State sponsored suicide bombings by children

[Chris Alger]

"Looks like we've got it pretty well covered"

Certainly papered up to your usual standards: textbooks that so nothing about attacking civilians or suicide bombing as proof that the same textbooks enourage suicide bombing and attacks on civilians.

[Chris Alger]

While you're busy blowing the bigotry whistle on what Bruce calls the "Arab snots," consider Isreal's fine record: Israeli Textbooks and Children’s Literature Promote Racism and Hatred Toward Palestinians and Arabs.

Excerpt: "Cohen’s book is a study of the nature of children’s upbringing in Israel, concentrating on how the historical establishment sees and portrays Arab Palestinians as well as how Jewish Israeli children perceive Palestinians. One section of the book was based on the results of a survey taken of a group of 4th to 6th grade Jewish students at a school in Haifa. The pupils were asked five questions about their attitude toward Arabs, how they recognize them and how they relate to them. The results were as shocking as they were disturbing:

Seventy five percent of the children described the “Arab” as a murderer, one who kidnaps children, a criminal and a terrorist.

Eighty percent said they saw the Arab as someone dirty with a terrifying face. Ninety percent of the students stated they believe that Palestinians have no rights whatsoever to the land in Israel or Palestine Cohen also researched 1,700 Israeli children’s books published after 1967. He found that 520 of the books contained humiliating, negative descriptions of Palestinians. He also took pains to break down the descriptions:

Sixty six percent of the 520 books refer to Arabs as violent; 52 percent as evil; 37 percent as liars; 31 percent as greedy; 28 percent as two-faced; 27 percent as traitors, etc.

Cohen points out that the authors of these children’s books effectively instill hatred toward Arabs by means of stripping them of their human nature and classifying them in another category. In a sampling of 86 books, Cohen counted the following descriptions used to dehumanize Arabs: Murderer was used 21 times; snake, 6 times; dirty, 9 times; vicious animal, 17 times; bloodthirsty, 21 times; warmonger, 17 times; killer, 13 times; believer in myths, 9 times; and a camel’s hump, 2 times."

"Camel's hump?"

[MMMMMM]

Are you trying to say merely that some racism exists in Israeli education, or are you suggesting it is as widespread and pervasive as it is in Palestinian education? I don't believe it is nearly as pervasive, so I'm trying to clarify here. I'm glad you brought it up but if there is a significant difference in degree or pervasiveness that is very significant too and should be mentioned.

[Chris Alger]

I have no idea "how" pervasive it is in either, or even how one would measure it, am quite sure you don't either. I can't imagine what difference it would make if we could. Was the issue in S. Africa or Northern Ireland ever "who hates whom the most for the least reason?" Even if you could answer it, what then? One group should get a worse bargain than the other? What if the slightly more hateful groups is slightly more convinced about the justification for its hatred, or more loudly or coherently says it is? It's pointless.

The point is that racist hatred isn't unique to either side and therefore probably isn't the only or even major underlying cause of the problems. Once you realize that, you move on to a serious discussion about why the hatred exists on both sides and how best to beat it or at least limit its harmful effects.

The pro-Zionist right, however, having pretty much won the real battle on the ground, hates this idea. It much prefers to remain mired in dead-end "my atrocity beats your atrocity" debates in order to prevent people from advancing beyond their prejudices. The practice of constantly insisting "I'm right, you're a communist" without more, instead of trying to clash with what's been said or engage in a going-forward dialogue, is one manifestation of this. It characterizes most of what's been said here recently by Israel defenders.

Your perception, given what you admittedly don't know, isn't worth much (nor is mine), as I can give you details compiled by Palestinian media watch people (compared with their counterparts at CAMERA if you like) that more than explain why you assume that the Palestinians are generally bad and the Israelis generally good (i.e., the greater frequency of anti-Arab calumny, the disproportionate coverage given to Palestinian violence compared to anti-Palestinian violence, etc.).

The problem is that the two groups have serious issues that one side refuses to address because the U.S. makes sure it doesn't have to. The U.S. does so only because so many people believe, like those on this forum, that Israelis have superior rights in the former Palestine, including a monopoly right on the use of violence, because the other side are, as others have put it here, "merely Arabs" and their children a bunch of "Arab snots." If we want to do something about prejudice beyond condemning it in others, then the task begins with healing ourselves.

[MMMMMM]

Racist attitudes or hatreds obviously exist to some degree in every large group on the face of the Earth. Therefore what matters is how pervasive the problem is, and how fanatical and destructive the racists are.

If only .0001% of today's American population is Neo-Nazi, well big whoop-de-doo. That's only 360 Neo-Nazi nuts in all of America, which isn't a number likely to cause calamitous problems. That number would just represent a fringe group, with little power or effect on the rest of society.

If however 10% of America's population today is Neo-Nazi,
that would be a very big deal and real cause for concern. 36 million racist militant fanatics could very well cause calamitous problems.

So if PA schools teach such hatreds, and support things such as suicide bombings, to a far greater extent and more widely than do their Israeli counterparts, it really does
matter a lot.

As I mentioned before, the report I read indicated that 10% of PA schools (or of PA schools in a certain region only, maybe Gaza, I honestly don't recall all the details) were glorifying suicide bomber martyrdom and inculcating the desire to emulate martyrdom in their young students. Well, when it comes to such fanatical and destructive things, 10% can really be a lot in terms of effect.

[Chris Alger]

As your links prove, you are incapable of honest comment. You imply in your header that there are "state sponsored suicide bombing by children," but in your post water it down to "Arab schools" that allegedly "encourage children to become suicide bombers" -- no more "state sponsorship" of bombings "by children" -- then provide a link to a reported "camp" run by tiny Palestinian Islamic Jihad ("much smaller, less organized group" than Hamas according to the Council on Foreign Relations) which (1) has no appearance of state-sponsorship; and (2) is about as representative of "Arab schools" as Bob Jones University is of "American Universities" (as in "American Univerisities prohibit interracial dating").

Further, you and your sources fail to distinguish suicide attacks against civilian or military targets and imply "martydom" is a synonym for "terrorism" or even "suicide bombing." As has been pointed out repeatedly, a "martyr" is anyone killed for the cause of Palestinian nationalism, including innocent victims.

It's the same kind of slight-of-hand the equates any statement about destroying the "Jewish state" or the "Zionist entity," or even failing to acknowledge their "legitimacy," as a threat to commit genocide. I suppose similar claims were made by some white South Africans whenever the ANC threatened to "abolish" or "eradicate" the South African state or even "apartheid."

[BruceZ]

As your links prove, you are incapable of honest comment. You imply in your header that there are "state sponsored suicide bombing by children," but in your post water it down to "Arab schools" that allegedly "encourage children to become suicide bombers" -- no more "state sponsorship" of bombings "by children"

The header is perfectly accurate. If the schools teach children to become suicide bombers, and the schools have a link to the state, then the state is sponsoring suicide bombings. This the title for the thread which is a work in progress, and M has found many better examples of this. I've also shown that PA sponsors propaganda for this purpose, and that other Arab states financially support the terror groups that engage in suicide bombing. So state sponsored suicide bombings by children is what the post and the thread is about, just like the title proclaims.

Further, you and your sources fail to distinguish suicide attacks against civilian or military targets and imply "martydom" is a synonym for "terrorism" or even "suicide bombing."

Sorry, I was speaking in a dialect of civilized.

I suppose similar claims were made by some white South Africans whenever the ANC threatened to "abolish" or "eradicate" the South African state or even "apartheid."

Try to stay on topic for once, I dare you.

Hey, I see you used Goedel's theorem in your footer, cool. You should really quote Goedel though, not me. This is one of the more interesting sounding statements of the proof. How are doing with the proof?

[Chris Alger]

"If the schools teach children to become suicide bombers, and the schools have a link to the state...."

If you had some evidence of this happening then you'd have the beginning of a point.

[MMMMMM]

Chris I have posted before that about 10% of PA schools even go so far as to host school plays where the young children play the roles of either martyrs or of those carrying the martyrs' corpses, and that such plays frequently glorify martyrdom. In these plays 'martyrs' refer specifically to suicide bombers.

This I read many months ago, but I no doubt you that would doubt that too. I'll search the web for it briefly but I've got better things to do really.

It's amazing to me that you always act like a lawyer, questioning and demanding evidence of everything, even those things you already know are true (not that you necessarily know this is true). Obviously you have an agenda other than to simply discuss the reality of the situation.

Also obviously you must know of other more inciteful, jihadist-type quotes of Arafat than the one you provided from Oslo. Why don't you provide those quotes too, then?

Your encyclopedic memorization of Middle Eastern affairs must surely have discovered many unflattering things regarding those whose side you take but you are very one-sided in the selections you provide. Your method of debate reeks of intellectual dishonesty and a lawyer's approach rather than a genuine attempt to discover and discuss the truth. If I were you I might consider whether or not I should be ashamed, regardless of however heartily you might believe in your cause. Others such as myself who do not have your notes or background are forced to look things up while ypou have everything filed, apparently. Yet you choose to provide only one side of the story.

For instance you must know DAMN WELL of other much more damning Arafat quotes yet you give only his most acceptable quote and you do it apparently with wide-eyed innocence. Disgusting if you ask me.

In a way you remind me of some craven district attorneys who do not share knowledge with the defense team which would hurt their case, in direct contravention of their duty to find and make known the truth.

[Chris Alger]

This is good:

"Your [search for knowledge] must [have uncovered] many unflattering things regarding those whose side you take but [since] you are very one-sided, ... your method of debate reeks of intellectual dishonesty...."

Did I paraphrase correctly? My allegedly greater knowledge makes me less honest, because you just know, you know! there are facts out there, somewhere, that undercut my argument. My failure to prove the argument you merely presume renders my argument less tenable, and indeed ought to make me "ashamed."

This thread is about state-sponsored suicide bombings by children. As I have repeatedly complained, you and other apologists for Israel constantly seek to equate the Islamic glorification of martyrdom with suicide bombing and the Palestinian objections to a Jewish state as a desire to commit genocide. I'm obviously trying to make the distinction, and all you can do is say the same thing, over and over again. Now, for example, you're trying to turn unspecified "jihadist-type" statements by Arafat into some kind of endorsement of terror or genocide.