Wed 15 Aug 2007
Industrial Disaster Draws Attention to Bedouin Villages
Posted by Mitchell Plitnick under Israel , Unrecognized Villages , EnvironmentOne of the issues that gets far too little attention within Israel is that of the so-called “unrecognized villages.” These are basically shantytowns where Bedouins who are Israeli citizens live, but because they are not officially recognized municipalities, they get no services, even basic ones in many cases, like water and electricity. The people in these villages represent the lowest stratum of Israeli citizens.
In recent years in the United States, more attention has been paid to the placement of plants and factories which are especially harmful to the environment around them, and which are hazardous to people living near them, near minority and poor neighborhoods. The same thing is at work here in Israel.
The incident, an explosion at the Makhteshim factory in Ramat Hovav near Be’ersheva, has drawn some attention to the serious environmental hazards accompanying Israeli industry. It’s also drawn attention to the plight of the Bedouins in the Negev, at least those in the Wadi Na’am area near Ramat Hovav.
The effect of the explosion on Monday is still not fully known, but although evacuations both of workers and of nearby residents, including the Bedouin, came about fairly quickly, the problem is not incidental. As these reports here, here, and here indicate, pollution of the area was a pretty serious problem even before. The “solution that was arrived at was to establish an army base in Ramat Hovav, not exactly an effective solution.
Unfortunately, as this article alludes to, environmental regulation is weak, despite the presence of a significant environmentalist movement and trend in Israeli society.
The Bedouin nearby have been demanding to be relocated for quite some time. Now, their pleas may get more of a hearing. It is not a matter of simply picking up and moving, as both economics and the difficulty for Arabs of relocation within Israel, particularly these days and due both to prejudice and to government regulations, means they need government action to relocate.
188 Responses to “Industrial Disaster Draws Attention to Bedouin Villages”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
why don’t you tell us how bedouins, christians and other minorities fare in palestinian and arab controlled land?
August 15th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Real Voice:
“Bombings are deadliest since Iraq war began Officials’ death toll estimates range from 250 to 500; U.S. blames al-Qaida.”
Asscoiated Press:
“BAGHDAD - Rescuers used bare hands and shovels Wednesday to claw through clay houses shattered by an onslaught of suicide bombings that killed at least 250 and possibly as many as 500 members of an ancient religious sect in the deadliest attack of the Iraq war.
The U.S. military blamed al-Qaida in Iraq, and an American commander called the assault an “act of ethnic cleansing.”
The victims of Tuesday night’s coordinated attack by four suicide bombers were Yazidis, a small Kurdish-speaking sect that has been targeted by Muslim extremists who consider its members to be blasphemers.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20274765/
August 16th, 2007 at 7:19 am
A ral voice for peace wrote:
“why don’t you tell us how bedouins, christians and other minorities fare in palestinian and arab controlled land?”
Regardless of the answer to this question, it’s hardly relevant in discussing the morality of Israel’s treatment of minorities. Should the USA have considered the treatment of minorities in African countries before addressing the civil rights of African Americans?
August 16th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
“it’s hardly relevant in discussing the morality of Israel’s treatment of minorities. Should the USA have considered the treatment of minorities in African countries before addressing the civil rights of African Americans?”
what does the US and africa have to do with anything.
the point was that, as always, Jewish Voice For Peace is wholly hypocritical when it comes to the situation in the middle east. they say they want peace, but they only ever criticize israel, even when the other side does exactly the same thing, they never criticize the palestinian side, only the israeli side.
a better analogy would be criticizing the actions of the red cross in darfur, because they made some mistakes, and ignoring the real cause of evil there, muslims that are killing innocents. which obviously would be ridiculous.
August 17th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Yes, why can’t Jewish Voice for Peace be fair and balanced like AIPAC or the Anti-Defamation League?
August 17th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Here is the story guys, again.
Israel is at the front-line of a global Islamic ‘Jihad’. Instead of admiring Israel’s fearlessness in the face of overwhelming odds against them, many people obsess on Israel’s real (and mostly perceived) defects.
Were this a new development, It would be more understandable how easily people bite the same hook. However, this is the same exact tired story — that goes back to the dawn of (recorded) civilization.
The ‘rapist’, in defense of his obvious crime, points to the woman (or even to the child) and asserts everything they did wrong. For many, many years in the USA such defenses worked. It still works in many Islamic nations.
Is Israel perfect?? No.
Is there any true moral equivalency between Israel’s injustices and those of most of its neighbors??? No. Surely not.
If Israel falls, which is what is at stake here, the radical Muslim movement will have the jump-start it wants and needs to fuel an expansion of conquest into Europe and eventually, everywhere else. The reason, in fact, why a conservative president has newly been elected in France is because after about 10,000 burnt cars and zones within Paris where the police dare not go, the locally-born people are finally waking up and smelling this reality.
Aside (for discussion) of the prophecies of ‘Judgment Day’ found in the Qur’an and without factoring in the growing roles of Muslim sects who not only (literally) believe it and actively attempt to facilitate it (a’la Mahmoud Ahmenijhad); the Muslims have no practical choice but to expand by conquest because they have very large families and are towards the bottom of the socio-economic strata.
PS>
Qur~an: 13:6 And [since, O Prophet, they are bent on denying the truth,] they challenge thee to hasten the coming upon them of evil instead of [hoping for] good [14] although [they ought to know that] the exemplary punishments [which they now deride] have indeed come to pass before their time. Now, behold, thy Sustainer is full of forgiveness unto men despite all their evildoing: [15] but, behold, thy Sustainer is [also] truly severe in retribution!
22:47 And [so, O Muhammad,] they challenge thee to hasten the coming upon them of [God’s] chastisement:
38:16 As it is, they say [mockingly]: “O our Sustainer! hasten on to us our share [of punishment even] before the Day of Reckoning!”
And Mr. P.L.O. Chairman Arafat did this while sacrificing his people time and again–when they could be building enjoyable lives for themselves and their children. And instead, he mass-produced solders for a war that was wholly (and Holly) unnecessary. Ahmenijhad follows in Arafat’s foot-steps.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
“Israel is at the front-line of a global Islamic ‘Jihad’.”
This is BS. Israel is not “the central battlefront in the war on terror” any more than Iraq is (Bush). The so-called worldwide Islamist jihad is in essence not “all about Israel.” Israel has tried to promote itself to America as the-enemy-of-thy-enemy.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
hi peter h.
the ADL is an anti-discrimination group, and in addition to antisemitism, they also call out racism of all types.
aipac is explicitly pro-israel, defending israel’s interests in washington. JVP claims to be neutral.
and i can’t believe it but i (mostly) agree with john baker in 7. bush’s war have been nothing but bad for israel and her security (as they’ve been for the US and hers).
August 17th, 2007 at 10:18 pm
ohmigosh
August 17th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
John stated:
“Israel is not “the central battlefront in the war on terror””
That’s not what I said. (. . . but you already know this and speak falsely anyway).
I said that Israel is on the front line of a radical Islamic Holy-war. Its NOT the much heralded “war on terror” or even the so called “war on Islam”. Its the Islamic (or psuedo-Islamic) war on the kefirs [Translation: us]. While ‘terrorism’ is often used as a tool of this battlefield, this is not the ‘terror’ battlefield, per-se. No one really cared much about civilian Israeli targets being blown up until the targets migrated into Europe and the USA. Then, miraculously, a global “war on terror” began. Israel was seen as a natural ally and even the traditionally Jew-hating Howard Baker has recently recanted his normal critical approach towards the JNH (Jewish National Homeland) because for the first time he now sees Israel as being the “green berets” as it were, in the war the USA is stuck into. But that is somewhat fortuitous to my comments, which really require no further explanation, except for John, with whom no amount of explanation will suffice, because the more sense the explanation makes, the more vigorously he will deny even the obvious statements and conclusions contained therein.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:59 am
That’s not what I said. (. . . but you already know this and speak falsely anyway).
No, the phrase is Bush’s as I indicated.
Its the Islamic (or psuedo-Islamic) war on the kefirs [Translation: us]. While ‘terrorism’ is often used as a tool of this battlefield, this is not the ‘terror’ battlefield, per-se.
Yes! (Isidor won’t take yes for an answer, so I don’t expect he will agree).
No one really cared much about civilian Israeli targets being blown up until the targets migrated into Europe and the USA. Then, miraculously, a global “war on terror” began. Israel was seen as a natural ally
Yes, I agree partly. Everyone cared about Israeli targets. After 9-11 Bush used the WTC attacks to vault into his neocon agenda which was marketed as Global War on Terror®. Sharon promoted Israel as the-enemy-of-thy-enemy by falsely claiming that terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets had all along been a target of this very same Al Qaeda-type pseudo-Islamic war on kefirs. The term “terrorists” got thrown around very loosely, and still is, so that it includes AQ, AQ in Iraq, the Taliban, Shiites in Lebanon, Iranian Quds Force, Hamas, Fatah, plus any other kind of insurgency in the world, as though they were all part of an organized, global trans-national conspiracy. A conspiracy in those terms while real and deadly is currently limited in extent. Israel was not a central target though now it has become symbolically important.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:12 am
corr.
read:
…by falsely claiming that Israeli civilian targets had all along been targets of this very same Al Qaeda-type pseudo-Islamic war on kefirs.
August 18th, 2007 at 9:12 am
“neocon”
Meaning a ‘conservative’ who (uncharacteristically) does not resent Israel and/or work to screw the Jews. Other then that distinction, I see little practical difference between GW Bush’s policies and famous “old-o-cons” such as:
Forrestal, Dulles, Baker, John Sununnu, John D. Rocafeller, Henry Ford, Herbert Hoover, J. Edgar Hoover, and George Bush sr. (just to name a few).
“The term “terrorists” got thrown around very loosely, and still is, so that it includes AQ, AQ in Iraq, the Taliban, Shiites in Lebanon, Iranian Quds Force, Hamas, Fatah, plus any other kind of insurgency in the world, as though they were all part of an organized, global trans-national conspiracy. A conspiracy in those terms while real and deadly is currently limited in extent. Israel was not a central target though now it has become symbolically important.”
A “terrorist” is someone (or some organization) who uses attacks deliberately launched against civilian targets to “terrorize” other civilians. In that regard, all the groups you mentioned properly qualify.
” . . organized, global trans-national conspiracy”
“Organized” is a subjective term.
They may not be “organized” in the way that say . . FEMA is ‘organized’ [read: sarcasm].
However, they are organized and affiliated in the respect that cooperation costs them nothing and therefore we must assume they are so situated.
The Qur’an is being used (mis-used) as a front to attract willing followers and in that respect, these groups are mainly on the same pages.
Those same pages call for a worldwide Islamic revolution, after which there will be no kefirs.
When the Taliban kills Muslim school-girls for daring to go to school and when hundreds of Iraqi (poverty-stricken) Yaszids are blown to bits by AQ in a coordinated attacks, because they are considered blasphemes, these events, (like the targeting of pizza-parlors in Jerusalem) are not being orchestrated through any single switchboard. However, they all rely on the same formula. Namely, the (mainly) false assertions that:
a. Muslims are the victims of everyone else’s aggression and;
b. the Qur’an not only permits such retaliation but predicts and therefore demands it.
August 18th, 2007 at 11:11 am
“Meaning a ‘conservative’ who (uncharacteristically) does not resent Israel and/or work to screw the Jews.”
Much more to it than that. They are not really conservatives at all. They are radicals. They want to concentrate power in the federal government and particularly in the Executive, particularly in the White House. Beyond our borders they think in terms of empire and have a large geostrategic agenda. America to them, because it is now the only remaining superpower, must dominate the world. To these ends, domestic and foreign, they are willing to shred the Constitution and throw the Bill of Rights under the nearest bus. No, I don’t think they are anything at all like the old conservatives, pro-Israel attitude aside. When 9-11 happened, it was just the Pearl Harbor-like event they had talked about in the documents of Project for a New American Century:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
See the document, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”
page 51, left column, top
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
August 18th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
To get back to the topic at hand, indeed the issue of the Bedouin unrecognized villages is a challenge for Israel. What goes overlooked is that its treatment of its Arab minority is remarkably free of the persecution of minorities that is usual in most of the world, especially the Middle East. It’s even more remarkable considering the fact that Israel has been targeted by neighboring Arab/Muslim states for destruction since its founding (originally an effort led by Egypt, now led by Syria and Iran).
Now, as was pointed out above, Israel is certainly not perfect, and can go a long way to improve its handling of issues such as this. So can many other countries to which the US gives support–Turkey with its Kurdish minority, Cental Asian republics with their ethnic minorities, Egypt with its Copts, etc.
However, trotting that out as an excuse to stand at public demonstrations with jihadists who support Hezbollah’s calls for genocide would be laughable if it weren’t so malignant.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
“…its treatment of its Arab minority is remarkably free of the persecution of minorities that is usual in most of the world, especially the Middle East.”
Or of its treatment of the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. There you will find not only infringement of civil rights but persecution and oppression by military occupation troops unlike anything in Israel itself, at least since the occupation by the Romans when the Jews were the oppressed.
August 19th, 2007 at 8:22 am
“The most grievous expression of the situation in the occupied territories under Olmert and Barak is the daily killing. Almost no day passes without a new atrocity. A pupil is run over, his injuries are critical, he is kept at the roadblock over an hour until he dies. The army issues a laconic statement: he was on the list of those “forbidden to enter Israel”. Five soldiers seize a boy waiting at a bus stop and beat him to death. A sick woman arrives at a roadblock and is detained there for no apparent reason until she dies.
Such stories have become routine and no longer cause a ripple. Two or three journalists do still get upset and report them, the rest just ignore them. Senses have been blunted. It’s not news.”
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1187476646/
August 19th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Aug. 20, 2007 0:11 | Updated Aug. 20, 2007 1:38
US Congress’s first Muslim wraps up trip to Israel
By HERB KEINON
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar
Talkbacks for this article: 2
As the first Muslim member of the US Congress, Minnesota’s Keith Ellison realizes that every step he takes regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict will be closely scrutinized by both American Muslims and Jews.
August 19th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Former member of the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam visits Israel:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1187502418890&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
August 20th, 2007 at 2:11 am
For more information on the Bedouin in Israel, please refer to BUSTAN’s website: www.bustan.org.
August 20th, 2007 at 3:35 am
A Real Voice for Peace wrote:
“the point was that, as always, Jewish Voice For Peace is wholly hypocritical when it comes to the situation in the middle east. they say they want peace, but they only ever criticize israel, even when the other side does exactly the same thing, they never criticize the palestinian side, only the israeli side.
a better analogy would be criticizing the actions of the red cross in darfur, because they made some mistakes, and ignoring the real cause of evil there, muslims that are killing innocents. which obviously would be ridiculous.”
Not being a member of JVP, I can’t speak for the. However I can speak for many Jewish peace and justice activists in Israel who not only oppose and resist the Israeli government’s policies and actions in its treatment of Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line, but equally deplore and condemn targeting of civilians, torture and ather attrocities committed by the non-Israeli combatants in the area. However, as Israeli citizen, I am partially responsible for my government’s actions, and can exercise my democratic right to complain, react, demonstrate, resist (non-violently), and otherwise do what I can to move the country towards a peace, justice and security for all. I believe that JVP has the same goals, and as Jews their primary reponsibility is for the policies and behaviour of the Jewish and Zionist government in Israel.
One of these responsibilities is the protection of our Bedouin minority which is experiencing a process of creeping ethnic cleansing. ‘real voice for peace’ asked how Bedouin fare in other Arab Lands. Well, the Saudi royal family are of Bedouin extraction as is the royal family of Jordan. In Saudi Arabia of course, they do no=t permit Jews to enter the country. Deplorable as this may be, it does not absolve my government from treating Israel’s bedouin population like any other citizens. We are supposed to be a democracy after all.
August 20th, 2007 at 8:46 am
One of these responsibilities is the protection of our Bedouin minority which is experiencing a process of creeping ethnic cleansing. ‘real voice for peace’ asked how Bedouin fare in other Arab Lands.>>>>
Can you please be specific? How are our Bedouin minority experiencing a process of creeping ethnic cleansing?
A few months back, I read articles about a problem in or near the community of Beer sheva in the Negev. Bedouins were stealing from Jewish households and from farms. This one farmer kept dogs fenced-in to protect his property and the Bedouin would give the dogs poisoned meat and then they would go in and steal. One night the farmer spent the night in his barn and he heard the agonized cries of his dogs dying a slow painful death from poisoning — here in the US this would be punishable under animal cruelty laws. At any rate he shot some of these thieves and the last I read he was being prosecuted. Why not drive all these Bedouin murderers, animal killers and thieves out of our land? Who needs this?
August 20th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Does this apply to Jewish authors Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky?
http://www.torah.org/learning/halashon/chapter8.html
Speaking Lashon Hara to Gentiles
The prohibition of Lashon Hara applies when the speaker disparages the subject before a Jew; all the more severe is his transgression if he disparages the speaker before gentiles.
By speaking to gentiles he disgraces the honor of Israel and defames the honor of Heaven. Further, he causes his fellow great harm, for if the speaker were to tell another Jew, at least the Jew would not conclude immediately that the information was true. However, if he speaks to a gentile, and tells him that the subject is a cheat, a swindler, or something similarly negative, the gentile will believe it immediately and publicize it, and the subject will be harmed and aggrieved.
So certainly if one speaks Lashon Hara about a fellow Jew to an audience of non-Jews, his sin is too great to bear (cf. Gen. 4:13), for he enters into the class of “malshinim” (those who slander their fellow Jews to the anti-Semitic government). His judgement is therefore akin to an apikores (heretic) and the disbelievers in Torah [because a “malshin” informs the government of hateful qualities of the Jews in order to prevent them from observing the Torah], when the dead are reawakened, he will be given permanent dwelling in Gehinom, as discussed in Tractate Rosh HaShanah. Therefore every Jew must take great care to guard himself from this.
One who violates this and slanders a Jew before gentiles flagrantly rebels against Torat Moshe Rabbeinu (the Torah which Moses taught us), as is discussed in the Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 26.
August 20th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
“Does this apply to Jewish authors Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky?”
In the words of Nathan the prophet, “Thou art the man.”
August 20th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
” . . . when the dead are reawakened . . ”
Is this going to happen before or after the living are awakened?
August 20th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Sshhhhhh!
August 21st, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Isador, you think it is funny that Jews slander Israel before non-Jews.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Steve asked:
“Can you please be specific? How are our Bedouin minority experiencing a process of creeping ethnic cleansing?
Then Steve follow dup with a description of criminal activities he had heard about in the Negev where the perps apparently were Bedouin. His final comments were “Why not drive all these Bedouin murderers, animal killers and thieves out of our land?” is so racist that it hardly deserves comment.
Perhaps the moderators of this blog might want to take note of these bigoted statements.
Steve sounds like my some of my former neighbors in Philadelphia who wanted to “send the damn Nig—s back to Africa”.
For anyone who wants to see Bedouin ethnic cleansing defined I suggest they take a look at the Bustan website that was posted in #20. All the documentation is there www.bustan.org.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:22 pm
“…that Jews slander Israel before non-Jews.”
You misread it. It’s about Jews slandering other Jews before gentiles, which reflects badly on Israel, on all sons of Israel, etc. This is what you do all the time, when you call them self-loathing traitors and destroyers of Israel, etc. You have done it to both Professors Finkelstein, Morris, Lappe, Chomsky, Abraham Heschel and all “German Jews,” Ariel Sharon, rabbis in general, and even Isidor a couple of threads back. No one escapes your lashon hara. It’s time you gave it some thought. “Thou art the man.”
August 21st, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Steve wrote:
“Isador, you think it is funny that Jews slander Israel before non-Jews.”
A “slander” as I understand it, has to be untruthful. So no, I do not find it funny that anyone lies about anyone else. Jew, non-Jew or someone else.
John:
Some Jews do have to prove (and proclaim) how embarrassed they are when another Jew acts ‘pushy’ or ‘greedy’ or in many cases, just assertively.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:57 pm
well, not my place to say
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:40 am
As the readers herein are probably aware, the BBC has recently canceled an episode of a popular dramatic series, with a story-line featuring Islamic terrorists.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2151853,00.html
The producers concluded that such a theme would offend Muslims. In its place, they have substituted “Animal Rights” activists as the villains. Apparently the BBC has no such concern about offending them.
While events of “Animal Rights” inspired vandalism and even acts bordering (or crossing) the line of “terror” have been on the rise, I have yet to hear of any event which actually harmed human people, mainly relating to spray-painting or tossing paint on people wearing fur coats.
“A senior Thames Valley police officer feared an escalation in terror tactics.
“The risk is that someone is going to get seriously hurt as these groups use more powerful devices.”
Alongside arson and other attacks on shops, bookmakers, factories, dairies, farms and laboratories, extremists have harassed individuals.” (BBC News).
So, to conclude, Islamic inspired any-civilian acts which have claimed 100’s of thousands of lives worldwide and go back at least 100 years, are too sensitive to feature dramatically but Animal Rights freaks (who are mainly leftist women) represent the REAL threat to world peace. I have to try to remember that.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:44 am
not my place to say…but anyway the basis of lashon hora is Lev. 19:18. The mitzvah goes well beyond “slander.” You shall not nurse hatred against your neighbor (fellow Jew) in your heart. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. This is not that originated with Jesus.
Your point about concern for animal rights where people are neglected is well-taken Isidor. Chaucer seemed to make the same point in his Tale of Mdme. Eglantine in the Prologue to his Canterbury Tales. She lavishes affection and food on her little dogs but all her charity seems directed to animals and animals alone. She is surrounded by hungry people and the miraculous story she tells is about a Christian child murdered by Jews, the notorious anti-Semitic blood libel!
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:46 am
Fred wrote: “Then Steve follow dup with a description of criminal activities he had heard about in the Negev where the perps apparently were Bedouin. His final comments were “Why not drive all these Bedouin murderers, animal killers and thieves out of our land?” is so racist that it hardly deserves comment.
Perhaps the moderators of this blog might want to take note of these bigoted statements.”
You don’t know me Fred. You are wrong about me. These are not criminal activities I had “heard about” in the Negev where the perps apparently were Bedouin.
http://jewishvoiceandopinion.com/a/jvo200705c.html
The head of the Israeli Ranchers Association, Moshe Har-Shemesh, is convinced that, in any other country in the world, Shai Dromi “would be treated as a national hero.” In Israel, Mr. Dromi, a 42-year-old Negev farmer who shot Bedouin intruders in what certainly looks like self defense, has been arrested…..
Dying Dog
On Jan 13, he was awakened by the sound of his new guard dog’s dying howls. When he saw his dog vomiting and then spotted wire cutters, clearly intended to break the lock on his sheep pen, he understood what was happening.
“The robbers had heard him and were hiding. At that point, Shai didn’t know if they had run off or were still on his farm,” said Amir Dromi.
According to Amir Dromi, his brother hid himself for 30 minutes, and then, once again, heard the wire cutters working on the lock. Having no idea whether or not the intruders were armed, Shai Dromi grabbed an old .22 caliber rifle his late father had brought with him when he immigrated from the US, and shot at the thieves’ legs.
Two of the would-be robbers escaped, and two were injured, one critically. Mr. Dromi had hit an artery in Mr. Atrash’s leg, and although the farmer immediately called for medical assistance as well as the police, and tried to administer first-aid himself, Mr. Atrash died of his wound.
“When the police came, Shai expected them to help him. Instead, to his disbelief, they arrested him,” said Amir Dromi…..
Read the full story here: http://jewishvoiceandopinion.com/a/jvo200705c.html
People that do this to the Jews and to our pets do not deserve to be protected citizens. That seems to be the distinction Fred, you seem unwilling to make between good people and bad people. This has nothing to do with race.
Bedouin like this man and his family, below do indeed deserve to live in Israel under the full protection of the law:
http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/4220.htm
A proud Israeli Bedouin questions American-Jewish apathy
By Ishmael Khaldi October 6, 2004
Two years ago, a few proud Bedouin Israeli citizens like myself asked: what is our position and status in the State of Israel in the midst of its current situation? After all, Bedouins are part of Israel’s success story. During current times, when Israel is being attacked and accused of being a racist state, an ‘aggressor and an oppressor’, we decided that the smallest and probably most effective thing we could do is to spread our story as part of Israeli society.
I, Ishmael Khaldi, am Israeli. I served with the IDF, with the Israel police, and with the Israeli Defense Ministry. In the last year, I have lost two Bedouin friends on army duty (God bless their memory) defending the State of Israel. My friends and family feel that we have a common destiny with the Jewish people in Israel: our grandparents created this land with Jewish immigrants who arrived during the 1920s, ’30s and ’40s to build a democracy….
Read the article: http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/4220.htm
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:13 am
John wrote: “You misread it. It’s about Jews slandering other Jews before gentiles, which reflects badly on Israel, on all sons of Israel, etc. This is what you do all the time, when you call them self-loathing traitors and destroyers of Israel, etc. You have done it to both Professors Finkelstein, Morris, Lappe, Chomsky, Abraham Heschel and all “German Jews,” Ariel Sharon, rabbis in general, and even Isidor a couple of threads back. No one escapes your lashon hara. It’s time you gave it some thought. “Thou art the man.”>>>>>
John, I think you may be mixing things up here. First of all, I do not know enough about Rabbi Abraham Heschel to comment. I don’t hold that Ariel Sharon has slandered his people; only that Sharon betrayed his people by expelling these wonderful Jews from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria.
You mention lashon ha-ra a good deal. This is what Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lashon_hara
Lashon hara (or Loshon hora) (Hebrew לשון הרע; “evil tongue”) is the Jewish sin of gossip. Lashon hara generally refers to true statements, written or spoken; untrue gossip is even more strictly prohibited. Thus, while truth is generally a defense against slander or libel, it is not a defense against lashon hara.
The main prohibition against lashon hara is derived from Leviticus 19:16 [1] : “Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people; neither shalt thou stand idly by the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD.”.
To me, Professors Finkelstein, Ilan Pappe and Noam Chomsky are spreading gossip about Jews and defaming Israel before the nations. The article from which I quoted states: “The prohibition of Lashon Hara applies when the speaker disparages the subject before a Jew; all the more severe is his transgression if he disparages the speaker before gentiles.
By speaking to gentiles he disgraces the honor of Israel and defames the honor of Heaven.”
You do not believe Professor Finkelstein is doing this? I do. I’ve got one of his books. I’ve been reading it.
Isador wrote: “Some Jews do have to prove (and proclaim) how embarrassed they are when another Jew acts ‘pushy’ or ‘greedy’ or in many cases, just assertively.”
I do not disagree with this in principle. There are Jewish leaders that say things publicly; things that embarrass me and things that I believe defame the Jewish people before the gentiles. There are times I feel compelled to state that this does not represent me, nor do I believe this represents the entirety of Jews.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:23 am
Should Christians support Israel?
(I count this pastor — Ken Garrison — a friend of Israel and a friend of the Jews. Christians might want to watch this video.)
http://tzemach.org/weblog/?p=84
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:21 am
re 21
“However I can speak for many Jewish peace and justice activists in Israel who not only oppose and resist the Israeli government’s policies and actions in its treatment of Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line,”
that’s a joke.
arabs in israel have full civil rights.
arabs in arab countries don’t have anything close to that, and jews aren’t even allowed to live there.
i do think that it is very important for citizens in a democracy to be critical of the actions of its government that could be better. i do that in the states, and i’m glad you do that in israel.
in my mind, however, that is NOT the same as hurling criticism against israel from the outside, as JVP does, especially when it questions israel’s existence.
i’m sure you don’t question israel’s right to exist. JVP does.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:33 pm
arvfp wrote: “i do think that it is very important for citizens in a democracy to be critical of the actions of its government that could be better. i do that in the states, and I’m glad you do that in Israel.”
It’s really hard for me to be objective with the Olmert government, it is so corrupt on so many levels.
That having been said, considering the threat the Jewish state is under to its very existence, it seems to me, Israel exercised incredible restraint even to the point of costing the lives of young Jewish soldiers because of the so-called “purity of arms” ethical standards in the IDF.
In war, every nation makes mistakes and civilians are killed. In every war. In most wars, historically, civilians are deliberately killed. Look at the hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese civilians that were deliberately targeted by the allies in our firebombings (nuclear bombings Hiroshima and Nagasaki) in the hope that morale and public support for the war effort by German civilians and Japanese civilians would suffer.
On Sept. 11, 2001, American only got a tiny taste of what Israel has suffered for the past many decades. There is no comparison. Were American cities shelled like Israel cities have been, there would be nothing much left of the nation shelling the U.S.
Israel, I believe to her discretic, exercises incredible restraint.
Americans would not tolerate in her cities what Israelis tolerate.
August 23rd, 2007 at 6:02 am
To me, Professors Finkelstein, Ilan Pappe and Noam Chomsky are spreading gossip about Jews and defaming Israel before the nations.
I don’t really want to belabor the point more than I already have, but you seem incapable of recognizing your own evil. I have tried repeatedly to remind you of your habit of maligning and defaming Finkelstein, Pappe, Chomsky, and a long list of other Jews, including Ariel Sharon and Isidor Farash. Now, you have defended yourself saying that you are only speaking the truth about them (in calling them Jew-haters, self-loathing Jews, traitors, appeasers, enemies of Israel, etc.). But read what your own quotation from wiki says about lashon hara:
“Lashon hara generally refers to true statements, written or spoken; untrue gossip is even more strictly prohibited. Thus, while truth is generally a defense against slander or libel, it is not a defense against lashon hara.”
The standards of Leviticus are high. If you are defaming a fellow Jew before gentiles, as you have done repeatedly from your very first post down to the present, even if you claim what you say about them is true, then according to Leviticus this is lashon hara. (Read Chofetz Chaim if you want to learn about it). It can mean gossip or it can mean any malicious talk, badmouthing, running-down, putting-down, slandering, defaming, etc. An evil tongue. You allege lashon hara in others, who in fact have said nothing of the kind except in your own hateful imagination, yet you seem totally blind your own evil tongue, to which you give full license. It is ironic that you call virtually every Jew who doesn’t agree with you a self-loathing Jew-hater, and accuse them of speaking lashon hara, yet fail to see that you yourself are speaking lashon hara in doing so. This is the moral development of the two-year old. OK if you are two years old. When an adult’s development is arrested at this stage, it is a serious matter.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:59 am
“The standards of Leviticus are high. If you are defaming a fellow Jew before gentiles, as you have done repeatedly from your very first post down to the present, even if you claim what you say about them is true…..”
Leviticus says, “You shall not hate your brother in your heart; YOU SHALL SURELY REPROVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AND NOT BEAR SIN BECAUSE OF HIM.”
Historian Paul Johnson wrote: “Every Jews is surety for every other Jew. If he sees a fellow sinning, he must remonstrate and if possible prevent it — otherwise he sins too. The community is responsible for the man who does wrong publicly. A Jew must always bear witness against and protest evil, especially great public sins of the powerful, crying to God for vengeance. But precisely because of the duty to protest another’s sin is so important, false and malicious accusations are particularly abhorrent. To destroy a man’s reputation willfully and unjustly is one of the worst of sins. The ‘witch hunt’ is a great collective evil.”
“A History of the Jews” page 159
Messrs. Finkelstein, Pappe, Chomsky, and a long list of others are very powerful Jewish thinkers, writers and authors who are spreading evil about the Jews and the Jewish state to the public. I believe I am obligated to speak out. If I were to contact them, I would write the same thing I have written here. I don’t know how to contact these men. No doubt they have heard from thousands what I have written and casually dismiss the criticism.
These are men who have indoctrinated you —and thousands, perhaps millions of others — our thinking on the Jews and Israel. For me, this is a tragedy.
I want it to be made known, very publicly, these men do not speak for me and I do not believe they speak for the Jewish nation or people.
Quite honestly, I do not remember what Isidor Farash wrote that angered me at the time but if you will recall I apologized. My only observation to Isidor is that though he disagrees with and debates you and your points, on many things I do not see much difference between the two of you on the issues.
In so far as malicious talk, badmouthing, running-down, putting-down, slandering, defaming, etc., I believe this applies to your treatment of me.
Have I complained about your malicious talk, badmouthing, etc., until now? No.
Yet you are constantly accusing me of all kinds of wickedness and evil.
You seem to have a problem with strong-willed Jews who are proud of our people, our heritage and our land and do not want to give into your ridicule, your lectures, your accusations of evil Jews oppressing ‘innocent’ Palestinian terrorists, etc.
We are unwilling to give up our land. Thus you seem to have a continual discontent and resentment because of this. Proud Jews seem to stick in your craw.
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:01 am
Correction:
These are men who have indoctrinated you —and thousands, perhaps millions of others — in your thinking on the Jews and Israel.
For me, this is a tragedy.
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Leviticus says, “You shall not hate your brother in your heart; YOU SHALL SURELY REPROVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AND NOT BEAR SIN BECAUSE OF HIM.”
The great “sin” all these Jews are supposedly guilty of, along with both President Carter and President Bush, and all the other people you have maligned and defamed and attacked personally here is that they have said something you don’t like. Imagine that. They said something you don’t like, so you feel entitled and licensed to attack them as persons, to call them Jew-haters or anti-Semites, etc. Saying something you don’t like is not a sin, because you are not the Almighty Steve.
In any event, you have not “reproved” your brother, which means that a man has a heart-to-heart talk with his brother to explain his errors. No, what you have done is to malign and defame these people at every opportunity, which includes most of the people on the planet as far as I can tell.
“…But precisely because of the duty to protest another’s sin is so important, false and malicious accusations are particularly abhorrent. To destroy a man’s reputation willfully and unjustly is one of the worst of sins.”
This is your nasty habit. Malicious accusations. Someone challenges your facts. You call them a Jew-hater. Someone challenges Israeli policy on settlements. You call them an anti-Semite or a self-loathing Jewish traitor. You quickly move from the factual realm to the personal realm and into cat-fight mode.
“Have I complained about your malicious talk, badmouthing, etc., until now? No.”
Your post 149 from the previous thread:
“Steve Klein Says:
August 21st, 2007 at 7:26 pm
John, I am going to say this once. I hope not to repeat it. You can complain to Mitchell and Mitchell can ban me if he wishes because I am going against the rules on this forum but there comes a time for honesty.
I believe you are a Jew-hater to the depths of your Christian heart. I believe your hatred of Jews and of the Jewish state is so intense, you can never be persuaded by reason.
There are some human beings such as yourself that are utterly consumed by Jew-hatred. This is my opinion of you, your denials notwithstanding.”
You have a short memory. It’s another illustration of your tendency to malign and defame others, accusing them of speaking evil of being Jew-haters or anti-Semites, and yet to be completely unaware of your own malicious tongue. I think that’s a serious problem for you, Steve. You have taken my comments as malicious because you are projecting your own darkness onto me and everyone else in the world.
You seem to have a problem with strong-willed Jews.
Don’t flatter yourself, Steve. You are not “strong-willed.” You are just extremely negative and unpleasant.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:34 pm
John wrote: “The great “sin” all these Jews are supposedly guilty of, along with both President Carter and President Bush, and all the other people you have maligned and defamed and attacked personally here is that they have said something you don’t like. Imagine that. They said something you don’t like, so you feel entitled and licensed to attack them as persons, to call them Jew-haters or anti-Semites, etc.” Saying something you don’t like is not a sin, because you are not the Almighty Steve….This is your nasty habit. Malicious accusations. Someone challenges your facts. You call them a Jew-hater. Someone challenges Israeli policy on settlements. You call them an anti-Semite or a self-loathing Jewish traitor. You quickly move from the factual realm to the personal realm and into cat-fight mode.”
I guess you are right John. I stand humbled and condemned by your words. I’m sorry for my intemperate remarks. Cat-fight mode? I love cats. I had cats as pets most of my life, maybe because Israel’s greatest tribe is modeled after the cat; the lion of Judah? I’m not sure. Cats are beautiful animals. Perhaps you are right about my cat-fight mode. I’m just a cat-lover.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Fair enough. Apology accepted. Just something to be aware of. I have much to apologize for myself. Later, John
August 24th, 2007 at 6:17 am
arvfp said (36),
JVP does, especially when it questions israel’s existence…you don’t question israel’s right to exist. JVP does.
Does JVP really question Israel’s right to exist? How so? Got references?
August 24th, 2007 at 11:44 am
John,
I think the claim that Jewish Voice for Peace questions Israel’s right to exist is based on the fact JVP doesn’t categorically reject a 1-state solution (The position paper is available here. However, JVP says in its position paper that it supports the right of Israelis to self-determination and would therefore oppose a one-state solution that was opposed by a majority of Israelis.
August 24th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Wow. It would appear arvfp is right. A Jewish Voice for Peace does indeed question Israel’s right to exist:
“As activists in the movement for peace and justice in the Middle East, JVP members are often asked for our position on how the Palestine / Israel conflict should ultimately be solved. Our mission statement (http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/mission.shtml) endorses neither a one-state solution, nor a two-state solution. Instead it promotes support for human rights and international law. As a result, we have members and supporters on both sides of this question, as well as many others who, like the organization as a whole, are agnostic about it. If a short answer is required, it would be that we support any solution that is consistent with the national rights of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews, whether one binational state, two states, or some other solution. In this paper, we provide a longer answer.
One might then reasonably ask why JVP does not take a two-state position, since that is the overwhelming position of Israelis and the clear majority position of Palestinians living in the region.
It should be noted here that Arab opposition to an independent Palestinian state, mostly from Jordan but certainly involving broader Arab leadership, was a factor in the absence of any pursuit of a Palestinian state between the wars of 1948 and 1967, as was the deepening conflict between the Arab states and Israel. Still, until the mid-1970s, the Palestinians were essentially united in their rejection of any two-state plan. The thinking was that Zionism was an illegitimate, colonial enterprise
Throughout the period before 1948, the preferred Palestinian solution was an end to Jewish immigration, an independent Palestinian state and a one person, one vote system. After that war and until the rise of the Palestine Liberation Organization, there was no Palestinian body that could voice support or opposition.
August 24th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Jewish Voice for Peace: “the Palestinians were essentially united in their rejection of any two-state plan. The thinking was that Zionism was an illegitimate, colonial enterprise…”
Jews are illegitimate?
August 24th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
a real voice for peace wrote:
i’m sure you don’t question israel’s right to exist.
Why should I care who recognizes the right of Israel to exist. Does the USA care who recognizes it? The issue is stupid and a red herring. Israel is strong enough to ensure its continued existence.
On the other hand if the citizens of Israel and Palestine chose to reorganize our political frameworks to accommodate our national aspirations within something other than the traditional nation state, then it’s no-ones business but our own. You folks abroad need to think out of the box a bit more.
Here in Israel and palestine we are starting to look at models of con-federation and shared sovereignty that work well in some parts of Europe and the Pacific. If we choose to move in that direction then I do hope that Jews in the US will get off their high horse and support us.
Just so there’s no question about this issue. The only people here who do not recognize the state of Israel, albeit for different reasons, are our ultra-Orthodox Jews (about 5% of the citizens), and our fundamentalist Muslims (about another 5% of the citizens and perhaps 10% of West Bank Palestinians).
August 24th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I’m wondering. Are you Jewish Fred?
August 24th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Correction - Regarding fundamentalist Muslim-Israelis. I meant they are about 5% of the Arab citizens which equals about 1% of citizens as a whole.
August 24th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Hey Steve - weird question.
FYI
My family was practicing Judaism in Palestine hundreds of years before the word Zionism was invented. We never left y’all. Some of us have been here a loooong time.
How about you? Are you a pure blood? Got the right Jewish lineage? Born Jewish? Speak Hebrew? Maybe a wee bit of Christian DNA sneak in there a while back? Come on ‘fess up . . . . ;->
You need to get a life Steve.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Fred wrote:Hey Steve - weird question.
FYI
My family was practicing Judaism in Palestine hundreds of years before the word Zionism was invented. We never left y’all. Some of us have been here a loooong time.>>>>
Fred, yours was a wierd answer. I mean, I’m not sure what to make of your answer. (:
Me? Yes, I believe I am 100% Jew. My mother was a Jew and my father was Jew. I do not have any reason to beleive there was any admixture. How would I know at any rate? I think I am pure blood Jew! A hated and despise Jew. I am an ancient Jew. An old Jew. A Jew of Jews, etc.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Fred, when you say your family was practicing Judaism in “Palestine” hundreds of years before the word Zionism was invented, now you’ve got my curiosity aroused.
What does this mean? Are you an ultra-Orthodox Jew who rejects Zionism? Are you a Samaritan? I guess Samaritans did not practice Judaism, did they?
How do you identify yourself since you said my question was a weird question? Most Jews would not think my question weird in the least, would they? I’ve asked my on the Internet if they were a Jew and they were not offended.
August 24th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
fred:
“On the other hand if the citizens of Israel and Palestine chose to reorganize our political frameworks to accommodate our national aspirations within something other than the traditional nation state, then it’s no-ones business but our own.”
sure. as soon as there is a palestine, get back to us on that. when they create a civilized state and join the rest of humanity, they can start making any kind of treaties and trade deals they want.
but the citizens of a future palestine have no business telling israel what to do, and vice versa.
“Why should I care who recognizes the right of Israel to exist.”
i’m not going to sit down with my neighbor if her unwavering position is that i should be destroyed. no big duh on that one.
i’m not saying that the palestinians CAN destroy israel, i am saying that such a position is a non-starter for peace negotiations.
“The only people here who do not recognize the state of Israel…”
you mean the only israelis that don’t recognize israel, for you left out the people in the government of the west bank and gaza.
and SPEAKING of red herrings, i notice you never did answer steve’s weird question. who cares about pure blood? you sound like severus snape…
“JVP says in its position paper that it supports the right of Israelis to self-determination and would therefore oppose a one-state solution that was opposed by a majority of Israelis.”
yeah, well, a one-state solution IS most definitely opposed by a (vast!) majority of israelis (and palestinians, by the way), so why the prevaricating? just come out and oppose it, JVP!
August 24th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Fred, although we often disagree, I have a relitively higher regard for you then I would for my average debate opponent.
However, your comments sound similar to the debate among the USA black community, about who is ‘blacker’ then whom. Or, which Lesbian is the REAL lesbian.
Speaking as a religious non-Jew and a proud cultural Jew, I must say that your argument is beginning to sound a bit desperate.
As far as I am concerned, anyone who is seen as ‘Jewish’ by the non-Jewish community deserves equal standing among (and within) the Jewish community.
August 24th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
Come on ‘fess up . . . . ;->
Note the emoticon, Isidor? An alert for the sarcasm-challenged. Fred is tweaking Steve, because the latter seemed (#49) to be questioning Fred along those lines. So, your comment really goes to Steve; not Fred, unless I am mistaken.
August 25th, 2007 at 5:52 am
seemed (#49) to be questioning Fred along those lines.
Fred’s tweaking seemed along the same lines as his response (#28) to Steve’s earlier remark about wanting to “drive all these Bedouin murderers, animal killers and thieves out of our land.” Steve’s suggestion implies racial testing to determine which non-Jews would get “cleansed,” who is a non-Jew, who is a Jew, etc.
August 25th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Thanks John -
when you see a ;-> symbol at the end of a post it usually implies irony or sarcasm. Lighten up people.
The context of Steve’s question is obviously offensive. It is quite clear that when he asks if someone is Jewish, it is in response to their opinions with which he disagrees? My remark was intended to illuminate that Steve connects political opinions and criminal behavior (in the case of the Bedouin) with religious affiliation or ethnicity.
RV for P # 54
There is indeed a Palestine whether you recognize the nation or not. The framework of a nation-state is but one definition of sovereignty. It is not for you or me to decide a matter of self-determination for others. Perhaps when Israel (and RVFP) finally recognizes the right of Palestine to exist, that the sentiment will be reciprocated.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:07 am
“;->”
More idolatry.
Fred:
Symbolism or not, the content of any given statement can not be diluted with an icon.
I do not agree with Steve in most of his points.
However, your statement did not seem particularly sarcastic.
It is not uncommon to hear (among Arabs) that Northern Euro Jews are somehow ‘illegitimate’ or of non-Semitic DNA and that somehow makes their claim on Israel (as a religious homeland) self-serving and also illegitimate. Your statement was a parallel to this common argument.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Religious affiliation is important, true. It has nothing to do with ethnicity however. Jews and Arabs are supposed to both be Semites; supposed to have a common ancestor.
Religious affiliation is another matter. A religion that teaches Jews are the infidel and should be subjugated, converted or killed is problematic.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:17 am
Here we have an Arab friend of the Jews:
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=brigitte+gabriel&search=Search
August 25th, 2007 at 11:23 am
when they create a civilized state and join the rest of humanity
About two thousand years ago, the Romans were the Occupying Power and the Jews of Syria-Palaestina were the occupied. I wonder what the Romans thought of the Jews’ ability to govern themselves, i.e., to conduct themselves appropriately under Roman law and in compliance with the military administration. I’d bet they thought they were rebellious, uncivilized, and would never “join the rest of humanity.”
August 25th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
I am not defending the Jewish revolts against Rome.
The reasons however were manifestly different from those that cause the Arab revolts against the Jews.
Jews lived reasonably well under Greek and then later Roman occupation and subjugation so long as the Greeks and Romans did not impose their gods on the monotheistic Hebrews.
Judaea was a client state of Rome just as she is a client state of the U.S. today.
Rome took over the appointment of the corrupt puppet-High Priests just as the Greeks did. The emperor declared himself a god and ordered his statues to be set up in temples throughout the empire. There was theft of a large amounts of money from the Temple treasury, etc.
Unlike the Greeks and the Romans, Jews do not impose our God on the Muslim Arabs. They are free to worship their own deity and free to appoint their own incitement-fostering imams in their mosques who teach hatred and murder toward the Jewish infidel, the sons of apes and pigs.
Reasons for Arab unrest are distinctly different from those that caused the Jewish revolts.
August 25th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
However, your statement did not seem particularly sarcastic
It was perfectly obvious to me, being familiar with Steve and Fred and the context. Also, he put an emoticon there for the tone-deaf and irony-challenged. Also, he just got through telling you it was intended as sarcasm. So, get off it and take up your argument with Steve. He needs to hear this.
A religion that teaches Jews are the infidel and should be subjugated, converted or killed…
I take it you are referring here to Stevodox Judaism, right? The Jews that are “infidels” being Norman Finkelstein, Israel Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, “German Jewish appeasers,” Ariel Sharon, Ilan Pappe, Benny Morris, Uri Avnery (?), etc., etc. and Isidor insofar as he doesn’t believe American Indians are owed reparations. Well, maybe you wouldn’t kill them, but then again…?
August 25th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Reasons for Arab unrest are distinctly different from those that caused the Jewish revolts.
That also goes for the King David Hotel?
August 25th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Religious affiliation is important, true. It has nothing to do with ethnicity however.
But it does have everything to do with ethnicity in your view. On religious grounds, you believe God gave the land to the Jews in perpetuity. But don’t you also believe, and now speaking in purely ethnic terms, that ethnic non-Jews should all leave and be welcomed henceforth only provisionally and only on a case-by-case basis? In other words, isn’t Israel for Jews only?
I believe this follows from your position that what is needed is a one-state (Jewish) solution. Otherwise, the one state would be majority Arab and might be called Ishmael instead of Israel. So, if there is one state, and it’s Jewish, this will mean the “transfer” (Verlagerung) of Arabs to clear the land and make it free of Arabs (Araberfrei).
August 25th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
That also goes for the King David Hotel? >>>>
I think we should understand Jewish terror in the context of the times. Let’s not forget, British in effect, conspired with the Nazis to murder some six million Jews. British are not innocent. To me, what the British did to the Jewish refugees desperate to flee Nazi Germany leaves a great stain on the English people and nation that will never be washed away. You might do a little study of British White Papers and their insidious affects on Jewish immigration from Nazi occupied Europe.
http://books.google.com/books?id=qBn6nYBK6XQC&dq=&pg=PP1&ots=M6gFJEzgix&sig=hoVWp6P8OWh2eVelqmuibQQhm14&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26ned%3Dus%26q%3Dcommander%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bexodus%26btnmeta%253Dsearch%253Dsearch%3DSearch%2Bthe%2BWeb&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title
August 25th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
But it does have everything to do with ethnicity in your view. On religious grounds, you believe God gave the land to the Jews in perpetuity. But don’t you also believe, and now speaking in purely ethnic terms, that ethnic non-Jews should all leave and be welcomed henceforth only provisionally and only on a case-by-case basis? In other words, isn’t Israel for Jews only? >>>>
John,
You are demonstrating your lack of knowledge. Actually I doubt you are as ill-informed as you pretend. You know, I am certain, a Jew has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. We have Jews from all over the earth. We have Chinese Jews, Indian Jews, Ethiopian Jews. In fact, anyone can and do convert to Judaism from any race or ethnicity.
I am speaking of friends and enemies John. Non-Jewish friends are welcome in Israel. Enemies are not welcome.
The same should hold true here in America. Muslims that celebrated on 9/11 should not be welcome here in the U.S. Clerics that teach the overthrow of America in our Saudi-funded mosques should not be welcome.
http://crf.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=4393&pubType=CRF_Reports
August 25th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
John, British soldiers beat Jews and later emaciated Jewish refugees from Nazi occupied Europe following the Holocaust to a bloody pulp.
The Patria, November 30, 1940: “The youngsters were covered in blood as they were driven back screaming… the women were sobbing but the British police were having fun. They taunted us, laughed and jeered and shouted: ‘Look at the bloody Jews!’ One man had an epileptic fit and was thrown about like a sack of potatoes.”
(Israel, A History by Martin Gilbert page 109)
John, I believe in the depths of your dark soul, you celebrate and glory in this.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
I think we should understand Jewish terror in the context of the times.
True. And also Arab terror.
You know, I am certain, a Jew has nothing to do with race or ethnicity.
There are religious and cultural Jews, and there are ethnic Jews. But it is not in reference to Jews that your concerns about race and ethnicity are to be clearly seen. That concern becomes evident, however, when you come to non-Jews, for example to bedouin and to Arabs and to Muslims.
“Arabs live in the land at the pleasure of Jews,” you once said.
“Why don’t we [Jews, yes?] drive all these Bedouin murderers, animal killers and thieves out of our land?” you said above.
Steve, it’s pretty hard to talk about ethnic cleansing without speaking of race and ethnicity.
So, you are not too worried about who is a Jew (except when a Jew disagrees with you and then you question his “credentials” or his yiddishkeit perhaps) but you are much concerned about who is a non-Jew.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
More for John’s heart:
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1468.htm
August 25th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
John, I believe in the depths of your dark soul, you celebrate and glory in this.
And I believe you are looking straight into the darkness of your own soul and projecting it onto me. Again. A man can only look into his own soul, and even that takes some doing because it takes great courage and we are good at placing obstacles in our way. Why don’t you confine your remarks to something you actually know about instead of worrying yourself with my soul? I fear in doing so you are neglecting your own, you see.
“Great people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Small people talk about other people.”
August 25th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
“murderers, animal killers and thieves” John.
Now I know you like murderers of Jews but please do not try to bring me down to your level.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Your post #73 is highly offensive, even if intended as humor.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
True. And also Arab terror.>>>
You think Jews are committing genocide on the Palestinian Muslims no different from what the Nazis did to the Jews?
August 25th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
#73?
August 25th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
John:
Very un professorial:
“I wonder what the Romans thought of the Jews’ ability to govern themselves, i.e., to conduct themselves appropriately under Roman law and in compliance with the military administration. I’d bet they thought they were rebellious, uncivilized, and would never “join the rest of humanity.”
In point-of-fact, the Roman view of the Jews was exactly the opposite. The Romans did NOT conquest due to a rationalization of superior culture. The were VERY impressed with the Jewish intellect, system of government, discipline and even the religion — which was one of the handful that were permissible under Roman law and even was legally practiced in Rome. They wanted to acquire the bounty of wealth associated with the Jewish intellectual and industrious methods and practices.
August 25th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
In point-of-fact, the Roman view of the Jews was exactly the opposite….The were VERY impressed with the Jewish intellect, system of government, discipline and even the religion…They wanted to acquire the bounty of wealth associated with the Jewish intellectual and industrious methods and practices.
They had a funny way of showing it, then. You are overlooking a couple of things. One was in 69 CE and the other was from 132-135 CE. After that, the last straw from the Roman perspective, they were so “impressed” with the Jews and their rebelliousness, riots, assassins, and terrorists, that they sent a military governor, stationed two more Roman legions, and obliterated the name Iudaea from the map so that it became known to them after that as Syria-Palaestina instead of “the land of the Jews.” And of course in doing so they expelled the Jews from the land. Your description fails to account for the Diaspora, therefore, as well as The First Jewish-Roman War (70 CE) and the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132-135 CE).
August 25th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
re 58: “There is indeed a Palestine whether you recognize the nation or not. The framework of a nation-state is but one definition of sovereignty. It is not for you or me to decide a matter of self-determination for others. Perhaps when Israel (and RVFP) finally recognizes the right of Palestine to exist, that the sentiment will be reciprocated.”
yes, there’s a palestine, like there’s a kurdistan. it’s a region but not a country.
and of course the term used to apply to the whole region, including present day israel.
there of course could have been an arab palestine, to go with the jewish palestine of israel, but the arabs living there never did agree to it.
israel of course would be very happy to recognize an arab palestinian state with which they could live side by side. israel has signed peace treaties with every arab state that would agree to.
why don’t you turn your considerable rhetorical talents towards convincing hamas (and fatah, for that matter) to sit down and negotiate in good faith?
but sure, you’re right, it’s not up to me to tell a people what kind of society to have. live and let live, i say.
re: 62
jews lived quite peacefully, for the most part, under the early roman empire, but then again they weren’t conducting suicide bombings or constant shelling.
and you do twist, don’t you. i did not say that i thought that palestinians would never join the rest of humanity. i never said that, thank you. in fact, if i did think that, i would have given up.
August 25th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
John:
The Romans were occupiers of Judah (then Judea) from about 200-BCE. During the progression of time, varying Roman administrations and Caesars had a “love/hate” relationship with the Jews. They generally liked and admired the Jews (as compared with most of their other subjugated peoples) because the Jews produced far more taxes (per capita) and were bold and courageous soldiers in the Roman army. The Jews also brought innovation and like the Greeks, an advanced culture which Rome wished to meld (morph) into their own. At one period of time, it was plausible that the entire Roman empire was about to adopt Judaism as its official religion. Except for two problems:
1. Circumcision.
2. The Jews did not want to “morph” into Roman culture and would not accept certain Roman standards, such as idols of Cesar and so forth.
This second problem became an intolerable insult to Rome, who believed they were paying an extreme complement to the Jews by even being willing to entertain the idea of a “morphation”. To the Romans, placing a statue of Cesar in the Jewish Temple was a complement (not an insult) to the Jews.
The one thing the Romans would never tolerate was rebellion (insurrection). It was really nothing personal toward the Hebrews. They could simply not allow ANY of their subjugated peoples to successfully emancipate. Doing so would encourage other subjugated people to follow and that would not due.
The Hebrews were (at times) pushed passed their limits. The two revolts you mentioned were events which were spawned by:
a. Particularly harsh treatment of the Jews (perhaps all Roman subjects) by the sitting emperor and his local prefect.
b. A Jewish belief of Hebrew scripture that God would empower a victory against overwhelming odds.
Bar Kokhba was therefore held out as the Messiah.
He was nearly successful at defeating the Roman legions and almost brought down the Roman Empire. The Romans had to call for reinforcements from as far away as Scotland.
How different history would have been if Bar Kokhba had been triumphant.
But the Roman slaughter and expulsion of the Jews which followed was the result of Bar Kokhba’s effectiveness. And no, emphatically, there was no Jewish “terrorism” because Jews did not attack Roman civilians.
The Romans handled the Jews the way that OJ Simpson dealt with his ex wife. Essentially, “if I can’t have you no one else will”. It does not mean that OJ did not have feelings for Nicole. Quite the contrary. It also did NOT mean that the Romans lacked admiration or respect for the Jews.
Your point therefore fails.
August 25th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
The bottom line, Isidor, is that the Romans ran out of patience and shut the whole thing down, renamed the place, and expelled the Jews or took them captive. I am quite sure that in 70 CE and in 132-135 CE they were saying exactly the things about the Jews that the Israelis are now saying about the Palestinians: rebellious, seditious, murderous, uncivilized, contemptible, etc.
August 25th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
No, Isidor, actually the Jewish terrorists during the Jewish revolts against Rome were quite famous and considered despicable by the Romans just like the Israelis consider the Palestinian terrorists despicable.
Josephus on the kana’im (zealots), who targeted Romans:
Josephus, The Jewish War Book 4 158 (p.246) notes how the underground guerrilla fighters against the Romans called themselves zealots (kana’im), “for Zealots they called themselves, as if they were devoted to good works, not zealous for all that was vile – vile beyond belief.“
Josephus on “the reign of terror” of the sicarii(dagger men), who targeted both Romans and wealthy Jews, whom they saw as collaborators and sympathizers:
” Among the large group of nationalists who resisted Rome was a group of especially violent nature who Josephus called sicarii or “daggermen,” after the Latin word, sica – dagger. “These men committed numerous murders in broad daylight in the middle of the City. their favourite trick was to mingle with festival crowds, concealing under their garments small daggers with which they stabbed their opponents. When their victims fell, the assassins melted into the indignant crowd, and through their plausibility entirely defied detection….More terrible than the crimes themselves was the fear they aroused, every man hourly expecting death, as in war.” (2:264 [p.137]).”
http://groupdialog.org/humanrights/texts/JEWISHZEALOTSANDTERRORISMTEXTS.htm
from wiki:
Political scientists see this radical offshoot of the Zealots as one of the earliest forerunners of modern terrorism. Like modern terrorists, they intended their actions to suggest a message to a wider target audience: in this instance, the Roman imperial officials and all pro-Roman and collaborationist Jews.
Obviously, the Jews they attacked were civilians.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
For John Baker
Re: “International law,” war crimes, Nuremberg trials and other assorted criminals:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhard_Gehlen
Reinhard Gehlen (born 3 April 1902; died 8 June 1979) was a Major-General (Generalmajor) in the German Army (Wehrmacht Heer) during World War II.
Gehlen held the position of chief of intelligence-gathering on the Eastern Front. He was subsequently recruited by the United States military to set up a spy ring directed against the Soviet Union.
Gehlen ran the West German intelligence apparatus until 1968, and is considered one of the most legendary Cold War spymasters. He organized the Gehlen Organisation, and later became President of the German Federal Intelligence Bureau……
The Gehlen Organisation was pivotal in supplying the West with intelligence on Warsaw Pact nations. The organization infiltrated these countries and tried to foment uprisings against Soviet control, while supporting other groups opposed to Soviet rule. The CIA worked closely with the Gehlen group: the Gehlen Organisation supplied the manpower while the CIA supplied the material needs of the clandestine operations, such as money and airplanes……
The Gehlen Organisation employed hundreds of ex-Nazis, among them Alois Brunner, who was responsible for the Drancy internment camp near Paris, is responsible for the death of 140,000 Jews, and is believed to be still alive as of 2007 [3]; the CIA turned a blind eye, and indeed actively participated in some cases, because of the exigencies of the Cold War. According to Robert Wolfe, historian at the US National Archives, “US army intelligence accepted Reinhard Gehlen’s offer to furnish alleged expertise on the Red Army — and was bilked by the many mass murderers he hired.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
For John Baker
Re: “International law,” war crimes, Nuremberg trials and other assorted war criminals:
Dr. Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr[1] von Braun (March 23, 1912 – June 16, 1977) was one of the leading figures in the development of rocket technology in Germany and the United States…..
Slave labor
SS General Hans Kammler, who as an engineer had constructed several concentration camps including Auschwitz, had a reputation for brutality and had originated the idea of using concentration camp prisoners as slave laborers in the rocket program. Arthur Rudolph, chief engineer of the V-2 rocket factory at Peenemünde, endorsed this idea in April 1943 when a labor shortage developed. More people died building the V-2 rockets than were killed by it as a weapon.[9] Von Braun admitted visiting the plant at Mittelwerk on many occasions, and called conditions at the plant “repulsive”, but claimed never to have witnessed firsthand any deaths or beatings, although it became clear to him that deaths had occurred by 1944 [4]. He denied ever visiting the Mittelbau-Dora concentration camp itself.
On August 15, 1944, von Braun wrote a letter (Ref 7) to Albin Sawatzki, manager of the V-2 production, admitting that he personally picked labor slaves from the Buchenwald concentration camp, who, he admitted 25 years later in an interview, had been in a “pitiful shape”.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
For Steve Klein:
What is your point?
August 25th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
For John Baker
Re: “International law,” war crimes, Nuremberg trials and other assorted war criminals:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Brunner.html
Alois Brunner
(1912- )
——————————————————————————–
SS-Hauptsturmfuhrer Alois Brunner was born in Austria in 1912 and joined the Austrian Nazi Party in 1931 at the age of 19. His anti-Semitism was considered to be so extreme that he was swiftly tapped to be Adolf Eichmann’s private secretary. As head of the Nazi’s Jewish affairs office in prewar Vienna, he organized persecution that forced thousands of Jews to flee to other European countries and the United States.
When World War II started, he sent 47,000 Austrian Jews to concentration camps. After organizing mass roundups in Berlin, he transferred to Greece, where he was responsible for deporting all 43,000 Jews in Salonika within just two months.
In June 1943, he was sent to France to take over the Drancy transit camp near Paris from its French administrators. During 14 months in France, Brunner sent an estimated 25,000 men, women and children to their deaths.
SS-Hauptsturmfuhrer Brunner transported the children of Izieu to Auschwitz. One of the most wanted of all war criminals, Brunner was responsible for the killing of thousands of Jews.
He was often sent by Eichmann as a trouble shooter to areas such as France to expedite the Final Solution, the killings of 6 million Jews.
After World War II, Alois Brunner found gainful employment courtesy of Reinhard Gehlen and the CIA. Gehlen, Hitler’s top anti-Soviet spy, surrendered to the Americans and offered his services. CIA took the bait and Gehlen re-established his spy organization, and enlisted thousands of Gestapo, Wehrmacht and SS veterans. During the Cold War Gehlen’s network of agents received millions of dollars in funding from the U.S. From 1956-68, Reinhard Gehlen was Germany’s Chief of Federal Intelligence Service.
Later Brunner escaped to Syria where he became a government adviser…
August 25th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
I’m just beginning to read this book, “Blowback: The First Full Account of America’s Recruitment of Nazis and Its Disastrous Effect on The cold war, Our Domestic and Foreign Policy.”
by Christopher Simpson
You claim this is all conspiracy mongering on my part and the book is full of unsubstantiated conspiracy, etc.
Then we get to the issue of law and international law John, that you demand I place my trust in. Where was the law here John. I’m not done yet. Barely opened this book.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
For Steve Klein:
What is your point?>>>>>
It’s amazing how “law” can be bent and twisted to suite one’s ends, isn’t it John?
August 25th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
rvfp said,
“jews lived quite peacefully, for the most part, under the early roman empire”
I’m sure that’s true. And any intelligent person knows that the situation of the Jews under Roman occupation is not identical to the situation of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation. That is not the point I was making, however. My point is that human beings are not intended by Hashem to live under military occupation. And consequently they don’t do well under those conditions. In time, they become desperate. And because people living under occupation are relatively powerless, they may resort to desperate means. Palestinians have. Jews have. It’s not pretty. But of all people Jews should be able to have enough empathy (not sympathy) with another occupied people to understand that if they are resorting to desperate (”uncivilized”) measures, it’s because they have been pushed beyond their limits by their occupiers. Jews have been the occupied and are now the occupiers. When they revolted, the Romans considered them despicable. When the Palestinians revolted (the intifadas) Israelis considered them despicable. If you can’t see the analogy, fine. You can continue to think the Jews under occupation were uniquely good and the Palestinians under occupation were uniquely bad. To me it’s quite clear, however, that the response of both to occupation is the typical human response, namely to resist with all available means. Terrorism, as close as there was in the ancient world to what we have today, was in fact invented by Jews living under Roman occupation. It’s not pretty. But it’s predictable because it’s what humans beings do in that circumstance. It’s not sub-human, as some might say. It’s very human indeed.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
My point is that human beings are not intended by Hashem to live under military occupation. >>>>>
Your point is dead wrong.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
It’s amazing how “law” can be bent and twisted to suite one’s ends, isn’t it John?
Again, what’s your point? Do away with the law? Ignore the law? Scoff at the law? Buy your own judge? Roll back to the old rules of warfare before 1907? Do you want American soldiers to go to war without the protection of the Geneva Conventions? Did you know that even Hitler was afraid of the Geneva Conventions as they were written in 1929? Do you really think that because former Nazis were recruited by the US during the Cold War that means that the ICRC does not have a right to insist that Israel not block ambulances and medical personnel trying to reach injured Palestinian civilians, and vice versa?
Ambulances and medical personnel must be allowed to move about unharmed and must not be prevented from discharging their medical duties. All those taking part in the violence must respect and assist the medical services, whether deployed by the armed forces, civilian organizations, the Palestine Red Crescent Society, the Magen David Adom, the ICRC, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies or other humanitarian organizations.
http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/5FLDPJ#1
So tell me again. Exactly what is your point?
August 25th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
My point is that human beings are not intended by Hashem to live under military occupation. >>>>>
The point is John, Palestinians should put themselves under the yoke of Israel, just as the Jews should have understood the times they were living in and submitted to Babylon and later to Rome. I would submit, you do not know Hashem. If you do know Hashem, how do you deal with his word?
Jer 27:6 “Now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, My servant, and I have given him also the wild animals of the field to serve him.
“All the nations shall serve him and his son and his grandson until the time of his own land comes; then many nations and great kings will make him their servant.
“It will be, that the nation or the kingdom which will not serve him, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and which will not put its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, I will punish that nation with the sword, with famine and with pestilence,” declares the LORD, “until I have destroyed it by his hand.
“But as for you, do not listen to your prophets, your diviners, your dreamers, your soothsayers or your sorcerers who speak to you, saying, ‘You will not serve the king of Babylon.’
“For they prophesy a lie to you in order to remove you far from your land; and I will drive you out and you will perish.
“But the nation which will bring its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him, I will let remain on its land,” declares the LORD, “and they will till it and dwell in it.’”"
August 25th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Your point is dead wrong.
You think that when humans were created btselem elohim that meant Hashem intended them to live under someone’s bootheel and made them in such a way as to thrive in that situation? I think one thing btselem elohim means is that all humans long to be free, that they don’t thrive in captivity or under oppression or military occupation. Another thing it means is that being an occupier over another people dehumanizes, brutalizes the occupier. Human beings were not made to live under occupation or to be occupiers.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Again, what’s your point? Do away with the law? Ignore the law? Scoff at the law? Buy your own judge? Roll back to the old rules of warfare before 1907?>>>>
No. You are missing my point. I want to know who made the law and what was its context and its original intent which was little doubt noble.
Like Robert Bork, for all the criticism piled on the man at his confirmation hearing for US Supreme Court Justice, he is a Constitutional scholar, like many who know our framer’s “original intent.”
When Jew-haters meet in Geneva and decide in a forty five minute meeting — which the US boycotted — that the Fourth Convention applies to Israel ‘only’ and not to any other nation, I want to know a little more about these men and women who decided this; what were their motives, etc.
August 25th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
You think that when humans were created btselem elohim that meant Hashem intended them to live under someone’s bootheel and made them in such a way as to thrive in that situation?>>>>
Bondage is not God’s ideal, this is true but it may be His will for a time.
Remember, this is the God that sent the Hebrews into Egyptian bondage for three hundred or so years. What was that all about since you know God’s will?
August 25th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
The following (in part) is God’s promise to restored Israel. I don’t think this is too far off. I do not believe this will come before God judges the earth for its wickedness. The prophet said God will not judge the earth as He did in the days of Noah, by water, but by fire. It’s not anything to look forward to but the way things are going, it may not be too far off. Maybe this generation. Maybe the next. We’ll see. I quote verse twelve because you do not think it is in the order of things for one people or nation to serve another people or nation. This is simply not true, it seems to me.
Isa 60:12 “For the nation and the kingdom which will not serve you will perish, And the nations will be utterly ruined.
Isa 60:1 “Arise, shine; for your light has come, And the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.
“For behold, darkness will cover the earth And deep darkness the peoples; But the LORD will rise upon you And His glory will appear upon you.
“Nations will come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising.
“Lift up your eyes round about and see; They all gather together, they come to you. Your sons will come from afar, And your daughters will be carried in the arms……
Isa 60:10 “Foreigners will build up your walls, And their kings will minister to you; For in My wrath I struck you, And in My favor I have had compassion on you.
“Your gates will be open continually; They will not be closed day or night, So that {men} may bring to you the wealth of the nations, With their kings led in procession.
Isa 60:14 “The sons of those who afflicted you will come bowing to you, And all those who despised you will bow themselves at the soles of your feet; And they will call you the city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
“Whereas you have been forsaken and hated With no one passing through, I will make you an everlasting pride, A joy from generation to generation.
“You will also suck the milk of nations And suck the breast of kings; Then you will know that I, the LORD, am your Savior And your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.
“Instead of bronze I will bring gold, And instead of iron I will bring silver, And instead of wood, bronze, And instead of stones, iron. And I will make peace your administrators And righteousness your overseers.
“Violence will not be heard again in your land, Nor devastation or destruction within your borders; But you will call your walls salvation, and your gates praise.
“No longer will you have the sun for light by day, Nor for brightness will the moon give you light; But you will have the LORD for an everlasting light, And your God for your glory.
“Your sun will no longer set, Nor will your moon wane; For you will have the LORD for an everlasting light, And the days of your mourning will be over.
“Then all your people will be righteous; They will possess the land forever, The branch of My planting, The work of My hands, That I may be glorified.
“The smallest one will become a clan, And the least one a mighty nation. I, the LORD, will hasten it in its time.”
August 25th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
The point is John, Palestinians should put themselves under the yoke of Israel, just as the Jews should have understood the times they were living in and submitted to Babylon and later to Rome.
Good grief, Steve. The sicarii would have slipped a dagger between your ribs in the market place, because you sure sound like a Roman collaborator and an appeaser to me. Wasn’t that the great sin you were holding “the German-Jews” accountable for, telling Jews to submit to persecution? Now you’re saying the same thing? Wake up, man. You think you’re thinking, but you’re not.
I would submit, you do not know Hashem. If you do know Hashem, how do you deal with his word?
I would submit that you need to get a life. This is some of the silliest nonsense I’ve ever heard of. You are desperately out of touch with reality, Steve. Desperately. Get a grip.
August 25th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
Good grief, Steve. The sicarii would have slipped a dagger between your ribs in the market place, because you sure sound like a Roman collaborator and an appeaser to me. Wasn’t that the great sin you were holding “the German-Jews” accountable for, telling Jews to submit to persecution? Now you’re saying the same thing? Wake up, man. You think you’re thinking, but you’re not.>>>>
Didn’t the Jews in the prophet Jeremiah’s day think he was a traitor and a collaborator with Babylon? Didn’t God tell the prophet He would protect him?
You are mixing apples and oranges with German Jews. Hitler was not asking for Jews to submit to his authority. He wanted all of the Jews dead.
Had the Jews submitted to the king of Babylon and perhaps to Rome…
I’ll let the scripture speak for itself:
“But the nation which will bring its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him, I will let remain on its land,” declares the LORD, “and they will till it and dwell in it.’””
August 26th, 2007 at 2:56 am
Steve -
and I suppose that the American colonists should have continued to submit to the yoke of the King of England . . . . .
Or the Blacks in apartheid South Africa . . .
Many of the great progressive changes in human history have come about through the revolutionary overthrow of repressive regimes.
However if the Torah is your only yardstick for history and current events then it seems to be pointless trying to discuss substantive issues with you.
August 26th, 2007 at 4:24 am
this whole roman analogy has gotten out of hand.
ancient jews did not send in suicide bombers, and they didn’t shell rome constantly. they also didn’t want to see rome destroyed, they just wanted to do their thing. palestinians do send in suicide bombers, they have shelled israel non stop, they do want to see israel destroyed.
no one is saying israel is perfect. but they are doing their best in a terrible situation. what do you want them to do john, just go away? when the palestinians want to talk peace, they will have it, it’s as simple as that. until then, israel will defend herself, and it won’t be good for the palestinians, that’s for sure.
August 26th, 2007 at 5:02 am
and I suppose that the American colonists should have continued to submit to the yoke of the King of England . . . . .
Or the Blacks in apartheid South Africa . . .
Many of the great progressive changes in human history have come about through the revolutionary overthrow of repressive regimes.>>>>>
You raise some good points Fred. I have thought about this, particularly the American example. I don’t have an easy answer. Sometimes I read about the ancient Hebrew “rebellion” in Egypt. But according to the Biblical account there was no rebellion. God brought Israel out of Egypt by means of miracles. America was founded on the principle of rebellion. Thomas Jefferson allegedly wrote: “A little revolution now and then is a good thing; the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Blacks in the American south did not rebel and they eventually obtained their freedom. I have long thought the American Civil war was divine judgment on America for the slave trade but that’s mere speculation on my part.
I’m not sure rebellion is the best way to found a nation yet it is true, this is how the U.S. came into being.
Weren’t the blacks of South Africa liberated mostly by the activities of the international community? Condemnations, boycotts and those sorts of things? Now that the Blacks are in control of South Africa, how is South Africa faring? Better than when the Whites held sway? I don’t know because I’ve not followed South Africa.
August 26th, 2007 at 5:21 am
Many of the great progressive changes in human history have come about through the revolutionary overthrow of repressive regimes. >>>>>>
This is what I do not understand. According to my study, after the 1967 Six Day war Moshe Dayan and others made it a priority to improve Palestinian lives in the territories and Gaza. Israel invested in substantial infrastructure and trade commenced between Israelis and Arabs. Palestinian lives, living conditions, standard of living, etc., accelerated far beyond what it was under Jordanian and Egyptian occupation. Dayan wanted Palestinians to rule their own lives as much as possible so they elected mayors in their towns.
When did the First Intifada begin? 1987? Since the Palestinians began their terrorist rebellions, their living conditions have done nothing but deteriorate, especially in Gaza which today is nearly a basket case.
If the Jews were establishing concentration camps in the territories for the Arabs and systematically gassing the Palestinians on a daily basis by the thousands or tens of thousands, then I could understand a Palestinian revolutionary overthrow. Under the circumstance, I have no sympathy for these Intifadas and Palestinian rebellions.
August 26th, 2007 at 6:45 am
How about if the occupiers were just killing one or two Jews, women, children, every day?
Because that is what the IDF is doing to Arabs, women, children, every day. It has become so routine that it is no longer news.
August 26th, 2007 at 7:28 am
rvfp
The Jews living under Roman occupation essentially invented terrorism, such as it existed in the ancient world. Everyone knows there was no such thing as explosives or shells. They used daggers in the marketplace. They didn’t only attack Romans, they mostly targeted Jewish collaborators, who were obviously civilians; not soldiers. Suicide martyrs? Nine hundred of them committed suicide (or killed each other) including women and children at Masada, which had been their base for murdering and pillaging Roman and Jewish settlements, which also included killing hundreds of women and children. They were a fanatical minority and claimed to be acting in the name of their religious beliefs.
“when the palestinians want to talk peace, they will have it, it’s as simple as that.”
If only it were. What you are saying is the same thing as Steve: when they submit to the yoke, they will have peace. Until then the mantra will be, “We have no partner for peace.”
I believe the question needs to be asked whether the Palestinians have a partner for peace, and also whether Israel recognizes the right of the Palestinian State to exist. I don’t believe we can assume an affirmative answer to either of those two questions. And that’s why it is not as simple as you say. What do I expect them to do? The majority of the people on both sides who realize that the land must be shared equitably, with justice and reconciliation, must summon up enough empathy for the other side to realize they have the same aims and sit down and negotiate in all earnestness how to bring about a comprehensive settlement to the conflict. It will take a lot of beating to turn all the swords into plowshares. And I believe this is what the Almighty expects as well, not that one people be the occupied and the other the occupier, for this is not why mankind was put on this earth. Rather He expects brothers and sisters to share the land in peace. “I desire chesed and not sacrifice.”
August 26th, 2007 at 7:33 am
Because that is what the IDF is doing to Arabs, women, children, every day. It has become so routine that it is no longer news. >>>>
It’s not IDF policy to deliberately kill women and children. I’m sure you know this. These women and children are in a war zone. Israelis are constantly under terrorist attack. Every day I am reading of terrorist attacks that were thrwarted by the IDF. Another one just this morning from Gaza.
August 26th, 2007 at 7:38 am
John:
In spite of your perpetual and infinite false moral equivalency — which permeates this blog like a fish-oil factory on a hot July afternoon:
a. “Daggermen” were assassins, not “terrorists”. Their targets were both military and political, such as judges, mayors, etc,. but back then those categories were also considered military acquisitions, as it was the judges who passed death sentences on the civilians, etc. You can NOT morally compare these people with 20-worst century suicide bombers, who target purely civilians, en-masse, including women and children.
b. you wrote: “I am quite sure that in 70 CE and in 132-135 CE they were saying exactly the things about the Jews that the Israelis are now saying about the Palestinians: rebellious, seditious, murderous, uncivilized, contemptible, etc.”
Again: NO. The Jews of the Messianic Revolts were NOT the equivalent of the Palestinian-Arabs of the Intafatas. No way even close. Not in the same solar-system. If anything, the Romans, who were brutal and sadistic murderers themselves would have seen the Jews as sissies, being bound and inhibited in their fighting tactics by an invisible God.
(‘assassin’ BTW is derived from Arabic circa 1,100-CE and the word did not exist in Roman times.)
“Rebellious & seditious”
No because the today’s Jews do not say such things about Arabs.
“murderous”
No because the Romans well knew that insurrection and emancipation could only be accomplished through war. Whereas the Arabs can have their emancipation (for 60 years already) through peaceful negotiations and keeping their agreements. There was no equivalent alternative for the Jews of Roman occupation.
“uncivilized” Wrong. The Jews were highly civilized, even by Roman standards and they knew it.
“contemptible” OK. So you get one. But who is not “contemptible” in any conflict, whether it be a blood conflict or a conflict of ideas?
August 26th, 2007 at 7:39 am
Immediately after Israel completely withdrew from Gaza, we got rockets. Palestinians did not wait so they could say “Israel violated” this or that agreement. Immediately.
Why is this John?
All these philanthropists spent I don’t know how many millions purchasing greenhouse infrastructure for these people and they looted and destroyed. You say these people are just like the Jews in terms of civilized norms?
Ms. Rice strong-armed Israel into opening up Rafah border crossing to unrestricted flow of weapons and terrorists into Gaza from Egypt.
August 26th, 2007 at 7:54 am
I quote verse twelve because you do not think it is in the order of things for one people or nation to serve another people or nation. This is simply not true, it seems to me.
If that is so, then who needs Moshiach? If everything is “the way it’s spozed to be” then what in the world are we waiting for the Messianic Age for???
You completely misunderstand the messianic expectations. Have you not noticed that hopes for the coming Kingdom rise among the people when despair over the current situations are at their worst? Palestine was boiling with messianic cults during the Roman occupation. Apocalyptic literature is always “persecution literature,” the kind of writing that circulates among the oppressed to give them hope that God is still in charge and that a total reversal is coming or is already at hand. The message is not to submit but to get packed, like the Chofetz Chaim, who packed his bags every Saturday night in expectation of Moshiach. And the message is definitely not to become an oppressor yourself. That would be appalling. How is such a reading even possible? “I desire chesed and not sacrifice.”
August 26th, 2007 at 7:57 am
John wrote: “If only it were. What you are saying is the same thing as Steve: when they submit to the yoke, they will have peace. Until then the mantra will be, “We have no partner for peace.”
I believe the question needs to be asked whether the Palestinians have a partner for peace, and also whether Israel recognizes the right of the Palestinian State to exist. I don’t believe we can assume an affirmative answer to either of those two questions.”
You know my position. If they submit to Israel’s rule they will have peace and a degree of self-governance but ideally they should emigrate and settle amongst their Arab brethren / co-religionists throughout the Muslim-Arab world. Since the Europeans are such big supporters of the Palestinian cause, are so fond of Muslim riots and terror, maybe France and England will take in a few million. I do not believe in a two state solution in the Holy Land because of my faith. A two state solution is abhorrent.
Were Palestinian Arab to submit to Israeli rule there is little question in my mind, they would have had a separate state many years back because most Jews do not think like me. Most Jews believe in a two state solution. The only thing that has prevented this till now, is not ideologically and religiously driven Jews and settlers but Palestinian terror.
August 26th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Isidor, I never knew how much the Romans and the Jews loved and admired each other before. Thank you for enlightening me.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:04 am
“If they submit to Israel’s rule….”
Earth calling Steve. Earth calling Steve. What’s your location? Over.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:09 am
These women and children are in a war zone.
No sh*t. They are being attacked by IDF soldiers and killed on a daily basis.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:09 am
You completely misunderstand the messianic expectations. Have you not noticed that hopes for the coming Kingdom rise among the people when despair over the current situations are at their worst?>>>>
I’m sure you know, messianic expectations can be deadly. You’ve probably read of the various ‘messiahs’ that appeared throughout Jewish Diaspora. Shabbatai Zvi was the most insidious of impostors.
You are right despair causing messianic hopes. The ancient Hebrews were in the depths of despair in Egypt and they cried out to God and He sent them a deliverer; Moses.
Many religious Jews look at the world today in much the same way. Israel is becoming more and more isolated in the world community of nations; a pariah. Israel’s enemies are arming to the teeth. Israel faces missile threats from Iran — soon a nuclear threat — from Hezbollah to the north, from Syria and from Gaza in the south and we have this loon of a prime minister that is eager to create a Palestinian state in the mountains of Judea and Samaria overlooking Israel’s coastal cities. Do you know how wide Israel will be at its narrowest. TEN MILES WIDE JOHN! It’s suicide! The Arabs are salivating over the Jews annihilation all over the Arab world, thing have not looked this good for Jewish blood and the end of the Zionist entity!
Thus many religious Jews are looking for messiah you can be sure. The difference between our day and any previous time is the fact that our prophets made the re-gathering of the Jews back into our land a sign of the last days. I have no doubt we are living in the “last days.” The question is, where exactly are we? Last days could go on for decades in God’s economy. It might be the next generation or later but clearly to most who study prophecy we are living “near” the end times. I’m sure you are aware of this.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:13 am
Earth calling Steve. Earth calling Steve. What’s your location? Over>>>>
No. Earth to John! They are firing rockets and but for IDF thwarting them, sending suicide martyrs. What are you taking about. They are in a state of rebellion.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:17 am
John do you know how many thousands of Jews were murdered and maimed in the days, months and years following the signing of the Oslo accords on the White House lawn.
Rabin and Peres brought a bunch of gangsters and criminals into Gaza from Tunis, they armed them and gave them control over the Palestinian towns, cities and villages. They signed the DOP (Declaration of Principles), etc., withdrew the IDF from PA controlled areas, etc.
What did the Jews get? Terror, suicide bombings and other atrocities. These people are not civilized John. They are simply not civilized.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:50 am
John:
I did not say the Jews liked and/or admired the Romans. I said the Romans liked and admired the Hebrews. This is not a hard concept to grasp, even though you refuse to do so.
A warden for example can have his favored inmates. Those who can be put in charge and productively administer the library, or the kitchen. In some cases, such favored inmates may in fact be innocent of the crime(s) for which they were convicted. No matter. That does NOT mean that such favored inmates either like the warden, or admire him, or respect him, or respect the institution which wrongly put them behind his bars.
Once you grasp this concept, then you may consider yourself duely enlightened.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:52 am
“These people are not civilized John. They are simply not civilized.”
Then why did you pick their country to move into? Were things that bad in Vienna and St. Petersburg?
If you expect “these people” to submit to Israeli rule, then you are the ones who are not civilized and the only thing you understand is force. This is not the way humans were made to live, whether as the oppressed or as the oppressors. To rule over another people is a despicable national goal. That’s nothing more or less than fascism. Utterly despicable. And to claim Divine sanction for that is blasphemy and chillul Hashem, desecration of God’s Holy Name. This makes me want to throw up frankly. It’s such an utterly depraved distortion of religion, it’s like those idiots who carry the signs saying “God Hates Fags.”
August 26th, 2007 at 9:02 am
“I said the Romans liked and admired the Hebrews”
Of course, that’s why they dragged thousands of them in chains off to Rome, so they could be closer to them!
Look, Isidor. You are trying to focus on Roman admiration for Jews by way of saying Jews are/were admirable people. I’m sure that’s true. But you are overlooking the main point, which is that Roman occupation was harsh and turned Jew against Jew. The Roman occupation brought cultural and religious interference that was obnoxious and offensive. In time, the Jews hated the Romans and vice versa. The Jews were finally pushed to the limit and rebelled and kept rebelling until the Romans came down on them hard. They turned the Temple into a parking lot and cleaned house. They expelled the Jews and renamed the country. Life went on for the Jews under the Roman Emperors. But you cannot ignore the fact that the Jews did react to the Roman occupation by fighting back for all they were worth. In that respect, they were no different than the Palestinians are today. Many things are different. The two situations are not the same. But Jews and Arabs are equally human, and the human response to oppression, occupation, persecution, is fairly constant down the centuries. And it’s because humans were not made to live like that, whether as the occupied or the occupiers. It’s bad for both. Ironically, the Jews have been in both positions. They should know better. Have a good day.
August 26th, 2007 at 9:12 am
They are in a state of rebellion.
They have every right to be under the Geneva Conventions.
“8. Demonstrations against the occupying forces by the civilian population under occupation or stand-offs between them are not acts of war. They should therefore not be dealt with by military methods and means. When faced with the civilian population, Israeli forces must exercise restraint: any use of force must be proportionate, all necessary precautions must be taken to avoid casualties, and the lethal use of firearms must be strictly limited to what is unavoidable as an immediate measure to protect life.”
http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/5FLDPJ#1
Is restraint too much to ask??? When five IDF soldiers take a teenager waiting for a bus and beat him to death, I don’t call that restraint. When a woman suffering a heart attack is kept at a checkpoint for an hour in the ambulance and dies, I don’t call that restraint. This stuff happens every day. They are in a war zone because they are being attacked by soldiers.
August 26th, 2007 at 9:16 am
To rule over another people is a despicable national goal. That’s nothing more or less than fascism. Utterly despicable. And to claim Divine sanction for that is blasphemy and chillul Hashem, desecration of God’s Holy Name. This makes me want to throw up frankly. It’s such an utterly depraved distortion of religion>>>>>
John, please. Don’t get so bent out of shape over my words. I have have no political power. I am a nothing. I don’t speak for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert or for Foreign Minister Tzippi Livini or for Defense Minister Barak or even for newly elected President Shimon Peres.
Let me say this in response to the revulsion you feel about my views on this matter and these people. I have an answer for you and for them. Emigration. Let them emigrate and settle amongst their own people in Jordan which is a Palestinian state or wherever in the Arab world. We will compensated them well for their property and help them to the best of our ability.
That is my answer because I do not believe these two people can coexist together in the Holy Land. As the Bible said about Avraham and his nephew Lot who were brothers, by the way, “the land could not sustain them while dwelling together.” How much more these two peoples?
August 26th, 2007 at 9:32 am
But Jews and Arabs are equally human>>>>
They don’t act “equally” human. Are you saying a female suicide bomber / martyr is a human response?
According to reports, Palestinian girls are recruited by exerting extreme social and psychological pressure on her after she had engaged in premarital relations. First, Fatah/Tanzim activists seduce young girls into engaging in sexual relations or even rape them. Then, they exert strong pressure on the girls to commit suicide to save their family’s honor.
What do you think of this? Is it human? Civilized?
August 26th, 2007 at 9:40 am
Question for Isador and ARVFP—–
since the two of you would like to see Israel and the Palestinians reach an accommodation:
Given past history, do you two have any reason to believe that should Israel abandon all the settlements in the West Bank and give the Palestinians the entirety of West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza and a corridor between the West Bank and Gaza, do you two have any reason what so ever to believe the Palestinians would discontinue the jihad against the greatly truncated and vulnerable Jewish state? Do you truly believe this would bring peace to the region?
August 26th, 2007 at 10:14 am
“That is my answer because I do not believe these two people can coexist together in the Holy Land.”
God expects this of them.
Not these two people? If Hashem expected you to rule over any people, surely wouldn’t it be people that had formerly ruled over you? Can you find me the verse in the Torah that says, “You shall oppress the Egyptian, for formerly he oppressed you when you dwellt in the Land of Egypt”? Where is that verse?
Oops. I got it wrong. Here is what is says instead, Deuteronomy 23:
7 “You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land. 8 Children born to them in the third generation may enter the assembly of the LORD.”
In fact the reason you are not even to hate him is for the very reason that you were oppressed once by his people. In other words, the mitzvah is that you should know better from that experience what it is like to be oppressed and how wrong it is to be an oppressor. The same goes for both Egyptians and Edomites, traditional enemies of the Jews throughout their history. You are not even to despise these people, much less oppress them. And we know that you are not to oppress them, because the mitzvah is that you are to permit their grandchildren to become members of the Great Assembly of Israel.
August 26th, 2007 at 10:20 am
According to reports…
The veracity of which are very much in doubt, as we have discussed earlier. Again, if they really are so evil, why is it necessary to exaggerate and misrepresent facts? If they really are sub-human, shouldn’t it be enough to report facts that you know to be true? If they really are demonic, why is it necessary to demonize them?
August 26th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Are you saying a female suicide bomber / martyr is a human response?
Didn’t I just get through telling you that Jewish terrorists (sicarii) living under Roman occupation slaughtered Jewish villages including women and children? The sicarii at Masada reportedly had the blood of about 700 on their hands. They all either committed suicide including the women and children or they killed each other including the women and children. Yes, I think it’s every bit as human a response to occupation and oppression as what you see today.
August 26th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Again, if they really are so evil, why is it necessary to exaggerate and misrepresent facts?>>>>
I’m not so sure it is exaggerating or misrepresenting facts.
http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/memoranda/memo84.pdf
page 44
For example, a report in Yediot Ahronot states, “This is how terrorist organizations recruit female suicide terrorists to commit suicide attacks: ‘If you don’t commit a suicide terrorist attack, we’ll tell people you were raped.’ Agents of Fatah and Tanzim in the Beit Lehem area rape young Palestinian women, or seduce them into having sexual relations. Then they blackmail them by telling them, ‘Either you commit suicide attacks, or we’ll tell your family.’ These are reports obtained by IDF intelligence sources.” According to these reports, at least as described in Yediot Ahronot, special units of rapists are operating on behalf of Tanzim in the Bethlehem
area with the express purpose of cultivating female suicide terrorists, though the special rapist units obviously play no direct part in the terrorist attacks.
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/html/final/eng/bu/women/women.htm
The Use of Women by Terrorist Organizations
Since continuous Palestinian violence erupted in September and at least up to January 2003, the participation of women in suicide attacks and other types of terrorist activities has increased exponentially. There have been more than 20 known cases in which women were involved in terrorist attacks against Israeli targets, some involving female suicide bombers.
This is not a new phenomenon. Terrorist organizations have been using women to perpetrate terror attacks; for example in Lebanon. They exploit the common perception that women are more gentle and innocent. The womens appearance allows them to arouse less suspicion and blend in on Israeli streets. It is widely known that male Israeli soldiers usually avoid performing bodily searches on women out of respect. In a very real sense, the use of women by terrorist organizations is an outright abuse of the compassion of IDF soldiers exhibited towards Palestinian women.
Terrorist organizations are well versed in exploiting the weaker sections of society. Reports note a growing trend by Fatah and Tanzim groups in recruiting emotionally distressed young women for suicide attacks. Local activists carefully select desperate women whom they can manipulate.
A woman’s reason for sacrificing herself may be personal/romantic or even socio-economic. For example, women from troubled socio-economic backgrounds, including women with bad reputations due to their sexual involvement with many men, have asked to participate in terrorist activities. They see it as a way to improve their social standing in Palestinian society.
A well-connected Palestinian from Bethlehem exposed the recruitment tactics used by Fatah/Tanzim to solicit one young woman for a suicide attack. Here are the highlights of his report:
A 20-year old Bethlehem resident was recruited in October 2002 by Fatah/Tanzim to carry out a suicide attack in Israel
The girl was recruited by two older women, sent by Hindy Al Maghribi, the wife of Ahmad Al Maghribi. Al Maghribi is a senior Tanzim activist from Deheishe near Bethlehem, who was arrested by Israeli security forces. The women have been involved in the activities of Ra’fat Jawabrah, a senior Tanzim activist and head of the Special Forces of Bashir Nafi in Bethlehem.
The girl was recruited by exerting extreme social and psychological pressure on her after she had engaged in premarital relations. First, Fatah/Tanzim activists seduce young girls into engaging in sexual relations or even rape them. Then, they exert strong pressure on the girls to commit suicide to save their family’s honor.
When the family became aware of the situation, the girl was smuggled out of Bethlehem. She recently went underground in fear for her life, as Fatah/Tanzim are making efforts to contact her.
It has also been reported that female suicide terrorists belonging to Fatah/Tanzim often decided to perpetrate suicide attacks after becoming pregnant- and after they have been seduced by Fatah members. Two specific examples of pregnant suicide bombers in recent months are:
Andalib Taqtaqah from Bethlehem: 21-year-old Tanzim activist. Perpetrated a suicide attack at the Machane Yehuda market in Jerusalem on April 12th 2002. Six civilians were killed and a further 60 were injured.
Ayat Al Akhras from Deheishe: 18-year-old girl from the Deheishe near Bethlehem. Perpetrated a suicide attack at a Jerusalem supermarket on March 29th 2002. Two Israeli civilians were killed and 22 were injured. Fatah/Tanzim took responsibility for the attack.
August 26th, 2007 at 11:31 am
I don’t hate the Egyptians. I’m not sure who are the Edomites today since they’ve been displaced somewhere.
But again, you are talking about the commandment to not oppress the stranger and the sojourner. My argument is these people, these Palestinian Muslim Arabs (many of them) are not the stranger and the alien in our land.
War is oppressive. Would you have argued the allies shouldn’t have oppressed the Germans and the Japanese? We have many Muslim Americans whose leaders are shouting about anti-Arab discrimination and racism here in the U.S.
Quite honestly, I don’t know how many are loyal citizens. Do you? Do we see mass demonstrations against Muslim terrorism all over the planet? Where were and are the mass demonstrations against bin Laden and his atrocities committed in the name of Islam? All we hear are complaints about racism and Islamophobia.
If nineteen Jewish terrorists had flown those jets into the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, you can be sure there would be mass outrage on the part of American Jews and our Jewish leaders. Mass outrage and mass soul searching!
August 26th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Worth reading!
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/2005/09/brigitte_gabrie_1.php
August 26th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MZGaBTlJH3w
August 26th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
re: The Use of Women by Terrorist Organizations
Steve, do you ever “consider the source”? I guess not, because the crap you post is always so easy to shoot down. If the National Enquirer reports Elvis was abducted by aliens and is still alive, do you plan to post it here? Where did this report come from, or where did you find it? It is on the website of CSS. The Terrorism and Intelligence Information Center at the Center for Special Services. In Israel. OK, so what is the Center for Special Services? Here is what THEY tell us:
“The Center for Special Studies (C.S.S.) located at the official memorial site of the Israeli intelligence community serves as an active and interactive educational and informational center. Its purposes are to honor and commemorate those involved in secret warfare and to transmit to future generations the legacy of the Israeli intelligence community.
The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center incorporates part of the wide-ranging activities of the Center for Special Studies, offering its users a variety of services…”
Also:
The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center opened in 2001. It is part of the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center (IICC) , an NGO dedicated to the memory of the fallen of the Israeli Intelligence Community and it is located near Gelilot , north of Tel Aviv. It is headed by (Col. Ret.) Dr. Reuven Erlich.
The Center boasts:
A small staff of experts who write Information Bulletins on a wide range of topics related to terrorism, hate and anti-Semitic propaganda and incitement to violence. The Bulletins are issued in Hebrew and English (many are now also translated into French , Russian , and Arabic ).”
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/site/content/T1.asp?Sid=18&pid=121
Steve, your article comes from an organization made up probably of retired Shin Bet and Mossad agents who are up to dish anti-Palestinian propaganda and hunt anti-Semites. They are in the propaganda business, probably officially, probably funded secretly or otherwise by Israeli intelligence. Give me a break.
I will bet you dollars to donuts you can also find a Palestinian source who will claim that girls were forced into become collaborators using the same methods.
I don’t believe any of this story of sexual recruiting techniques has been independently verified. I am dubious, particularly considering the tabloid sources. Has this ever been reported in Haaretz? On the BBC?
August 26th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Israeli recuitment techniques used on children:
http://www.iansa.org/regions/nafrica/documents/child_recruitment_israel_en2004.pdf
Statement from Palestinian boy:
…Raed then ends his statement by telling how he was finally recruited using sexual extortion.
DCI–Palestine’s report includes several accounts of Palestinian children who were tortured as a means to weaken their resistance to a proposal of collaboration. Reports by several other Human Rights organisations, confirm that although Israel has stopped using some of its former methods for torturing
Palestinians, torture is still commonly used and children are not afforded preferential treatment.
Methods of torture still in use include beatings, painful shackling and detention in inhuman conditions, e.g. deprivation of sleep, exposure to extreme heat and cold and to continuous artificial light.134 The clinching factor usually includes some form of long-term pressure, for example issuing a work permit or sexually blackmailing the detainee into collaborating, but surely the torturing serves to weaken whatever power one may have to resist this potentially life-endangering offer.
The Israeli human rights group B’tselem has also documented cases dating from the first months of the Al Aqsa Intifada (October 2000 to January 2001) of Palestinian children aged 14-17 being tortured by members of the Israeli police, among other things in order to obtain information about actions by other youths (although no mention was made in this report of attempts to recruit them for long-term
collaboration).135 The use of torture against anyone is a crime against humanity, as stated in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998). It seems that using torture on children is an extremely heinous
crime, especially when the purpose of the torture is to force that child to serve an occupying state’s security system against the interests of his or her own people.
Both sides in other words accuse each other of using sexual techniques to recruit children and young adults. The truth is that both sides are guilty of failing to protect children from violence.
August 26th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
John, this is why I sent two source in order to confirm this. I also sent “The Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies.”
Perhaps you are dubious because you are sympathetic to our enemy’s cause? I don’t know yet. I will keep an open mind to your side of the argument; for now.
On the other hand, you insisted just days ago, U.S. CIA, Pentagon’s Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency, and other agency recruitment of Nazi war criminals following the second world war was merely conspiracy mongering. It would appear you were wrong.
I find it interesting that the US was a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention which specifically addressed Nazi war crimes, all the while our government was recruiting these criminals who committed these crimes in order to help fight the Soviets.
Don’t you find this just a little disconcerting John?
August 26th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Don’t you find this just a little disconcerting John?
Of course. But what are you suggesting? I also find it disconcerting that someone would claim that as justification for ignoring the Fourth Geneva Conventions altogether. It was not the Geneva Conventions that were the problem, after all; it was the cynical way they were enforced by the United States. If the Fourth Geneva Conventions are ignored, where does that put us? It puts us back to the Geneva Conventions of 1921. These were the ones which Hitler was very careful of but found a way around, for example in the interrogation of prisoners using sophisticate psychological techniques. The Nazis operated a number of interrogation camps for downed Allied airmen in WW II. Because of the Geneva Conventions of 1921 the Germans for the most part did not physically torture the airmen. Instead they used German university professors as interrogators and applied wine and cigarettes and women to induce conversation looking for tiny scraps of information. The Conventions required only “name, rank, and serial number.” But much else slipped past the Conventions of 1921. As you say, it was because of the Nazis and particularly the things they did to Jews that the Fourth Geneva Conventions were written in 1949. They did away with interrogation camps altogether. The Americans and Brits who pushed for the Fourth Geneva Conventions assumed that the great violator was going to be Stalin and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union resisted them all the way during the conferences. All the nations that signed, pledged themselves, to themselves and others, for their own sakes to raise the standards of their own past performance. Israel was a new nation but also pledged itself to adhere to that standard. Israel is being reminded of those pledges and asked to live up to them. If the United States fails to live up the pledges we made, we should also be held accountable. If Donald Rumsfeld is put on trial in The Hague you will see what that means. But even if it doesn’t happen, even if the United States fails its obligations and avoids accountability, I don’t believe the Geneva Conventions should be ignored or torn down. I believe each nation that contravenes the Conventions should be reminded repeatedly by the entire community of nations until they bring themselves into compliance. I want my country to adhere to and uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention regardless what any other nation does. I can’t understand why any other people would not think the same way about their country. If Country X argues that it is “no worse than Country Y” in violating, this comes down to the argument that Country X is also no better than Country Y in violating the Conventions. For example, if Country X admits they torture terrorist prisoners but says they are no worse than Egypt or Saudi Arabia which do the same, they are only claiming they are no better than Egypt or Saudi Arabia in that regard. Israel is surrounded by dim bulbs. You don’t fulfill your role as “light unto the nations” by claiming that you also are a 15-watter just like them. I want America to be the best. Don’t you want Israel to be the best also?
August 26th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
John,
Your world view and mine are such polar opposites.
I’m not arguing that the Conventions were wrong or should be done away with.
I am arguing that had the great powers done what was right in the early nineteen thirties, the Fourth Geneva Convention would have been moot; unnecessary.
When Adolf Hitler violated the Treaty of Versailles by sending troops to Rhineland, when he began re-arming Germany in violation of the treaty, he should have been crushed like a toad.
That’s all. Crushed. Historians acknowledge he was militarily weak then in the early thirties and he (Hitler) knew it but he was counting on the cowardice, ineptitude and the utter stupidity of Great Britain and France. Hitler was skilled at brinkmanship. William Shirer wrote: “The governments of London and Paris continued for years to engage in empty diplomatic negotiations with Berlin and Rome to assure ‘nonintervention’ in Spain. It was sport which seems to have amused the German dictator and which certainly increased his contempt for the stumbling political leaders of France and Britain — ‘little worms’, he would shortly call them on a historic occasion when he again humbled the two Western democracie3s with the greatest of ease.”
Great Britain and France negotiated with and appeased the gangster-criminal, giving him time and room to build his military.
Isolationist America sat here with her fingers up her rear end taking her cue from the “America First Committee,” from Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Father Charles Coughlin and other Nazi sympathizers.
We see the identical thing happening with the criminal in Iran; Ahmadinejad. He should be crushed John, like a toad, before he makes nukes and sends them out to his jihadist sleeper cells all over the globe and here in the US. Instead, Ahmadinejad is looking at George W. Bush as the “little worm” that he is!
We should crush these monsters. We don’t need more Conventions. We need to see an enemy and crush him before he becomes a powerful threat to the world.
August 26th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
I am arguing that had the great powers done what was right in the early nineteen thirties, the Fourth Geneva Convention would have been moot; unnecessary.
I’m not sure how many of the Third Geneva Conventions of 1929 would have related directly to Hitler’s early moves or enabled the other nations to stop him, as they are concerned with treatment of prisoners of war.
The First Geneva Convention of 1864 had to do with the treatment of the sick and wounded.
The Second Geneva Convention of 1949 dealt with sick and wounded at sea. It was a revision of the Hague Conventions of 1907.
However, as to your point, the Geneva Conventions including the Fourth are necessary even without a Hitler and will always be necessary as long as there are wars. They are laws having to do with the humane rules of warfare and for the treatment of prisoners, the sick, the wounded, medical personnel and civilians who are in battle zones. The great powers should have squashed Hitler all right, but that had nothing to do with the Geneva Conventions, and even if they had squashed him the Geneva Conventions would still be necessary.
August 26th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
Klein:
My position has been fully elaborated in past posts. All the Palestinian-Arabs, including the populations considered “refugees” should be placed under “special Administrative” governance by their respective host nations. The Palestinian-Arabs within West Bank and Gaza should be administered by either Egypt & Jordan or by an international committee. They need no army because everyone is trying to help them. All such persons should be given passports and assume normal lives with the same human rights enjoyed by the other people living in the same nation(s) as themselves. This is the only solution that will save immense bloodshed.
Baker:
I know you get it about Rome. You just refuse to give it back.
Then, you have the bronze stones to compare Masada with homicide bombers?
The Masada event was the culmination of a four year war. The Jews knew their fait was going to be slow death by torture. I would have done the same thing.
August 26th, 2007 at 8:16 pm
The Masada event was the culmination of a four year war.
If I say two things are comparable or analogous, does that mean they are identical, that they are the same thing? No, it doesn’t. And I didn’t say they were.
Of course you would do the same thing. At long last you have restated my point! When humans are pushed past their limits they become desperate and do desperate things. That is my point.
August 27th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Christiane vs. Christians and Jews
By Phyllis Chesler
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/27/2007
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=384CFE53-5830-4377-B773-0F53C0602871
August 27th, 2007 at 7:42 am
“Of course you would do the same thing. At long last you have restated my point! When humans are pushed past their limits they become desperate and do desperate things. That is my point.”
No . . . . If I were faced with a certain slow death by torture, I would prefer the swift blade.
How is that decision in any way analogous to the Palestinian-Arabs, who have chosen slow torture over swift peace and eventual prosperity? Of course one does not mirror the other. The Roman occupation and brutality against the Hebrews is not analogous to the disputed land rights of today’s P.A. Arabs and Hebrews. That was your original point and I continue to dispute it. To my mind, the Roman occupation of year zero has never fully ended. Therefore, the Jews are still today subjected to at least the remnants of that oppression. Much of the Christian world (still today) applies false sympathy towards the Arabs because they resent the idea that Jews control their “Holy-Land”. Then you, the king of all false moral equivilancies, place the Arabs in the historical role of the Jews.
August 27th, 2007 at 7:43 am
Of course you would do the same thing. At long last you have restated my point! When humans are pushed past their limits they become desperate and do desperate things. That is my point. >>>>>
The point is, you are excusing and justifying savagery and barbarism John.
August 27th, 2007 at 8:34 am
My position has been fully elaborated in past posts. All the Palestinian-Arabs, including the populations considered “refugees” should be placed under “special Administrative” governance by their respective host nations. The Palestinian-Arabs within West Bank and Gaza should be administered by either Egypt & Jordan or by an international committee. They need no army because everyone is trying to help them. All such persons should be given passports and assume normal lives with the same human rights enjoyed by the other people living in the same nation(s) as themselves. This is the only solution that will save immense bloodshed.>>>>>
I don’t know how this prescription will end the bloodshed. Egypt is already arming Hamas in Gaza. Should Arab states administer these territories, what is to stop the free-flow of arms and weapons? Basically both Jordan and Egypt are not friendly to Israel. Besides, the Palestinians, Fatah and Hamas would not accept this, would they? They want their own independent state.
August 27th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
See: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/7.htm
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188197167879&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Aug 27, 2007 15:54 | Updated Aug 27, 2007 15:54
The Islamic Jihad lashed out at the Palestinian Authority security personnel who rescued an IDF major from a lynch mob in Jenin on Monday, saying that their actions prevented the group from kidnapping the Israeli officer.
Palestinians gather around the burning car that was driven by an IDF soldier after it was torched in the West Bank town of Jenin.
Photo: AP , AP
“We were successful in trapping a uniformed Israeli officer,” a statement released by the group read. “We were surprised when [PA security forces] thwarted our efforts by surrounding us and taking control of the soldier. In a matter of minutes, four IDF jeeps arrived at the scene and were given the soldier.”
The Islamic Jihad statement further condemned the PA security forces, saying that they should work to protect the “Palestinian people instead of soldiers of the Occupation.”
Earlier Monday, a major in the IDF’s central command narrowly escaped lynching after he accidentally entered the Palestinian town of Jenin, in northern Samaria…..
August 27th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Seven Years Ago, Six Weeks Ago
The near-lynch was reminiscent of a tragic event that occurred nearly seven years ago, when two reserves soldiers were brutally lynched after making a wrong turn into Ramallah and being taken to the local police station. The two, Yosef Avrahami and Vadim Norzitch, were among the first victims of the Oslo War, launched by the Palestinian Authority in September 2000.
Just six weeks ago, too, Arabs in the PA-controlled city of Shechem, south of Jenin, happened upon two Israeli soldiers who mistakenly entered the Balata slums - and immediately began shooting at them. The driver made a quick U-turn, but several armed Arabs quickly took off in pursuit, shooting at them all the while with their Kalachnikov rifles. Seven bullets hit the IDF Toyota, and within seconds, the tires had been shot out and the Israelis found themselves driving on tire rims alone. The chase continued nearly up to the Hawara checkpoint, and only there did the officer and his driver manage to escape. The officer in the car was given some army prison time for his negligence.
August 27th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Isador, I am astonished that you defend this savagery!
August 27th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
to steve in 123:
no, i have no reason to believe that, and i don’t think israel should abandon any settlements until the palestinians are sincerely wililng to talk peace.
john baker, you’ve really gone too far here, you must realize you’re out-argued.
jews in roman times invented terrorism, are you mad? i know you hate jews, but that’s a little much. terrorism didn’t exist before the roman empire? please. you are so unhelpful in this discussion. like the palestinians you represent.
August 27th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
The point is, you are excusing and justifying savagery and barbarism John.
Why? Because I said, “When humans are pushed past their limits they become desperate and do desperate things”?
And you don’t think desperate people do desperate things?
It’s so human it’s predictable, Steve. It’s not pretty, but a substantial part of the moral blame belongs to the oppressors. I told you once as a Christian of European descent I was ashamed that during the Middle Ages Catholic bishops drove some hundreds of Jewish parents to such desperation by forcing them to publicly desecrate God’s Name that they murdered their own children to prevent them doing this. Most if not all of the moral blame for that belongs on the bishops’ heads, I would say. The parents were wrong to do it, but I cannot judge them. If you don’t like that, too bad.
August 27th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
terrorism didn’t exist before the roman empire? please.
No need to be offended. Just give me a counter-example. Now, here’s what I mean. The sicarii operated in broad daylight in the open marketplace. They came up on both Romans and prominent Jews and slipped daggers between their ribs to kill them. Then they faded away into the crowds. They created fear. Every man feared he could be next. And the purpose of this was to send a political message. So, give me a similar example. I have no ego invested in this. I am not offended by your suggestion that I am wrong, but I am offended by your saying that I hate Jews. If you can show me I’m wrong, do so and I’ll accept it. Find me earlier examples where an occupied people used murder of civilian targets to spread terror among the populace for the purpose of spreading a political message or warning. Maybe you can be more helpful, shed some light and not just heat.
August 27th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
John, is the following true or false?
“The Israeli Supreme Court is a creation of the Knesset and is therefore representative of all of the people - Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike. ….Its job is to balance the security needs of its citizens against the humanitarian concerns of West Bank Palestinians.
“Contrast this with the questionable status of the International Court of Justice in The Hague. No Israeli judge may serve on that court as a permanent member, while sworn enemies of Israel serve among its judges, several of whom represent countries that do not abide by the rule of law.”
http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Jul-04/120704.html
August 27th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
is the following true or false?
Probably neither.
I don’t know about the Israeli Supreme Court specifically, but courts are generally not representative bodies. In addition, I assume that describing its job in terms of security issues, is a gross distortion. Again, I don’t know about the Israeli Court, but in general security concerns are not the job of courts. Normally, their job is to interpret the law. That is the job of the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Israel was fully aware of the structure and nature of the Court when it signed the Geneva Conventions and the UN Charter. If it thinks the ICJ is stacked against it, why doesn’t Israel withdraw?
August 27th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
response to arvfp 146
Lest you think my statement is some whacked out idea of my own, here is the source of it:
“Political scientists see the radical Sicarii offshoot of the Zealots as one of the earliest forerunners of modern terrorism. Like modern terrorists, they intended their actions to suggest a message to a wider target audience: in this instance, the Roman imperial officials and all pro-Roman and collaborationist Jews.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicarii
I don’t really care if the sicarii were the first terrorists, i.e. were the the inventors of terrorism, my point is that under desperate circumstances and pushed beyond their limits, people including Jews will do desperate things, and that in that regard the Jews living under Roman occupation are not all that different from Arabs living under Israeli occupation. Why can’t you admit it, instead of telling us that the sicarii did not have explosives or rockets, etc.? How they killed people is beside the point.
August 27th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
“Every man feared he could be next . . . ”
Every man? Rediculous.
These were targeted assinations of specific political power-brokers. Perhaps the other politicians in that clan (colaborators) might fear reprisal. Hardly terrorism.
John: You take the fun out of dys-fun-ctional.
August 27th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
“Every man feared he could be next . . . ”
Every man? Rediculous…John: You take the fun out of dys-fun-ctional.
Take it up with Josephus. He said it. I was referring to this statement of his which I quoted previously #83:
”Among the large group of nationalists who resisted Rome was a group of especially violent nature who Josephus called sicarii or “daggermen,” after the Latin word, sica – dagger. “These men committed numerous murders in broad daylight in the middle of the City. their favourite trick was to mingle with festival crowds, concealing under their garments small daggers with which they stabbed their opponents. When their victims fell, the assassins melted into the indignant crowd, and through their plausibility entirely defied detection…. More terrible than the crimes themselves was the fear they aroused, every man hourly expecting death, as in war.” (2:264 [p.137]).”
http://groupdialog.org/humanrights/texts/JEWISHZEALOTSANDTERRORISMTEXTS
They were terrorists, such as existed in ancient times. Everyone knows they were terrorists. And before the sicarii were the Maccabean assassins. Why can’t you concede such an obvious fact? Silly.
August 28th, 2007 at 6:46 am
I do not concede because the concept is absurd. “every man”. This same Josephus reported that over 1-million Jews were slaughtered by Rome in (I think) the 66-CE revolt. Being that in Jewish tradition, a “man” was any male over the age of 13, are we to assume that about 400,000 people (who technically qualified as males over 13) lived in mortal fear of a handful of “daggermen”? If you believe that one, I have some swamp-land to sell you in beautiful downtown Baghdad.
Combatants, that is to say solders are conditioned to anticipate “sneak attacks” and they do not (generally) attribute such to “terrorism”, especially so because they themselves are also trained to inflict “sneak” or “surprise” attacks.
“Terrorism” is a uniquely modern development which coincided with the advent of more effective anti-personnel weaponry, and is used to strike fear in the hearts of ordinary civilian populations, thereby the expectation is that such civilians will ultimately pressure their own armed forces into surrender, or at least appeasement of the enemy.
Josephus’ chronicles must be separated into two parts:
a. Factual history and
b. creative commentary.
This is more or less true with most historians. Who was Josephus to speak on behalf of “all men”? If for example, he said that Romans preferred horses which were spotted white and brown, that would be a fair historical observation. One either believes its factual basis or not. If Josephus however stated that the horses preferred Roman riders, such a statement would not be evidentiary but merely his opinion, the same as your “every man” assertion and the further reaching conclusion that such equated the invention of “terrorism” (as we know it today).
August 28th, 2007 at 6:47 am
my point is that under desperate circumstances and pushed beyond their limits, people including Jews will do desperate things>>>>>
You are an apologist for the kind of savagery Muslim jihadists perpetrate against innocents like the kind of savagery we saw on 9/11. John Baker justifies this kind of savagery and worse.
These are the kinds of atrocities John Baker justifies: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/7.htm
August 28th, 2007 at 6:50 am
And this: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/8.htm
August 28th, 2007 at 6:56 am
If it thinks the ICJ is stacked against it, why doesn’t Israel withdraw? >>>>
Good question. I don’t know. I would withdraw from the United Nations as well.
August 28th, 2007 at 7:11 am
I would have the USA withdraw from the United Nations. It has become nothing more then an executive committee for third-world tyrants.
In its place should be a Union of Free Nations”. Anyone may join but to vote, a member must demonstrate they have:
Free Press
Free Speech
Free Religion.
Voting rights apportioned according to population.
No power to impose law on unwilling nations. However, any member nation or group of members is free to use its own (or combined) military to do whatever they feel needs doing (and accept the consiquences). The body would mainly use econimic power to invoke its will, which might work if the votes were not (as is the case today) controlled by blocks of war-lords.
August 28th, 2007 at 7:22 am
#146 ARVFP: “no, i have no reason to believe that, and i don’t think Israel should abandon any settlements until the Palestinians are sincerely willing to talk peace.”
But how do we know if they are sincere? People thought Arafat was sincere when he signed and Rabin signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn. The Prime Minister of Israel and the PLO leader, Yasser Arafat, shook hands before cheering crowds on the White House lawn in Washington, September 13, 1993. Then he gave a speech in South Africa calling for jihad.
“Since we cannot defeat Israel in war; we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”
–Yasser Arafat on Jordan TV on 14 September 1993, after signing the Oslo Accords that called for putting an end to “decades of confrontation and conflict” and stated that Israel and the Palestinian Authority would “strive to live in peaceful coexistence.”
August 28th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Errors in CNN’s “G-d’s Jewish Warriors” Noted (Worth reading):
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123512
August 28th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
re 147:
no, being desperate is not an excuse for sending suicide bombers to kill women and children. gandhi was desperate and didn’t resort to those tactics, mlk jr was desperate and didn’t resort to those tactics, jews throughout history have been desperate and didn’t resort to those tactics. there’s no excuse.
john, do i have to do your google searches for you? examples of terrorism that predates the roman empire:
Man Corn: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest by Christy G. Turner, II, Jacqueline A. Turner
http://www.athenapub.com/8prewar.htm
and there’s actually a course on the subject at cornell, S HUM 416
wikipedia is not a reliable primary source. even my 5th graders know that.
in any case, who cares, it’s a red herring, once again you are trying to blame jews for terrorist actions of the palestinians. and if your point is that desperate people do desperate things, i’ve already addressed that, that is not true, only arab terrorists care so little for human life as to send in suicide bombers. (individual exceptions aside, the numbers speak for themselves.)
re 159, i can’t argue with that steve. i know that someday peace must be acheived, for israel’s sake, it can’t go on like this forever. but how will we know they are sincere? i have no idea. it’s been nothing but lies so far.
August 28th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
examples of terrorism that predates the roman empire: Man Corn: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest by Christy G. Turner, II, Jacqueline A. Turner
What does (alleged) cannibalism have to do with political terrorism? Violence has been around since Cain slew Abel. I am not talking about simple violence, but violence from an occupied people targeting occupiers (and collaborators) with the intention of spreading fear among the populace as a political message. That was new. Your counter-example needs to involve spreading fear through murder for the purpose of sending a political message.
August 28th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Isidor #154
So Isidor Farash knows better than Josephus who was afraid of the sicarii? Give me a break. The longer you keep this up, the sillier you look. So be my guest, and don’t concede. By not doing so, when everybody and his brother knows the sicarii were terrorists, you just show how obstinate you are. Now everyone can appreciate what I’ve been putting up with these many months trying to reason with you.
August 28th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
These are the kinds of atrocities John Baker justifies
Get a life, Steve.
August 28th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
“What does (alleged) cannibalism have to do with political terrorism?”
doing your google searches are not enough, now you want me to read books for you? you’ve got the info. do your own research if you want. like that will get you to stop hating jews. or just wallow in ignorance if you prefer. yup, jews invented terrorism, the atom bomb, poverty and disease. all our fault. yup.
re 164. when you are defeated you can only resort to personal attacks? sad. you do justify palestinian terrorism. are you afraid to admit it?
August 28th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
I might have guessed. You have found no evidence of political terrorism prior to the sicarii under the Roman Empire. That would have been interesting and worthwhile discussing at least. I challenged you to shed some light instead of heat. Instead, you only respond with the usual personal slurs, allegations of Jew-hating, and even defending Steve Klein’s smears and slurs to boot. Why? Are your position and Steve’s so completely based on prejudice and hate that you cannot conceive that an opposing argument could not likewise be based on prejudice and hate? Why are you defending the honor of the sicarii, who after all were Jew-killers? Steve Klein may sling some mud your way next.
August 28th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Steve
In posts #155, 156 you state that I justify atrocities. In #74 you state that I “like murderers of Jews.” Steve, you are a liar. I do not justify atrocities and do not like murders of anyone; I have said these things are completely predictable. There is a vast difference, though you have been so far out of touch with the truth, and so lost in your own hate for so long, maybe you no longer recognize either the truth or common decency.
August 28th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
John, you say “my point is that under desperate circumstances and pushed beyond their limits, people including Jews will do desperate things.”
You do justify atrocities against the innocent. Al Qaeda, Hamas and Islamic Jihad all have grievances against non-Muslims. Osama bin Laden was pushed beyond his limits and he killed thousands in New York and Washington. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Tanzim, etc. murder innocent Jews. You condone this murderous behavior on the basis that people are pushed beyond their human limits.
You wrote: “Steve Klein may sling some mud your way next.”
Why are you trying to stir up hatred on the part of other members of this forum against me? If I challenge another person, little doubt they can and do defend themselves without your incitement against me.
August 28th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
You do justify atrocities against the innocent.
You are still lying. I justify no such thing. I have said atrocities are predictable, human nature being what it is. When people are pushed beyond their limits, they become desperate and do desperate things. If as you claim I justified their doing desperate things, I would say they should do desperate things, that such things were justified. I didn’t say that, and you know it. I said they do desperate things and that it’s predictable. Now you may believe that leaves a door open to justifying desperate things, but you are lying when you state that I have walked through that door. I have not, as I have said repeatedly.
August 28th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
“So Isidor Farash knows better than Josephus who was afraid of the sicarii? Give me a break. The longer you keep this up, the sillier you look. So be my guest, and don’t concede. By not doing so, when everybody and his brother knows the sicarii were terrorists, you just show how obstinate you are. Now everyone can appreciate what I’ve been putting up with these many months trying to reason with you.”
My earlier comments stand on their own reason.
You may think I look silly but that too is for the various readers to decide for themselves.
“everyone can appreciate . . ”
Yourself, like Mr. Josephus has no business speaking for everyone else.
August 28th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
Yourself, like Mr. Josephus has no business speaking for everyone else.
OK, fair enough. I’ll take his version over yours though, because you are two thousand years from the events and know not whereof you speak; he does.
August 28th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
You do justify atrocities against the innocent.
This was the same logic on which you based an attack in practically the same words regarding abortion. I had stated then as I am saying now, that there have always been abortions and always will be, human nature being what it is. It’s predictable. That doesn’t mean I justify abortions, although as I recall you made such a claim about me, or my theology, or some such thing. You may think my statement leaves the door open for justifying abortions, but you are lying if you assert that I have walked through that door. I have not and have said so. Prediction doesn’t mean approval. If that were the case, I would have said abortions should always be part of the human scene. I didn’t say that. I said it was predictable that they would be. The problem is your rhetoric plays fast and loose with the truth. I happen to take exception to that when it concerns me directly.
August 28th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
“I’ll take his version over yours though, because you are two thousand years from the events and know not whereof you speak; he does.”
I have at times, disagreed with Mr. Jesus (or at least with certain things he is attributed to have said). Who is Josephus compaired with Jesus?
Also, I have not debated with Josephus’ facts, only his conclusions.
August 29th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
yup, jews invented terrorism, the atom bomb, poverty and disease. all our fault. yup.
I certainly don’t adhere to any of that nonsense and am sorry if I sounded like that. I probably should have simply said the sicarii were the earliest examples of that type of political terrorism in the region. I do not blame the evils of the world on Jews or Israel. I have always thought that Jews were the keepers of the light in our world.
August 29th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
“The Death of Jesus” by Carmichael (1964) deals extensively with the “daggermen” history from a variety of well respected sources. Overall, it does not come off like you describe. These were NOT “terrorists” such as we use the term today. They were political assassins.
Was the guy who shot and killed Meyer Kahane in New York a “terrorist” by your standards John, because, news-flash: He was never charged with “terrorism” and was aquited of the lesser crime of ordinary murder.
August 29th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Thanks for the reference. I will take a look. You raise an interesting point about the murder of Kahane. I would say the charge or lack thereof is not the issue. The question for me is whether the murder was intended to spread fear as a political message to intimidate / threaten the populace. What about Dr. Baruch Goldstein and Yigal Amir. Goldstein was clearly a terrorist, wouldn’t you agree? What about Amir? How do you decide? A political assassination seems to me to be an act of terrorism in the way that the assassination of say John Lennon does not. It is intended to send a political message. “This is what we do to appeasers,” for example (Rabin). Or, “This is what we do to rightwing extremists” perhaps (Kahane). So, I don’t know that calling the sicarii political assassins lets them off the hook. After all, who were they targeting? Romans and prominent Jews who collaborated. But in an occupied society everybody suspects everybody of collaborating and rumors fly around like crazy. When you are bleeding to death with a blade between your ribs is too late to protest, “But I’m not a collaborator.” So everyone was afraid. Because fanatics were running around killing people on the basis of rumor sometimes. Happens still when people take the law into their own hands.
August 30th, 2007 at 6:01 am
While I agree that Baruch Goldstein was a terrorist, I do not consider Amir as such. If that road is taken, next, every case of domestic violence would qualify as an act of “terror”.
The key qualification in my mind is:
a. If targeted against military, it can not be “terror”, per-se.
b. If targeted against non-military, there has to be some indiscrimonate nature to the attack, or, be targeted specifically against non-discriptive civilians -or- even if targeted against military, if reasonable measures were not taken to avoid injury or death to others.
By the above measure, the nuclear attacks on Japan would qualify as “terrorism”, as would the firebombing of Dresden and bombing of London before that. However, Amir would not and neither would the work of historical “dagger-men” or Surhan-Surhan or John Hinkley.
August 30th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
The key qualification in my mind is:
a. If targeted against military, it can not be “terror”, per-se.
b. If targeted against non-military, there has to be some indiscrimonate nature to the attack, or, be targeted specifically against non-discriptive civilians -or- even if targeted against military, if reasonable measures were not taken to avoid injury or death to others.
Yes, I would call “a” probably an insurgency, as in Iraq. Bush calls them “terrists” but they are insurgents insofar as they attack Humvees. Now the same people also blow up civilians indiscriminately, and in there we do have terrorism no question.
So, no political assassination counts as terrorism? The assassination of Lincoln, for example? There was a lot of violence in the Reconstruction Era, such as the original KKK, which most people would call American terrorism. Don’t you think the assassination of Lincoln sort of set the stage for that?
August 31st, 2007 at 6:57 am
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392492676&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Aug 29, 2007
Poisonously biased
CNN’s Christiane Amanpour has set a new standard - and not the kind a news network usually trumpets. God’s Jewish Warriors, her two-hour screed against Israeli settlers and American supporters of Israel, is the most poisonously biased and factually shoddy feature to air on mainstream American television in recent memory…..
…..Throughout, Amanpour hammers the claim that Jewish settlements violate international law and seeks to paint this position as a universally accepted view with a lopsided parade of like-minded commentators.
Yet apart from any judgment about the political advisability of building or not building settlements, many legal scholars argue that these communities are, in fact, legal and do not violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, as the detractors claim. Such experts include Meir Shamgar, former Israeli Supreme Court justice, internationally renowned legal scholar Professor Julius Stone and former undersecretary of state Eugene Rostow, among others. But not one scholar of this viewpoint is given voice in a two-hour feature largely devoted to decrying settlements and their residents.
ALSO CONSISTENT with Amanpour’s propaganda-style use of images and editing is her grossly misrepresenting American presidential views of settlement legalities. A videoclip shows former UN ambassador William Scranton saying: “Substantial resettlement of the Israeli civilian population in occupied territories, including east Jerusalem, is illegal.”
Amanpour then declares: “Ever since, American presidents both Democrat and Republican have spoken from virtually the same script.”
The next image is Ronald Reagan making a tangential comment framed as agreeing with Scranton. But Reagan explicitly did not speak from the same script. “As to the West Bank,” he said in a February 1981 New York Times story, “I believe the settlements there, I disagreed when the previous [Carter] Administration referred to them as illegal, they’re not illegal.”
Nor, contrary to Amanpour’s gloss, have other presidents, including Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, termed settlements “illegal.”
AMANPOUR is similarly deceptive and manipulative in other depictions of nefarious Jewish power, respectfully interviewing both Jimmy Carter and John Mearsheimer, and giving not the slightest hint of the gross factual errors in the charges leveled by the two controversial figures whose recent, incendiary allegations against Israel have been extensively debunked.
Carter declares absurdly that no member of Congress could vote against aid to Israel “and hope to be reelected.” Amanpour does not, of course, remind him, or viewers, of the numerous members who have opposed aid to Israel and been repeatedly reelected, including Senate Majority leader Robert Byrd and more than a dozen representatives.
In another sequence meant to demonstrate the vast, coercive powers of the Jews, she claims the first president George Bush opposed loan guarantees for Israel but collapsed under the weight of Jewish pressure and backed down. In fact, Yitzhak Rabin was elected as prime minister to replace Yitzhak Shamir and offered concessions that satisfied the administration.
Israel backtracked - not Bush.
Numerous other falsehoods and distortions mar the production. Amanpour declares bizarrely that “the 40-year tug of war over Jerusalem began when Israel bulldozed the Arab neighborhood next to the Western Wall and built a plaza where Jews now pray.” Obviously, the modern battle over Jerusalem “began” 60 years ago, when the Arabs attacked in 1948 to destroy the newborn State of Israel, seizing the eastern side of Jerusalem, including the Jewish quarter of the Old City. Every Jew was expelled or killed and all synagogues were destroyed. Thereafter, for 19 years, no Jew could pray at the Western Wall and Christians had limited access to their holy sites.
Such obtusely uninformed and biased claims betray Amanpour’s agenda and reveal a derelict network where editorial oversight failed shockingly. CNN needs to correct every error and slander against Israel and its American supporters. Every one.
The writer is executive director of CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.
August 31st, 2007 at 11:49 am
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392502776&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Aug 31, 2007 0:23 | Updated Aug 31, 2007 0:23
Archaeologists: Muslim dig damaged Temple wall
By ETGAR LEFKOVITS
A month-old Islamic dig on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount to replace faulty electrical cables has damaged an ancient wall that is likely a remnant of the Second Temple, Israeli archaeologists said Thursday.
The work, which is being carried out with the approval of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the state-run Antiquities Authority, has been repeatedly condemned by independent Israeli archaeologists, who are calling for its immediate halt…..
September 1st, 2007 at 5:55 pm
GNN
(Gobels News Network)
It is a favorite pastime of the world to bash Jews and in so doing, grossly misrepresent facts and of course, draw creative conclusions.
Much of the world gets such a thrill out of Hebrew disparagement that it is akin to men enjoying the idea of lesbian relations. No shame whatsoever because society encourages such.
This has been going on for so long that I dare submit; if no conflict involving dastardly Jews existed, one would have to be invented to satisfy the craving of society.
“Settlements”. Even the name in erroneous. These are houses in and among neighborhoods.
September 2nd, 2007 at 2:59 am
Isador -
FYI. The Israeli government, and Israelis, use the word ’settlements’ in English and Hebrew to define any new town or community inside Israel or the Territories. the word is even used on highway signs. The problem is that the term has become a ‘dirty word’ in many circles, so now some folks try and deny that ’settlements’ exist.
Similarly the Israeli government uses the Hebrew term ‘Hafrada’(meaning separation or apartheid), to describe policies of separating the Arab and Jewish populations both inside Israel and the Territories.
Debate in Israel is much more ‘up front’ than elsewhere. Many Israelis have no problem advocating for settlements and the explicit separation of Jews from non-Jews in all aspects of daily life.
To quote many of my Israeli friends: “I didn’t come to Israel to live next to Arabs. I came to live in a Jewish country among Jews”.
Now I don’t agree with this statement. But I do respect my co-citizens who honestly wear their racism on their sleeves. At least the lines are clearly drawn.
September 2nd, 2007 at 7:18 am
It is a favorite pastime of the world to bash Jews
This is wildly inaccurate and hyperbolic claim reccurs so often in your posts, it must be one of your core beliefs. Isidoxy. To paraphrase, I dare submit; if no conflict involving dastardly non-Jews existed, one would have to be invented.
Case in point, these imagined “slanders against Israel” in Amanpour’s report. As with her daring to use the word “settlements,” you are whining because the rest of the world doesn’t happen to use vocabulary that supports your delusional upside down view of reality.
As of July, 2004 it became irrelevant what Ronald Regan (or anyone else) called the settlements, if not long before that. That was as you know when the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled that the settlements were illegal, in contravention of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The ICJ; not CNN.
What did you think of the other two parts of the series? Did you find any inaccuracies there “in Middle East reporting” to tattle-tale to CAMERA?
September 2nd, 2007 at 8:37 am
…betray Amanpour’s agenda (#179)
Despite what you say my lying eyes told me that Amanpour’s agenda was to portray “God’s Warriors” of all THREE varieties as people who are out of their freaking minds and totally batsh-t crazy. That I thought she succeeded in doing admirably. Everybody needs to do a better job of keeping their own crazy people “at home.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Fred:
The human lexicon contains thousands of words which are not completely accurate. Accepted is completely another thing. We drive on a “parkway” and park on a “driveway”.
When one hears the word “settlers”, it portrays a false notion that the “Pennsylvania Dutch” are planting themselves in and around Hawaiian villages.
The land in question is of disputed ownership. The Jews living there are proud to rely on “Biblical rights” but they neglect to assert their legal rights and the WCJ also ignores the title and deed which passed to the world Jewish community after WW1.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:30 pm
“The ICJ; not CNN.”
CNN was the original international news channel. When Ted Turner invented it, he realized that the world would not be ready for an American version of the news so (from day 1) he instructed the producers to adopt a more internationally popular political position. This included gross animocity against Israel.
John:
At least 90% of all American Blacks will insist that they can spot a racist in two seconds.
Q- Do you believe it ????
Please do not ignore the quesion, as you tend to do when I ask you something that you can’t answer without revealing something else you want to keep quiet about.
I stopped watching GNN years ago.
They can kiss my Jewish caboose.
September 5th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
I zam pleased an dproud not to be a JVP Racist. There are individual Israeli citizens that are illegally squatting on land not their own. Its a simple matter. The typical racism of JVP then views these people not as individual citizens, but by their race and collectives their problem not as a problem of individial choice, but as a political problem. Then to compound this inherently racist view of the situation, the appologists for the Palestinians view these people as “Palestinian” simply because of their common religion and language. Beduoin certainly do not consider themselves “Palestinan” and are quite proud of their distict Beduioin heritage. When will JVP stop muzzlig discussion on the racism inherent in the “anti-zionist” community?
September 7th, 2007 at 5:28 am
At least 90% of all American Blacks will insist that they can spot a racist in two seconds.
Q- Do you believe it ????
Please do not ignore the quesion, as you tend to do when I ask you something that you can’t answer without revealing something else you want to keep quiet about.
I stopped watching GNN years ago.
I did too.
90%? Sounds like a stereotype to me.
To answer the question, I would say that there are a number of unfortunate souls whose thinking is atavistic, a throwback to a more primitive, tribal stage. These people, as all humans did at an earlier stage, see the world as made up of A’s and B’s. A’s are members of one’s own group, like self. B’s are the others, not like self, and by definition A-haters. For these people, all that is necessary to recognize whether someone is an A-hater is to determine whether they are non-A.