting that "after a period of relative calm there has been a major surge in violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories." Correspondent Jerrold Kessel reported that the bombings "cast doubt on the viability of this peace process known as the road map for peace."

These bombings had killed four people, including the bombers. Just four days earlier, on August 8, two Palestinians and one Israeli were killed in an Israeli raid on a suspected militant, while two more Palestinians were
killed at an ensuing rally-- one shot, and the other killed by Israeli tear gas (Chicago Tribune, 8/9/03). But those five deaths-- mainly Palestinian-- were not deemed a "major surge in violence" or a "grim return to the battle days" on CNN. Instead, anchor Carol Costello (8/8/03) suggested that the Israeli raid "may be another smudge, a bump if you will, on that road map to peace."

The media's tendency to downplay-- or completely ignore-- Palestinian suffering and death is nothing new. In late 2001 and the beginning of 2002, for example, a loose cease-fire declared by Yasir Arafat led to a period of very few Israeli deaths, but sustained Palestinian deaths-- and the American media repeatedly referred to it as a time of "relative calm."

In order to convey the Mideast crisis in all its complexity, journalists need to take seriously the violence suffered by all communities. References to "relative calm" while Palestinians are being routinely killed only serve to trivialize human life and obscure the cycle of violence that afflicts the region.

[andyfox]

"the cycle of violence that afflicts the region."

So what can be done to break the cycle of violence? I note that Abu Mazen said the other day that he would/could not crack down on the Palestinian militants unless he received help from Arafat.

Is any real progress possible from either side?

[MMMMMM]

Arafat is himself a terrorist, so good luck to Mazen in this attempt.

[Tuco]

This post sickens me. Step back from your continued rhetoric and think about why you would defend a "militant" that would kill 6 children on that bus ON PURPOSE.

I dont care what Israel has done, or is doing. That's not the point. I don't condone or defend what they are doing/have done.

I feel alot of compassion for the palestinian people. It's too bad that they are represented (wheather they like it or not) by people that would kill children on purpose.

Tuco.

[andyfox]

I don't see where he's defending the attacks. He's pointing out that the media ignores Israeli depredations.

What is sickening to me is the "he started it, no he started it" thing. Someone with guts will have to step forward and see the violence stops here, and stick to it no matter what happens on the other side. Otherwise the violence will continue indefinitely. We're not likely to see such statemanship from the likes of Sharon and Arafat.

[MMMMMM]

Whats more, not only have the Palestinians chosen to make popular groups which perform such dastardly deeds, but Palestinians cheer and express joy at such atrocities as the bus bombing. The Israelis don't freakin' CHEER when Palestinian children get killed in a missile attack on a terrorist leader. A great many Palestinians seem to find and express joy at things such as killing a busload of Israeli civilians. This should sicken any decent-minded person. What is wrong with these people and why can't Chris Alger see that there is a difference. They dunked their fists in blood and soot and raised them over their heads swearing revenge for the missile attack that killed the terror leader and his two bodyguards. To them, revenge is killing another busload of families. If their idea of revenge were killing some Israeli leaders instead of families and children I wouldn't find it so hard to swallow, but these people are SICK.

[MMMMMM]

"The violence stops here"--well, guess that will have to be at the fence because even were Israel to lay down their arms and never shoot another bullet the Palestinian goons would continue their attacks. They aren't only attacking "in revenge", they are attacking to eliminate Israel as a state and they have proclaimed as much. Sick bastards, whose greatest joy in life is slaughtering innocent families.

[Tuco]

He defends the attack from the standpoint that he points his finger in the other direction. "People condemn the Palestinian attack yet say nothing about Israeli attacks" type crap.

I would have alot more respect for him and people like him if they admitted that the suicide bomber that deliberately targets children is indefensible.

Tuco.

[Chris Alger]

What can be done to break the cycle of violence is for the U.S. to withhold aid and support for Israel until it gets serious about negotiating.

The only thing Abu Mazen can do is deflect heat by blaming Arafat. Sharon wants the PA leadership to make war on the "militants" (not just the terrorists), probably suicidal for the PA. A lot of the "peace process" can be explained as a Abbas-Arafat struggle over who gets to be the local strongman and how much of Israel's bidding they must do to get the job. Arafat's out of the picture but Abbas can't go anywhere as long as Sharon remains committed to screwing the Palestinians, so once again Sharon and the U.S. have painted themselves into a corner where they're not all that uncomfortable.

"Is any real progress possible from either side?"

I doubt it. And not according an editorial in yesterday's Ha'aretz, requesting an "imposed" solution, one that will not be forthcoming as the U.S. fails to take action against Israel or even seriously criticize its predations.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
What can be done to break the cycle of violence is for the U.S. to withhold aid and support for Israel until it gets serious about negotiating.

The only thing Abu Mazen can do is deflect heat by blaming Arafat. Sharon wants the PA leadership to make war on the "militants" (not just the terrorists), probably suicidal for the PA. A lot of the "peace process" can be explained as a Abbas-Arafat struggle over who gets to be the local strongman and how much of Israel's bidding they must do to get the job. Arafat's out of the picture but Abbas can't go anywhere as long as Sharon remains committed to screwing the Palestinians, so once again Sharon and the U.S. have painted themselves into a corner where they're not all that uncomfortable.

"Is any real progress possible from either side?"

I doubt it. And not according an editorial in yesterday's Ha'aretz, requesting an "imposed" solution, one that will not be forthcoming as the U.S. fails to take action against Israel or even seriously criticize its predations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why on earth should the US do any of what you suggest? It is clearly the Palestinian terrorists fault so you suggest we punish the only rational party to this conflict. Absurd reasoning!!!

[Chris Alger]

"The Israelis don't freakin' CHEER when Palestinian children get killed in a missile attack on a terrorist leader."

They do but they're better at hiding it. Image-conscious Zionists long ago learned that the smarter response after killing a bunch of civilians is to express remorse and promise investigations while blaming the Palestinians and planning to do it again. Still, it comes out in things like Israeli children's letters to the IDF encouraging them to "kill Arabs," Baruch Goldstein's funeral eulogy "a 100,000 Arabs are not worth a single Jewish fingernail," (the Hebrew-language daily) Ma'ariv's celebration of 9/11 as a propaganda bonus for Israel, and assorted racist rantings of the Israeli and American right. If you don't believe me, check out the "pro-Israel" posts from anti-Palestinian racists in Israel and the U.S. after Palestinian civilians get killed. Or this one, a response to a story about a little Palestinian girl who got a new lease on life from an Israeli organ transplant: "I'd have thrown it [the organ] into the trash before letting the bitch grow up to breed more terrorists."

You're just pretending that Israeli terrorists are a few rotten eggs or bad shots while the Palestinian terrorists and their supporters are "the Palestinians" or "these people" while wondering how anyone else can't make the same bigoted distinction.

[Chris Alger]

"Step back from your continued rhetoric and think about why you would defend a "militant" that would kill 6 children on that bus ON PURPOSE."

Of course I haven't done anything of the sort.

"I dont care what Israel has done, or is doing."

I know, it's the old double standard: Israel invades, expropriates, occupies and colonizes, killing thousands of innocents in the process. When the response is terrorism that kills dozens or hundreds, then terrorism is the only issue worth caring about. The only explanation for such insanity is an assumption that the terrorists somehow "started it" or come from an inferior race.

"I don't condone or defend what they are doing/have done."

If you pay federal taxes, you help supply the ammo. Given that, why would anyone care what you condone or defend any more than what those who sow suicide bomb belts condone or defend?

[Chris Alger]

"I would have alot more respect for him and people like him if they admitted that the suicide bomber that deliberately targets children is indefensible."

As in the statement issued by the PA two hours ago condemning "all attacks targeting Israeli and Palestinian civilians?" The PA, Abbas or Arafat have done this after all the suicide bombings. Now find where Sharon or Bush have called Israel's killing of civilians by its official forces as "indefensible." You can't. Israel has the right to kill civilians in order to "defend itself," meaning its occupation.

[Chris Alger]

I now see you're talking about me instead of Abbas. Sure, for about the dozenth or so time I'll condemn all Palestinian attacks on civilians. It's indefensible, criminal, morally outrageous. No buts about it. It's also the inevitable response, which Sharon and Co. welcome, to Israel's refusal to end the occupation.

[MMMMMM]

No, the Israelis aren't "just better at hiding it." The Palestinians are more widely sick, as in psychologically sick, as in the grip of a death-cult, as in truly feeling joy at innocent Israeli deaths.

Also, you will find more widespread joy in the Middle East at American tragedies than you will find joy in America at Middle Eastern or Arab tragedies.

[Chris Alger]

"It is clearly the Palestinian terrorists fault..."

If the Soviet Union backed Cuba's invasion and occupation of some West African country, and a handful of people in that country retalliated by killing Cuban civilians, would you say the same thing to someone who called for the Soviet Union to stop supporting Cuba's occupation?

[MMMMMM]

Chris Alger: "If you pay federal taxes, you help supply the ammo. Given that, why would anyone care what you condone or defend any more than what those who sow suicide bomb belts condone or defend?"

So (apparently) according to Chris Alger, US citizens paying taxes are as guilty as those who actually give suicide bombing belts to terrorists.

All I can say to that is WOW. Someone is off the deep end here and I don't think it's me.

[MMMMMM]

Yeah that's the same BS the PA always has said.

They talk out of one side of their mouths "condemning" terror then turn right around and support terror. You know it as well as they do.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
What can be done to break the cycle of violence is for the U.S. to withhold aid and support for Israel until it gets serious about negotiating.


[/ QUOTE ]

US military support keeps the Arabs and Palistians from pushing the Isrealis into the sea. The US also uses its control(over aid and support) to keep the Isrealis from pushing the Palistians into the sea.

The cycle of violence will end when the Isrealis and the Palistians decide to stop butchering each other. Until then, all the US can really do is keep the genocide on both sides to a minimum.

Stu

[Chris Alger]

"US military support keeps the Arabs and Palistians from pushing the Isrealis into the sea."

Now which Arabs would these be? The Palestinian Authority, a shell of a quasi-government that needs Israel's permission to meet, that has no tanks, helicopters, or ships (or any army, navy or air force) to even attempt to prevent the world's sixth largest military from not merely occupying but colonizing its homeland? The Egyptians, scrupulously honoring their peace treaty with Israel these last 25 years and itself wholly dependent on U.S. aid? The Syrians, unable since 1967 to drive Israel from Syria, much less into the sea, and willing since the early 1990's to enter into full peace if Israel only gets out of Syria? The Jordanians? Colluders with Israel in 1947-48 to prevent a Palestinian state, their sole effort to push Israel "into the sea" since then consisted of "two symbolic thrusts" (Martin van Creveld) one day 36 years ago in response to an Israeli invasion of Egypt. Jordan has also scrupulously honored its own peace treaty with Israel since 1994. Hezbollah? They can't get the Israelis to fully withdraw from Lebanon (although their terror bombings worked at least as well as those of Israel's founding fathers). Lebanon's Christian facsist Arabs? They hate the Palestinians more than Israel does. The U.S. clients of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States? The Omanis? Must be Iraq....

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]


If the Soviet Union backed Cuba's invasion and occupation of some West African country, and a handful of people in that country retalliated by killing Cuban civilians, would you say the same thing to someone who called for the Soviet Union to stop supporting Cuba's occupation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Although this is not similar at all to the situation in the Middle East I would reserve judgement untill this highly unlikely scenario occurred. To be perfectly frank there seems to be no shortage of jungle available in West Africa nor is there a short supply of sand in the desert on which the Palestinians could hang their hat.


I suggest we simply let them "go at it" until one side or the other hollers "UNCLE". We should only prevent ouside intervention and see who wins. Doesn't that seem fair Chris? The entire conflict should only last say, SEVEN DAYS!!!

[David Steele]

I have had trouble finding any detailed description of these deaths mentioned in the report.

The PRCS (Palestine Red Crescent Society) ambulance reports
don't seem to characterize any of the incidents. What exactly is being included in these statistics that the "fairness" people are relying on?


One thing is clear, that there are much less injuries and deaths in the months of July and August then before. Here is the data from their web site:

..........Deaths/Total injured
August 12/34
July...... 9/34
June...... 68/367
May....... 61/239
April..... 66/303
March..... 95/377


D.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Now which Arabs would these be?

[/ QUOTE ]

The ones who call Israel "the little satan" and the United States the "The Big Satan". Those are the Arabs, who if the opportunity arose, would drive the Israelis into the sea.

Since you did not dispute my ascertation that the United States keeps Israel from pushing the Palistinians into the sea, I will assume you agree with it. You see US foreign policy is not one sided. If it was, there would be no Palistinians and no infitada.

Stu

[Chris Alger]

The ones who call Israel "the little satan" and the United States the "The Big Satan".

Which are ...? You're just making this up, aren't you?

"You see US foreign policy is not one sided. If it was, there would be no Palistinians...."

That would require the genocide of some 8 million people. Another good argument: everything short of the Nazis -- very short -- is fair, and not even "one-sided."

[andyfox]

It's not an inevitable response, it's a tactic chosen. The terrorism used by the IZL and the Stern Gang was not an inevitable response to British imperialism, it was a tactic chosen; nor was Ghandi's non-violent resistance to British imperialism inevitable.

[andyfox]

There are sick bastards in every society. Sharon is a sick bastard. It will take someone to look past the sick bastards and say "enough." When people in one society consider the people in the other society sick bastards nothing can be accomplished.

[Chris Alger]

The data give you some idea of what Israel thinks a cease-fire means: instead of killing 2 people a day, they only get to kill someone every other day. Hence the media's ubiquitous description of "relative quiet."

You can read fairly detailed daily descriptions of Israeli killings in the occupied territories in Ha'aretz (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/), The Palestine Chronicle (http://palestinechronicle.com/index.php), The Palestine Monitor (http://www.palestinemonitor.org/index.html), and The Jerusalem Times (http://www.jerusalem-times.net/), among other places. You can also get good eyewitness accounts from B'Tselem (http://www.btselem.org/English/Testimonies/index.asp), the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, but it takes them a few weeks to do the interviews and get the testimonies on their site.

The only Palestinian death story that recieved much mention in the U.S. press during this time concerned Machmoud Quabaya, the 4-year-old boy killed when his car was riddled with "accidental" machine gun fire (his sister's arm was cut off), while waiting at an IDF check point, one of three Arabs killed "accidentally" in two days last month. Quabaya was from the village of Barta, one of several trapped between Sharon's concrete "fence" and the green (1949 armistice) line, and therefore subject to heavy Israeli harrassment as the IDF tries to encourage the residents to leave and surrender their homes to Israel.

Filmaker Juliana Fredman describes Israel's need for and methods of provocation since the hudna began as follows, which gives a pretty good flavor for how people have tended to die under Israeli occupation these last three years, except during times of all-out atrocities, such as in Spring 2002 (from Counterpunch (http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Palestine/081903_recipe_for_the_destruction_of_a.htm)):

"So as the world rubs its eyes and finds no `terrorism' to splash across front pages with which to nullify and marginalize the reality of occupation, some people began to notice the wall, under construction for a year, and the brazen theft of yet more vast tracts of Palestinian land as well as almost the entire western aquifer.

And what is the only democracy in the middle east to do when `the terrorists' will not cooperate as distractions from their crimes?

Here is what to do. Early in the morning on Friday August 8 (Nagasaki day) enter Askar refugee camp with 3 tanks, 15 jeeps, several personel carriers and an apachee helicoper and suround the house of a leading figure of Hamas. Fire a tank shell into the 4 story house and cause an explosion that kills the `wanted' man and shatters every window around throwing matresses and couch cushions into neighboring trees . Next, drag his body out onto the pavement and leave it there in the hot sun for 7 hours before loading it into a military ambulance and stealing it from his grieving family. Leave only a bloody print behind.

In the meantime pump thick gas down the narrow alleys of the camp so that all anyone can see through their own teary eyes this morning is glimpes of others in the street obove the hands cupped over noses and eyes and all one is aware of is slivers of onion pressed into hands and the sound of gunfire beyond the blindness.

To really ensure maximum provocation pump sufficient gas through for one more death from suffocation and kill a stone throwing boy for good measure.

Now run over the ravaged house for two hours in a bulldozer waving a large blue and white Israeli flag , make sure nothing is salvageable form this home. And always, always hold back the ambulances by whatever means necessary to ensure a maximum number of shaheeds.

Now pull the army back and leave the 4th body to be discovered under the rubble by family and friends clutching meager almost delicate scooping tools.

This is how to end a ceasefire when everyday prolonged brutality and the occasional murder just wont do, the pragmatic occupier must use a recipe of grand scale, flagrant and outrageous provocation. We'll see what they manage to cook up.

Tommorow: closing all checkpoints detaining hundreds between every village and town and ascribing it to threat of terrorism based on the attacks in Askar. In other words, collectively punish others for your crimes."

[Chris Alger]

How is it not similar? Israel invaded and occupied territories in contravention of international law and has flouted dozens of UN security council resolutions spanning decades. The U.S. facilitates the occupation. Your reponse is that we should blame the terrorists who respond the way that the Nazis blamed the "terrorists" of the French underground.

The Palestinians have been hollering "uncle" for nearly 20 years. In fact, this was precisely the way Sec. State Schultz described an Arafat's conciliatory speech of 1988. Yet Israel continues the torture because (1) it wants to and (2) nothing except the U.S. can stop it. As for the Palestinians' ability to move elsewhere, I doubt there's a shortage of land in your state. Now which part of it do you want to surrender to make way for 8-9 million Palestinians?

[Chris Alger]

Well I agree, although by "inevitable" I mean "certain to happen" in the eyes of the provocateur rather than to suggest that the Palestinians responsible aren't culpable for their crimes.

[Chris Alger]

"Terrorist acts cannot be carried out without the wherewithal of those who fund them."
Asst. U.S. Atty., 30 Aug., on the occasion of the 155-year-sentence given by a U.S. court to Mohamad Hammoud for funelling profits from cigarette smuggling to Hezbollah.

But citizens of a democratic country that provides the lion's share of Israel's lethal aid, have every ability to at least protest it, yet do nothing -- in Tuco's words "I don't care" -- bear no moral responsibility whatsoever for the criminal uses of that aid.

That's typically attitude of so-called "conservatives": long-winded lectures about everyone else should live up to their moral responsibilities while claiming that those that demand the same from us are "off the deep end." We play by one set of rules and demand that others play by another because we have more guns. And then the exasperation and befuddlement at claims that Americans are arrogant. Incredible.

[Cyrus]

I understand that until a few days ago, it was Islamic Jihad that had vowed to avenge the death of its officer (which I mentioned in another post) by Israelis. Hamas was grudgingly but effectively respecting the appeal (what else can he do?) of Mahmood Abbas for restraint.

I just learned that, in its usual precise and most effective manner, an Israeli helicopter fired a missile that killed a Hamas officer in his car along with his two bodyguards. Great job, kudos all around, etc. Now Hamas vows revenge as well.

I hasten to condemn before-hand the inevitable murderous attack (probably a suicide attack) that will follow this execution. Although by no means justifying any terrorist action, the behavior of the Israeli leadership consistently shows that they have never been and will never be serious about peace negotiations with the Palestinians. Never, until serious pressure is put on them by the United States leadership.

Those who choose to ignore the many aspects of the Middle East conflict and find justice and reason to be only with the Israeli side, choose fantasy over reality.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Which are ...? You're just making this up, aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the Iranians can take credit for it. You know the country testing missles with a ranges capable of striking israel. I heard a rumor they are building nuclear weapons too.

Stu

[MMMMMM]

What's incredible is that any semi-intelligent person can see paying taxes as being equivalent to handing out suicide bombing belts.

[Cyrus]

"The Israelis aren't "just better at hiding it." The Palestinians are more widely sick, as in psychologically sick, as in the grip of a death-cult, as in truly feeling joy at innocent Israeli deaths."

How can you condemn an entire people of being "sick"? This immediately brings forth the issue of the cure. And, since as you say the sick are beyond hope, and dangerous, extermination is a logical measure.

The dehumanization of the other side is equally ferocious in both sides, in the Middle East conflict. Denying that only shows one's blind empathy. While I acknowledge the creeping anti-semitism in many, otherwise legitimate, anti-Zionist positions taken by Palestinians and Arabs, the Israeli side (and I'm talking about large segments of the Jewish population) vews Palestinians as "just cockroaches, all".

Such words sound atrocious in Hebrew, but they can't compare with German!

[adios]

Here's one take on Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR):
How Does A Group Calling Itself ‘Fair’ Only Find Conservative Bias In A Network World Of Liberal Bias That’s Been Proven And Documented For Years? (http://www.mediaresearch.org/press/2001/press20010702.asp)

Any group that labels itself as such ought to make one suspicious. They've long been accused of being anti-conservative. I also had to snicker about Chris's claim that having the USA withdraw support for Israel will break "the cycle of violence" as others put it.

[MMMMMM]

andy, I believe you are approaching this from the wrong tack.

Here's why:

1) If it were only a "cycle of violence" it might be stopped by the Israelis ceasing all violent acts against the Palestinians. But there is more to it than that: the Palestinian terrorist organizations are committed to destroying Israel in total.

2) Failing to acknowledge that one side has a much higher percentage of psychologically sick people than the other is a prescription for trying to solve the problem by methods which won't work. That doesn't mean all Palestinians are sick, but many more Palestinians than their Israeli counterparts are psychologically sick. When you have a culture that truly glorifies death and destruction and believes in falsehoods such as the ascent of suicide bombers to Paradise where they will enjoy 72 virgins, it is essential to realize that this signifies a high degree of irrationality.

3) You are mistaken if you take offense at this comparison of cultures. All cultures are not equal nor would it make sense to expect them to be. The Palestinians, for whatever conglomeration of reasons (and not entirely their fault), have developed a most barbaric, sick and irrational culture. Failing to acknowledge this fact can only lead one to erroneously presume that if they were simply treated as we would wish to be treated, they will simply respond in kind, as we would. But this is not so, because the fanatic groups are pledged unto death to completely destroy Israel, and they fully believe in the sanctity of this undertaking.

Before you presume that others think like you do, take a look at what they actually think.

Now I'm not saying that they should be treated as animals or anything like that. But I am saying it is mistaken to presume that if they were only treated better they would actually cease attacking--at least as long as their major terrorist organizations remain viable, they will, quite simply, never stop attacking.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, if you read what I wrote, you will SEE that I DID NOT condemn an entire people as being sick. I said they are more widely sick than their Israeli counterparts--which is true. A higher percentage of Palestinians than Israelis are psychologically sick, and under the complete sway of this incredibly destructive and delusive martyrdom-death-cult nonsense.

I definitely don't think the Palestinians should be exterminated, and I am truly surprised that you even would jump to that thought from what I wrote. It certainly never occurred to me. Going after the terrorist leaders however is probably a necessary thing and a good idea.

[Cyrus]

Since the two sides are so keen on murdering each other and since they both getting away with murder, there are two choices:

1. Continue the current policy. Provide military and economic support to Israel; propose plans ("roadmaps", etc) for peace; propose more plans; condemn terrorism; etc.

2. Send peace-keepers in the area. The United Nations broached the idea that a peacekeeping force should be finally deployed in the Middle East, see that a complete truce is respected and assist the peace process. They even invited the United States to have their troops there, as such. The U.S. flatly rejected any discussion of the idea. The Israelis must've blanched when they heard the idea! They were of course relieved to hear that the U.S. would not consider it. (The Israelis had distanced themselves from the American interventionist positions, consistently. As, for example, in Kossovo. The Israelis were explicit, though careful, in expressing concern that, if the "domestic affairs" of a country legitimately become a concern for the world community, Israel could have to face an international intervention into its territory some time in the future. See for example, this Israeli accusing Albanians of war crimes against Jews and condemning the UN intervention against Milosevic (http://www.jbuff.com/c050301.htm).)

...Of course, there are now as many chances as seeing the U.S. sending peacekeepers in the area as there are chances of Bush sending flowers to Osama.

[MMMMMM]

I believe it shows Chris Alger's mendacious tendencies when he affects surprise that Arabs referred to the US or Israel as "Satan."

Next, I suppose Chris will express astonishment that the head Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca referred to the Jews as "the sons of pigs and monkeys" in one of his public sermons.

Surely, Chris, with all the reading you do on those Arab web sites you must have come across at least a few references to the USA as the "Great Satan." And did you ever chance to catch the nightly news during the Iranian hostage crisis?

[Chris Alger]

I never said they were "equivalently" reprehensible only that they were reprehensible under the same principle.

[MMMMMM]

Do you really, really think that U.N. peacekeepers (jokes that they are) could ever keep the peace between Israel and the Palestinians??? Israel's soldiers have a tough enough job keeping the terrorist goons out without a bunch of ineffectual patsies dressing up and getting in the way. How could the UN peacekeepers possibly do as good a job as the Israelis at containing terror....hmmm....have to think on this a bit...

Talk about an impractical idea...UN peacekeepers probably couldn't keep a pack of hungry dogs out of a UN dining room, let alone terrorists on a mission.

[MMMMMM]

Well quit playing games then and deliberately obfuscating.
You know damn well what you were suggesting.

[Cyrus]

"Since you did not dispute my ascertation that the United States keeps Israel from pushing the Palistinians into the sea, I will assume (blah blah blah).."

Stop assuming anything! Chris Alger did not claim that Arabs love Israel. Alger's post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=322266&page=0&view=ex panded&sb=6&o=14&vc=1) demonstrated very explicitly where the balance of power is tilted : Israel is unassailable!

Posting inanities that Israel is somehow threatened to be "pushed to the sea" needs a little more justification than saying that Arabs "call Israel "the little satan" and the United States the "The Big Satan" ". Even if that were true of all Arabs, the balance of power is still the same! Words, sticks and stones, do no change the hard facts of life : Israel is unassailable.

Has been for decades. Denying it is just a pathetic smokescreen.

[MMMMMM]

The Palestinan way of crying "Uncle!" is to say "We renounce terror!" and to then immediately send out the next flock of suicide bombers. This has been their practice for a long, long time.

Would you tell us, Chris, that this has never dawned on you before?

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Israel is unassailable!


[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think will happen should the situation change?

[ QUOTE ]
Posting inanities that Israel is somehow threatened to be "pushed to the sea" needs a little more justification than saying that Arabs "call Israel "the little satan" and the United States the "The Big Satan" ".

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps there will come a time when all the Arab states will sincerely acknowledge Israels right to exist. If that day should come, then Chris's suggestion the United States removes its support to the country when it misbehaves becomes much more viable.

Stu

[Chris Alger]

What would one expect from Bozell but a factless screed of adjectives leading up to the comical claim that there is not merely a liberl "bias" in the media but a liberal "monopoly on information." Poor Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Will, Kristol, Brooks, Krauthamer, Novak, Limbaugh, etc. etc. etc. just can't find any corner of the airwaves or print to express themselves.

Here's a sample of FAIR's critique of Brit Hume's right-wing bias on Special Report:

"Of the 56 partisan guests on Special Report between January and May, 50 were Republicans and six were Democrats -- a greater than 8 to 1 imbalance. In other words, 89 percent of guests with a party affiliation were Republicans."

"On Special Report, 65 of the 92 guests (71 percent) were avowed conservatives--that is, conservatives outnumbered representatives of all other points of view, including non-political guests, by a factor of more than 2 to 1."

To refute this, Bozell doesn't even refer to the findings but blithely asserts that FAIR is "a joke" and "an ultra-left wing ideological organization" making "absurd allegations" that have "no credibility" as part of "trumped up attacks" against "balanced journalism.” The evidence: "Fox News is the most balanced network in television news."

An ad hominum attack to support an ad hominum attack. That pretty much exhuasts the "conservative" bag of tricks.

[Cyrus]

"Do you really, really think that U.N. peacekeepers (jokes that they are) could ever keep the peace between Israel and the Palestinians???"

Yes, I do. Under certain conditions.

1. Since the United States has effectively defangled the U.N. and has taken it upon itself to police the world, the suggestion is (that's what the Palestinians have asked for, in fact) for an American armed force to be installed in the Occupied Territories.

2. That force would be under American command and would not be restricted by the standard UN-applied operational restrictions. The peacekeeping force should act assertively, pre-emptively and decisively. In fact, it should act just as the American army is acting right now in Iraq!

3. The rules that such a peacekeeping force would enforce would be : No military actions whatsoever from any side; enforcement of the world community's (read : the USA's) approved roadmap to peace; enforcement of Security council resolutions (as approved also by the US); demilitarization of warring parties; humanitarian relief all around; etc. (Again, that was the idea floated by Kofi Anan.)

Why do you think that the terrorists would continue down the road of terrorism if the Palestinian people saw finally some hope in their future ? And if they do continue their attacks after that, why do you think they would not be totally isolated ? The terrorists cannot be eliminated right now because they enjoy some popular support (which facilitates operations). When the Palestinians isolate them, it will be like trying to capture a gang of renegades -- rather than the whole Irish Republican Army. (Remember : except for the suicide part, the Irish terrorists were using the same tactics as the Palestinian and Zionist terrorists.
Also remember : After the British gov't offered true and just peace to the Irish, some terrorists are trying still to continue the bombings, under the moniker True-IRA, but have been immediately isolated and hence neutralized.)

The <font color="red"> tell </font> : It's the Israeli leadership that visibly sweats at any mention of American soldiers imposing peace in the West Bank. It's the Palestinians who get excited at such a proposal.

[Chris Alger]

So now that we know who Picaso's referring to when he says the "Arabs" will drive Israel into the sea unless the US bankrolls Israel's occupation, maybe you could explain how the head Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca going to do this, as in "with who's army?"

You see anti-American, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic references in the Arab press all the time. You see similar things directed against Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. and Israel press too. In fact, you adn B-Man have often said that Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims are excessively murderous, violent people, making them worse and more deserving of contempt than having mere animal parentage.

But it doesn't follow that (1) because there is hatred against Israel that (2) Israel must occupy the territories and the U.S. must pay for this in order to keep Israel from being driven into the sea.

[Cyrus]

"Israel is unassailable!" What do you think will happen should the situation change?

I am, as you should know, referring to the military balance of power, as is also Chris Alger. Now, in reality, and not in any hypothetical scenarios. We can start spinning hypothetical scenarios until we run out of space. What would be the use, except to avoid reality?

Israel has been militarily stronger than all the Arab countries put together for many decades now. (Re-read the previous phrase a few times because it is hard to believe. I know. Most western media keep mum about this unpleasant little fact.)

Israel has never been in any danger of being "pushed to the sea", annihilated, defeated or even suffering a serious military loss, from Arabs and Palestinians. Not since 1947.

In the 60s, a journalist asked the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. Armed Forces if he would exchange the American weapons for the Soviets' weapons, seeing as the Soviets enjoyed such a "huge military advantage over the U.S." and there was that damn "missile gap" all the papers were talking about.

--- Not on your life, replied the General.

So, ask the Israeli Chief of Staff then if he would exchange Israel's military power for the combined military power of all the Arabs put together. Including Iraq's WMDs. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Chris Alger]

The Arab states haven't been willing to recognize Israel's "right to exist?"

The PLO and Palestinian Authority have said as much repeatedly. On March 27, 2002, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia said this:

"I would further say to the Israeli people that if their government abandons the policy of force and oppression and embraces true peace, we will not hesitate to accept the right of the Israeli people to live in security with the people of the region.

We believe in taking up arms in self-defense and to deter aggression. But we also believe in peace when it is based on justice and equity, and when it brings an end to conflict. Only within the context of true peace can normal relations flourish between the people of the region and allow the region to pursue development rather than war and destruction.

In light of the above, and in this place with you and amongst you, and with your backing and that of the Almighty, I propose that the Arab summit put forward a clear and unanimous initiative addressed to the United Nations Security Council based on two basic issues: normal relations and security for Israel in exchange for full withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories, recognition of an independent Palestinian state with al-Quds al-Shareef [East Jerusalem] as its capital, and the return of refugees."

This proposal was later adopted unanimously by the entire Arab League. Instead of jumping at the opportunity to "live in security with the people of the region" and have "normal relations and secuity" from all Arab states, Sharon, Bush's "man of peace," refused to even consider it, responding instead by launching the bloodiest offensive Israel has seen since Israel's last offensive, culminating in the deaths of nearly 500 Palestinians throughout the illegally occupied territories in a few weeks, a veritable orgy of what Human Rights Watch characterized as "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity," including indiscriminate killing of civilians, executing civilians, using civilians as human shields, killing medical workers, preventing medical assistance for the wounded and chronically ill, arbitrarily demolishing houses and government buildings, destroying government records and public infrastructure, and desecrating homes, government offices and religious shrines, including such class acts as the liberal depositing of human feces in homes and offices.

The government of Israel, in stark contrast to most people of Israel, cares nothing for peace. It not only is willing to tolerate Palestinian terrorism indefinitely but actively courts it to build a pretext for endless conquest leading to the South Africanization of the West Bank and Gaza. You see this in such extreme measures as the recent expansion of settlements, the de facto expropriation of more Arab land through Sharon's Wall, the petty racist harrasment at the 200+ checkpoints, the blind eye turned to Israeli settler terror and by making the abandonment of any "right of return," much less actual return, a precondition to it's further qualified "acceptace" of the roadmap.

[Chris Alger]

This is how Arafat's PA sends "flocks of suicide bombers" to Israel and how Israel tries to prevent them, according to the U.S. State Dept. (http://216.239.33.104/custom?q=cache:IjlxvZB3tagJ:www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2438.htm+"patterns+of+global+terrorism"+palestinian+authority&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8):

"Earlier in the year [2000], PA and Israeli security forces disrupted HAMAS networks that were planning several large-scale anti-Israeli attacks. On 10 February a botched bombing plot in Nabulus led to the discovery of a HAMAS explosives lab, several caches, and a multicell network in the West Bank. The network was preparing major terrorist operations designed to inflict mass casualties, including the bombing of a high-rise building in Jerusalem. The Israelis linked those arrested to a series of pipe-bomb attacks in Hadera in 1999. In March, an Israeli raid on a HAMAS hideout in the predominantly Israeli-Arab town of Et Taiyiba uncovered an extensive HAMAS network with ties to Gaza that was planning multiple terrorist attacks in Israel. The cell planned to carry out four-to-five simultaneous suicide bombings against Israeli targets, including bus stops and hitchhiking stations inside Israel frequented by Israeli soldiers. The PA discovered additional explosives in a Gaza kindergarten and arrested a bodyguard of HAMAS leader Shaykh Yasin on suspicion of having links to the Et Taiyiba cell. Israeli authorities arrested a Jewish settler and indicted an Israeli Arab for allegedly assisting the cell."

That was in 2000.

Then came the Sharon at the Temple Mount and the carnage that ensued. In 2002, the State Department noted that

"Unlike the pre-intifadah era, when Israeli-PA security cooperation was generally effective, PA counterterrorism activities remained sporadic throughout the year. Israel’s destruction of the PA’s security infrastructure contributed to the ineffectiveness of the PA. Significantly reduced Israeli-PA security cooperation and a lax security environment allowed HAMAS and other groups to rebuild terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian territories."

Perfectly fine with Sharon, who loves suicide bombers to help him maintain the occupation. So by the next year, after dozens of attacks on the same PA security forces that Israel purportedly wants to help rein the terrorists, including assasinations and murder,

"The Palestinian Authority’s efforts to thwart terrorist operations were minimal in 2002."

Why?

"Israeli military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip degraded a PA security apparatus that was already hobbled by corruption, infighting, and poor leadership."

Another great victory for the Middle East's only democracy. Now the bombers are free to bomb at will and Sharon can point to them any time someone mentions ending the occupation or dismantling settlements. And these reports are from one of Israel's biggest cheerleaders.

Neither Arafat nor the Palestinian Authority has ever sent a single suicide bomber, much less "a flock of them," anywhere, and neither the Palestinian Authority nor the PLO are a designated foreign terrorist organization.

All the above quotes are taken from the DOS's annual "Patterns in Global Terrorism" reports.

If you must lie, try not to do it so crudely.

[MMMMMM]

First of all, virtually any genuine military clout the UN possesses it draws from the US (and by the way, since the US is also the primary source of funding for the UN, it's ironic that both the teeth and the funding for this dubious orgainazion flow from the US while much of the UN is anti-US--but that's another discussion).

US peacekeepers couldn't keep out all the suicide bombers any more than could the Israelis (without a fence). Remember the Israelis are the best in the world at this sort of thing. US peacekeepers could perhaps more effectively stop a battalion of Palestinians on the march, but as for stopping lone, perhaps disguised individuals, the Israelis are much better at observing and interrogating people crossing into Israel. They've been at this for decades and their superb profiling and interrogation (along with other things) has even prevented any airline hijackings. Why would you think that US soldiers would be any more effective than IDF forces at stopping individual suicide bombers from slipping into Israel?

The Palestinian terror organizations enjoy wide popular support, not merely "some" support as you say.

I am less optimistic than you that if the Palestinians were better off Hamas et al would become marginalized or renounce their goal of taking all of Israel. Let's not forget Arabs attacked Israel long before the current expanded settlements, etc...it has been a perpetual history...and Hamas et al are sworn to take Israel and believe they are going to Paradise when they commit suicide bombings. Do you really think they would drop this religious belief.

[MMMMMM]

Chris Alger:" You see anti-American, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic references in the Arab press all the time. You see similar things directed against Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. and Israel press too."

No, what you find in the American press (or probably mainstream Israeli press) is not nearly comparable nor as widespread. Shame on you for once again drawing a grossly false parallel.

Chris Alger: "In fact, you adn B-Man have often said that Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims are excessively murderous, violent people, making them worse and more deserving of contempt than having mere animal parentage."

No, you LIAR: I have said the Arab culture is more violent and backwards, which is obviously true. That doesn't mean their people should be held in contempt, but that their culture needs to do a lot of catching up. The only people I have expressed true contempt for are the actual terrorists who I believe are worse than animals. However that is FAR DIFFERENT than saying that Arabs or Palestinians as a group is worse than animals. You know this yet you falsely portray what I have said (it would be rather incredible if you were to actually have misunderstood what I have said--I presume you are smarter than that, but maybe that is too generous a presumption).

Finally, I don't think B-Man has ever said anything like what you are falsely attributing to me or to him.

[MMMMMM]

CA: "The Arab states haven't been willing to recognize Israel's "right to exist?"

The PA has repeatedly said one thing while practicing just the opposite.

Of all the Arab states, I believe ONLY ONE officially acknowledges Israel's right to exist.

Chris, the lawyer-like arguments and obfuscations grow old. Don't pretend with your leading question that the Arab states actually acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Don't pretend that Saudi Arabia's proposal is as good as an actual acknowledfgement of Israel's right to exist (or that it is practical for Israel to unconditionally withdraw only to face attacks from closer vantage points). When Israel was young and smaller she was within the pre-1967 borders and the Arab states not only failed to recognize her right to exist but tried to destroy her.

You are a deceptive debater and I think you should be ashamed for that. If you routinely do things like this in the courtroom your practice is beyond contempt.

[MMMMMM]

I said the Palestinian way of renouncing terror is to say one thing and do the opposite. You respond by saying the PA is not Hamas. Yet even if the PA is unconnected to terror (which is a rather laughable platform), what I said still holds true because Hamas enjoys widespead popular support amongst the Palestinians. Thus what Hamas does represents a great deal of popular Palestinian sentiment.

The argument about the PA being defanged and unable to restrain the terrorists is a complete red herring (and you should know it) because the PA never restrained the terrorists before in the first place. Shame on you again for putting forth such a blatantly misleading argument.

[brad]

'group is worse than animals. You know this yet you falsely portray what I have said (it would be rather incredible if you were to actually have misunderstood what I have said--I presume you are smarter than that, but maybe that is too generous a presumption).

Finally, I don't think B-Man has ever said anything like what you are falsely attributing to me or to him.

'

fwiw i remember somebody posting something about them being worth less than dogs or animals or somtehing, not just actual terrorists but more palestinians in general although to be fair i think it was intended to apply only to actual bombmers i think the poster later clarified.

[MMMMMM]

I never posted anything like that regarding Palestinians in general nor do I recall B-Man doing so.

I am confounded by one of two things: Alger's mendaciousness, or his inability to read clearly and recall the salient points accurately. I really don't know which is to blame here so if I called him a liar when I should have just called him someone with poor reading recall then I do apologize. However his apparent skills in argument and writing do make me suspect the former.

[brad]

well i have to say i remember the gist of it being like chris alger said.

just my 2 cents.

also he said 8 mil palestinitans but you know 30 million illegal aliens total in phoenix, LA, san diego, etc. (texas).

seal mexican border a couple years have arabs come in instead ,heh. problem sovlevd

[Wake up CALL]

" As for the Palestinians' ability to move elsewhere, I doubt there's a shortage of land in your state. Now which part of it do you want to surrender to make way for 8-9 million Palestinians? "

They are welcome here. The only problem may be building more jails quickly enough for the radical elements. I suppose we could just rebuild a galoose and " Hang em High". We have no desert and currently a shortage of tents and outdoor toilets but it would be good for the local economy.

In about 90 days or so we would go from 8 million refugees to 7 million model citizens. This would also happen in the Middle East if Israel was allowed to freely eliminate the terorist element in the Palestinian society.

[David Steele]

Those news sources are interesting.

I didnt have time to search for many stories. Here is the first thing I found by randomly looking at the Aug 10th archive.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=327246&amp;contrassID=2&amp;subContrass ID=1&amp;sbSubContrassID=0&amp;listSrc=Y

These deaths seem consistant with a ceasefire as describe, although I can see an argument for saying the Palestinian reaction to shoot first was not.


D.

[MMMMMM]

No brad, I am certain the gist of it was not at all like Alger said.

I think I once did post something as a clarification but that was uneccessary as what I originally wrote was crystal clear. I think I reiterated or rephrased it one time just to be doubly sure nobody mistook my meaning since it can be an emotionally charged subject. By the way I think you sometimes tend to remember some emotionally charged issues cloudily as I have occasionally noticed this tendency in some of your posts. So maybe it was for your benefit that I took extra pains to clarify things!;-) (j/k)

[MMMMMM]

(Excerpt)

"Here's a puzzle: How do Palestinian refugees differ from the other 135 million 20th-century refugees?

Answer: In every other instance, the pain of dispossession, statelessness, and poverty has diminished over time. Refugees eventually either resettled, returned home or died. Their children - whether living in South Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan, Israel, Turkey, Germany or the United States - then shed the refugee status and joined the mainstream.

Not so the Palestinians. For them, the refugee status continues from one generation to the next, creating an ever-larger pool of anguish and discontent.

Several factors explain this anomaly but one key component - of all things - is the United Nations' bureaucratic structure. It contains two organizations focused on refugee affairs, each with its own definition of "refugee":

The U.N. High Commission for Refugees applies this term worldwide to someone who, "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted . . . is outside the country of his nationality." Being outside the country of his nationality implies that descendants of refugees are not refugees. Cubans who flee the Castro regime are refugees, but not so their Florida-born children who lack Cuban nationality. Afghans who flee their homeland are refugees, but not their Iranian-born children. And so on.
The U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), an organization set up uniquely for Palestinian refugees in 1949, defines Palestinian refugees differently from all other refugees. They are persons who lived in Palestine "between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict." Especially important is that UNRWA extends the refugee status to "the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948." It even considers the children of just one Palestinian refugee parent to be refugees.
The High Commission's definition causes refugee populations to vanish over time; UNRWA's causes them to expand without limit. Let's apply each definition to the Palestinian refugees of 1948, who by the U.N.'s (inflated) statistics numbered 726,000. (Scholarly estimates of the number range between 420,000 to 539,000.)

The High Commission definition would restrict the refugee status to those of the 726,000 yet alive. According to a demographer, about 200,000 of those 1948 refugees remain living today.
UNRWA includes the refugees' children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, as well as Palestinians who left their homes in 1967, all of whom add up to 4.25 million refugees.
The 200,000 refugees by the global definition make up less than 5 percent of the 4.25 million by the UNRWA definition. By international standards, those other 95 percent are not refugees at all. By falsely attaching a refugee status to these Palestinians who never fled anywhere, UNRWA condemns a creative and entrepreneurial people to lives of exclusion, self-pity and nihilism.

The policies of Arab governments then make things worse by keeping Palestinians locked in an amber-like refugee status. In Lebanon, for instance, the 400,000 stateless Palestinians are not allowed to attend public school, own property or even improve their housing stock.

It's high time to help these generations of non-refugees escape the refugee status so they can become citizens, assume self-responsibility and build for the future. Best for them would be for UNRWA to close its doors and the U.N. High Commission to absorb the dwindling number of true Palestinian refugees." (end excerpt)

In addition to the rest of the article, I also found the reader responses quite interesting and representing many differing views.


http://www.danielpipes.org/article/1206

[Chris Alger]

M directly above: “The only people I have expressed true contempt for are the actual terrorists....” (your emphasis)

And how do you distinguish your contempt for Palestinians, which you deny having, from the "acutal terrorists?" The following quotes from you are also taken from this thread:

"not only have the Palestinians chosen to make popular groups which perform such dastardly deeds, but Palestinians cheer and express joy at such atrocities as the bus bombing."

“The Palestinians are more widely sick, as in psychologically sick, as in the grip of a death-cult”

“The Palestinians, for whatever conglomeration of reasons (and not entirely their fault), have developed a most barbaric, sick and irrational culture.”
(My emphasis)

It’s like trying to carry on an argument the protaganist of Memento.

Defending a racist rant on the grounds that you don’t mean to express contempt for a nation of people but merely the “psychological sickness” of their “barbaric, sick and irrational culture” is a distinction without a difference. It’s what people like the Imam of the Grand Mosque say.

Moreover, you don't know beans about Palestinian culture. I mean, how many books have you read, films have you seen, from cultural experts devoted to the subject? You are merely infected with the psychological sickness of racism based on all the racist propaganda you read, something that is at least as prevalent in the American mainstream press as it is in the Arab press.

After all, what kind of racist would defend the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on the grounds that Afghanis are held in the grip of a "barbaric, sick and irrational culture?" What kind of racist would think that the really important issue for such an invasion is the Soviet Union's right to "defend itself" from terrorism that results from the invasion? Yet in America, this kind of thinking is par for the course for the U.S. government, the pro-Israel lobby and "conservatives" generally, something that can't be said for the governments and intelligentsia of the Arab countries, including the PA, virtually all of whom have embraced the concept of two nations, same land, equal claims, a concept foreign to most Americans that have read the ubiquitious racist propaganda on this issue.

[Cyrus]

"[The Palestinians] are welcome here. The only problem may be building more jails quickly enough for the radical elements. I suppose we could just rebuild a galoose and Hang em High."

I'm sure there are experienced and willing folks out there who would gladly help out in stringing up a few darkies. In case you do hook up with the Klan, do me a favor. I always wanted to ask, what cloth are these lovely white robes made of?

[Cyrus]

M,

You realize of course that, throughout his thread, and as always, Chris Alger has supported his positions with arguments and evidence, backed up with citations and even web links, while you respond with arbitrary statements and unsupported claims. Moreover, you have not responded to anything Chris Alger claims. Your accusation abt obfuscation comes on a little rich in that respect.

Now, if I was a person completely ignorant of the Middle East conflict and trying to make up my mind by reading this forum, your debating style would seriously undermine your efforts to convince me.

--Cyrus

[Cyrus]

"...the US is also the primary source of funding for the UN ..."

At the risk of begetting another sub-thread, I put it to you that the US is always behind in its payments to the UN! Another tactic in the chronic US attempts to undermine the UN's credibility and power, that's been applied way before the Cold War was over.
But enough about deadbeats.

"Why would you think that US soldiers would be any more effective than IDF forces at stopping individual suicide bombers from slipping into Israel?"

This would not be the point of the peacekeeping force. The main point would be to enforce UN SC Resolutions. Israel's non-compliance with the UN SC Resolutions is the cause behind the (totally inexcusable) terrorist attacks. And the Palestinians that support them, no matter how many they are, do so, not because of some weird "death cult" mania or because "Islam has been at war with the West for 200 years" or any such bullshit. They do so because they is nothing left to do. The world ie the UN recognizes that Israel is doing something wrong, votes that it should stop, and the United States votes along with the rest of the world ...and Israel moons the world!

The primary mission of the peacekeepers would be stopping any further Israeli settlements; dismantling those existing settlements that Israel has promised to dismantle but never did; take over security from Israelis who routinely abuse and shoot at Palestinian civilians, as witnessed by all the human rights organisations there, including the American ones; implement no-fly zones and have USAF patrolling the whole area; extend demilitarization outside Israel's borders to an agreed safe distance; etc.

The suicide bombing would be halted immediately.

"I am less optimistic than you that if the Palestinians were better off Hamas et al would become marginalized or renounce their goal of taking all of Israel."

This is simply ignoring the lessons of History. I gave you the very specific and most relevant example of the IRA terrorists.

"Let's not forget Arabs attacked Israel long before the current expanded settlements, etc."

This myth about Arabs attacking Israel is all worn out and discarded. It's in the muck by now. Israeli historians have explicitly and conclusively refuted that argument. Those scholras' honesty makes them worthy of Jewish identity more than a thousand recitations of the Torah ever could. And I have provided you with a sample list of History books to peruse, all written by eminent Jews, which you choose to refuse to read. But I understand. You prefer the comforting myth of Jews as eternal victims, Arabs as eternal aggressors. Suit yourself.

[brad]

'I have been trying to communicate with a Klansman for years without success. '

obviuosly you dont have friends/ releatives in the fbi

[brad]

well he believes that blond hair is being bred out and that evolution is responsible for people at mcdonalds being dumber today than 20 years ago.

i think hes gotta be right about something just by chance, maybe its this /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Chris Alger]

"When Israel was young and smaller she was within the pre-1967 borders and the Arab states not only failed to recognize her right to exist but tried to destroy her."

And when, between 1949 and 1967, did this event supposedly occur?

[Cyrus]

It's enough to kill Sharon from laughing too hard.

[Chris Alger]

A word of caution. Ha'aretz, sort of the New York Times of Israel, is a good source for daily events and has reasonably accurrate reporting reflecting some diversity of viewpoints, something one rarely sees on this issue in the actual New York Times.

It is, however, like all the Israeli press, subject to military censorship and considerable pressure to avoid saying too many things hurtful to the Israeli state, given the complete dependence of its occupation policy on aid and support from the U.S. I understand that the reporting in the English version of Ha'aretz is nowhere near as candid as that in Israel's Hebrew-language press, or even in the Hebrew editions of Ha'aretz (for excellent analyses of these sources, see Tanya Reinhart). So you have to take the Ha'aretz accounts of military operations that rely on mostly IDF sources, notorious for disinformation, with a grain of salt. For example, notice that point-blank, non-skeptical justification for attacking a faction that had abided by the cease-fire: "Security officials suspect the two had been trying to recruit a suicide bomber for an imminent attack inside Israel, despite the Islamic anization's formal allegiance to the hudna." Note that this claim is hardly plausible: if Shin Bet had reasonably good information of such an imminent attack that would help undermine Abu Mazen's government and actually wanted to stop it, they could have cordonned off the area in the fashion that they did and allowed Dahlen's PA security forces in to make the arrest/execution. (You'll read other Ha'aretz editorials complaining about the imminent disaster that will follow from Sharon's policy that the hudna doesn't apply to the IDF).

Here's a more argumentative account of the same incident described in Ha'aretz from the Al Aqsa Intifada website (http://alaqsaintifada.org/index.html) (not to be confused with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades). I'm not saying that it's necessarily more accurate, but consider how the same events are viewed differently depending on which side of the guns one is standing:

"Early Friday morning 3:45 a.m. and without warning, Israeli forces of the occupation crossed the threshold of the Askar Refugee Camp near Nablus in the West Bank – home to thousands of Palestinian men, women, and children – with 4 armored personnel carriers, 14 military jeeps, 2 military bulldozers, and 2 helicopters. They surrounded a four-story apartment building, forced its residents to evacuate, and then fired on it heavily (human rights violation no. 1). Next they launched a missile, destroying one of its floors, and forced refugees to enter the remainder of the building as human shields (violation no. 2). Then they planted explosives in the building, flattening it (violation no. 3). Two Palestinian activists were killed in the building (violation no. 4), one had more than 10 live bullets in his body and the other was buried under the collapsed building. When the operation ended, Palestinian civilians exited their houses to inspect the damage, and Israeli soldiers opened fire, killing an 18-year-old boy, and sprayed tear gas, killing a 41-year-old man (violations nos. 5 &amp; 6)."

"That’s four Palestinians dead. And last night Israeli soldiers, back in Askar Refugee Camp, demolished another Palestinian home. Israeli officials quoted in papers today called home demolitions part of an “ongoing strategy” to combat violence. The rest of the world continues to call it an illegal human rights abuse known as 'collective punishment.'"

"The deliberate and premeditated Israeli violence in Askar on Friday was targeted at Hamas, the faction to which the two activists killed that morning belonged, and one of the factions that has abided by the ceasefire."

The common thread running through the Palestinian coverage of these events is that Israel seeks to arbitrarily hurt Palestinians instead of the terrorists among them, exactly the opposite of what one would expect from a country trying desperately to preserve a fragile ceasefire. This argument simply doesn't appear in the mainstream U.S. press, which consistently characterizes Palestinian terrorism as bolt-out-the-blue violence and Israel military operations as a response to same.

Here's another account from the same source of IDF "antiterrorist" operations in the West Bank following the most recent Palestinian terrorism. Notice how all the elements that Palestinian militants complain about -- the concentration on coveted land, the destruction of commercial property to impoverish, and the collective nature of the punishment, are present:

"As evening fell large numbers of Israeli tanks and armored vehicles began to amass on the outskirts of Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin, Hebron and Tulkarem. In the early hours of the morning these large forces commenced simultaneous
operations - invading refugee camps and medical centers, demolishing houses, whilst arresting and injuring many.

In Jenin tanks entered the refugee camp, firing randomly into the air before invading houses and terrorizing sleeping families. The city of Hebron was placed under a strict curfew with all entrances and back roads closed. No
one may enter or leave the city. In Nablus too, large numbers of tanks and jeeps entered the town and invaded a Palestine Medical Relief Clinic in the Old City. The Israeli operation is continuing inside Nablus.

In Tulkarem several people were injured when four tanks and approximately ten armored vehicles invaded. Soldiers closed off the city and refugee camp entirely and arrested three people. Information from Tulkarem Hospital later confirmed that one boy, age 15, Sayid Ghanem, had been killed in an exchange of fire.

Despite continuing curfews, as dawn broke, one Palestinian community in particular were able to see the true extent of the night's damage and the real meanings behind it. Governor Iz al-Din al-Shareef of Tulkarem reported how Israeli forces entered the town of Nazlat 'Isa in the night and, giving residents just minutes notice, began to demolish more than seventy homes and shops. The estimated cost of this destruction and subsequent loss to the local community, he estimates is somewhere between 15 and 20 million dollars. The motives behind this destruction of Nazlat 'Isa however, are much more calculated than retaliation or retribution. Lying close to the green line, this demolition on such a huge scale has conveniently cleared the ground for Israel to continue the construction of its devastating apartheid wall, furthering their process of ethnic cleansing."

[andyfox]

Well, I think you're approaching it the wrong way. Jews think they are God's chosen people, that Eretz Israel, on both sides of the Jordan, is theirs by divine right. They settled the land and treated the inhabitants who were already there either as if they didn't exist, dealing only with the British, or as insignificant "things," no different than the animals or the rocks.

The result has been a cycle of hatred leading to a cycle of violence. To assume no blame resides with one side is to miss the point.

As I've said before, I find the behavior of both sides to be reprehensible. Neither people is worthy of the land.

[Chris Alger]

"Here's a puzzle: How do Palestinian refugees differ from the other 135 million 20th-century refugees? In every other instance, the pain of dispossession, statelessness, and poverty has diminished over time."

Sounds like they have quite a lot in common with a rather remarkable group of first century refugees.

It's the typically racist Daniel Pipes double standard, similar to his argument that Palestinians don't have equal political rights unless they accept Israel's right to exist, meaning to disposses Palestinians, yet no such corresponding obligation burdens the Master Race. You can crystalize it thus: the Palestinian refugees should accept that they are historical losers and get on with their lives in other countries, abondoning their dream of returning to their homeland, so that Israel can get on with the business of their inalienable, unalterable, and unassailable right to recreate by violence, dispossession and expropriation the Jewish homeland destroyed by the Romans in 135 A.D.

How do they differ? In addition to being the largest group of refugees in the world, they differ most importantly because (1) their lives continue to be miserable as a result of their status and (2) the country responsible for creating them refuses to acknowledge that historic fact, much less accept any moral responsibiity for it, and refuses to negotiate any resolution of their status, despite demands annually repeated by the United Nations for more than 50 years, all because its superpower patron refuses to lift a finger to force the issue.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm sure there are experienced and willing folks out there who would gladly help out in stringing up a few darkies. In case you do hook up with the Klan, do me a favor. I always wanted to ask, what cloth are these lovely white robes made of?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus responding to you is like talking into a tunnel. One thing goes in and garbled gobbledegook comes out. As for the robes silk is the preferred material, although blood stains do not come out easily, they do shimmer nicely in the firelight.

One fairly important difference in the klan and my suggestion was that they really did not care about any infractions committed by the objects of their hatred. I merely suggested imprisioning or executing terrorists. Hard to believe you are that obtuse, nevermind, I believe it.

[Cyrus]

"Responding to you is like talking into a tunnel."

I sympathize. It's tough getting hit by the facts, isn't it?

"For the [Ku Klux Klan] robes silk is the preferred material, although blood stains do not come out easily, they do shimmer nicely in the firelight."

Thank you. It's always nice to know such details.

[Tuco]

"Those who choose to ignore the many aspects of the Middle East conflict and find justice and reason to be only with the Israeli side, choose fantasy over reality."

I only find injustice when innocent people, especially children are killed. If you CHOOSE to be in a militant group on either side, I will have very little sympathy for you when you are hit with a missle or blown up by a bomb.

ANY person that deliberately targets innocent civilians, and especially children, can only be described as the lowest form of life on this earth. If there is a hell, these people deserve a fate much more severe.

Tuco.

[Cyrus]

"I only find injustice when innocent people, especially children are killed."

I fully agree.

Now, let's see you apply the same measure of severity to the Israeli side : What do you have to say about the Israeli soldiers, policesmen and pilots that fire at crowds and kill children or directly shoot at children and kill children or shoot rockets at places where children are certain to be killed and children are indeed killed ?

I trust that your sentiments are as follows :

"If there is a hell, these people deserve a fate much more severe."

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]

I sympathize. It's tough getting hit by the facts, isn't it?



[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus you might not recognize a fact if you were hit in the face with the Encyclopedia Britanica. Oh, you are quite welcome for the info on the robes. You do realize a full moon with a burning cross nearby provides the proper ambience?

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
The Arab states haven't been willing to recognize Israel's "right to exist?"

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a big difference between saying and doing Chris. The onus is on the Arabs to show the are doing more than saying.

Stu

p.s. Didn't the Israelis stop some boat full of weapons being smuggled in from an Arab state just a short time ago?

[Tuco]

"What do you have to say about the Israeli soldiers, policesmen and pilots that fire at crowds and kill children or directly shoot at children and kill children or shoot rockets at places where children are certain to be killed and children are indeed killed ?"

What part of the sentence below was confusing for you Cyrus?


ANY person that deliberately targets innocent civilians, and especially children, can only be described as the lowest form of life on this earth.

[MMMMMM]

"The suicide bombing would be halted immediately."

To this I would reply LMAO if it weren't so deadly serious.

Also, to deny the strong influence of a Palestinian death-cult is to be wearing both blinders and earmuffs.

Finally, the Palestinian terrorist/jihadist death-cult is much different than the IRA. I'll leave it to you to hazard a guess as to which of the two is more superstitious and irrational (if you can bring yourself to perform an honest assessment, political correctness and all that other juicy falsity be damned).

[MMMMMM]

I'm not contradicting what you just said, but you didn't address the points I made.

Regardless of who (both) are at fault, the fact remains that the terror groups pledged to annihilate Israel are pledged to do so regardless of whether or not there is a "cycle of violence." Unless and until this can be rectified, there is no hope for true peace.

That's not to say that other preconditions for peace do not matter because of course they do. However this is one definite and complete impediment to peace and this one happens to rest entirely with the Palestinians.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, I don't think web links are needed to point out deliberately manipulative or duplicitous, insincere tactics used by an opponent. I don't think you think so either.

Alger assumed an insincere attitude of question or surprise at the statement that most Arab states don't accept Israel's right to exist. The fact is that Saudi Arabia's proposal itself, when made, was considered ground-breaking. The quoted passsages by Alger also make clear that Arab states do not currently accept Israel's right to exist. Yet Alger feigned surprise or doubt at a fact he very well knows.

Do I need a web link to point this out? Just go back and read it and see if the insincerity of the tactic does not jump out at you.

Do you need a web link to figure out why Alger used such an insincere tactic?

[MMMMMM]

1948. You argue worse than the creatures in Alice in Wonderland.

[MMMMMM]

If by "bred out" you meant being totally eliminated, I don't think so. I took your use of "bred out" to mean the incidence of blond hair being in decline due to breeding--which is indeed occurring.

If you haven't noticed more dummies today than 20 years ago maybe your eyes just aren't that sharp;-) And if stupid people have twice as many (or more) kids than smart people, do you really think it would have ZERO discernible effect on the population base? It CAN'T have ZERO effect, and unless you can come up with a better reason why there are more nitwits floating around today I'll stick with my theory, thank you;-)

[MMMMMM]

Well Chris, maybe YOU can't discern the difference between the statements of mine which you actually quoted and what you erroneously paraphrased as being what I claimed. I'm not here to provide remedial reading comprehension skills.

Also, not being able to distinguish between cultural criticism and racism is another indication of your poor analytical skills. No wonder we don't see eye-to-eye on practically anything.

The Palestinian culture is widely sick. That doesn't mean I hold every single Palestinian in contempt.

If the above statements in italics seem irreconcilable to you, I'm not here to provide remedial conceptualization skills either.

[MMMMMM]

Well Chris I do think they should start getting on with their lives, just like the other 135 million refugeees of the 20th century have done.

Of course there are those who would prefer to see them fighting an unwinnable war for all eternity and being forever miserable.

Tell me, if someone does something bad to you and you have no recourse, do you stay stuck on it and in one place for the rest of your life, or do you eventually move on? Which is better for you?

If you are convinced they were wrong is that enough to forever keep you from moving on and choosing the course that would most benefit you?

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus he didn't say one thing to suggest he was being racist. Would you really be surprised if 1/7 or so of the Palestinian population is radical and terrorist?

By the way I also fail to see why you brought up the Nazis regarding some of my prior posts in various threads. I can only guess that you tend to see such shadows too readily--maybe it's a bit like Rorschach ink blots where the viewer has quite a bit of latitude to see whatever he is inclined to see;-)

[Cyrus]

"ANY person that deliberately targets innocent civilians, and especially children, can only be described as the lowest form of life on this earth.

What part of the sentence ... was confusing for you Cyrus?"

Thanks for the clarification. No confusion, just making sure that I have understood you correctly.

And I must say I'm glad to witness some even-handedness on this forum. For some reason, most of the active posters here seem to be more fanatical and unquestioning in their support of everything and anything that Israel does, than Meir Kahane ever hoped for to see in his acolytes.

A worse betrayal of true Zionism one cannot imagine.

"No, it's not anti-Semitism !" (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n16/butl02_.html)

[Cyrus]

"You might not recognize a fact if you were hit in the face with the Encyclopedia Britanica."

Let's see if that 'joke' has any basis on reality : Throughout the discussions on the Middle East conflict, the few proponents for a balanced view of things, such as myself or more seriously Chris Alger, have gone out of our way to support our positions with logical arguments AND substantiate them. The substantiation consisted of mostly Jewish and/or Israeli sources, and not only "anti-American organisations" such as BBC, The Guardian, Amnesty Int'l, etc etc.

You, on the other hand, and most of the numerous other unwavering supporters of anything and everything Israel does (and they are the majority in this forum) seem to base your positions on arbitrary statements ("Israel has always been on the defensive"), generalities ("their culture is backward") and out-and-out fallacies ("Arafat is behind the suicide bombings"). All of that silliess has been thoroughly debunked here, with specifics and with citations.

But not from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, no, sorry, I didn't have any facts from that 'un. If that's what's kept you from thinking rationally about the issue instead of responding with pathetic ad hominem attacks, I'll try and use the damn Encyclopaedia some time soon.

In the meantime, take care -- and don't bust a vein.

--Cyrus

[Cyrus]

"Wake up CALL didn't say one thing to suggest he was being racist."

Some of your views and dear ol' Wake up CALL's views, in de-humanizing a whole nation, are racist. You may not realize it but they are, all the same.

And any time I see people proposing mass gallows as any form of solution, yes, one's thoughts do tend to hark back wis'fully to the good ol' days when good ol' boys were stringin' up 'em backward natives. (Umm, them's the niggers, y' unnerstan', not the Ayrabs.)

Happy Martin Luther King's Day to you too.

"I also fail to see why you brought up the Nazis regarding some of my prior posts in various threads."

"Fail" is the right word. I have patiently explained to you the reason behind my use of the Nazi vs Allies example, in the thread about the reliability of sources we use for an argument. Seeing as you failed to understand, I explained further that you can use any other example, and not my blatant obe. (For instance, if you're a Republican and you want to attack a Democratic position, it will greatly help your cause if you could offer sources from the opposite camp, i.e. a Democratic source, that supports your argument.) But I will explain no more.

In the words of Peter Griffin (Hi, B!) that Don Schlesinger so often quotes, "I provided an explanation, I am not obliged to make you understand".


Take care.

[Cyrus]

"The Palestinian terrorist/jihadist death-cult is much different than the IRA."

Any time you wanna start a thread about the IRA terror campaign, I'm game. (IRA = a terrorist organisation that's based on religious sectarianism that has killed women and children without discrimination.)

I'm warning you : the conclusions will not be pleasant for your side. About what the IRA did, what it achieved, how the Brits handled the terrorism, whether it was a 'better' or 'worse' terrorism than the Palestinians and a host of other lessons.

For the moment, I'm done here. Have the last word.

--Cyrus

PS : I note that you are keen on having the last post in every sub-thread that develops about the issue of Israel. This is commendable, in a way. But it would help if there was substance in your responses. Merely having the 'last word', with a repetition of the same unsupported claims, helps not your cause.

[Cyrus]

The issue about Israel's insistence on the Arabs recognizing its right to exist is worthy of a thread in itself. If anyone has the courage to start one, go ahead. I won't.

Briefly, the Israeli insistence is unique. The right to exist is not a diplomatic term. Or even a political term. It's actualy the first time that the term is been used in int'l relations. The Israelis demand essentially that the Arab countries (which countries in particular?) recognize something that no one can deny! Of course, Israel exists! No matter what anyone thinks about its policies and actions, one cannot deny that it exists. It's there!

If Israel wanted something that the Arab nations can realistically provide, it would demand that they recognize its legitimacy. In other words Israel's statehood be formally recognized, ie exchange of ambassadors, etc. This of course would unearth numerous UN Resolutions that would show the abundance of illegitimate tenets in Israel's statehood. And the issue of frontiers would come up! Where precisely does Israel begin and where does it end? What are the frontiers of Israel to the North, the East and the South?

Hell, Israel doesn't want any of that. The Israelis they correctly prefer the gains that Hot Peace brings them, the Hot Peace that's prevalent for 50 years.

Hence, the red herring of "right-to-exist". Zionist crap, par for the course.

[Cyrus]

You are trying to get out of the corners you paint yourself in, by just "posting" something and hoping that your post will not draw any more responses. A transparently disingenuous tactic, if I may say so.

Chris Alger had the figure correct : In 1948, the War for Inependence was won by the Israeli side. From 1949 and onwards until 1967 (when supposedly "the Arabs attacked" -- Chris was being kind, if you hadn't noticed), the question remains :

JUST WHEN DID THE ARABS ATTEMPT TO DESTROY ISRAEL? This is exactly what you claimed in your post. So go ahead and tell us! I'm waiting to learn something here.

[MMMMMM]

Once again I note you bring up a related issue but fail to address what I specifically outlined. I specifically suggested you hazard a guess as to which terrorist group is more irrational, not which is/was more destructive. Reason: the thread was dealing with whether or not the Palestinian suicide bombings would cease if conditions you suggested were met. Is asking this twice mere repetition if you failed to address it the first time?

As for IRA I have previously suggested they be SWAT-teamed out posthaste.

[MMMMMM]

Yes Cyrus but I did not specify 1949 onward, Chris did. Please refer to my prior post. Why do you not count the initial war since the Arabs attacked Israel on the day of announcement? And while we're at it let's not forget the wars after 1967 either, or Nasser's statement that this would be the war to finish Israel. The Arabs have always had the goal of eliminating Israel. Claiming they haven't is pure BS and I don't see how anyone can do it with a straight face.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus I do not dehumanize any races period. I dehumanize terrorists somewhat though.

CORRECTLY criticizing cultural backwardness is neither dehumanizing nor racist. In fact it is the first step to realizing the essence of the problem and finding ways to bring the backward into the modern.

Very superstitious, the devil's on his way...criticizing insane destructive beliefs of jihadist martydom leading to Paradise is fighting superstition...and an extremely pernicious supertition at that.

YOU TOO should criticize backward cultural practices...and even more so should andyfox because he is more loathe to do so than you are. Customs richly deserving of criticism should not be immune to criticism because of well-meaning but ultimately misguided taboos against being judgmental, or fearing to speak the truth.

And again, WAKE UP CALL was not suggesting stringing up Palestinians for being Palestinians, he was suggesting stringing up terrorists. I trust since you are able to discern a difference between these two categories of people that you realize WAKE UP CALL is able to do that too. Further I am sure you realize he was being a bit flip, but you seem so overly concerned about racial issues that you see racism where it does not exist.

Their culture sucks. That doesn't mean they all suck. I don't know how much clearer it can be than that.

[Cyrus]

Have you understood that you were wrong about the Nazi reference? You were shadow boxing. I didn't see you admitting as much.

Your views are racist to the core. You may not feel that you are being a racist but holding that a whole culture is backwards without even knowing anything about it, is racist. What you do know, is only a sketchy descpription of the fanatical faction of Islam -- whose extreme beliefs do not differ in paranoia or murderousness from Christian or Jewish fanatics at all! Christian fundamentalists believe in the same after-life silliness that the Muslim fundamentalists do.

As to Wake up CALL's "joke", you will forgive me for being so gauche. I wish I could laugh but not when the joke is about one million Palestinians being hanged for being terrorists. I wish I could laugh with jokes about Jews and soaps. But I can't. Sorry.

--Cyrus

[adios]

"I note that you are keen on having the last post in every sub-thread that develops about the issue of Israel. This is commendable, in a way."

I think it's amazing and I think it's great.

"Merely having the 'last word', with a repetition of the same unsupported claims, helps not your cause."

Now Cyrus don't you think that there are others who are hell bent on having the last word, that repeat their claims in these threads as well? They're not interested in a debate IMO, they're interested in pushing an agenda thus they must have the last word. I actually respect M a lot for taking the time to respond to Chris Alger even though I suspect M knows it's a waste of time.

[Wake up CALL]

As to Wake up CALL's "joke", you will forgive me for being so gauche. I wish I could laugh but not when the joke is about one million Palestinians being hanged for being terrorists. I wish I could laugh with jokes about Jews and soaps. But I can't. Sorry.

Cyrus you missed the fact that I was welcoming the Palestinian refugees to live alongside myself and my family. I do not think it unreasonable that we should purge the terroristic elements from that group before I sit down to tea with my new neighbors. As far as being racist your understanding of the English language is worse than mine.

If you are insisting that none of the Palestinians are terrorists then I consider you a comrade of theirs earning my contempt as well as my pity. You accuse me of casting unwarranted aspersions on you all the while you insult me terming me a racist with no foundation whatsoever. I find you repugnent, argumentative and part of the problem not part of the solution.

[Wake up CALL]

Tom I agree with you as for respecting M for his continued debate with both Cris and Cyrus. It may be an exercise in futility but I want M to know I appreciate his informative and objective posts.

[Cyrus]

"I actually respect M a lot for taking the time to respond to Chris Alger even though I suspect M knows it's a waste of time."

This is surprising. So you really consider M's posts to be responses?! What is this, a Monty Python sketch?

Responding means taking the issue one step further. It means providing justification for your arguments. With a few sources cited, if possible, thank you very much. And, most of all, reponse means responding to claim A by showing that non-A is correct. Are we going to analyze the basis of dialectics now?, or what?

What M does, is repeating his positions ad infinitum, without providing justification, without providing sources, making wild and erroneous claims on issues that he ignores (and choosing to ignore that he has those facts wrong, by the way) and particularly, particularly what M does is not responding to what the other side says!

Now, if you find such a style of dialogue "commendable", what can I say. To each his own.

[Cyrus]

"You missed the fact that I was welcoming the Palestinian refugees to live alongside myself and my family. I do not think it unreasonable that we should purge the terroristic elements from that group."

...Which happen to be oh some one million Palestinians. I see. (Some sugar with that tea, dear?)

"If you are insisting that none of the Palestinians are terrorists then I consider you a comrade of theirs earning my contempt as well as my pity."

Saying that I "insist" that "none of the Palestinians are terrorists" directly implies that I have claimed in the past a preposterous thing. I have not, of course, and you know it. This shows the total dishonesty (and flippancy) with which you discuss the issue. And it puts the lie in all your wild claims.

Well, I have already thanked you in the past for making my case easier with your attitude. I thank you again now.

"I find you repugnent, argumentative and part of the problem not part of the solution."

Be sure to hang me high as well, then. That'll put a stop to my "argumentative" ways for good.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
"You missed the fact that I was welcoming the Palestinian refugees to live alongside myself and my family. I do not think it unreasonable that we should purge the terroristic elements from that group."

...Which happen to be oh some one million Palestinians. I see. (Some sugar with that tea, dear?)

"If you are insisting that none of the Palestinians are terrorists then I consider you a comrade of theirs earning my contempt as well as my pity."

Saying that I "insist" that "none of the Palestinians are terrorists" directly implies that I have claimed in the past a preposterous thing. I have not, of course, and you know it. This shows the total dishonesty (and flippancy) with which you discuss the issue. And it puts the lie in all your wild claims.

Well, I have already thanked you in the past for making my case easier with your attitude. I thank you again now.

"I find you repugnent, argumentative and part of the problem not part of the solution."

Be sure to hang me high as well, then. That'll put a stop to my "argumentative" ways for good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I believe 1 million is a fair estimate. WHat would your estimate be and why would it be any more valid than mine? You keep thinking me for helping to prove your case. Just what is your case Cyrus? I see none other than to agree with Chris Alger and to disagree with other less biased and cogent posters.

My posts are neither dishonest nor flippant. Might you have some proof for a change for this latest barrage of unsubstantiated claims? I thought not.

As for hanging you if the shoe fits please don yon slipper. We will include a silk scarf to protect that thick neck of yours from rope burns. i'll even throw in a matching robe if you ask nicely. I imagine you are of the type that would complain even when hung by a new rope.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus I guess you don't understand the difference between race and culture, especially in this context.

Also, your presumption that extreme Islam is not different than extreme Christianity is quite unfounded. As just one minor example of the difference I'll cite that Jerry Falwell said Muhammad was a terrorist--so his Arab Islamic counterpart, some head Imam or other, said Falwell was a terrorist and issued a fatwa sentencing Falwell to death for blasphemy. Now tell me that isn't any difference. And it isn't just one isolated example either; their fanaticism runs far deeper and is more prevalent than "our" fanaticism. If you deny this you are simply ignorant.

Does even Israel forbid the practice of other religions within Israel? Well some Islamic countries forbid the practice of religions other than Islam. Converts away from Islam to another religion can and are sometimes sentenced to death for apostasy. People who have left Islam frequently have to change their names for fear of being murdered in the name of religion. If the government won't do it they still have to run and hide from their relatives and religious fanatics.

It is an actual crime to proselytize for Christianity in Saudi Arabia and some other Arab countries. You really don't know what the hell you are talking about on this issue.

[MMMMMM]

I guess there are some on these boards who are able to follow logical arguments without links;-)


By the way I did provide what I thought was a good link in this thread. For anyone interested there are a few more in my next post entitled Links For Cyrus.

[MMMMMM]

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=18062002-044316-3353r

http://www.secularislam.org/articles/wtc.htm

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-taheri031403.asp

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-beichman050503.asp

http://www.nationalreview.com/mowbray/mowbray052903.asp

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9413

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9413

http://www.geocities.com/islamic_monitor/intolerance.htm

http://www.almuhajiroun.com/

[brad]

'It is an actual crime to proselytize for Christianity in Saudi Arabia and some other Arab countries'

its not permitted in israel either btw

[Cyrus]

The Islamic religion did not ave the equivalent of the Christian reformation. I never contested that. (As a matter of fact, I have posted about tis subject many times.) Hence, Islamic religion, as practiced by most Muslim countries, is currently far more intolerant and backward than Christian religion. I do claim that Christian fundamendalists and their Muslim counterparts, and also the Jewish ones, are practially identical in their beliefs and objectives :One Nation Under God (with some differences of opinion about whose god that'll be...)

The apocalyptic tones in all three religions' Holy Texts are of equal ferocity and barbarism. (In Christianity, this is particularly true of the Old Testament.)

The fact that Saudi Arabia is still a backwards society does not give you any grounds to lump together the whole Arab people as backward (or worse, as you have called them). And it does not address the issue of the Palestinians themselves. They are the ones that are being slaughtered and persecuted and uprooted by the Israelis. And Palestinians are the most enlightened and secular of all Arabs!

It's Sharon that wants to change that. And turn them into religious fanatics by radicalising them, by offering them no hope except for a "martyr's death". Religious fanatics Sharon can deal with. Moderate seculars who want a Jewish/Palestinian homeland he will never accept.

(You already have your reading assignment (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859845177/qid%3D1061883086/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-0088231-9927877).)

[Cyrus]

Don't just post away such quicksearch results about links, M. You do this and then you think that you have "responded" and moreover that you have provided "sources".

Have you actually gone through any of them sources, in detail??

Your link to UPI.com (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=18062002-044316-3353r) takes us to a news item about someone who "warns the President" not to have a dialogue with islamists. That person "claims to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammed". /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

The next link (http://www.secularislam.org/articles/wtc.htm) talks about about the current backwardness of Islamic religion as compared to Christian religion. This is hardly news and comewehat irrelevant since it doesn't go into any of the reasons behind the recent (last two years) killings between Israelis and Palestinians. Where the figures show a much higher number of Palestinians getting slaughtered, by the way. Damn!.. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Next, you have a hat trick of links to William F. Buckley's online mag Nat'l Review. One of 'em (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-taheri031403.asp) rants against the United Nations, which is dare I say somewhat irrelevant to the issue. Wrong link, perhaps? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif The other Nat'l Review takes to a rant (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-beichman050503.asp) by a Hoover Institute and Israeli lobbyist (http://www.benadorassociates.com/about.php) hack that also moonlights for the Washington Times. Gee, that guy sure must be objective, thanks, M. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

The final Nat'l Review link (http://www.nationalreview.com/mowbray/mowbray052903.asp) takes us to the offerings of the male equivalent of Ann Coulter (check out his book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261103/ref%3Dnosim/nationalreviewon/103-0088231-9927877) about the State Department "betraying America"!). More dispassionate and moderate analysis. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

... I could go on.

M, when you put up sources about your positions (trying to do a Chris-Alger!), you don't just put up a haphazard bunch o' links. You research the field! You go the extra mile --- beyond a simple Google I-feel-lucky exercise. And first of all, as I told you, you should provide sources from the other side, sources which, even unwittingly, provide support for your claims.

Me, time and again, I have provided you with web texts and book titles, written by eminent Jewish scholars, scientists and politicians that explicitly &amp; conclusively demonstrate the validity of everything I (and Chris) have ever claimed about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Here's today's reading assignment, which you must complete before posting any wild claims about the current Israeli leadership' "quest for peace" again : "Politicide: Ariel Sharon's War Against the Palestinians" (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859845177/qid%3D1061883086/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-0088231-9927877) by Baruch Kimmerling, who happens to be Distinguished Research Professor at the Univeristy of Toronto and also Professor of Sociology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (Yep, another Jew, sorry /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

--Cyrus

[nicky g]

[ QUOTE ]
These deaths seem consistant with a ceasefire as describe, although I can see an argument for saying the Palestinian reaction to shoot first was not.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's absurd. You can't say, right we're on ceasefire, but we reserve the right to make arresting raids on the enemy. Trying to arrest a leader of a military/paramilitary organisation is equivalent to attacking it and in obvious breach of a ceasefire. By making the raid the Israelis were instigating a gun battle, and knew there would be a response. How that's consistent with a ceasefire I don't know. The bus bombing was a vastly worse atrocity than what the Israelis did to provoke it and is totally unjustifiable, but the Israelis knew damn well what they were doing when they broke the ceasefire in the first place. If they had have stuck to the terms there would have been no bombings.

[nicky g]

"How do Palestinian refugees differ from the other 135 million 20th-century refugees?

Answer: In every other instance, the pain of dispossession, statelessness, and poverty has diminished over time. Refugees eventually either resettled, returned home or died. Their children - whether living in South Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan, Israel, Turkey, Germany or the United States - then shed the refugee status and joined the mainstream."

A. The Palestininas cannot return home.

B. This is wrong. THere are several hundred thousand refugees from the invasion of Western Sahara by Morrocco who have been living in desert refugee camps ever since. There are also large refugee problems from the Rwandan conflict a decade ago. The East Timorese refugee problem was only solved when the Indonesians withdrew from their ocupation of East Timor. Hint, hint.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, I am truly sorry I haven't saved links to all the pertinent articles I've read. By the way, I thought the Ibn Warraq article, the NRO articles, and the Frontpage articles were all pretty good. I think your habit of apparently discounting information because you don't like the views of various authors is unfortunate. I tend to look at the message as being much more important than the messenger. Maybe that's just me.

Also, you will notice I titled my post A Few Links For Cyrus. I think that was accurate;-) Maybe next time I'll have a list entitled Many Links for Cyrus, but since I am only very recently starting to save links to many articles it will not be for a while.

[MMMMMM]

The Koran is more ferocious than the Old Testament by a degree, and it is inherently different in that much of the ferocity is given as an injunction to the reader instead of as mere historical fact. However The New Testament has far, far less ferocity than either the Old Testament or the Koran. Christianity is thus considerably less ferocious in scripture than either Judaism or Islam.

Now listen here to what you are saying: "The fact that Saudi Arabia is still a backwards society does not give you any grounds to lump together the whole Arab people as backward (or worse, as you have called them)."

No, it merely gives me and you the right to say that there is a lot of backwardness in their society, that many (but not all) of them hold backward beliefs. Sorry if you misinterpreted my remarks to apply to ALL Arabs or ALL Saudi Arabians.

I was merely saying what you are saying, but looking further at what the implications of that specific widespread backwardness are. The implications are significant. For one thing, if that backwardness were less widespread, so too would militant Islamic fanaticism be less widespread.

[MMMMMM]

OK, so it isn't universally true. But the fact remains that most refugees don't return home. And considering the endless line of descendants to be refugees also is odd at least. I'm not saying Pipes' idea of eliminating UNRWA is good--I have no idea if it is or isn't. But I do think the peculiarities of the Palestinian refugeee situation vis-a-vis other refugee situations merit further thought and scrutiny.

[nicky g]

I don't think it's that odd to count the children of refugees as refugees if they continue to live as refugees, in refugee camps etc, which is the case in the Lebanon for example. While the Lebanese government has treated the Palestinians there appallingly, there is no real reason it shoud have to totally absorb several hundred thousand refugees into its population because of a crisis it had very little to do with (especially given the tensions that already exist between the Christian and Muslim communities there). Gaza (in particular) and the West Bank are already hugely overcrowded (unlike Israel, which plans for millions more immigrnats) and don't have the infrastructure to integrate the thousands of people in refugee camps there into everyday society.

[MMMMMM]

I agree that is an important factor. But also, just how many generations is this supoosed refugee status to apply for? It's already in the great-grandchildren stage. Obviously this isn't a workable long-term classification, not is it workable for the refugee camps to be increasingly accommodating more descendants. Nor for that matter is it likely that even Israel accommodate all descendants of these refugees in perpetuity. Some of them are eventually going to have to resettle (or be resettled), no matter what happens.

[Cyrus]

I write up a rebuttal (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=324234&amp;page=9&amp;view=ex panded&amp;sb=6&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=) to your post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=323144&amp;page=9&amp;view=ex panded&amp;sb=6&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=) and in particular to the texts you linked to, justifying why each and every one of 'em (well, most of 'em anyway, otherwise it'd be too long) sucks big time as a reliable source.

You respond (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=324333&amp;page=9&amp;view=ex panded&amp;sb=6&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=) that, still, in your opinion, those links "were pretty good".

End of argument.

...And we have various people here actually admiring your bottle and the kind of strong debate you put up against the likes of me and Alger. Well, truth be told, this is not debating at all, just repeating. (OK, Wake up CALL wouldn't notice the difference, but Tom Haley?)

[brad]

i honestly think M could be a very good talk radio show host as some kind of republican shill or shomething (a la rush limbaugh, although im not comparing M to rush), since the most important thing is just to keep repeating your talking points, get on people who agree with you, and occasionally make fun of people who dont disagree while not letting them make their points.

[MMMMMM]

Huh? Your "rebuttal" consisted mainly of ad hominem attacks and claims of irrelevance.

Also, I didn't say ALL the links showed that you were wrong about Islam, I said, here are a few links for Cyrus;) For instance I thought the article on the UN was interesting and informative even if off-topic.

Rather amazing that you can discount entire articles because you consider the authors to be Ann Coulter clones or otherwise unfit to collect and assemble information. For that matter, if she wrote a good article it would be wrong to discount it as well (yeah go ahead jump on the if;)

Again, Cyrus, please consider the facts and the message, not the messenger...or didn't that suggestion make any impression on you the first time I mentioned it?

[MMMMMM]

brad, the fact that you think that that's how I argue makes me suspect that maybe you are one of the McDonald's generation;-)

[Cyrus]

"Your "rebuttal" consisted mainly of ad hominem attacks and claims of irrelevance."

Au contraire, my freedom-fries friend. I did not attack you, which would constitute an ad hominem attack. I pointed out that your sources, in my opinion, are extremely biased if not totally unreliable.

If you on the other hand, still think your sources to be vanilla-flavored objective, you would have a hard time convincing your audience! After all, you offered us the ramblings of someone who claims to be a "direct descendant from Mohammed".

"If [Ann Coulter] wrote a good article it would be wrong to discount it as well ."

Yeah, hold your breath waiting for that 'un, if you're suicidal.

By the way, I had a good chuckle watching Ann Coulter delivering the goods on Larry King the other day. I had never seen King shaking his heads so much in any other interview -- and he has inteviewed quite a few loonies before.

[nicky g]

"Nor for that matter is it likely that even Israel accommodate all descendants of these refugees in perpetuity. Some of them are eventually going to have to resettle (or be resettled), no matter what happens. "


I agree, though it's worth pointing out that many of them have settled elsewhere, including in the US, for example. Nevertheless the refugee problem is so huge has not all can be resettled in the places where they're encamped now, and Israel has to share a large degree of responsibility for them. There is no reason that no refugees at all should ever be allowed back.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, I did not presume that you launched an ad hominem attack upon me;-)

Your ad hominem attacks and dismissals were upon my sources. Rather than deal with the facts they presented and the points they raised, you simply dismissed all with a grand wave or two of your hand. As I've said before, it's the content that matters most, not the source. Perhaps you would find some content and facts in those articles which are true regardless of who the author is--and perchance some of those facts would help controvert some of your claims such as regarding Islamic fanatics being just like Christian fanatics, or your misinterpreting my criticism of culture as racism.

[Cyrus]

"Your ad hominem attacks and dismissals were upon my sources. Rather than deal with the facts they presented and the points they raised, you simply dismissed all."

I saw no facts, figures or events related in your 'sources'. Only opinions and interpretations. And since the folks who posit those opinions are either heavily biased (male Ann Coulters) or just plain weirdos (direct descendant of Mohammed?!), I had every reason not to give them too much of my time. I did read them all though, and reading them only verified they're extremely biased or unreliable -- so I responded as much.

If your 'sources' had anything to day, I'd say so. They simply don't. And this is not an "ad hominem" attack, it's just a statement of fact.

But since I am of the habit of using the other party's sources against his positions, I have bookmarked one and all of your 'sources'! They are a cinch to unwittingly offer evidence of their fallacies in the future. I'm stalking 'em.

[BruceZ]

The only problem may be building more jails

Not to mention Seven-Elevens! /images/graemlins/ooo.gif