PALESTINE HUNGER STRIKE

[Erikl]

erikl i do get angry when you basically brush jenin under the carpet

The thing is that there is nothing to brush under the carpet!

I have no problem debating Jenin - as long as we stary in the boundaries of truth.

Blaming my country in massacre, genocide, or whatever - is nothing but complete bogus.

yet your people have a licence to kill in your eyes.

No, my people has the right to defend ourselves.

If this includes killing TERRORISTS, I say go ahead.

If even a single Palestinian civilian is being killed - there is an enquiry ordered by the hight court and the military itself.

because everyone's got to have so much sympathy for you and your people

Not at all - but if one's looking at the simple facts without being biased, there is no escape but to see that the true vilains here are the terrorists and their supporters, while both Israelis and Palestinians are victims of this terrorism.

i do not hate jews, my father's friend used to buy stock for his clothes shop from jews.

This reminds me of the old saying: "I am not anti-Semite, my best friends are Jewish" ....

they got on very well and allowed my dad's friend credit and never ripped him off, unlike some cowboys

This just get better and better, isn't it?

Look, being that we are a democracy, we are well aware to our mistakes, believe me.

I don't think both Americans nor Britons are in the place to judge us - their records of dealing with terrorists are much worst than ours, and you don't see Israelis criticizing Britain nor US for their policy towards terrorists.

I suggest first that British and American citizens will do their best critisizing their own governments, then when they'll be off with that, find the spare time to criticise my country.

Any time besides it is nothing short of hipocricy.

The reality showed that not only they don't have an alternatives but to fight terrorism, but they do it much worst then us and with much more civilian causulties.

Yet you don't see the UN jumping off it's chair anytime 40-100 civilians are being killed in Iraq by American or British actions.

Look how this disccusion started - Talon though that disputing the "massacre" (that didn't happened) in Jenin is like denying the Holocaust.

Now that I (with your help btw) disputed that there was any genocide, you pick the facts that 10% of a 50 years old refugee camps collapse in IDF's actions.

This is just pittifull - instead of admitting - "sorry, I've been misleaded, indeed there was no genocide/massacre in Jenin", you start criticizing the fact that a small percentage of a refugee camp is being destroyed, when non of the dwellers got killed.

This is PC and hipocracy from citizens of which their countries' actions caused the death of houndreds in just one weekend.

[Erikl]

Funny I thought her source was UN's site.... I didn't know they thought of Isreal as 'the big Satan'

I have work now, I'll be sure to post on this when I get back

Edit:

Oh and if you'll read this link:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michell...m20040602.shtml

You'll see why a UN Red Cross source is not very reliable...

You know, I don't think I completely trust a site which as soon as you open it you see an ad saying 'Keep Reagan's legacy alive: Make a stand for conservatism' to be unbias.

Is this site better for you?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?...M20040602a.html

[alis]

how do you get anywhere with both eyes shut?? id like to know. i have to have my eyes wide open to get anywhere.

being that your sources are usually TeheranTimes.com

im still waiting....

anyway erikl, im fed talking to a brick wall, catcha later!

Edited August 23, 2004 by alis

[Erikl]

how do you get anywhere with both eyes shut?? id like to know. i have to have my eyes wide open to get anywhere.

And what does this means?

If you have no serious response to my statements, you better off not responding at all.

im still waiting....

You used once too many lol

anyway erikl, im fed talking to a brick wall, catcha later!

Yes you go now... better open up for the truth before returning though.

[alis]

i do not hate jews, my father's friend used to buy stock for his clothes shop from jews.

This reminds me of the old saying: "I am not anti-Semite, my best friends are Jewish"  ....

QUOTE 

they got on very well and allowed my dad's friend credit and never ripped him off, unlike some cowboys

This just get better and better, isn't it? 

im still waiting.... 

You used once too many lol 

from the above quote erikl, i dont think you can really critisize me, when your serious respponse is this.

[Erikl]

from the above quote erikl, i dont think you can really critisize me, when your serious respponse is this.

That is your problem.

You claim of me not being srious holds no root in reality.

When you say it as if it was a great wonder that a Jew didn't rip of your dad's friend after giving him credit (being that one of the oldest anti-Semitic claim is that Jews con people in money alowences), and that you actually make the distinction between Jews and non Jews when it comes to people that aren't close to you to you as a friend of your dad who once let him but clothes or something like that - that doesn't look good....

[alis]

You claim of me not being srious holds no root in reality.

you support the mad Iranian regime in it's actions and you believe like (unfurtunately) many muslims that Israel is the big satan

QUOTE 

being that your sources are usually TeheranTimes.com

When you say it as if it was a great wonder that a Jew didn't rip of your dad's friend after giving him credit (being that one of the oldest anti-Semitic claim is that Jews con people in money alowences

and that you actually make the distinction between Jews and non Jews when it comes to people that aren't close to you to you as a friend of your dad who once let him but clothes or something like that - that doesn't look good....

i was trying tell you that many muslims havent got a problem with jews, and what do you mean 'let him'? my dad's friend was giving him business, my dad's friend didnt have to use him as a buyer.

you have tried to put words in my mouth by saying i think Israel is the big satan, you would like it if i did say it, it would be an excuse for you to try and claim sympathy again. the truth is i dont have a problem with jews or any other religious sect, as far as im concerned, we are all one. it would be nice however, if more people could have compassion for people who are currently being totally mis represented.

[Circles]

Isreal is a terrorist with the backing of the law.. to the prisoners

What about Sharon, who used to be a member of a terrorist organisation called Haganah? That was a terrorist organisation that was fighting against British rule. In fact, the present-day Israeli Army is just Haganah with a name change. I don't see any difference between Haganah fighting British occupation and Hamas fighting Israeli occupation.

by Stephen Gowans -

"In a December 5 paean to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Globe and Mail journalist Paul Koring writes, Sharon "has been a fighter since the age of 14, when he first joined the Haganah, an underground military group that opposed British rule."

If your eyes pass over the sentence quickly, nothing seems amiss. But pause for a second, and ask yourself this: How is Haganah, "an underground military group that opposed British rule," different in principle from Hamas, the Palestinian military group that opposes Israeli rule? And why is Haganah, a terrorist group, called an underground military group, when Hamas, a terrorist group, is called a terrorist group?

Heres another question: Why is Sharon, once a member of a terrorist group fighting British rule, called a "fighter," while Osama Bahar and Nabil Halabiyeh, the two Palestinians who blew themselves up and took 15 others with them, are called "terrorists"? Both belonged to terrorist groups, yet Sharon is admired as a "fighter" while Bahar and Halabiyeh are reviled as terrorists. Shouldnt all three be reviled as terrorists?

The contras, the mujahadeen, the KLA, and the KLA offshoot in Macedonia, the NLA, are called freedom fighters, rebels, an underground military group, never terrorists -- until they change sides. Whether terrorist or rebel depends on who the target is.

The KLA was once a terrorist organization in the eyes of the US State Department, until it became one of Washingtons principle tools in ousting former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. Then it became a band of fighters, defending itself against the Serbs (who, themselves, had been made-over from the vigorous antifascists they are into the Nazis they never were.)

The mujahadeen, Washingtons tool to bog the Soviet Union down in a military quagmire, were freedom fighters. The mujahadeen were responsible for expunging the pre-Taliban days that Laura Bush now waxes lyrical about. Some former mujahadeen are now decried for sponsoring terrorism (the Taliban), while others are admired as liberators (the Northern Alliance.) Yet, whether Taliban or Northen Alliance, their tactics are the same. The difference is the interests they serve.

Osama bin Laden, elevated to the status of master terrorist, was not always so. He too was once admired as a "freedom fighter." And yet his methods have survived his transformation from hero to goat. Only his targets have changed.

Writer William Blum says a terrorist is anyone who has a bomb but not an airforce, emphasizing that those who are called terrorists use the same methods as airforces, but don't have the sanction of the state. Kill others with a bomb strapped to your chest in a suicide attack and youre a terrorist. Kill others with a bomb dropped from 30,000 feet and youre a fighter in the war against terrorism.

Political scientist C Douglas Lummis puts it this way: "It is a scandal in contemporary international law...that while the wanton destruction of towns, cities and villages is a war crime of long standing, the bombing of cities from airplanes goes not only unpunished but virtually unaccused. Air bombardment is state terrorism, the terrorism of the rich. It has burned up and blasted apart more innocents in the past six decades than have all the anti-state terrorists who ever lived."

Listen to Haji Khan, who fled Kandahar, which has been subjected to "around-the-clock bombing raids designed to shatter the nerves and morale of the people," as The Globe and Mail reported on December 4. "It was like being inside a nightmare. Everyone was crying. There were dead people everywhere. It never ends. It was boom, boom, boom, boom, and then boom again." This is state terrorism, carried out under the direction of the state terrorist extraordinaire, George W. Bush. Bush orders the wanton destruction of towns, cities and villages, oversees a military that commits war crimes against Taliban prisoners at a fortress outside of Mazar-i-Sharif, and is hailed in fluff pieces as having the moral courage to rid the world of the scourge of evildoers, a task that, if truly carried out, would engender a host of self-referential paradoxes.

But while theres a double standard in excusing regular military forces for their terrorism, theres another double standard: Whos denounced as a "terrorist," and whos admired as a "fighter," depends entirely on whether the target is friend or foe, apart from the issue of whether the terror is state-sanctioned or not.

The only way to avoid the double-standard is to recall Margaret Thatchers, "terrorism is terrorism is terrorism." In that vein, let me begin: Sharon is a terrorist. He was then. He is today. Call him a fighter, but hes still a terrorist, no different in the days he was a member of Haganah, than Osama Bahar and Nabil Halabiyeh were last Saturday as members of Hamas; no different today, as a state terrorist, than he was at the age of 14 as an anti-state terrorist."

Mr. Steve Gowans is a writer and political activist who lives in Ottawa, Canada.

Source:

by courtesy & © 2001 Steve Gowans

[Circles]

And since when has Israel got the backing of the law? Since when does Israel obey the law? It has broken more UN resolutions than all the other countries in the world combined. The only major country that really supports Israel is the United States.

[Circles]

from the above quote erikl, i dont think you can really critisize me, when your serious respponse is this.

That is your problem.

You claim of me not being srious holds no root in reality.

When you say it as if it was a great wonder that a Jew didn't rip of your dad's friend after giving him credit (being that one of the oldest anti-Semitic claim is that Jews con people in money alowences), and that you actually make the distinction between Jews and non Jews when it comes to people that aren't close to you to you as a friend of your dad who once let him but clothes or something like that - that doesn't look good....

Don't start with all that anti-Semitic nonsense. Don't you realise that the Palestinians are also Semites? Therefore you and anyone who is anti-Palestinian are also anti-Semitic.

[Circles]

Edward S Herman, USA writer on the Middle East:

"Thus, instead of having to leave the occupied territories Israel continues to push out the locals by force, uproot their trees, steal their water, beggar them by 'closures' and endless restrictions, and it suffers no penalties because it has USA approval, protection, and active assistance. The partners also deny Palestinians any right to return to land from which they were expelled, so 140+ contrary United Nations votes, and two Security Council Resolutions (both vetoed by the United States) have no effect; and in a remarkable Orwellian process of doublethink - and double morality - Israel is free to expel more Palestinians in the same time frame in which their protector spent billions and great moral energy in a campaign to return worthy victims in Kosovo."

"Another remarkable Orwellian process is this: the abused and beggared Palestinian people periodically rebel as their conditions deteriorate and more land is taken, homes are demolished, and they are treated with great ruthlessness and discrimination. Many are among the hundreds of thousands expelled earlier, or who have still not forgotten their relatives killed and injured by Israeli violence over many years - and Palestinian deaths by Israeli arms almost surely exceed Israeli deaths from 'terrorism' by better than 15 to 1. And after this long history of expulsion and murder they are still under assault. In this context, if they rise up in revolt at their oppressors this is not 'freedom fighters' or a 'national liberation movement' in action, it is 'irrational violence' and a return to 'terrorism,' and both Israeli and USA officials (and therefore the mainstream USA media) agree that the first order of business is to stop this terrorism."

"But in the definitional system of oppressor and patron this is TERRORISM, horrifying and intolerable. What Israel has done making this people desperate is not terror. As [uSA] State Department PR man James Rubin explained after another spate of Israeli demolitions of Palestinian houses, this was 'a wrong signal' for a delicate stage in peace talks. Not bad in themselves and a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, just a wrong signal. Madeleine Albright called on the Israelis to refrain from 'what Palestinians see as the provocative expansion of settlements, land confiscation, house demolitions and confiscation of IDs'. Only 'the Palestinians' see these actions as 'provocative;' Albright does not find them objectionable in themselves or illegal. In fact, under Clinton the United States finally rejected the international law and almost universal consensus on the occupation, declaring the territories not 'occupied Palestinian lands' but 'disputed territories' (Albright). By USA fiat Palestinian lands became open to settlement by force by the ethnic cleanser who the United States has armed to the teeth, and who has aggressively brutalized while creating 'facts on the ground' during the 'dispute,' which will not be settled until the victims end their terrorism."

"And Albright has stressed that there is 'No moral equivalency between suicide bombers and bulldozers' (Newsweek, Aug. 18, 1997). Clinton, standing next to Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres as the latter defended a blockade of the Palestinians that was adding to their misery, put the blame on Hamas who were allegedly 'trying to make the Palestinians as miserable as possible' (Phila. Inquirer, March 15, 1996). There was not the slightest hint that Israel was contributing to Palestinian misery despite massive expropriations and 300 devastating "closures" after 1993."

"So it is not Israeli policy, which amounts to a continuous and illegal assault on and displacement of the Palestinians, that is ultimately at fault and that must be changed to resolve this conflict. Albright can't recognize that decades of 'bulldozers' necessarily produce suicide bombers, although she was quick to find that much less repression in Kosovo produced 'freedom fighters;' nor can she distinguish between systematic policy (i.e., bulldozers) and uncontrollable outbursts from victims that do NOT constitute policy. The inability of these USA officials to see Israel's hugely discriminatory and brutal expulsions, demolitions, mistreatment and plain exploitation as seriously wrong in themselves, illegal, or causal manifests a complete identification with and apologetic for the ethnic cleansers. Five years ago a senior Clinton White House official declared that 'We are not going to second-guess Israel'. [Later] Colin Powell assured the Jewish lobbying group AIPAC that 'We are dedicated to preserving this special relationship with Israel and the Israeli people...[and] a secure Israel with internationally-recognized borders remains a cornerstone of the United States foreign policy.' In short, now as in the past, and with only rare exceptions, as in the case of the unauthorized Israeli attack on Egypt in 1956, Israel will get strong USA support for whatever it does, and the ethnic cleansing of its unworthy victims can proceed as required."

"One of the triumphs of [the] Oslo [Agreement] was its buying off of Arafat, making him into a second class client and an enforcer of the pathetic 'settlement,' with USA and Israeli funds and training exchanged for his commitment to keep his people in line and control 'terrorism.' The formula for the wholesale terrorists (Israel) has always been: whatever violence we perpetrate is 'retaliation' and it is up to the retail terrorists (Palestinians) to stop terrorizing and then we might 'negotiate' with them in a 'peace process.' Israeli leaders say 'You can't ask us to stop expanding existing settlements, which are living organisms' (Netanyahu), as if this were not in violation of UN resolutions, the Fourth Geneva Convention, and even the 1993 Oslo agreement itself."

"USA officials can never bring themselves to say that what Israel is doing is wrong - at worst it may send 'a wrong signal,' etc. And they follow closely the Israeli party line that 'terrorism' (Palestinian, not Israeli) must be stopped first, so that the 'peace process' can be put back on track. For Albright, 'security' is primary, and she told Arafat that 'she needed a commitment and action on the subject of security' before she could make a credible approach to Israel on other issues. 'Security' always means Israeli security, not Palestinian, for Albright - or for Colin Powell - just as for Israeli officials. Here as elsewhere these high USA officials internalize the Israeli perspective and the idea of 'security' for the unworthy victims doesn't arise, any more than the notion that Israeli insecurity arises from the much greater Palestinian insecurity that inevitably results from Israeli policies. In his visit to Jerusalem in March 1996, Clinton spoke of 'the awful persistence of fear' - but only in reference to Israelis, not to Palestinians. This is an internalized racist bias that has characterized USA official statements and media and expert opinion here for decades."

"Why does the United States support Israel's ethnic cleansing? Broadly speaking, the reasons boil down to two factors. One is Israel's role as a USA proxy in the Middle East and its integration into the USA security system, which encompasses not only keeping the Arab world in line, but also providing services like supplying arms to the Somoza regime in Nicaragua, the Pinochet government of Chile, Mobutu, Idi Amin, apartheid South Africa, and the Guatemalan and Argentinian terror states. Because of these services, Israel's victims are not merely unworthy, they also become 'terrorists' and part of the 'Islamic threat' for the USA political elite and mainstream media."

"The second factor is the exceptional power of the pro-Israel lobby, which for many years has bought and bullied politicians and the media, so that they all vie with one another in genuflections to the holy state. This bullying is especially strong and effective in Canada and the United States, but it applies widely, and the distinguished British reporter Robert Fisk, describing the abuse he has suffered in reporting on the Middle East, says that 'the attempt to force the media to obey Israel's rules is now international'."

"These factors feed into the intellectual and media culture in complex ways that institutionalize the huge bias, with pro-Israeli and anti-Palestinian perspectives internalized and / or made obligatory by potential flak and pressure from above and without. This is extremely important, as there is no reason to believe that the USA public would support a massive and brutal ethnic cleansing program if they were given even a modest quantum of the ugly facts, if the main victims rather than the ethnic cleansers were humanized, and if the media's frames of reference were not designed to apologize for Israeli expropriation and violence. However, the ongoing media and intellectual biases do very effectively complement the national policy of support for the ethnic cleansing state, just as they helped cover up national policy supporting Indonesia's murderous occupation of East Timor, and just as they roused the public to a pitch of frenzy over the unapproved Yugoslav violence in Kosovo."

[Erikl]

Oh boy... another wiseguy, eh?

*Sigh*....

What about Sharon, who used to be a member of a terrorist organisation called Haganah? That was a terrorist organisation that was fighting against British rule. In fact, the present-day Israeli Army is just Haganah with a name change. I don't see any difference between Haganah fighting British occupation and Hamas fighting Israeli occupation.

Just reading these lines shows how much knowledge you have not only about the conflict, but about Israel itself.

The Haganah not only DIDN'T fight against British rule, it cooperated with it, thus made it possible for the IDF to be what it is today.

The British Security Forces cooperated with it by forming the Jewish Settlement Police, Jewish Auxiliary Forces and Special Night Squads. The battle experience gained in the Great Uprising was to become very useful in the Palestine war 1947-1949.

Even the Irgun, which was formed only in 1937, after the British stopped all Jewish immigration to the Palestine mandate (in a violation of the Balfour decleration), leaving Europe's Jews to the mercy of the Nazis (a policy that didn't change during the Holocaust itself - Britain locked all Holocaust refugees till 1947 in concentration camps in Cyprus and Mauritious), which conducted warfare activities against British military alone (in a sharp opposite to Palestinian terrorism which mostly target Israeli civlians), stopped all it's hostilite actions towards the British during WW2 (only two years after it's creation) and cooperated with them against the axis powers and their allies.

I would laugh if it wasn't sad how much self confidence you and people alike have about subjects which they no nothing about lol....

And since when has Israel got the backing of the law? Since when does Israel obey the law? It has broken more UN resolutions than all the other countries in the world combined.

Not only you have no knowledge about Israel and the ongoing conflict, you don't even know how the UN works lol....

Read THIS...

And for the highlights:

I. UN Resolutions

A. Two Kinds of Resolutions

1. Chapter Six deals with the peaceful resolution of disputes and entitles the council to make non-binding recommendations.

2. Chapter Seven gives the council broad powers to take action, including warlike action, to deal with "threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression". Such resolutions are binding on all UN members.

B. Application

1. Chapter Seven resolutions were used against Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait.

2. The resolutions relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict come under Chapter Six, not Chapter Seven.

3. By imposing sanctions--including military ones--against Iraq but not against Israel, the UN is operating in accordance with its own rules.

C. Palestinian Admission of the Difference: In a PLO report, entitled 'Double Standards' and published at the end of September, it is pointed out that though the UN has upheld the Palestinians' right to statehood, condemned Israel's settlements and called for Israel to withdraw, nevertheless 'no enforcement action or any other action to implement UN resolutions and international law has been ordered by the Security Council.'

"

The only major country that really supports Israel is the United States.

This is indeed an enigma which bypass me...

I think there are severall reasons which makes most of the world to be against us:

1. There are 22 Arab countries, united in agendas by the Arab League, and represented seperately in the UN.

2. In addition, there are 52 muslim countries which see Mecca and Madina as their religious centers, which makes them largely agree with Arab policies (think about how Christian countries correlated their agendas after Rome during the middle ages... ).

3. 66% of petroleum sources is in the hands of muslim/arab countries... most of European oil comes from muslim sources... being that we are an "oil civilization", I think this also explains alot...

4. France, while having most of it's energy comming from nuclear power, still has a large Arab minority - 10% of the population is Arabic, which means that if French politicians want this pulic's voice in the next elections, they better speak in correlation to this public's wishes and agendas... being that the current agenda in the Arab world is to hate Israel and Jews in general, one cannot expect these politicians to speak kindly of Israel. Keeping in mind that France is one of the most dominant

forces in Europe, and you get the picture....

5. All these reasons might explain why most of the world's governments might have something to gain in being against Israel, but it doesn't really explain why most of the world's public opinion is so anti-Israeli, does it? I think that for this phenomanon, the western media is largely to blaim. You see - news networks have to inform as many people as they can in a short time.

Most people are, unfutunately, ignorants. If news networks will start digging too deep, they'll lose of most of their audiance. The conflict that your news networks are covering is over 80 years old. It didn't start 4 years ago, nor did it start in 1967.

A reporter cannot start explain his viewers all the history of the conflict - all they'll just change the channel.

This is why ALL the news networks over-simplify ANY story, into the basic known human understandings - who is a victim and who is the oppressor.

Seeing Israel, an advanced western country with a modern military driving tanks in a Palestinian city, cannot be simplier for a reporter to over-simplify - it is comming to him on a silver plate. It's easy to say after such a sight: "Here, ther is your opressor, and there is your victim".

The normal people who live through the conflict, on the other hand, has a much greater knowledge about the history and real facts of this conflict. Being that I live only 40 minutes off Ramallah, ten minutes off a medium-sized Palestinian village, I have a view and experience that non of you can get on TV.

Also, the fact that my country is a democracy, while the Palestinian Authority is not (and that's an understatement), makes my country's claim to be much more reliable than that of the PA (being that we have free press, people can and do critisice the government openly without resking anything, and we can't really be brainwashed because we do ineract with Israeli Palestinians, which make 20% of Israelis, and we all have free access to foriegn sources and opinions).

As for the thought that runs through many European heads: "If Israel is not massacring the Palestinians, how come the conflict has so much focus in the media". The reason for that is simple: the Arab countries has a non-hidden agenda. They want this conflict to be debated. Keep in mind that almost all Arab countries not only hostile to Israel but do not recognize it's existance as legitimate. Keeping in mind that most the world's oil supply is in their hands, and you can undestand why all the world focus about a conflict which makes most of it's oil sources p***ed.

And why Arab governments are so anti-Israeli? This is also quite simple - Israel is a western democracy, and a very succesfull one. It is a source of envy to the failing Arab dictatorship, who see Israel as a representive of the western world in the middle-east. Israel is a very good scapegoat for Arab dictators: "don't blaim us that you don't have food or money, it's the Zionists' fault!".

Sometimes I find it quite amusing seeing how many people believe America invaded Iraq for oil, but underestimate oil's influence on the world's politics. Having and selling oil gives you much influence in this world of ours. Having most the world's oil reserves gives you an even bigger influence. What's the matter? France, Russia and Germany are imune to greed for oil? I don't think so.

Don't start with all that anti-Semitic nonsense. Don't you realise that the Palestinians are also Semites? Therefore you and anyone who is anti-Palestinian are also anti-Semitic.

Another pearl of wisdom, eh?

Anti-Semitism = Anti-Jewishism, not anti-semitic-races.

The term was coined in the late 19th century by an anti-Semite, who, when knowing that the Jews are Semites, tried to give a more scientifically sound to his and others' hatred towards Jews.

Anyhow, belonging to the Semitic people caused no problem for the Arab world to be ally with the axis powers, espicially the Palestinians, who's ex-leader (the founder of Palestinian nationalism) Mufti Haj Amin Al-Husseini, was a close friend of Hilter and was responsible for the killing of 400,000 Hungarian Jews in 1944 (and some 20,000 Jewish causulties in Yugoslavia much earlier).

LINK

PLO police force graduates (class of August 1995) swear their alligance to Arafat.

Anyhow, reading just highlights of youre posts, I can see that you have no knowledge of this conflict.

Go home.

Study about it.

Stop studying only from newspapers and news networks.

It'll open youre eyes.

Edited August 24, 2004 by Erikl

[Talon]

First, can I just address an issue for a sec.

I refer to Erikle’s first ever post in February

edited out [by moderator]

…

But ofcourse that doesn't matter to you, Talon, cuase you are such full of Jew-Hatred. edited out [by moderator]

Edit [by moderator]

Right, everybody calling anybody names from now on will receive an official warning

His post two days ago.

And also that equating my country's war against terrorism to the holocaust by many is nothing short of a new form of Jew-hating

I find it really sad that we are seven months on, and haven’t progressed an inch. Can’t we have a debate were anyone who is critical of Israeli foreign policy is not called a racist?

Look how this disccusion started - Talon though that disputing the "massacre" (that didn't happened) in Jenin is like denying the Holocaust.

Actually I just said Jenin happened. I didn’t mention a ‘massacre’ (so why you quoted the word I have no idea ), only that 4,000 people were left homeless in an event which only killed 47 terrorists and 7 civilians also (and Amnesty isn’t even sure if that figure is correct - “more than half of the 54 Palestinians who died as a result of the incursion between 3 and 17 April, appear not to have been involved in fighting. Among those killed were seven women, four children and six men aged over 55”. As far as I’m concerned that’s a war-crime (just like the holocaust).

I also find these war crimes:

"My family was at home on Friday 5 April. It was about 3 or 3.15 in the afternoon. We heard the knocking and calling for us to open the door. My sister 'Afaf said 'Just a moment'. She said this right away.... When she reached the door, she had just put her hand out to touch the handle of the door and it exploded. The door exploded in on her and the right side of her face was blown off.... I think she must have died instantly. We started shouting. The soldiers were just outside that door. The IDF began to shoot at the walls as if to try and scare us. We yelled at them to get an ambulance but they did not answer us."

"I looked and saw one of the large bulldozers coming from the west side bulldozing the al-Shu'bi family house and I saw the house tilt over. Without even thinking, I yelled to the soldier in the bulldozer, 'Let the residents leave the house.' At this point the soldier came out of the bulldozer, took his weapon and started to fire in my direction." Ten members of the Shu'bi family were buried under their house in Nablus for six days, only two survived.

In both Jenin and in Nablus, there were instances when the IDF bulldozed houses while residents were still inside. The IDF either gave inadequate warnings or no warnings before houses were demolished, and subsequently failed to take measures to rescue those trapped in the rubble and prevented others from searching for them. Amnesty International documented three incidents leading to the deaths of 10 people. Six others on the hospital lists of those killed in Jenin were recorded as having been crushed by rubble.

And it doesn't end with adult, but goes on to children as well;

The majority of Palestinian children have been killed in the Occupied Territories when members of the IDF responded to demonstrations and stone throwing incidents with unlawful and excessive use of lethal force. Eighty Palestinian children were killed by the IDF in the first three months of the intifada alone.

Sami Fathi Abu Jazzar died on the eve of his 12th birthday after being shot in the head by a live bullet fired by Israeli soldiers into a crowd of mostly primary school children. The shooting took place in the aftermath of a stone throwing demonstration. Six other children were injured by live fire in the same incident. Amnesty International delegates were present in the crowd at the time and concluded that the lives of the soldiers were not in danger.”

Dina Matar, two-months-old and Ayman Matar, 18-months-old, were among nine children killed on 22 July 2002 when the IDF dropped a one ton bomb from an F-16 fighter jet on a densely populated area of Gaza city. The bomb killed 17 people. The aim of the attack was to assassinate a leading Hamas activist, who was among those killed. The following day Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon called the attack "one of the most successful operations".

A number of Palestinian children have also died after being held up at IDF checkpoints, and delayed or even prevented from passing through to reach hospital. At least three children have been killed by Israeli settlers. In most cases the IDF does not intervene to protect Palestinians from Israeli settlers, who literally get away with murder.

And its not even limited to Palistinians, but also ambulances and aid workers;

The IDF shot at ambulances or fired warning shots around them. Ambulance drivers were harassed or arrested. As a result, the wounded lay for hours untended or were treated in homes, and the dead remained in the street or in houses for days. In several cases, people reportedly died in circumstances where lack of access to medical care may have caused or hastened their death. In two cases investigated by Amnesty International, the delay in obtaining medical treatment will have long term consequences for those injured.

These reports are taken from Amnesty International's site.

Link

Link

They I beleive are an unbias source, and isn't at all one-sided, equally hitting out in other links at Palistinian terrorists for killing Isreali civilians.

The complete opposite of your own to links, the first tzemachdovid.org is a Jewish site (so I'm not sold on its neutrality) and the second tellthechildrenthetruth.com from its very title shows its not exactly keeping an open mind (and yeah, a fascist muslim leader was best friends will Hitler, but I fail to see how that justifies making 4000 civilians homeless and killing children).

Furthermore,

Now that I (with your help btw) disputed that there was any genocide, you pick the facts that 10% of a 50 years old refugee camps collapse in IDF's actions.

You ignore that that 10% made up 25% of residential area;

"In Jenin and Nablus, the IDF blocked access for days to ambulances, humanitarian aid and the outside world while the dead and wounded lay in streets or houses. In Jenin a whole residential quarter of the refugee camp was demolished leaving 4,000 people homeless."

Link

So it wasn’t 10% of homes which were destroyed at all, but rather 25%, of a total population of 13,055 (about 46% of whom are children). I do find it troublesome though that you refer to our sympathy over 4000 homeless as simply 'pick[ing] the facts' as if we're nitpicking over an unimportant issue.

Now, I'm not saying that Israel hasn't got the right to defend itself against Terrorists, but dear god, these are civilians who are getting hurt here, CHILDREN!

I won't pretend to know how to solve this, I don’t think anyone knows how to, and I can’t see it being resolved any time soon. But my god, there must be a better way that sending troops into refugee areas, shooting at medical personnel, and killing more civilians than terrorists!

And yes, I'll agree that the Palestinian leaders are supporting terrorists, but so are the Israeli leaders every time their military sends tanks and missiles into populated areas to take out a small number of militants!

Both sides have shades of grey, I just take exception to the fact that all to often a very much black and white picture from a single side is painted, placing all the blame on the PA, non on the Israeli government, all the while saying any opposing argument is down to European or America ignorance.

Indeed, Israel has had a hard history, however so have the Palestinians, and when the UN come in one day and give their territory to the Israelis their must have been many who saw it as an invasion. A view that has likely never decreased due to the constant death of civilians in the crossfire between two opposing armed groups.

If leaving 4000 people homeless at Jenin makes more terrorists, then surely pulling out military and sending in engineers, medical staff and food to build cities and lives will have the opposite effect.

The road will be a long one, but the sooner it starts the sooner Israel and Palestine will get there, and for that Israel needs to stop looking at all Palestinians as possible terrorists, so that the Palestinians can stop looking at all Israelis as invaders.

[Erikl]

Oh comeon Talon, this is just rubbish and you know it.

I find it really sad that we are seven months on, and haven’t progressed an inch. Can’t we have a debate were anyone who is critical of Israeli foreign policy is not called a racist?

First of all, my comment to you in Feb. is unrelated - to what we are talking about today.

I didn'y know who you are, and you obviously knew very little about Israel.

Saying that no one can criticise Israel without being called a racist is just playing insocent and distorting the facts.

When you equate Israel to Nazi Germany - this is not a legitimate criticism, giving to the fact that you specifically chose that equavalence because the Jews were victims of Nazi genocide.

EDIT: it is also woth mentioning that I specifically said in this thread the followings: "With this kind of statements, if I didn't know that you are not an anti-Semite, I would regard you has such."

Secondly, Israel is not comitting genocide in the Palestinians. Untill I won't hear it from you that you confirm this fact, everything you say about Israel is based on this wrong assumption. Going around it, by saying that Israel destroyed many houses, after youre claim that it commit genocide in the Palestinians was refuted, is just trying to get away from the simple truth of admitting that you were wrong.

Saying "actually I just said Jenin happened" is another way for you to face the harsh truth that youre line of thinking is wrong. You specifically said "dude, isn't denying Jenin like denying the Holocaust?" and there is only one way to understand such a sentence:

You believed that Jenin was a massacre (and you confirmed that those were your thoughts a couple of posts after that, when you wrote: "After sighing in relief that 3,000 lives have not been lost..."), and when this was refuted, you start focusing on the houses which were destroyed, ignoring the facts that Israel payed the PA to reconstruct those houses, and that the PA was the one eventually preventing the Palestinians from rebuilding those houses.

You'll do anything to hold on to your beliefs, even when those are refuted by facts.

You want to talk about real war crimes?

How about the Coalition forces who bombed mosques in Iraq (something the IDF has never done in the disputed territories), bombed a wedding killing dozens of men, women and children, bombing civilians from the air, and abusing POWs.

Israel didn't do the tenth of what the colaition forces have done in Iraq, yet Israel is the one being blamed for genocide, being number one war criminal, human rights violations.

Not only this, but colaition forces had made it clear that they do not obey international law in Iraq because they don't find it suitfull for war against terrorism - something Israel not only never said, but never did.

Criticising Israel is legitimate. But equating us to Nazis, just because of what the Nazis have done to us, is not legitimate.

And anyway, I wasn't calling Alis an anti-Semite, I was implying for the irony that after her remark that she is not anti-Semitic, she wrote statements which are typical for anti-Semites in the colset (for example, saying that although you are not anti-Semite, you have many Jewish friends - meaning that you distinct between you Jewish and non-Jewish friends. Saying that you know Jews and that they are nice because they didn't con you - like it is expected that they will ).

And as for Circles info - I would expect that even you would remark on his lack of knowledge in history about his conflict, but it seems that acedemic integnity is hypocratic these days .

And its not even limited to Palistinians, but also ambulances and aid workers;

Again, you ingnored the source which I gave you about UN red cross workers who help terrorists.

And yes, I'll agree that the Palestinian leaders are supporting terrorists, but so are the Israeli leaders every time their military sends tanks and missiles into populated areas to take out a small number of militants!

Nonsence!

How is sending military to take out terrorists who hide in civilian population a terrorism?

I believe you have a solution for how to conduct war against terrorists then?

The great Talon - our expert on counter-terrorism actions!

What do you think - that we should wait untill they enter our city and then take them out? Sorry, this is not the way to defeat terrorism.

Indeed, Israel has had a hard history, however so have the Palestinians, and when the UN come in one day and give their territory to the Israelis their must have been many who saw it as an invasion.

"Their territory"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but last time I checked it - there was never a Palestinian state.

Actually - Jews have been living in the land called by the Romans "Palestine" long before any Arab came there, and lived here also when the first Zionists came in 1882.

The fact that the majority of Jews today are the descendants of Jewish immigrants is of no importance - even most of the Palestinians today are the descendants of Arabs who came to the Palestine mandate.

The only people who ever had a soveirgnity on this lands were us, Jews, and we continue to live here even after the majority of us went to exile.

and yeah, a fascist muslim leader was best friends will Hitler,

Not a "muslim leader", but the founder of Palestinian nationalism!

He was for Palestinian nationalism what Hertzl was for the Zionist movement (only without the fascist elements lol... Herzl was a Socialist ).

He was Arafat's uncle and is still being admired by all Palestinians.

He has houndreds of thosands of Jewish victims' blood on his hands.

He was visiting Aushwitz during the Holocaust, and made a pact with Hitler that when Palestine will be captured, such a camp will be constructed near Nabulus for the Jewish population in Palestine.

A view that has likely never decreased due to the constant death of civilians in the crossfire between two opposing armed groups.

Not two armed groups - stope grouping the IDF and Palestinian militias in the same group.

The IDF is a western military which acts according to international codes.

The Palestinian terrorist groups are simply terrorists, who hide in their own people's streets because they don't care if their fellow Palestinian brothers get killed or not - if they did care, they wouldn't be hidding in amid civilian population.

Edited August 25, 2004 by Erikl

[Erikl]

Anyway, I might not be able to reply in the next few days (to long posts anyway) because I'm very bussy at work in the next week.

So don't come to any conclusions if I'm not replying in the comming days to any long posts.

[Talon]

First of all, my comment to you in Feb. is unrelated - to what we are talking about today.

I didn'y know who you are, and you obviously knew very little about Israel.

Strange, cause I seem to be well aware of what the IDF is doing in Palestine, which you seem quite unaware of. And considering your still using the race-card, your first hate-filled post is relevant.

And anyway, I wasn't calling Alis an anti-Semite, I was implying for the irony that after her remark that she is not anti-Semitic, she wrote statements which are typical for anti-Semites in the colset (for example, saying that although you are not anti-Semite, you have many Jewish friends - meaning that you distinct between you Jewish and non-Jewish friends. Saying that you know Jews and that they are nice because they didn't con you - like it is expected that they will  ).

And I didn’t even make any reply to this.

Not a "muslim leader", but the founder of Palestinian nationalism!

He was for Palestinian nationalism what Hertzl was for the Zionist movement (only without the fascist elements lol... Herzl was a Socialist  ).

He was Arafat's uncle and is still being admired by all Palestinians.

He has houndreds of thosands of Jewish victims' blood on his hands.

He was visiting Aushwitz during the Holocaust, and made a pact with Hitler that when Palestine will be captured, such a camp will be constructed near Nabulus for the Jewish population in Palestine.

You can’t found nationalism, it’s a feeling of love for your country, you either have it or don’t, nobody can come up with it. Next you’ll be saying that because of Hitler and the existence of violent Neo-Nazis in German cities we should send the IDF into Berlin.

Again, you completely fail to explain how this justifies killing civilians.

Not two armed groups - stope grouping the IDF and Palestinian militias in the same group.

The IDF is a western military which acts according to international codes.

The Palestinian terrorist groups are simply terrorists,

I Didn’t that’s why I used the word ‘two’

Your military is only called a military because it has tanks and missiles, the Palestinians are called terrorists because they only have bombs. Really this is just a lack of resources

"Their territory"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but last time I checked it - there was never a Palestinian state.

Actually - Jews have been living in the land called by the Romans "Palestine" long before any Arab came there, and lived here also when the first Zionists came in 1882.

So your admitting even the Roman’s called an area of land Palestine a few thousand years ago, yet are denying the territory of Palestine ever existed.

Saying "actually I just said Jenin happened" is another way for you to face the harsh truth that youre line of thinking is wrong. You specifically said "dude, isn't denying Jenin like denying the Holocaust?" and there is only one way to understand such a sentence:

You believed that Jenin was a massacre (and you confirmed that those were your thoughts a couple of posts after that, when you wrote: "After sighing in relief that 3,000 lives have not been lost..."), and when this was refuted, you start focusing on the houses which were destroyed, ignoring the facts that Israel payed the PA to reconstruct those houses, and that the PA was the one eventually preventing the Palestinians from rebuilding those houses.

Yeah, you love bringing this part up to bypass the rest of my argument. As I said, Jenin is a war-crime, the holocaust is war crime. Civilians died in both. You are the individual you mentioned the word ‘massacre’. My post about "After sighing in relief that 3,000 lives have not been lost...", is based on one of your own posts which stated that original posts stated that number died, but were corrected later on.

So, I’m right. The world did hold its breath, then sigh in relief. Now I’m waiting for the tears for those homes are now charcoal.

And you’re the one you says the PA are hiring terrorists and not building houses, so why is the Israeli government funding them instead building homes itself, it’s the one who destroyed them.

When you equate Israel to Nazi Germany - this is not a legitimate criticism, giving to the fact that you specifically chose that equavalence because the Jews were victims of Nazi genocide.

Why not, a lot of people do it, High ranking Politicians have even done so. Everyone sees, everyone looks at the atrocities committed toward the Palestinians and see that the Israeli military and government, in an attempt to make use they never become the victims again, have become what they hate the most.

That why we refer to Israel as the modern day Nazis, because that’s what we see. The Nazis believed that in an attempt to safe themselves from the Jewish communist threat it legitimised everything they did, even claiming the rest of the world’s countries were part of an anti-German conspiracy. You yourself seem to have no problem with making 4000 people homeless if it means killing a few dozen terrorists and killed a few dozen bystanders with a missile if it means hitting one militant leader.

That’s what we see, its nothing to do with anti-Jewishness, or Anti-Semitism. Its cause we in unbiased neutral countries, standing on the side lines looking in see the big picture.

Look past the hate and the propaganda, the Palestinians are people too.

You'll do anything to hold on to your beliefs, even when those are refuted by facts.

Dude, the word hypocrite springs to mind, we’ve posted a ton of reports stating IDF atrocities, and you haven’t even bothered to reply on them. Instead you gave a few Israeli sites stating the UN was using their vans to drive terrorists around cities to shoot and Israelis;

Again, you ingnored the source which I gave you about UN red cross workers who help terrorists.

Yeah, I don’t care what ‘proof’ you have, the claim that the UN is supporting terrorists on Isreali sites is military propaganda. If you can’t see that, then there’s no hope for an end to this conflict.

You want to talk about real war crimes?

How about the Coalition forces who bombed mosques in Iraq (something the IDF has never done in the disputed territories), bombed a wedding killing dozens of men, women and children, bombing civilians from the air, and abusing POWs.

Yes, I already believe there are multiple threads hammering the Coalition for their incompetence in Iraq. Its funny how you, like the rest of us, will agree its horrible, but when you own military does similar or worse, you ignore the evidence.

Or post something like this;

Anyhow, reading just highlights of youre posts, I can see that you have no knowledge of this conflict.

Go home.

Study about it.

Stop studying only from newspapers and news networks.

It'll open youre eyes.

Erikle, I understand that living in a terror plagues country means your obviously going to have a hard time keeping an open mind, and since your off doing monitory military service at the moment, you’ll be subject to military propaganda. But if you look past all that, look on the Palestinians as people, forget what you’ve been told, take your own evidence and research non-bias material, it might just open your eyes.

I believe you have a solution for how to conduct war against terrorists then?

As I believe, I already stated ‘I won't pretend to know how to solve this, I don’t think anyone knows how to,’

If fact the majority of my argument, namely the areas you know are true and can’t disprove, you simply ignore and pretend I never stated it. Like all the Amnesty reports of children being killed by the IDF.

Edited August 25, 2004 by Talon S.

[alis]

He was Arafat's uncle and is still being admired by all Palestinians.

who's line of thinking is wrong??

And anyway, I wasn't calling Alis an anti-Semite, I was implying for the irony that after her remark that she is not anti-Semitic, she wrote statements which are typical for anti-Semites in the colset (for example, saying that although you are not anti-Semite, you have many Jewish friends - meaning that you distinct between you Jewish and non-Jewish friends. Saying that you know Jews and that they are nice because they didn't con you - like it is expected that they will  ).

actually my dad's friend had been conned before by other suppliers, and he was grateful that he had found trustworthy suppliers. you had acused me of being racist, and i was replying to that. heck, if im so racist, why is it i can never miss an episode of ali G, he's very open about being jew, i laugh my head off when he's on tv, Bettie Midler's another, i loved her in Beaches, are you still trying to imply im anti semite, because that's what you've been trying to do.

btw you've written statements which are typical of being anti palestians. (see first quote)

QUOTE 

And its not even limited to Palistinians, but also ambulances and aid workers;

Again, you ingnored the source which I gave you about UN red cross workers who help terrorists.

so are you implying denying aid to the injured, innocent people is ok because of this source?

the failure to ensure Israel's compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention has had, and continues to have, far-reaching, detrimental consequences and implications. Israel's violations and grave breaches of the Convention have not only inflicted severe harm on the Palestinian civilian population but have also resulted in decreased security for both Israeli and Palestinian civilians. The failure to ensure Israeli compliance has also directly and negatively impacted the ability of the Israeli Government and the Palestine Liberation Organization to reach a just, comprehensive and lasting peace.

http://www.un.org/peace/jenin/

Edited August 25, 2004 by alis

[bathory]

How about the Coalition forces who bombed mosques in Iraq (something the IDF has never done in the disputed territories), bombed a wedding killing dozens of men, women and children, bombing civilians from the air, and abusing POWs.

whoah whoah whoah

1) bombed mosques? if i recall corectly they blew out a wall to get at Bathists/terrorists whatever, hiding inside, calling this a war crime is childish

2) bombed a wedding out on the border where they found passport making machines and other innocent paraphenalia...as the army guy said, even bad guys have celebrations too, killing children is unfortunate however:(

3) bombing civilians from the air? of course it will happen, its not intentional, this is a war, there are always going to be civilian casualties, its like eating KFC without having a Pepsi:)

4) abusing POWs? hey at least the Coalition has aired its dirty laundry, call us when your boys get more than a slap on the wrist for gunning down palestinian children for throwing rocks

[Seraphina]

4) abusing POWs? hey at least the Coalition has aired its dirty laundry, call us when your boys get more than a slap on the wrist for gunning down palestinian children for throwing rocks

Bathory, I seldom agree with you....but for this, I'm going to take a moment to applaud, because I just heard a whip cracking somewhere

The fact is though....you're flogging a dead horse, all of you. Erikle lives in a world where he believes his country is "right", and everyone else is "wrong". The fact that every other country in Europe agrees that his government and military are responsible for more war crimes than any other nation in the middle east doesn't sway him at all....after all, it's all part of the great big anti-jewish conspiracy he's been taught about

Fact is, you can't argue with someone who considers any word spoken against his country as anti-semetic. Until Erikle learns the difference between Isrial (the country) and Jews (the people), and that despising the actions of one does not mean despising the other, then you're not going to get anywhere....you're argueing against a person who sees a very black and white picture of this conflict, and isn't willing to see anything else.

And Erikle, I'm just going to try and make sure you properly understand why everyone makes references to Nazis, Hitler, etc etc when arguing with you...

It's because that's what your country has turned into....you've turned into a very paraniod, aggressive, military state, attacking its neighbours, and accusing everyone else of being part of some secret conspiracy to undermine you. That's exactly what the Nazis did too. While it's true that any number of evil powers could have been used in the example, the reason we choose to equate you to the Nazi empire is that we have some distant hope you might one day see the irony.

[Erikl]

When you equate Israel to Nazi Germany - this is not a legitimate criticism, giving to the fact that you specifically chose that equavalence because the Jews were victims of Nazi genocide.

Why not, a lot of people do it, High ranking Politicians have even done so. Everyone sees, everyone looks at the atrocities committed toward the Palestinians and see that the Israeli military and government, in an attempt to make use they never become the victims again, have become what they hate the most.

That why we refer to Israel as the modern day Nazis, because that’s what we see. The Nazis believed that in an attempt to safe themselves from the Jewish communist threat it legitimised everything they did, even claiming the rest of the world’s countries were part of an anti-German conspiracy. You yourself seem to have no problem with making 4000 people homeless if it means killing a few dozen terrorists and killed a few dozen bystanders with a missile if it means hitting one militant leader.

That’s what we see, its nothing to do with anti-Jewishness, or Anti-Semitism. Its cause we in unbiased neutral countries, standing on the side lines looking in see the big picture.

And Erikle, I'm just going to try and make sure you properly understand why everyone makes references to Nazis, Hitler, etc etc when arguing with you...

It's because that's what your country has turned into....you've turned into a very paraniod, aggressive, military state, attacking its neighbours, and accusing everyone else of being part of some secret conspiracy to undermine you. That's exactly what the Nazis did too. While it's true that any number of evil powers could have been used in the example, the reason we choose to equate you to the Nazi empire is that we have some distant hope you might one day see the irony.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

""The Swastika Retuns"

For most people, the Nazi swastika means one thing -- the Holocaust. So

strong is this vile association with the Nazi slaughter of 12 million

people, including six million Jews, that in some European countries, its

display or sale can be a crime.

So it is nothing short of shocking that in the past two weeks, posters,

graffiti and placards have proliferated across the Continent displaying

variations on the same theme: star of david and a swastika linked with

an equals sign. Which is to say, the Israelis are now Nazis.

The attempt to compare the 2,000 or so Palestinian deaths over the last

18 months -- most of them the result of armed combat with Israelis -- to

Hitler's systematic massacre of millions of Jews in gas chambers and

death camps would be absurd if it were not so insidious. But the analogy

is not merely inaccurate.

Tying the Jews to the Holocaust in this way has a special resonance that

is as old and evil as anti-Semitism itself. For it is not simply that

the Jewish state is being falsely accused of genocide, but specifically

of the same genocide of which they were themselves the victims. Tying

Israel to Hitler and his crimes has a way of appearing to excuse the

real Holocaust. Binding together Israel and Nazi Germany in this way

thus has the benefit of relieving Europe's lingering, deep-seated guilt

over the Holocaust.

To be sure, not everyone in Europe who opposes Israel's current military

campaign has embraced this bizarre form of moral equivalence. And some

Europeans acted heroically to save Jews threatened by Hitler. But since

the slanderous equivalence was first suggested, apparently by Nobel

Prize winning author Jose Saramago some two weeks ago, it has spread

with alarming rapidity across the EU. It is now appearing not only at

pro-Palestinian rallies, but as graffiti in public places and on public

transportation.

This ugly association is not merely revisionist. In attempting to

implicate the Jews as somehow to blame for their horrible fate, it

echoes Hitler's own original vilification of the Jews, a campaign of

lies that paved the way for the original Holocaust.

That historical parallel is the one Europe's leaders should bear in mind

as they play to the gallery by whitewashing Yasser Arafat's terror

campaign and demonizing Ariel Sharon."

">From CIndy Sweeney, the distinguished Canadian journalist, the following

piece from the WSJ Europe is especially thought-provoking on the Memorial

Day for the Holocaust.

As it notes, the efforts by misguided pc-types (not by any means the

majority, I hope), plus misguided and badly informed supporters of the

Palestinians --- or just, in some instances, the usual Jew-haters --- to

equate Israel or Zionism with Nazism is a disgusting absurdity. It not only

fails to further the cause that those who repeat the slogan hope to see

flourish --- leaving aside the Jew-haters (and racist Jew-hating, absent

traditionally in Islam, is rife in large parts of the Middle East now) ---

but underscores the irrationality and paranoid fantasies of those who say

such things. Fifteen hundred Palestinian deaths in 18 months,most in combat

situations or incurred in efforts to put down riots (the shooters nicely

using teen-age kids as fronts), hardly approaches 12 million dead.

Some students here are surprised when I reject their offerings from sites

that use such slogans. A few are even surprised that . . . well, I won't

deal with stuff taken from neo-Nazi sites. After all, if it's sufficiently

Jew-hating or Israel-hating, that ought to be enough in their eyes to get

attention, no?

Fortunately, this sort of thing doesn't happen much in this country compared

to Europe. Nor, oppositely, is there the groundswell of rising anti-Muslim

sentiment here that exists in Europe --- some of it just a backlash to

growing violent crime among young alienated Muslim men, but much of it far

worse and racist. And when enraged young Muslims in France and elsewhere

start throwing firebombs at Jewish sites or attacking elderly Jewish

couples, they are letting loose furies that could well end up engulfing

them."

*sigh*....

Edited August 26, 2004 by Erikl

[bathory]

i for the most part agree with allot of what Erikl is saying (now before people go jumping to conclusions, run whatever it is you think i might agree with by me so i can tell you whether or not it is something i agree with:P ), it just bugs me that he would bring up the Coalition in Iraq, of course bad stuff has happened its a war, noone is denying the bad stuff (i personally think allot of good has come from it too, but thats an arguement for another day), I just don't think he's in a position to be critical of a small occurance (in the sense not many are involved) when similar small occurances occur within the IDF. I treat the Prisoner abuse and shooting of palestinian children the same, both shocking abuses, he pretends as though the shooting of palestinian children was justified whilst condemning the abuse in Iraq, not on.

Oh and i also disagree with the notion of an Israeli genocide of Palestinians (i'm not saying there are people in Israel who probably support it) i just think that its not a systemic thing

Edited August 26, 2004 by bathory

[Erikl]

it just bugs me that he would bring up the Coalition in Iraq, of course bad stuff has happened its a war, noone is denying the bad stuff (i personally think allot of good has come from it too, but thats an arguement for another day)

I agree with you bathory, I said coalition forces, but what I really meant was to expose European hypocricy when treating Israel. I agree with the reasons for the war in Iraq, as you saw in many other posts of mine. It's just too disgusting what happening in Europe these days. The hypocricy is so high there... god, Europe haven't changed a bit sense 1933 - still believe themselves to be the center of morality, to be the enlightened people of this planet, when in fact they have commited so much crime that even the greatest mathemathician will lose count. I don't have problem with European in personal - both of my parents were born and raised in Europe, and were very distant from their Jewish roots (my mother came from a socialist family, and my father almost married a russian girl in the USSR).

I do have a problem with Eurocentricity. The thought by so many Europeans that they are the center of this world. The arrogance of being able to lecture to other people when the most horrible crimes in recorded human history have occured on European soil.

I do not agree with you however about the IDF delibertly shooting Palestinian children.

First of all, those "childrens" (age 13-18 usually) carry AK74/M16/explosive-belt. Secondly, the fact that Palestinian terrorists hide between civilian population is the sole reason for why some Palestinian civilians (ie - people who do not carry arms) are getting killed.

Third, I wonder what colaition forces would do if Iraqi children who were brainwashed to become martyrs will run with M-16s or explosive-belts toward them. Will they shoot them, or will they just run away/stand still and themselves get killed.

Also, I wonder how would they act if Iraq wouldn't be 5000 miles off Washington or 3000 miles off London - but 20 minutes from those cities.

[Talon]

or just, in some instances, the usual Jew-haters

European hypocricy when treating Israel

here we go again

[Erikl]

or just, in some instances, the usual Jew-haters

European hypocricy when treating Israel

here we go again

Talon, responding with "here we go again" to reality won't make it disappear. You obviously has a prespective about Israel which is not true. period.

You equate Israel to Nazi Germany out in the open and don't understand why it's so sickening.

This doesn't make it ok - it's just shows how serious this problem is in Europe.

Then you are surprised why I say you are biased.

Sheesh...

[alis]

the failure to ensure Israel's compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention has had, and continues to have, far-reaching, detrimental consequences and implications. Israel's violations and grave breaches of the Convention have not only inflicted severe harm on the Palestinian civilian population but have also resulted in decreased security for both Israeli and Palestinian civilians. The failure to ensure Israeli compliance has also directly and negatively impacted the ability of the Israeli Government and the Palestine Liberation Organization to reach a just, comprehensive and lasting peace.

just incase you missed what id found from the UN report earlier Erikl, here it is in bold for you.