Total number of comments: 144 (since 2012-02-09 09:33:30)
Showing comments 144 - 101Page: 2 1
Terrorists claimed the lives of 9 innocents, not Bin-Laden's assassination.
'Yes, as it is a justification for the racism, theft and the inhumanity that is inherently a part of the zionist ideology.'
Zionism is an ideology that desires a homeland for the Jewish people - that is all.
'So then you would have no problem with Gazans firing rockets to try to destroy the government offices in S’derot, for example?'
If government/military officials in Sderot would be plotting attacks against Gazan civilians, then a Gazan preemptive strike would make sense. In our reality, however:
1. Israel doesn't target Gazan civilians
2. Fire from Gaza is aimed at civilians, not government or military installations (not that that would be OK)
'‘rockets’ coming from gaza doesn’t mean there’s been any kind of evidence or trial to determine the people massacred by israel in the drone attack last week were even related to that incident.'
In a state of conflict, it is often impractical to arrest people in territories controlled by a hostile combatant. In such a case, neutralizing the threat against one's own civilians by striking the attackers is reasonable and lawful.
"Nurit Peled Elhanan has done the study, Izik, so I’m afraid I can’t accept your answer"
Peled-Elhanan provides factually correct examples, but intentionally distorts them to suit her agenda. Yes, Israeli books are naturally pro-Israel, placing more emphasis on Israeli, Jewish and Zionist history than Palestinian history or suffering. Does this constitute education for racism? Do the Israeli books portray Palestinians as dehumanized monsters, as savages? I don't think so. Like previously said, the books are accessible for anyone to read.
'That’s good. Too bad most of your fellow israelis can’t say the same.'
Most Israelis I know don't harbor hate towards anyone.
'So what. It still uses them.'
When it does, it's in violation of Israeli law and the offenders should be tried. You may argue that this happens less than it should, but Israeli policy is proactively against the use of human shields.
'It wants to destroy the Palestinian nation. '
I don't think Israel wants to destroy the Palestinian nation. Why do you think that?
'Yes it does. It’s animating ideology of zionism is racist to the core; in principle and in practice.'
Zionism is an ideology that states that the Jewish nationality should have a homeland. Similar to national movements, not excluding the Palestinian one. There is nothing racist about this ideology.
"Lucky you. Many of your countrymen are in a different boat."
The public school system definitely does not preach hate.
"Oh, yes! Countless Israeli violations of this law even, once, led to a couple of suspended sentences, I believe."
Not sure what you mean by 'countless', but I'm not familiar with information that suggests that Israel somehow uses human shields as a sanctioned military strategy.
'Considering that “Israel” exists on the ruins of a definitively destroyed, ethnically-cleansed country, you can see why many are nervous about, for example, this:'
What country did Israel destroy? The Palestinian community was offered one in the 1947 partition plan, but eventually decided against forming a country and for starting a war.
'“Israel” is racism'"
No. It isn't. Not sure what that even means.
"Teaching children to hate."
I wasn't taught to hate, and I don't hate anyone.
"Using human shields"
Israel outlaws the use of human shields.
"Wanting to destroy a country."
I am not aware of any country that Israel wants destroyed.
Israel does not promote racism.
According to Israeli media, the two killed were members of of a terrorist organization and were planning an attack in Israel.
The attack is a good example of how Israel does indeed take a lot of care in avoiding civilian deaths.
Are you referring to the incident where militants ambushed Israeli soldiers on the Egyptian border - killing one and suffering three casualties? How can you characterize this incident as Israeli aggression?
link to bbc.co.uk
"Imagine what Israeli state schools teach Jews about Palestinians and the other people of the Levant."
The books are available, you can see for yourself. In any event, there is no teaching of hate against Palestinians or any other people, naturally.
"Many of them also have military gadgets to play with."
I grew up in Israel. What "military gadgets" are you referring to?
Are you suggesting that Israel restricts Palestinian movements between cities during Yom-Kippur because of a demonic religious motivation? That's ridiculous.
"Isn’t this wrong in a pluralist democracy? If Palestinians live in Netanya or beside PZ should they have to stay in for Yom Kippur?"
They don't have to stay in, Arab, Jews and Christians. can do whatever they want on Yom Kippur.
Well. Of course. Mossad. How come I didn't think of it sooner?
"Izik is either ignorant or a moron or a simple hasbara liar."
You seem incapable of having a civil debate.
Since 1937, Zionists aspired to establish a two-state solution as proposed by the peel commission. This idea was rejected by Palestinian leadership.
"You are a liar and an apologist for terrorism, Izik. Shame on you."
You are projecting.
"Israel regularly targets civilians and civilian infrastructure."
False. Israel does not target civilians.
Israel does not target civilians, and those who do are tried and brought to justice.
"I have merely pointed out that it has been tit for tat since day one, which began when Zionists arrived to acquire what did not belong to them. "
And what I said - is that there is no "tit for tat" when it comes to civilians. Civilians should never be part of a military/violent strategy. You seem to accept that targeting civilians is somehow OK or understandable.
As for your "tit for tat" claim. Let's put it into the test. Let's go back to the 1929 Hebron Massacre. What's the justification for the murder of 67 Jews?
link to en.wikipedia.org
"What else happened in 1955-6 Izik? What happened in 1948? Why did Arabs revolt and riot in the 1930s, in 1929, in 1919-20 etc. Israel always operates in a vacuum of innocence for you. "
Is there ever a justification for attacking civilians? You seem to suggest that in some cases - attacking civilians is OK, or understandable. For me, it is always a form of evil - regardless of the perpetrator.
"Attacks on civilians began only after the Ibrahimi mosque massacre by Baruch Goldstein."
An easily refutable falsification:
1970 - link to en.wikipedia.org - 9 children murdered
1971 - link to en.wikipedia.org
1956 - link to en.wikipedia.org - Eilat bus ambush
That's the tip of the iceberg. Just Google "list of terror attacks in Israel" for the full details.
Palestinian terror existed before and after 1948 - totally unrelated to Baruch Goldstein. In event, suicide attacks also occurred years before Goldstein's attack, while the first "proper" suicide bombing occurred in April 16'th 1993, about a year before the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, so your assertion is false.
Citation: link to en.wikipedia.org
Walid - if Israel had been "hunting down" Palestinians, don't you think the death toll would be far higher than 15,000 over a period of 63 years, a figure which includes combatant deaths as well. This is a far smaller death toll than most national conflicts in the history of the 20'th century.
Assad has killed far more of his own - yet no one is considering that he's a Nazi. The death toll of the Syrian uprising is 19,000 in a period of just a year and half.
What is exactly a Zionist "pathology"? You seem to be projecting.
And no one's mocking Corrie's death. It was a terrible accident and tragedy. But no one assassinated her.
All these holocaust comparisons are vulgar - nothing here is similar. The Palestinians aren't being killed in the millions - they aren't being killed or targeted.
How is it that Syria's murder of its civilians, by far a more brutal repression and murder of the Syrian people - does not get the "holocaust treatment"? You guys seem eager to depict the Jews living in Israel as the new Nazis, that's warped.
"subsequently became the subject of a massive Zionist PR campaign".
The story of Anne Frank isn't a "Zionist PR campaign" - it's a story about a human being, who happened to be Jewish. It has nothing to do with the "Zionists".
"She was but one person out of 6 million and her death from typhus was less dramatic than what most concentration camp Jews experienced."
Walid, should Anne Frank's relatives apologize for not having a more "dramatic death"?! What kind of twisted person puts grades on the deaths of innocent people?
You guys are warped.
How can you compare the death of Anne Frank, who was hunted down like an animal for belonging to an "inferior and dangerous race" to the accidental death of Rachel Corrie?
The founding fathers of Zionism were secular, non-religious people. Zionist "claims" were made in the light of the failure to assimilate and the need for an independent state, a point made all the more strong by the holocaust.
"I’m glad you agree with how revolting Zionists are."
So all Zionists are "revolting", are they?
You're nothing but a racist yourself.
"If you’re not involved in academic life or the Holocaust museum industrial complex you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel."
Somehow, I get the feeling you'd like the song if its performers weren't Jewish Israelis.
Iran has been making direct threats against Israel and the west. I regard their threats very seriously.
I wonder whether your friends also believe that Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah are "non-oppressive". It would show once and for all that they are not fighting for human rights, but rather, against them.
"then walid says, he doesn’t support sharia (walid, you can’t fall for these traps)"
LOL. Even a superficial knowledge of Hezbollah should introduce you to the fact that they wish to impose a religious, Islamic regime. Do you not find the persecution of gays, notion of dhimihood and other backward religious elements, a negative thing?
It seems that you lack a moral spine.
From the Hezbollah charter (the 1985 open letter)
"Allah has also made it intolerable for Muslims to participate in an unjust
regime, unjust for you and for us, in a regime which is not predicated upon the
prescriptions (ahkam) of religion and upon the basis of the Law (the Shari’a) as laid
down by Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets.
Yet, you did not provide a material response. Why do you side with all the primitive forces, just on their basis of being "anti-Imperialist"? You despise Mubarrek, but adore Assad. You admire Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, although all of these forces advocate a very oppressive religious school of thought.
There is definitely something backward about supporting those who enforce Shari'a law and use suicide bombers and rockets to murder civilians.
You don't need to support Israel, but your so-called struggle for Human rights would have far more credibility if you condemned religious oppression in Muslim countries as you do settler violence against Palestinians.
This Nasrallah you admire so much is considered a terrorist by the west, and supports enforcing Shar'ia on his own people.
I have no qualms with you supporting Iran, Hamas, Assad, Hezbollah, Moscow and any force that presents itself as 'anti-Imperialist'. What's devious here is your adoption of "rights speech". You use a vocabulary of justice and rights, but you end up aligning yourself with the most backward forces in this world.
"You just don’t like Jews, do you?"
This is a ridiculously juvenile spin.
You didn't link to any specific quote, but whatever they may be, let me save you some time:
I strongly oppose Hamas, and I think Cast-Lead was necessary in order to protect our citizens in the south. I don't believe in negotiations with Hamas, but I do believe with negotiations with Fatah. I support a two-state solution based on the 67' borders, with East-Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital and joint control over the holy sites. I oppose the right of return, but support some form of compensation. I believe in resolving this conflict, not prolonging it. I oppose the settlements, and I believe in equal rights for all men. Anything you quote me saying will support the above opinions.
"we are operating in an info battlefield where the opponent spends millions in online advocacy for agents who do not reveal themselves as agents."
As an Israeli who is somewhat familiar with the details, the above statement is paranoid. I don't think the Israeli government knows or cares about MW.
"Don’t applaud too hard – he’s a Zio-supremacist."
I do not. Not sure what that means, really.
"He believes in Israel as a religion-supremacist Jewish state"
Being as I am an atheist who firms believes in the separation of religion and state, that is a false statement.
I dare gamble that what you consider a "moderate Israeli" is a person who shares your exact opinions.
Would you consider me, a Zionist Meretz voter, two-stater, a moderate? In Israel, I am pretty far on the left. What am I to you?
In any event, I do not understand your assault on wiseman. The Iranian regime is indeed oppressive. That does not affect any of your claims against Israel, so why are you so against the idea of harsh criticism against Iran?
Annie, you are right. It was Danaa who suggested this, not you. I apologize for the misrepresentation:
link to mondoweiss.net
These people seem to deny the existence of anything they deem unacceptable, such as a moderate Israeli or an anti-Mullah Iranian. Annie once suggested that I am an anglo immigrant to Israel, and refused to budge when I corrected her to my identity - a native Israel.
These guy aren't very tolerant.
I would not regard two stories about IDF violence as "balancing one another". They both reflect negatively on the army.
What should I spare you from, the truth?
link to ynet.co.il
'In all likelihood: "Gantz will discharge Eisner"'
Do you have examples of armies behaving in the same way in similar events?
But they didn't.
Instead, they elected to suspend Eisner and most likely he will be discharged from the army.
You have lost all credibility. First go to Syria and protest against the daily massacres against his people. Then we'll talk.
I strongly disagree with their decision, but I hope they will at least contribute to society through civil service.
"Yedioth Ahronoth also published an apology"
Noam's link points to a 2002 commentary in the seventh eye, an Israeli media watchdog. The link is not related to the current 2012 Tibi incident. Sloppy error on Noam's behalf.
"“I admit I was wrong. We owe an apology to [MK] Tibi.”"
He did say that. However, I have received no reasonable clarification for the following in Tibi's speech: "Those who the occupiers wants to be labeled as 'terrorists', while there is nothing greater than those who died for their country".
"for about 5 years now"
Let's pray there won't be another suicide bombing for another 1000 years. It is truly a heinous thing.
"Is that fair to call Palestinians armed resistance to illegal occupation as “violence?”
I think it's pretty fair to refer to as suicide bombings against civilian targets as violence.
'Israel’s Law of Return allows people descended from Jewish families to gain Israeli citizenship providing they haven’t converted (I think).'
Wrong. The law applies to anyone who is born to Jewish ancestry or converts to Judaism.
'But there is no such thing as a ‘Jewish’ nationality. Just like there is no such thing as a Muslim nationality or a Christian nationality.'
There definitely is a Jewish nationality and Zionism is a manifestation of it. It was formed as a result of the failure to integrate Jews into their host societies and their ongoing persecution.
'What does Jewish nationalism or Jewish nationality mean for the 20% of Israel that is ARAB?'
Israel is a Democratic state that allows its citizens to the right to fully express themselves and preserve their cultural identity. Arabs in Israel should have (and indeed do) the same rights as any Jew.
But let me ask you this. There are many countries in the world who are not Democratic and DO have an exclusivist religious denomination which by-law discriminate against other religions minorities. Even the new Palestinian state will be an officially Muslim state with Shar'ia as a source for legistlation. Is that OK by you? Is it OK that Saudi-Arabia doesn't allow Jewish/Christian religious ceremonies to take place on its ground? How about Iran?
Why do you choose to single out Israel as allegedly suffering from "discrimination", but clearly ignore actual instances of religious discrimination?
Does Palestine have the right to exist as a religious Muslim state, as stated by its constitution?
Article 4. From the Palestinian constitution:
Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained.
The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be the main source of legislation.
Arabic shall be the official language.
Does Saudi-Arabia have the right to exist as a theocratic Muslim state? Does Iran?
All of this doesn't matter anyway. The definition of Israel as a Jewish state is a national definition, not a religious one. It's just like France is the home of the French nationality and Germany is the home of the German nationality.
Trying to go through a heavily guarded border seems like an insanely irresponsible thing to do.
'Would one have been a “hypocritical opportunist” to lead marches against those quotas while still attending one of those schools? Only an idiot would think so.'
A very poor comparison. He's not leading a campaign for the integration of Palestinians in Israeli universities. He's trying to get TAU boycotted and eventually destroy it. You'd have to be a pretty amoral person to try and hold the stick at both ends like he's doing.
The "oppressed" Barghouti is living in Ramallah. He could have chosen to study at Beir-Zeit university in Ramallah. Instead, he chose to study in Tel-Aviv. This doesn't add up.
Perhaps he is just a hypocritical opportunist?
Still, isn't that at odds with the call to boycott TAU?
Doesn't Omar Barghouti attend Tel-Aviv university?
How does that compute with his call for boycotting Israeli universities?
"That, pudnazi, is the racism."
Not sure whether referring to a person as a "Nazi" is a civil form of debate.
"You know, Izik, I could draw a perfect picture of you with a kvetch-a-sketch."
Let me guess - it involves me having a big nose and a dollar sign instead of pupils. :)
Why am I being moderated? Don't like what I'm saying?
"Izik is so deeply and fanatically racist"
It's always mature and constructive to start a response with a baseless ad-hominem attack. It seems to me that I am not the one afflicted with stigmatization of an entire people.
"that he thinks that when Israeli Jews say they will follow the law and apply it fairly towards Arabs, that THAT is exemplary."
Nope. Never said that. I don't think it's "exemplary". Why do you lie about my views?
Annie said that the attackers have impunity and suggested that previous attacks were also ignored - she did not provide references.
I, on the other hand, provided references about previous attacks and the police response to them as well as the police response to this attack.
She provided a wrong statement - I contradicted. That's it.
Yes, the police screwed up, just like it screws up on many occasions, regardless of the victims being Arab. On the other hand, this particular screwup prompted a lot of media publicity which eventually forced the chief of police into action.
No. That's not the idea.
The hooligans are just being who they are - dimwitted thugs. Just like any dimwitted football hooligan in the world.
The police frequently arrests people charged with violence (towards Arabs or Jews), as evident by the links I've provided. Can you empirically show that violence towards Arabs is ignored by the police?
Just fresh from three hours ago: Israeli Chief of police says - "Hooligans will be located and put on trial"
link to mako.co.il
Being as no one was hospitalized, I am not sure whether the description of the hooligans "beating the crap out of people" is an accurate one. Regardless, your description of the Beitar fans being immune to arrest is inaccurate, to say the least:
link to ynet.co.il - Three Beitar fans are arrested after assaulting two Arab maintenance workers.
link to forum.muonline.co.il - Beitar fans are arrested after throwing stones at the bus Sakhnin team bus.
It really takes a pretty simple Google search to see that Beitar fans are arrested regularly and that the police considers them a threat, in the same manner that European police forces consider their own football hooligans a threat.
Everyone across the board condemned their latest hooliganism, and the police is investigating, which will probably lead to arrests, as it has before.
Can you empirically prove that football hooliganism towards Arabs in Israel receives less attention compared to football hooliganism in Europe?
"It’s called the Eved Ki Yimloch (the slave shall rule) syndrom and an inevitable product of the “Jewish State” and the indoctrination of ethnic nazionalism and supremacy. "
Singling out Jewish soccer hooliganism as a product of "nazionalism and supremacy" is a bit strange, being as this sort of hooliganism exists in almost every country in the world. In the UK, for example, the hooligans are far more racist and far more violent. But you wouldn't say the UK is a "nazi and supremacist" state on accord of a few hooligans, would you?
These guys are hooligans and racists.
There is no difference between these thugs and any other football thus in Europe.
Relating to Syria:
Do you support BDS on Syria?
Do you support sanctions against Syria?
Do you demonstrate against Syria?
Does the MW community write about Syria?
"[The conflict in Syria] for the most part, [is] a year old."
What difference does it make? We are arguing about the relative severity of Israel's actions compared to other countries. I think we both agree that the events in Syria are far more aggressive and deadly than the situation in the territories, and the breaches of human rights there are far more extensive.
"he wind is on our backs izz, we will not be distracted"
I didn't ask why you're distracted. I asked a simple question:
Why do you falsely portray Israel's as the world's greatest human rights violators, when there are clearly far worse violators?
But isn't Gilad's argument against the Palestinians the exact same argument you have against the "lying Zionists"?
Why is it "Nazi" for Gilad to suggest that Palestinians systematically lie, but it's OK for you to do the exact same thing for "Zionists"? Could it be hypocrisy?
Annie, objectively speaking, the violations occurring in Israel are in order of magnitudes less severe than what's going on in Egypt, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, China, Russia and other countries. Yet Israel is the focus of so many "leftists". Why is that a single Palestinian wounded in a demonstration receives so much more attention than the slaughter, rape and abuse of 9000 in Syria.
Seriously, I would like to get a straight answer.
Let's start with you.
Do you support Israel's right to exist as a home for the Jewish people? Do you support BDS? Do you support ROR? Do you demonize Zionists? Do you think Israel controls the US through shady "Lobbies"?
"Mondo is about saving Israel from its own demons."
LOL. Most of the commentators here expressed a desire to see Israel destroyed. How is that considered "saving" Israel?
"Gilad G’s comments reflect the Zionists’ imperative to always have a wartime situation."
That's only in your head.
"Israel is run by and for Ashkenazis"
I've no idea. I didn't check the DNA or roots of Israeli politicians. Who cares?
"Remember these are the people who keep Ethiopian Jews out of their schools"
Uh? No one keeps the Ethiopians out of their schools.
"who search for the “Jewish” gene by testing white Europeans, whose native Jews were called “Schwarze Jews by American settlers, etc.
You are seriously projecting.
How do you know the soldier is "Ashkenazi"? And who cares if he is? Most people in Israel are "mixed" anyway.
Before we continue.
Do you support the targeting of civilians with rockets or suicide bombings against civilians?
'Do you really believe all the chattering about “security for the south”?'
'Did you believe the chattering about “security for the north”?'
The rockets have been falling on Israeli civilians for 12 years. They were fired before the withdrawal, after the withdrawal, after Hamas was elected and after Hamas committed a bloody, violent coup against Fatah. And they will continue to fall, because the people who are firing them would rather kill Israeli civilians rather than tend to the boring job of building a state.
"To drive the Palestinians out of their minds in frustration using whatever they have at their disposal, even terrorism. Then the ‘peace loving’ state of Israel can say look, they’re savages. It’s typical of ABUSERS."
That doesn't make any sense. Why would Israel want to provoke Palestinians into terrorism which claims the lives of Israelis?
"Of course you are. You were probably brainwashed from a young age into your twisted ideology, so are confounded when the truth is revealed."
Yes. I was brainwashed to think that volunteering at hospitals is a "good thing".
"If it furthers the evil goal of the Zionist state"
Well... I am really at a loss for words. If you think volunteering with old people, troubled youth or the red cross is "evil", then you are truly lost.
"So she should help prop up an evil state?"
So volunteering with youth or at a hospital is now considered "propping up" an evil state?
If she has such a moral issue with the "occupation", she can request a posting that doesn't relate to it. For example, she can serve in the "home front" corps, dealing with civil defense procedures, or join the education corps and help troubled youth with their army experience. There are plenty of opportunities for her.
I think she took the easy way out.
Like Oleg said, in Israel's individualistic society, she will suffer little grief from society for not serving.
'Izik, I think it is peculiar to Israel to view a refusal to serve in the military as “rejection of the society”.'
Rejecting army service isn't necessarily rejecting from society. In Gur's case, I suspect that her decision not to join the army isn't purely politically motivated and also has personal motivations.
"How does state of Israel determine who has the duty to serve? Officially declared religion?"
Israeli citizens have a duty to serve, with the Arabs exempted. Some Beduins and Duruz serve in the army, while non-Arab, non-Jewish citizens also serve in the army. Jewish ultra-orthodox men and females are exempt from military service. Men serve 3 years, women 2.
"She reminds me of Sophie Scholl"
Scholl was executed for distributing anti-war leaflets.
Gur will find a nice apartment in Tel-Aviv and live her life comfortably.
"Connecting with one’s community thru participation in occupation and domination of palestinians gives one a more balanced and holistic outlook on life?"
I was referring to civil-service. It should be possible for her, should she choose to refuse military service, to perform civil service (e.g., volunteer in a hospital, volunteer in a boarding school, etc'). I hope that she chooses to contribute instead of isolate herself.
It is not uncommon for people who feel alienated from society to reject it. I hope that she will choose to perform civil service. Connecting with one's community gives one a more balanced and holistic outlook on life.
It seems to me that Noam is projecting her own personal demons on the IDF and Israeli society.
I sincerely wish her all the best and for her to find internal happiness.
"And the Palestinians in Gaza are the safest to take pot-shot missile attacks at to test the ‘effectiveness’ of this shield"
These "pot-shots" wounded 4 civilians, 1 seriously. And that's after 25 successful Iron Dome interceptions.
According to Islamic Jihad's own admission, all of the killed were terrorists. Many of them were killed after/before launching rockets into Israeli towns. They are not to be mourned from my perspective.
At the time of writing that post, indeed all the casualties were Islamic Jihad members. Unfortunately, that changed later.
Perhaps I should be accused of lacking the ability to predict the future, but I certainly did not lie.
Annie, that is a very interesting and creative op-ed, but fails to address the substance matter: Attacking Israeli cities with rockets is terrorism.
BTW, who is the moderator? Why do some of my posts fail to get through?
Peace is attainable, Pamela, but only if we allow ourselves to see past blind rage.
In any event, firing rockets at Israeli cities is hardly conducive to peace.
The death of the child is terrible. Trust me when I say that no one in Israel is happy that a child was killed. My condolences.
Waleed, there is anger on both sides.
Revenge will not improve the life of people in Gaza or the West-Bank. Only peace will.
"nah. israel is making allegations. the iof lie all the time. where’s the proof? no trial or jury, just the word of a criminal apartheid gov."
What do you think Israel lied about this time?
1. If it's identity of the casualties - Islamic Jihad has itself admitted that the dead were its own members
2. If it's the fact that missiles are being fired into Israeli cities - this has been corroborated by all news agencies.
I have no knowledge of the specific instance you are referring to, can you provide a reference? Also, I am not familiar with the term "Team Israel", what does it refer to?
Regardless, any death of an innocent is a horrible thing.
"israel is still on a killing spree at the moment. "
Israel is targeting those who commit war crimes by firing at its cities. What problem does that pose?
"I believe that we can look for many other peaceful ways, don’t you ?"
I completely agree, continued violence is a waste of human life.
How do you suggest the sides move forward?
Annie, do you or do you not support the direct targeting of civilians?
Do you agree that a country has a right to defend its own civilians?
Do you support the targeting of civilians by Islamic Jihad and other organizations?
"Personally, I would be in favor of some 'price tags'….say 2 Israelis for every Palestine you kill. ..primitive meets primitive."
Why a normative person would advocate more death is beyond me.
I favor an end to all hostilities. It is really that simple.
"it is you who justify the murder of civilians."
No. Murdering civilians is a crime.
Why do you lie about my views?
"The real terror is the occupation and the colonization of Palestinian land."
There is not a single IDF soldier or Israeli civilian on Gazan soil.
"It doesn’t matter whether Palestinians use violence or non-violence and everything in between."
Are you justifying the intentional killing of Israeli civilians?
"The Israeli policy of disproportionate use of excessive force in retaliation "
It doesn't get more proportionate than attacking those who are personally responsible for firing rockets into your towns.
What would you consider a proportionate response?
"The family of the innocents killed in the crossfire and considered ‘collateral damage’ do not see things that way."
Fortunately, there were no collaterals.
"The names of the dead are aired now: Moatasem, Fayyeq, Shadi, etc. But it does not matter any longer, for what keeps my mind busy now is "Who is next?""
Who's next? The next person who decides to launch a rocket into Israeli towns. The Gazan casualties were militants.
Waleed, if it's calm you want, you will have it next Tuesday - simply relinquish the way of terror. Until you do that, Israel will defend itself.
The PRC secretary paid the price for his role in the Eilat attack which claimed the lives of 8 Israelis.
link to en.wikipedia.org
In response to killing a terrorist, Gazan terrorists began bombarding Israeli towns, specifically targeting civilians, myself included. In dealing with terrorism, the response should be swift and harsh.
"You really are a sadist."
Ad-hominem. Fred was arguing the lethality of rubber bullets and you accuse him of "sadism" and "fascism". Check yourselves.
You originally presented a quote, claiming it was taken from the Shamgar report - which you now admit is a lie. The quote you now provide cites settlers nutcases providing their interpretation of an unknown, uncited part of the Shamgar report.
"Why don’t you provide a link to the whole report of the Commission"
Na uh. That's not how it works. Let's say I accuse you of pedophilia. It's not up to you to disprove it, but rather my obligation to provide sufficient evidence incriminating.
You have not provided an ounce of incriminating evidence.
"So it can’t be used to disprove independent reports about the contents of the other chapters of the full commission report."
It is up to you to provide a complete citation for what seems to be an outright lie. Can you provide it? I don't think so.
“The investigation verifies the claim of the residents of Kiryat Arba that Goldstein acted to forestall a massacre.”
I call bullshit. No such thing was written in the Shamgar report.
link to mfa.gov.il
"the big surprise is that he hasn’t already started a world war by sending-in Mossad agents with stolen US passports to assassinate Ahmadinejad."
No. It's not a big surprise.
'Israel promotes and conducts itself as a religion-supremacist “Jewish state”.'
No, that is a lie.
"Jewish is not a nationality. It is a religious designation"
I am an atheist. A Jewish atheist. The founders of Israel were non-religious as well. Zionism was founded by Herzel (non-religious) to provide a homeland for Jews and protect them from persecution.
"In a religion-supremacist “Jewish state”, non-Jewish citizens cannot be equal."
Israel is a secular country.
Come and see for yourself.
Yes. Deep. Jerusalem and Israel appear in almost every religious and traditional Jewish text.
"Why would anyone accept the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish State?"
Countries are formed around a common nationality. Israel is the home of the Jewish nationality.
"That means they relinquish their RoR"
Yes. RoR is not an option. Compensations are.
"and accept second-class status for the Palestinians in Israel."
Israeli Arabs are not second class citizens. They are equal citizens.
"Israel’s historical narrative is bullshit."
Well, I guess that settles it then. I'm off to pack my bags.
"They got their state in 1948. It wasn’t good enough for them
Enjoy it while it lasts."
Thanks, I intend to do so.
"And look at all the trouble it has brought."
I fail to see how Massada or Israeli archaeology have anything to do with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
"Jews didn’t live en masse in Israel"
The deep Jewish connection with Israel is a fact.
"Ashkenazi Jews should really go on discovery trips to places like Lvov and Vilnius to connect with their heritage."
Unfortunately, the Lvov, Vilnius and European chapters of Jewish history did end up so well for Jews.
"Zionist history is a fairytale."
Zionism is about having a state of the Jewish people. That's it. Surely you'd agree that Jews are entitled to their own state?
In any event, the argument is moot. Jews in Israel are not going anywhere. You should work towards peace. Fighting for Israel's destruction will only result in further misery for the people who are living in this tiny stretch of land.
"the threat is that Israel would lose it’s ovwewhelming nuclear wepoans advantage"
No. The threat is that Iran, a country that refers to Israel as a "cancerous tumor that must be removed" will have Nuclear ICBM's aimed at Israel. Not good.
"Was she a plant?"
Yes. Monica Lewinsky was a Mossad plant. And Linda Tripp is her operator. Are you guys aware of the sheer lunacy in these theories?
"AIPAC and Likud Israel depend on this conflation to milk America of its treasure and soldiers"
To suggest that Israel "milks" America, the world's strongest super-power, of its "resources" is ludicrous, and is suspiciously similar to anti-semitic lore about regarding Jewish "shadow governments" ruling countries or the world. From the protocols:
'6. In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of America or China or Japan'
In short, it's the same anti-semitic canard dating back over a 100 years ago.
Funny how people think "Zionists", which is a thinly disguised euphemism for Jews, have all these super-powerful secret abilities to control the US' foreign policy through secret "lobbies". Anyone with with a minimal every day political knowhow knows that Netanyahu can barely pass a law raising taxes on vegetables. He is weak and nervous, hardly the kind of person who can control the world's strongest superpower with his secret Jew powers. The connection of these stories to standard anti-semitic mythology cannot be denied.
Israelis are flocking to see Separation. I'm going to see it today. I am already aware of the great cinema industry Iran has. It just goes to show that Iranians and Israelis are ultimately quite similar. It's a shame the Iranian citizens are being held hostage by its oppressive regime.
Congratulations for the Iranians on receiving the Oscar, although "Footnote" is also a movie I'd recommend anyone to see. Footnote was the Israeli entry into the Oscars. :)
link to trailers.apple.com
Where is the evidence for the claim that "Torah Hamelech" is "mandatory reading" in the IDF? You completely ignored that part.
Let me save you some time - there is none. You either made an honest mistake, or propagated a vicious lie.
I'll respond in length later. One claim stood out among others as a particularly nasty lie:
"Or the King’s Torah, which is mandatory reading for the IDF."
The authors of the King's Torah, Ha Rav Lior, has been arrested for authoring his inciteful and disgusting book. The claim that his book is "mandatory reading for the IDF" is complete and utter nonsense, and a sad attempt at demonization.
If what you're saying is true - I challenge you to present evidence. In what units is the reading mandatory? In what part of the training is it mandatory? Is there an exam afterwards?
"False again. The talks had already failed by the time the second Intifada had begun."
The 90's terror-wave has nothing to do with the Intifada. When Israel was withdrawing from Palestinian city after city, Hamas and Islamic Jihad launched a deadly terror-wave on the cities of Israel. To wit:
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org - This was especially nasty, when a second suicide bomber exploded when the rescue party came
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org
All of these bombings happened in the midst of the peace process and were carried by Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
"Goldstone did not admit to any flaws in his report and certainly did not identify any."
From the Goldstone apology:
"While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy. ...
Although the Israeli evidence that has emerged since publication of our report doesn’t negate the tragic loss of civilian life, I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes."
He admits that his report did not have evidence that was later on revealed.
"Here’s another horse’s mouth. When the Israeli Supreme Court banned the use of human shields by the IDF (a practice it had been carrying out for some time), Shin Bet appealed the descision on the grounds that the use of human shields was very useful."
The readers should be aware that the procedure in question is called "Nohal Shachen" (neighbour procedure). This procedure is used in anti-terrorism tactics to address a situation where a suspect refuses to get out of his house. A family member or a neighbour would go to his house and ask the suspect to give himself to the security forces. In 2005, the supreme court criminalized the use of this procedure - for good reason. What you wrote about the Shin-Bet is factually wrong, however. The Shin-Bet never appealed to the supreme court on that decision.
"Yes he did sell out on this point, seeing as no investigation actually took place and he gave Isrel credit without seeing any part of that investigation"
There was plenty of investigations whose results were made public. Here's a link (Warning: PDF) to the official document Israel sent to the UN, describing its investigations. I obviously didn't see a Hamas equivalent.
link to mfa.gov.il
"shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that Israel , an organization that praises murderers of civilians, pretends to investigate itself and never finds any wrongdoing on it’s part."
LOL. IDF praises killing of civilians? Come on. Give me one instance where the IDF praised the killing of a civilian, just one. You seem to confuse the IDF with Hamas.
"YouTube is full of examples of the IDF using human shields."
"The IDF were given explicit instructions to kill civilians and target civilian infrastructure."
That is a deceitful lie. The IDF never had orders to kill civilians. To wit, about 50% of the casualties were civilians. Don't you think that the IDF, the 4'th most powerful army in the world, when concentrating all its fire-power on the heavily populated Gaza, would be able to kill more than just 500 civilians? Goldstone himself later retracted the claim that Israel targeted civilians. If the IDF did indeed order troops to kills civilians, where is the evidence? Where are the orders?
"Israel did not put an end to the suicide bombings, Hamas did in 2006."
Of course it did. The fact that Israel essentially tore down the terror infrastructure and claimed the heads of many senior Hamasniks, had nothing to do with it. Again, your claim is false. Hamas tries to carry out attacks inside Israel all the time but is thankfully unsuccessful. Here's an example from just 6 days ago (Warning: Google Translate!)
link to translate.google.com
And from 16 hours ago:
link to translate.google.com
And from late 2011:
link to nrg.co.il
Hamas has never stopped the violence, Israel simply got better at stopping it.
"having fired 7,700 shells into Gaza over the 10 months after it withdrew."
What you are neglecting to mention is that shells fired into Gaza are directed at squads that launch rockets against Israeli towns. Israel does not randomly fire into Gaza.
"as such, the Serbs were armed and able to fight back."
LOL. What are you suggesting then? Should Israel give Hamas some more weapons before going to fight it? You know, to even the odds a bit. :)
"Israel started the war without provocation for political reasons."
Wrong. The background to the Cast Lead is as follows:
In December 18'th, 2008, Hamas announced the termination of the truce, a day prior its official cessation. On December 24 Hamas and other organizations fired over 60 rockets against Ashqelon, Sderot, Netivot, Kiryat-Gat Ofakim and other towns. On December 27 Israel launched its operation.
"Gaza was a massacre without a doubt."
Was Kosovo a massacre as well? Both wars have similar civilian to militant ratio. You can repeat something, but that won't make it true. A massacre is when civilians are directly targeted and killed. This isn't the case.
"Resistance is absolutely necessary. It does not have to take the forms of violence, but resistance must continue until the occupation ends."
By occupation, you mean the 67' occupation, or the 48' "occupation"?
" The tunnel story was a bullshit excuse concocted by Israel to justify an attack on Gaza"
If it was concocted by Israel, then show it to be true. Where's the evidence of a "conspiracy"?
"But because Israel is a lawless society, it is not enforced."
Israel a lawless society? A society in which a former president, one of the most powerful men in the country, is jailed for sexual assault, is not a "lawless" society.
"It is also very revealing that you make such an issue of the Hamas charter while saying nothing of the PLO charter, which is practically the same."
The PLO charter is problematic as well, but certainly does not use the same religious and murderous language as Hamas does.
"You are either insanely deluded or a pathological liar."
Please refrain from this type of attack.
"they launched a coup to overthrow Hamas"
When did Fatah launch a coup? The coup was performed by Hamas, in Gaza, against the PA.
"You love Fatah so much is because they are corrupt sock puppets of Washnington and Tel Aviv and they are prepared to sell out their own population."
I don't love Fatah. Israel has shed a lot of blood at the hand of Fatah terrorists. But Fatah is pragmatic, and does not seem to be dedicated to the ideal of destroying Israel at all costs - which Hamas apparently is. Palestinians need pragmatism, not religious psychos in the form of Hamas.
I'll address the peace-process in a different post, as most of your attributions regarding the peace-process are not on this post:
"No, it’s quite plain. Israel killed Palestinians at a ratio of 100 to 1 during the Gaza massacre."
According to Hamas itself, around 600-700 of the casualties were militants, which puts the ratio of civilian to militant casualties at about 1:1, which is quite good compared to US and NATO operations, especially considering that Hamas intentionally placed its operatives in residential areas:
link to haaretz.com
"Hamas was nurtured by the Israeli government as a counter to the secular PLO:"
That is correct, although "nurture" is not the best adjective to describe early Israel-Hamas relations. Just like the US unwittingly armed Al-Qaeda, so did Israel cooperate with Hamas to combat what at the point was a murderous terrorist organization - the PLO. The tides changed during in the 1990's, in the ensuing peace talks with Israel and Fatah, when Hamas started blowing up buses in city centers to sabotage the talks.
"Wrong. The Goldstone report found no evidence of human shielding carried out by Hamas."
The flaws in the Goldstone report have been numerous, as admitted by Goldstone himself in 2011. On that same op-ed, he complemented Israel for making a serious undertaking of investigating itself and derided Hamas for not doing the same. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that Hamas, an organization that praises murderers of civilians, will not investigate itself. With regards to the use of Hamas of human shields, there is clear evidence of it. Here it is - straight from the horse's mouth:
link to youtube.com:
"Accordingly, Palestinians created a human shield of women and children"
Here are some more accounts of Hamas using civilians as human shields:
link to palwatch.org
Cliff says: "In one such case, the Israeli soldiers responsible were only suspended – a slap on the wrist for such a heinous crime."
You yourself admit that out of the few cases of Israeli soldiers acting out of line, they were prosecuted. You (and me, by the way) are not pleased with the verdict, which included on-probation jail time and demotion. This sent out a clear message to any soldiers that such behavior is not acceptable. In the IDF, the proper behavior is the norm, while improper behavior certainly isn't. How many Hamas fighters were charged by Hamas for "improper" conduct towards civilians? That's right, 0. Why? Because by Hamas ideals, killing civilians isn't "improper", it's norm.
"This is a colonial conflict and Israel can achieve it’s ideological goals of colonizing Palestinian land without comparable levels of bloodshed, precisely because the Palestinian people have long been pacified and defeated."
The war in Gaza wasn't a "colonial" conflict. Israel retreated from Gaza, how can anyone claim that it wants to "colonize" it after it itself demolished its settlements there, nearly risking civil-war in doing so? The Gaza war is the result of 8 long years of rocket fire against Israeli towns, nothing "colonial" about it.
"The violence that Hamas used to carry out (used to, because they have stopped their suicide bombing campaigns for several years now) could just so easily be seen as a drop in the bucket compared to what other terrorist organizations or forThe violence that Hamas used to carry out (used to, because they have stopped their suicide bombing campaigns for several years now) could just so easily be seen as a drop in the bucket compared to what other terrorist organizations or former terrorist organizations have done. mer terrorist organizations have done. "
Hamas continued with the violence, after Israel effectively put a stop to the suicide bombings. Firing rockets into towns is terrorism, and Hamas did just that for 8 years, after Israel had retreated from Gaza.
"You should be concerned by your own actions and not Serbia, or Kosovo, or whomever else you use to whitewash Israeli criminality."
That's not the point. The point is that if you're trying to paint Gaza as a "massacre", you would have to label NATO's operations in Kosovo as a massacre as well, because they have a similar civilian to militant casualty ratio (1:1). But Gaza wasn't a massacre, it was a war, in which Israel took great measures to reduce civilian casualties.
"The rockets killed all of 8 people until the Gaza massacre. In 2 and a half weeks, Israel killed 1400+ Palestinians in Gaza – mostly civilians and among them, mostly women and children."
First, it's 16, not 8, but that's besides the point. How many Israelis have to be murdered by Hamas until the government decides to do something about? 20? 30? 100? When is it enough? Why do deny Israel's right to defend its own civilians?
"There is no difference between a suicide bombing and firing a missile into a crowded street or an apartment complex or at a chicken farm or into a refugee camp."
There's a huge difference. While Hamas tries to kill AS MANY civilians as it can and focuses its resources on doing so, Israel tries to target military targets as accurately as possible and prevent innocent lives from being lost. Of course there's a difference. The Israelis attack direct security threats, and Hamas tries to kill women and children.
"In the past, democratic nations have dealt with groups recognized as terrorist organizations. Their designation as terrorist organizations did not interfere with negotiations if the negotiations were important."
Do you prefer Hamas over Fatah? Why? Because Hamas has a more extreme approach towards Israel?
"The report concludes that Hamas is not going away and has demonstrated it’s willingness to take pragmatic steps towards peace in spite of it’s terrorist actions. "
Does this sound pragmatic to you?
link to haaretz.com
Haniya: ""They (West) want from us to stop resistance and acknowledge Israel but I herewith announce that this will never happen."
"It was only after Israel broke the cease-fire, by killing Palestinian militia in Gaza, that the rocket fire resumed. Israel refused to extend the cease-fire to the West Bank."
The ceasefire ended when Israel attacked a tunnel that Hamas was digging into Israeli territory in order to kidnap a soldier (exactly as they did with Gilad Shalit). I would say that building this tunnel was a violation of the cease-fire. After the Israeli strike, Hamas started launching rockets into Israeli towns. At that point, enough was enough for Israel.
I'll address the accusations of "legalized" torture later, but they are essentially wrong as well. Torture is essentially illegal in Israel except for certain conditions. I'm not sure the same applies for the darling Hamas, who shoot political opponents in the kneecaps. Quite a lovely bunch.
Again, why would you go to great lengths to vindicate the murderous Hamas is beyond me, when you can support the relatively moderate Fatah. Fatah is the only organization that can bring Palestinians some form of Democracy, while Hamas represents the same Taliban-like oppression we've seen taken hold of many unfortunate countrires.
I honestly do not understand your aggression or your attempts to demean me.
"Please name the town (hint: it’s not Tel Aviv or Rehovot)":
link to en.wikipedia.org
"Izik, if you are not anglo, then my horse has wings, and flies straight into the rainbow, just like unicorns do."
LOL. I'm afraid you will have to eat your hat. I assure you, I am not anglo and have no anglo roots. Israelis are exposed to English through TV shows and literature. I guess I acquired my English simply by being exposed to it. I'm honestly flattered that you don't believe me, though my written English is far from perfect or eloquent.
"As I never tire of telling people around here, the average israeli has very little confidence in their written English"
Then I guess I am not your average Israeli. How many Israelis do you know, by the way?
"The father from Poland – OK, that’s interesting. You know that there were very few Polish Jewish immigrants to Israel after 1950 or so, right? But, whatever. "
LOL. Are you serious? My father was actually born in Israel, like my mother. If you're interested in my family story, which I'll be happy to divulge, my
grandfather left Poland some time before WWII and my grandmother left Egypt in 1946, when things got unfriendly for Jews.
"Not that I actually ask for any details since I already know enough"
Amazing. You know my family story just by guessing. What a talent. :)
"we had here a poster, eee was his name – you know him by any chance? he too claimed to be an Israeli – born and bred, who served in the IDF, etc. Alas, he has absconded somewhere – say Hi if you run across him (not that we miss him much)."
Sorry. Don't know the guy or his pseudonym. Israel is a small country, but large enough so personal relationships don't amount to a full-mesh network. :)
"Alas, you also didn’t get my original point, I fear. The cover story of support for 2ss on 1967 borders + left-wingism IS built into version 1.0."
Well, what can I say. If you know everything about me and my opinions and think that my opinions are "stupid" or "cooked", then there isn't much chance for dialog. By the way, a dialog doesn't necessarily have to lead to me convincing you or the other way around - fat chance of that happening. But a dialog CAN dispel some of the visibly stereotypes you have about Israelis. Without even knowing me, you've already decided that I am xenophobic, Arab hating, Anglo and from Ashdod, while none of these assumption are accurate. Perhaps you shouldn't judge me according to my national categorization, but according to who I actually am.
I'm willing to take a chance and dialog, even with people who are inherently hostile towards me, are you willing to do the same?
"Izik, your Hasbara 1.5 is a little stale. You do know they’ve release version 2.0, right? "
Is it typical to accuse people of "Hasbara" when you don't agree with them?
"Has anyone noticed how so many of our new oleh Hasbara volunteers just happen to live in Ashdod (OK, some live as far as Ashkelon) and/or just barely escape a suicide -bomber on their way to the yeshiva? Next, he’ll supply us with the name, date and time of his birth at – why – a bona fide Israeli hospital – perhaps in Rehovot? Givataim? "
Are you referring to me as an Oleh? On what basis? Do you know me? Why do you figure I live in Ashdod? Is it easier to "handle" me by typecasting into some mold that you can fathom?
I was born in Israel and have lived here ever since. My parents are not anglos. My mother is Egyptian and my father is from Poland. I served in the army, and I am not right winged.
As I previously stated, I support a two-state solution, with the Palestinians receiving the West Bank, Gaza and East-Jerusalem, yet in your eyes, I am a "Zionist Hasbara drone", why is that? I don't hate Arabs, I have nothing against Arabs.
I will address everything Cliff wrote, but it will take some time, as I do have to attend a day job. :)
The responsibility of civilian deaths by the hands of the IDF lies primarily with the Hamas, who knowingly and purposefully places civilians in the line of fire. Also, Israel has effective counter-terrorism that has essentially stopped conventional suicide bombings. Israel spends most of its efforts defending its citizens, whereas Hamas has an agenda of endangering their own.
I'm not sure whether this is a valid comparison.
The "Protocols" are an anti-semitic hoax used to incite violence against Jews.
The Hamas Charter, on the other hand, is the official ideological document of Hamas, which also incites violence against Jews.
"Hamas is not even close to as bad as you portray them."
They are exactly as bad as their charter indicates. Putting aside the religious dictatorship they enforce in Gaza, Hamas has a record of the most horrific terror attacks Israel endured. They exploded on buses, discos, parties in an attempt to kill as many Jews as possible. That's about as bad as it gets. After the suicide bombings were eventually thwarted by Israel, they began firing rockets into Israeli towns - in the attempt to kill as many civilians as possible.
"Israel kills 10 times as many children and 5 times as many civilians in general than all the various Palestinian militias/terrorist groups/etc. Those are rough estimates, since they have been true all throughout the time since the 2nd Intifada."
Measuring morality in a conflict through a casualty count is misleading. Unlike Hamas, whose ideology and actions are focused on causing as many civilian deaths as possible, Israel tries to minimize such civilian casualties. In the Gaza War, for example, Hamas cynically used its own civilians as human shields and fired from houses, schools and stored weapons in mosques, all in the attempt to increase the civilian casualties. But even with these explicit attempts, the civilian to militant ratio in the Gaza war, according to Hamas itself, is about 1:1, which compared to the NATO operations in Kosovo or the US operations in Iraq, is a pretty good ratio, which shows that Israel goes to great lengths to protect civilians.
"Most Israeli Jews supported Operation Cast Lead."
Myself included. Hamas fired at my town for 8 years until my government decided to do something about it. Do you think that Israel should have just sat quietly while Hamas bombed its cities?
"there was never a meaningful Israeli peace movement at any time and there will never be one in the future."
Rabin lost his life for Oslo and for withdrawing Israel from every Palestinian city. Barak lost his position after offering Arafat and opportunity to end the conflict. Olmert offered Abu-Mazen 100% of the territories and East-Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital. This is the solution I support as well:
link to memritv.org. There was a peace-camp in Israel, and it will rise again if the Palestinian make the strategic decision of promoting peace.
"You are just another Zionist though"
What does that mean?
"I don’t understand why you put emphasis on Hamas’s actions when it is not colonizing Israeli land for 45+ years with no end in sight."
Terrorism in Israel didn't begin with Hamas and certainly did not begin in 67'. Israel has suffered murderous terrorism straight after the 48' war. I place emphasis on your whitewashing of Hamas because:
1. Hamas has a history and present of terrorism, and it is troubling that you justify their actions
2. The Hamas is the enemy of moderate forces in the region. They are a recognized terrorist organization. Supporting Hamas means that you oppose peace. I think that's a counter-productive approach.
If you want to advance peace and help the moderates in Palestine and Israel, you should forego the narrative that depicts Israel in a monstrous light and portrays terrorists in a sympathetic one.
I don't know what the "MSM" is.
As for killing innocents, America and Europe, for the time being, are the only countries that are siding with the people of Syria.
"And most of us see Hamas in context too"
I can understand criticism of Israel and even support of the relatively moderate Fatah, but I cannot understand people who support Hamas. Hamas has one of the most racist charters. It has been involved in heinous acts of terror, including the bombing of buses and a disco filled with teens. Given your statements, I realize that you truly abhore Israel, but perhaps you should think twice before you ally yourself with self-described terrorists, especially if you want your claims of supporting "human rights" to have any validity.
link to en.wikipedia.org
"generally as the elected representatives of the Palestinians."
Hamas essentially toppled the Democratic Palestinian Authority rule in Gaza through a bloody military coup, which left hundreds of Fatah members dead - many were executed. Again, these are not the guys you want to ally yourself with, Abu-Mazen is.
"Basically, we know what Israel is and what it stands for"
What does it stand for?
"But towards individual Israelis, a healthy dose of suspicion is recommended, at least until we find they are human beings"
So Israelis (that is, Israeli Jews), before proving so, are not considered by you as "human beings"? Do you realize how terrible and racist that statement is?
"Why are you putting censored in quotations? The Palestinian children’s art exhibit WAS censored and it wasn’t censored by Klingons or Rastafarians or nocturnal Hispanic Mormons."
Because I have no knowledge of the story, and after reading a bit about it, your portrayal of it is inaccurate. The organizers of the children's art exhibit had a political agenda in bringing the drawings, and then played innocent when the exhibit was taken down for similar political reasons.
"Darwish was allowed to give her hate speech (which you approve of, seeing as how you have made no comments on the actual content of her views)."
I did not know of Darwish beforehand. Reading her description on Wikipedia, I could not see anything that would amount to hate-mongering on her side. Do you have an example?
"Censorship is preventing someone from even making it to the podium. That is what Zionists do by and large. "
That is one form of censorship, correct. "Zionists", to the best of my knowledge, are not engaged in this act of censorship. You'd have to bring significant empirical evidence to make that case, or at least some anecdotes. Censorship is also shouting-down speakers with whom you disagree - in the same manner that Oren, Olmert and many Israeli speakers are not allowed to speak on US campuses. Preventing them from speaking by disturbing their talks, systematically, does amount to the worst kind of censorship.
So far, I have been subjected to several ad-hominem attacks merely for what people perceive me as. I would say that trying to bully a person into shutting up is also a form censorship.
"What do you think of the 1948 war? The Nakba? Ilan Pappe? The legitimacy of the settlements? The concept of a State’s ‘right to exist’? The Israel Lobby? The morality of Zionism? Etc."
I am a Zionist Israeli/Jew. I belong to the social-Democratic left in Israel. I strongly disagree with politics that demonize Israel and that allow no room for dialog. I mean, if you guys prefer Hamas over Abu-Mazen, a one-state solution instead of negotiations on returning the 67' lines, then I would suggest you do not support peace, but rather the prolonging of the conflict.
On what basis did you unleash this wild ad-hominem attack?
Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad are all terrorist organizations according to the US and Europe. I can list countless acts of heinous terror carried out by these groups. There is nothing "xenophobic" in what I wrote.
"Is Holocaust denial illegal in the US? Nope. Do you think we need to sit through a lecture on how there were no gas chambers?"
No, you don't. But I would also not advocate interrupting a lecture about holocaust denial, regardless of how detestable I think it is. This is the price I am willing to pay for Democracy.
"Of course you’d defend them. Your very first comment on MW was defending the psychotic audience who physically assaulted a group of college students."
Sorry, but you are confusing me with someone else. I certainly do not advocate any violent behavior, not the sort of violence the protesters applied and certainly not the sort of violence that was directed to them in response.
"It’s obvious you wouldn’t mind silencing Palestinian voices, such as the childrens art exhibit censored by Zionists. Yet, you are up in arms after this video? Did the Palestinian solidarity activists go crazy and hit and punch people?"
How is it "obvious"? You don't even know me. I have no knowledge of the children art exhibit "censored" by the "Zionists". In any event, it is very problematic to accuse the "Zionists" of censorship on one hand and actively support the exact same kind of political censorship on the other hand. Free speech isn't an exclusive right reserved for your political allies only. Either you support free speech for all, or you don't support it at all.
"Why didn’t you comment on the video I posted below? StandWithUs activists pepper sprayed JVP members at one of their events."
I haven't seen it. In any event, I have no qualms about condemning violence, regardless of the "camp" it stems from. My morals tend to be absolute - either something is wrong or it isn't.
"Why don’t you tell us who you think is a pro-Palestinian liar, who frequents college campuses, delivering lectures?"
I am not part of the "clique" and I am not active on US campuses - I am an Israeli Jew. There is one particular Muslim leader, Amir Abdel Malik, who is particularly hateful (comparing Israel to the 4'th Reich, supporting Hezbollah and Hamas, which support the annihilation of Jews). He is quite active on US campuses and is allowed to speak freely, although I personally feel that his messages are tantamount to incitement to murder. That been said, as long as the law permits him to speak, I will certainly not try to silence him.
Again, you are advocating the stifling of free speech, this is something I strongly disagree with.
"because only you get to do that? or were you advocating not deciding the students actions were proper or improper?"
I am advocating that any stifling of free speech is improper, and that the protesters should not have interrupted the session.
"You are again assuming, that people like Wafa Sultan, Walid Shoebat, Nonie Darwish, et. al. are people who would be on the list of voices that should be heard."
Who are you to decide who should or shouldn't be heard? If what they are saying is illegal (e.g., incitement to murder), then you should you place a complaint with the police. Otherwise, allow them to be heard and judged. Don't decide for others what is proper or improper.
"The reality is that there are plenty of people who are simply liars for Israel"
Perhaps. There are likely liars for Palestine as well.
"who should be disrupted and mocked. "
Mocked? Go ahead, it's your right to mock anyone. Disrupted? Absolutely not. If they wish to be heard and others wish to hear them, then you have no right to interfere with that right, regardless of how you feel about their politics.
Challenge your opponents in the open market of ideas. If you need to "win" by silencing your opponents, that is a sign of weakness and bullying.
Right. Why debate? There's no point in promoting dialog, challenging your opponent in the open market of ideas.
One of the traits of non-Democratic regimes is the way they extinguish any form of dialog through bullying. These were the exact same tactics of the "protesters".
Comments are closed.