Israeli Army has Doubts

[a_unique_person]

http://msnbc.com/news/994931.asp?0cl=c3

There appears to be a revolt brewing in the IDF. Pilots, Generals and troops on the ground are all questioning the ethics of the brutality they are inflicting on Palestinians. It is being done in the name of the religious zealots who want all of the ancient Biblical lands, but won't fight themselves.

They don't want to do it beacuse it harms innocent people, is for a senseless cause, and brutalises their own selves.



HE NOTICED the grandmother first, her creased face so blanched with terror that she appeared on the verge of collapse. A middle-aged couple huddled close by, trembling.
“They could be my parents,” Hakkak, the 22-year-old son of an Israeli poet, recalled thinking. In that split second of recognition, he said, “you really feel disgusting. You see these people and you know the majority of them are innocent and you’re taking away their rights. You also know you must do it.”

As the Israel Defense Forces enter a fourth year of battle with the Palestinians, the most dominant institution in Israeli society is also embroiled in a struggle over its own character, according to dozens of interviews with soldiers, officers, reservists and some of the nation’s preeminent military analysts.

Officers and soldiers have begun publicly criticizing specific tactics that they consider dehumanizing to both their own troops and Palestinians. And while they do not question the need to prevent terrorist acts against Israelis, military officials and soldiers are speaking out with increasing frequency against a strategy that they say has forsaken negotiation and relied almost exclusively on military force to address the conflict.

[a_unique_person]

AN ARMY’S MYSTIQUE
Cpl. Mati Milstein was sweaty and bored — extremely bored, as he recalled. He was halfway through an eight-hour shift at a Gaza Strip checkpoint near a Jewish settlement when he spotted a car approaching. A Palestinian man and his young son were inside.
Milstein, his coffee-colored eyes set in a face that seemed all sharp angles, trained his M-16 rifle on the father and ordered him out of the car. He remembered that the “young son watched in horror.”
The soldier peered inside the trunk. The father and his boy were probably returning from the beach and were no security threat, Milstein told himself.
“But I wasn’t finished,” Milstein later wrote in a Jewish newsletter. “At gunpoint, I ordered the father to open the hood and show me the engine, open the glove compartment, lift up the front seats, crawl into the back and show me whatever was stuck between the rear seats, open his shopping bags, empty his pockets.”

Then, with the man’s identity card in his pocket, Milstein ambled over to his shaded and fortified checkpost and gossiped with a colleague, keeping his M-16 trained on the father and son, who remained standing under the wilting sun.
“I held them for 20 minutes — because I could,” he recalled. “Then I let them go because I got bored with the game.”
Milstein, an American who moved to Israel and joined the army four years ago, said he discussed the incident with no one — not with fellow soldiers nor with his parents back in Santa Fe. “We tend to keep those experiences within us,” he explained, echoing the feelings of almost every soldier interviewed. “It’s very personal. We might prefer to forget what happened.



From "A Mind in Prison", p93. It seems relevent.



At one of the stops (on the light rail), a few careworn figures wearing yellow Star of David badges sneaked into the car. They did not dare enter the cabin, but stood on the small platform next to the door. Their entire behaviour seemed to be dictated by only one wish - not to be noticed.

The cruelty against these defenseless people struck me as painfully as the story of the old Jew whom the Nazis had thrown out of the window during Kristallnacht. These weary figures, I thought, must have lived in this state of anxiety ever since that fateful night. This was worse than murder, this was violation of the soul, this was torture!

[Mr Manifesto]

I realise this is a really crude analogy, and I don't want too much to be read into it, but I am reminded of the cycle of abuse that occurs between parent and child: The parent abuses the child, who goes on to abuse their child. It looks like a similar thing is happening here: The empowered nation (Europe, pre-Nazi) abuses the disempowered (Germany, Pre-Nazi) leading to the newly empowered nation abusing the disempowered (Nazis/Jews/Gypsies/etc) and now we have the Israelis abusing the Palestinians.

Well, it's probably a crap analogy, but I thought I'd float the idea anyway.

[Mycroft]

HE NOTICED the grandmother first, her creased face so blanched with terror that she appeared on the verge of collapse. A middle-aged couple huddled close by, trembling.
“They could be my parents,” Hakkak, the 22-year-old son of an Israeli poet, recalled thinking. In that split second of recognition, he said, “you really feel disgusting. You see these people and you know the majority of them are innocent and you’re taking away their rights. You also know you must do it.”


The situation is very hard on everyone. The IDF is called upon to do hard police work, and not everyone is suited for it. We can hope for an end to the intifada and perhaps some real effort from the Palestinian-Arab leadership to put an end to terror, and the situation can improve.

At one of the stops (on the light rail), a few careworn figures wearing yellow Star of David badges sneaked into the car. They did not dare enter the cabin, but stood on the small platform next to the door. Their entire behaviour seemed to be dictated by only one wish - not to be noticed.

The cruelty against these defenseless people struck me as painfully as the story of the old Jew whom the Nazis had thrown out of the window during Kristallnacht. These weary figures, I thought, must have lived in this state of anxiety ever since that fateful night. This was worse than murder, this was violation of the soul, this was torture!


Interesting choice of quotes. Tell me, do you think these Jewish commuters were so timid because they were afraid of being delayed on their journey for 20 minutes?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
I realise this is a really crude analogy, and I don't want too much to be read into it, but I am reminded of the cycle of abuse that occurs between parent and child: The parent abuses the child, who goes on to abuse their child. It looks like a similar thing is happening here: The empowered nation (Europe, pre-Nazi) abuses the disempowered (Germany, Pre-Nazi) leading to the newly empowered nation abusing the disempowered (Nazis/Jews/Gypsies/etc) and now we have the Israelis abusing the Palestinians.

Well, it's probably a crap analogy, but I thought I'd float the idea anyway.

IIRC, it has been shown that many child abusers were themselves abused as children. The notion of a 'package' of violence moving from one group of people to another is a good one. What is important is people realising what is happening to them, and stop it. This article appears to show that this is indeed the case. One can only hope the sentiment moves on to those in policy making areas.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
I realise this is a really crude analogy, and I don't want too much to be read into it

Your request is accepted and it will be respected. I have a request too. If I persuade you with my arguements, you won't use those analogies in this forum again.

Do we have a deal?

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Well, it's probably a crap analogy, but I thought I'd float the idea anyway.
If it was, for example, British, American, Australian, or Jordanian soldiers occupying those territories and manning roadblocks, are you saying that there would not be similar accounts? Or are there similar traumatic events in their histories which would lead them to act in that way?

Assuming there had been no 9/11, but America had still invaded Iraq, do you suggest that we would be seeing less reports of, for example, families being shot at roadblocks? Surely this is an inevitable part of conflict and invasion, and whether you think it's justified or not, it does not require the Holocaust as a causative factor.

[a_unique_person]

I think it would be unusual if there was no backlash to the treatment of Jews in WWII.

However, the extremists seem to have won the day. Count Bernadotte, a man who went out of his way to save Jews from the Nazis, was assasinated by Zionist terrorists because they believed he would get in the way of their quest for a state of Israel.

With Sharon in power and people who won't even join the army urging it on to help them evict those living in the West Bank and Gaza.

Human nature being what it is, though, those in the IDF are questioning the wisdom of the job they have been given.

Gratuitous violence and humiliation are vastly different to just maintaining peace and a military presence, however.

[tamiO]

I have solved some of these problems this morning (in my mind)

If the IDF all were on camera and this footage was being streamed onto webcams where everyone could tune in, maybe the soldiers would be less tempted to abuse their authority and terrorise innocent people for fun.

I feel that these things happen more frequently because the soldiers are not objective and there are no objective observers to keep them from acting out their hatred and frustrations on innocent people.

Just thought I'd throw this out there. :) What do you think?

[a_unique_person]

The IDF has been intent on making sure that people do not find out what they are up to. For example, the Jenin "massacre". After the UN concluded that they did not know if there was a massacre or not, because they were not allowed to investigate fully, they IDF used this statement as proof there was no massacre.

However, this approach cannot stop the members of the IDF themselvles from knowing what is going on.

[crackmonkey]

What a revisionist history of Jenin... there was no massacre. Jeez - some people.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
What a revisionist history of Jenin... there was no massacre. Jeez - some people.

Finally, someone who knows what happened in Jenin! You were there, right crackmonkey? Tell us what you saw. :)

I have no idea what happened in Jenin, I was not there. The UN was not allowed to investigate properly, so all I know is the two sides of the story. I want to know the third side.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
What a revisionist history of Jenin... there was no massacre. Jeez - some people.

I am not saying there was. I am talking about being open and transparent.

[demon]

Mr Manifesto
"Well, it's probably a crap analogy, but I thought I'd float the idea anyway."

It`s not a crap analogy at all.
Very fitting considering the history of the much vaunted Jewish persecution. Sums up the perverse nature of the Zionazis very well ie. the repression and bullying of a much weaker victim.
The number of children murdered by the IDF just adds an extra unfortunate but fitting layer to the analogy.

[Cleopatra]

Hi demon

No sleep? Go to bed :)

[Cleopatra]

Mr. Manifesto

Will you reply to my question or shall I proceed to explain you why your analogies apart from crude are totally wrong?

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Mr. Manifesto

Will you reply to my question or shall I proceed to explain you why your analogies apart from crude are totally wrong?

Sorry- I thought it was a rhetorical question. No, you have a deal- shoot.

[Cleopatra]

Mr. Manifesto

Since yesterday evening, I spent some hours browsing Yahoo and Google News plus the site of Amnesty International, trying to see which of the conflicts around the world could remind you of the Holocaust and the Nazi Era.

In Amnesty International Headlines (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Amnesty+International&t=amnesty+International) from Yahoo, you will see various accusations concerning violation of human rights in Muslim Countries mostly . When it comes to Israel there is always the matter of the Fence. Interestingly, among the 152 countries in which violations of Human Rights occur on a daily basis, Israel is the only country in which the civilians face real dangers of massacre on a daily basis.

Israeli citizens are those who live with the daily fear of a terrorist attack and yet Israel is reported for violations that have to do with legalistic matters of the Occupation( freedom in movement, the right to work, the fence, the issue of citizenship).
In conflicts all around the world various attrocities take place and yet you claim that only when it comes to Israel, Nazis come to your mind.

Unique posts a report about an episode in a check point and then dares to compare this episode with an "image" from the Nazi period. The people who wore the Star of David didn't have the same luck with the Palestinians at the check point and not only that, with comments like the one Unique makes they are humiliated and violated for once more, even after their death but we know Unique, we haven't met him yesterday.

What makes you believe that if the Australian Army occupied the West Bank far less attrocities would occur? From which collective trauma suffered the Americans for example when they were performing their war crimes in Vietnam?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Mr. Manifesto

Since yesterday evening, I spent some hours browsing Yahoo and Google News plus the site of Amnesty International, trying to see which of the conflicts around the world could remind you of the Holocaust and the Nazi Era.

In Amnesty International Headlines (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Amnesty+International&t=amnesty+International) from Yahoo, you will see various accusations concerning violation of human rights in Muslim Countries mostly .



As I have said before. If you want a debate on whether other countries should improve their human rights records, such as many Muslim countries, you won't get it here. I think we would all agree that these countries should improve. Eg, Saudi, Syria, Malaya. I have condemned Mahatir Mohammed for his acts and his stance, but have noted that at least he is not getting worse, but appears to be mellowing in his old age by calling for violence to be stopped in the ideological battle he sees he is having with the Jews.



When it comes to Israel there is always the matter of the Fence. It is not a fence, it is a wall, and it is being used to steal more land.
Interestingly, among the 152 countries in which violations of Human Rights occur on a daily basis, Israel is the only country in which the civilians face real dangers of massacre on a daily basis.

Israeli citizens are those who live with the daily fear of a terrorist attack and yet Israel is reported for violations that have to do with legalistic matters of the Occupation( freedom in movement, the right to work, the fence, the issue of citizenship).
In conflicts all around the world various attrocities take place and yet you claim that only when it comes to Israel, Nazis come to your mind.



I saw an interview with Israelis at a coffee shop after a suicide bombing. The people clearly were suffering strees. But they also acknowledged that both sides are suffering, that both sides are also tenacious, and will not give in.

Palestinians never know, from day to day, when they will be shot at, arrested, humiliated, have their land taken, their home destroyed. There is no legal process. It is just summary action. And this is the reality they face on a daily basis.



Unique posts a report about an episode in a check point and then dares to compare this episode with an "image" from the Nazi period. The people who wore the Star of David didn't have the same luck with the Palestinians at the check point and not only that, with comments like the one Unique makes they are humiliated and violated for once more, even after their death but we know Unique, we haven't met him yesterday.



The point I was making was that the humiliation is a reasoned part of the checkpoint process, and that this author saw humiliation as a huge crime against humanity. The Palestinians are not killed, for the most part, but they are kept in daily fear of their lives, as they know they can be shot at for just going to work their farms, or made to feel worthless and less than human for just travelling.

When you make someone feel like they are not human, they may not act with humanity.



[quote][b]

What makes you believe that if the Australian Army occupied the West Bank far less attrocities would occur?
It begs the question, would the Australian army perform this role? In East Timor, there was a recent military investigation because some soldiers were accused of violating the dead body of a terrorist. The IDF does not seem to have the same standards.


From which collective trauma suffered the Americans for example when they were performing their war crimes in Vietnam?

Collective trauma can be just one reason for brutality. In the US, the fear and paranoia appear to be a cultural thing, ref" Bowling for Columbine. However, you are correct, all armies are associated with violence. It appears to be part of the deal when you train people to kill to the best of their ability. Perhaps part of the problem is that the US has such large and heavily armed 'Reserve' forces. The Australian armed forces, eg, would only have regulars acting as pilots. The Americans accused of shooting up innocent people in Afghanistan, against orders, were reservists.

As I noted, there are many in the IDF who do not like what the IDF is doing, and what being in the IDF does to them. At least there is free speech in Israel that allows such thoughts to be aired, as distinct from Nazi Germany, where such actions would have brought instant death.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
IIRC, it has been shown that many child abusers were themselves abused as children. The notion of a 'package' of violence moving from one group of people to another is a good one. What is important is people realising what is happening to them, and stop it. This article appears to show that this is indeed the case. One can only hope the sentiment moves on to those in policy making areas.

Excuse me, this article shows what?

The article cites two examples of Palestinian-Arab “hardships” at the hands of Israelis. In one, a soldier abuses his power by searching a car even more carefully than the situation requires and them makes the Palestinian-Arab man wait around for another twenty minutes just because he can. In the other, a group of soldiers search the wrong house and scare its inhabitants.

Exactly what do these instances show?

The first is clearly an abuse of power, but it’s also a pretty mild one. It happens all the time in police departments all around the world, I doubt that you can find a police officer that’s been on the job for any length of time who can’t think of a time when he went a little too far “just because he could” and felt guilty about it later. That’s normal human behavior.

In the second example, they searched the wrong house. Yeah, we wish we lived in a perfect world where that sort of thing didn’t happen, but we don’t and it does. Again, police all over the world sometimes stop the wrong people or search the wrong houses. It’s happened to me, it’s happened to people I know, I bet it happens in Australia.

These are not examples of brutality.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Excuse me, this article shows what?

The article cites two examples of Palestinian-Arab ?hardships? at the hands of Israelis. In one, a soldier abuses his power by searching a car even more carefully than the situation requires and them makes the Palestinian-Arab man wait around for another twenty minutes just because he can. In the other, a group of soldiers search the wrong house and scare its inhabitants.

Exactly what do these instances show?

The first is clearly an abuse of power, but it?s also a pretty mild one. It happens all the time in police departments all around the world, I doubt that you can find a police officer that?s been on the job for any length of time who can?t think of a time when he went a little too far ?just because he could? and felt guilty about it later. That?s normal human behavior.

In the second example, they searched the wrong house. Yeah, we wish we lived in a perfect world where that sort of thing didn?t happen, but we don?t and it does. Again, police all over the world sometimes stop the wrong people or search the wrong houses. It?s happened to me, it?s happened to people I know, I bet it happens in Australia.

These are not examples of brutality.

Not with a gun pointed at you. This is routine behaviour, not isolated instances. There are many examples of checkpoints being used as a routine means of humiliating people. When the police abuse their power, it is usually when they think that someone deserves to be punished for something they know the law would not punish. That is, we won't charge you, just humiliate you and let you go, don't do it again. Here, the people are humiliated for no reason at all. They are suspected of being nothing more than Palestinians.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Not with a gun pointed at you. This is routine behaviour, not isolated instances. There are many examples of checkpoints being used as a routine means of humiliating people. When the police abuse their power, it is usually when they think that someone deserves to be punished for something they know the law would not punish. That is, we won't charge you, just humiliate you and let you go, don't do it again. Here, the people are humiliated for no reason at all. They are suspected of being nothing more than Palestinians.

Yes, actually, with several guns pointed at me. Just inches from my face.

I think it's interesting that only in Israel is a checkpoint considered "humiliating". Anywhere else, it's just a normal response to a threat of violence.

I also think it's interesting that only in the disputed territories of Israel is being stopped at a checkpoint considered reasonable motivation for becoming a suicide-terrorist. Anywhere else in the world, that would be considered insane, yet somehow when it’s Palestinian-Arabs in the disputed territories, we’re not surprised when they’re given a belt and then a street or hospital is named for them.

Anywhere else, someone seeking a solution for checkpoints would look at the underlying need for them, not at the checkpoints themselves. Oh no, don’t look at the terrorism the checkpoints are supposed to stop…!

[a_unique_person]

Many of the checkpoints sever no security purpose whatsoever. They are used just for this purpose, to humiliate, to let the Palestinians know who is boss. Many will be there, with the road closed, while everyone can just get to where they are going by taking the back road, walking around it and leaving their cars behind. What sort of security is serverd by doing this?

A checkpoint is a military act. It involves armed forces pointing guns at you. As in this example, a child is sitting next to his father. Do you think that he maybe hates the Israelis now?

The recent example of a suicide bomber was home when her brother, sitting outside drinking coffee with his cousin, was summarily executed by the IDF, who were after his cousin.

A bride on her way to her wedding.

http://www.palestinercs.org/images/Children%20&%20Conflict/Surdacheckpoint310803WBRR2.jpg

Students cannot go to University. In what way is that a security risk?

http://www.palestinercs.org/images/checkpoints%20images/studentsoncheckpoint2.jpg

Trying to get home after going shopping. Where is the security risk?

http://www.palestinercs.org/images/checkpoints%20images/Israelitank120702WBRR2.jpg

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Many of the checkpoints sever no security purpose whatsoever. They are used just for this purpose, to humiliate, to let the Palestinians know who is boss. Many will be there, with the road closed, while everyone can just get to where they are going by taking the back road, walking around it and leaving their cars behind. What sort of security is serverd by doing this?

You’re an expert in military security? Can you cite a source that proves there is a policy of humiliation?

Originally posted by a_unique_person A checkpoint is a military act. It involves armed forces pointing guns at you. As in this example, a child is sitting next to his father. Do you think that he maybe hates the Israelis now?

Again, only in the disputed territories of Israel is being stopped at a check point seen as reasonable cause to become a suicide-terrorist. Thank you for illustrating my point. J

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The recent example of a suicide bomber was home when her brother, sitting outside drinking coffee with his cousin, was summarily executed by the IDF, who were after his cousin.

Yes, there is so much anecdotal evidence one way or another.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
A bride on her way to her wedding.

Who is smiling.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Students cannot go to University. In what way is that a security risk?

Many of the suicide-bombers come from Palestinian-Arabic universities.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Trying to get home after going shopping. Where is the security risk?

People from all walks of life become suicide-terrorists in the disputed territories.

[renata]

The recent example of a suicide bomber was home when her brother, sitting outside drinking coffee with his cousin, was summarily executed by the IDF, who were after his cousin.
What you forgot to mention is that both brother and cousin were both wanted members of Islamic Jihad, and that in retaliation she killed 19 people, including several children, wounded more than 50, and her victims were split evenly between Arabs and Israelis. She was a great recruit for Islamic Jihad- a young woman could pass easier through a checkpoint. Did she avenge the killing of her brother, who belonged to a radical terrorist organization, by campaigning for human rights? Did she do it by taking up arms and shooting an Israeli soldier? No, she murdered defenseless Jewish and Arab families. In what universe can this be justified? And, how did her family react? They praised her, calling it her "wedding day" and saying they got congratulations from everywhere. I guess some brides do make it through the checkpoints.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3165604.stm



As to some of your examples- there is no question that checkpoints can be humiliating and inconvenient. I have no doubt that some, maybe many soldiers abuse their powers. They are kids, they are scared, they are faced with hostile people every day. That must escalate after terror acts. I know crackdowns happen after bombings. I know there used to be more free travel, but terrorists usurped those opportunities.

Anecdotes can be piled on a mile thick. For every anecdote, every picture there is an equally or more horrific anecdote on the other side. Posting photos to prove your point does nothing. Here is an example.



A bride on her way to her wedding.

http://www.palestinercs.org/images/Children%20&%20Conflict/Surdacheckpoint310803WBRR2.jpg

Bride killed on the eve of her wedding, along with her father, expert in treating victims of bomb attacks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3099638.stm)




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3099638.stm

Students cannot go to University. In what way is that a security risk?

Nine students murdered at a university (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/21/mideast/)

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by renata

What you forgot to mention is that both brother and cousin were both wanted members of Islamic Jihad, and that in retaliation she killed 19 people, including several children, wounded more than 50, and her victims were split evenly between Arabs and Israelis. She was a great recruit for Islamic Jihad- a young woman could pass easier through a checkpoint. Did she avenge the killing of her brother, who belonged to a radical terrorist organization, by campaigning for human rights? Did she do it by taking up arms and shooting an Israeli soldier? No, she murdered defenseless Jewish and Arab families. In what universe can this be justified? And, how did her family react? They praised her, calling it her "wedding day" and saying they got congratulations from everywhere. I guess some brides do make it through the checkpoints.


Thank you, Renata. I didn't realize which Palestinian-Arabs he was refering too.

For AUP I will point out again that your pictures show:

1) A bride who is smiling. She is stepping between two cement dividers, but there is no indication if this is at a checkpoint or in a parking lot somewhere. If this is indeed her wedding and she is being inconvinienced at a checkpoint, that is regretable, but people who are not above smuggling explosives and weapons in ambulances or disguising explosives as a baby are not above using a wedding for the same purposes.

2 & 3) People standing in line next to some soldiers, and people standing around a tank. Nowhere in these pictures in anyone being abused or humiliated. If they are being delayed at a check point, that is regretable, but such things will end when the violence ends.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by renata

What you forgot to mention is that both brother and cousin were both wanted members of Islamic Jihad, and that in retaliation she killed 19 people, including several children, wounded more than 50, and her victims were split evenly between Arabs and Israelis. She was a great recruit for Islamic Jihad- a young woman could pass easier through a checkpoint. Did she avenge the killing of her brother, who belonged to a radical terrorist organization, by campaigning for human rights? Did she do it by taking up arms and shooting an Israeli soldier? No, she murdered defenseless Jewish and Arab families. In what universe can this be justified? And, how did her family react? They praised her, calling it her "wedding day" and saying they got congratulations from everywhere. I guess some brides do make it through the checkpoints.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3165604.stm



I did not forget to mention it. I was pointing out the process of creating a terrorist. How do we know they were terrorists? The IDF told us? Must be true then. Even if they were, why were they summarily shot? If Israel wants to play by legal rules, let it, if it wants to play a dirtier game, don't be surprised if both sides do.



As to some of your examples- there is no question that checkpoints can be humiliating and inconvenient. I have no doubt that some, maybe many soldiers abuse their powers. They are kids, they are scared, they are faced with hostile people every day. That must escalate after terror acts. I know crackdowns happen after bombings. I know there used to be more free travel, but terrorists usurped those opportunities.

Anecdotes can be piled on a mile thick. For every anecdote, every picture there is an equally or more horrific anecdote on the other side. Posting photos to prove your point does nothing. Here is an example.



I don't supply just anecdotes. I have members of the IDF, soldiers, generals and pilots, backing me up.



Bride killed on the eve of her wedding, along with her father, expert in treating victims of bomb attacks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3099638.stm)

Nine students murdered at a university (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/21/mideast/)

This was not my point. The routine humiliation of innocent people is akin to murder. It makes a person feel like they wish they were dead. This is being done on a much larger population on a much more sustained basis. About 30 years, in fact. Many people have grown up knowing only life under military occupation.

[demon]

"As to some of your examples- there is no question that checkpoints can be humiliating and inconvenient."

Fvcking incredible.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


You?re an expert in military security? Can you cite a source that proves there is a policy of humiliation?



Again, only in the disputed territories of Israel is being stopped at a check point seen as reasonable cause to become a suicide-terrorist. Thank you for illustrating my point. J



Yes, there is so much anecdotal evidence one way or another.



Who is smiling.



Many of the suicide-bombers come from Palestinian-Arabic universities.



People from all walks of life become suicide-terrorists in the disputed territories.

Most of the checkpoints have nothing to do with restricting access between Israel/Palestine, but between Palestinian towns.

The people going home had just been to the market. No suicide bombers heading to Israel.



http://www.palestinercs.org/pressreleases/PR100903WBRR.htm

When you need a road map just to get home

Adapted from Al-Quds, 31-7-2003



For years the Palestinians have been subjected to brutal measures of collective punishment under the pretext of Israeli security. One of the measures most disruptive to their everyday lives is undoubtedly the policy of closures. Roads are closed hindering or preventing movement between towns and villages in the West Bank and between the West Bank and Gaza. Palestine has become a patchwork of closed, disjointed cantons and people are plagued with unending worries about how to get to work, to school, to the doctor, to visit family or go to prayer.

The events of the last few months, including the appointment of a prime minister, US Secretary of State Colin Powell's meeting with high-ranking Palestinian officials in Jericho and talk of the Road Map, rekindled the fire of hope in the hearts of the Palestinian people who anticipated an easing of oppressive conditions imposed by the occupying army. Tragically, the difference between promising speeches and the situation on the ground today could not be starker. This is certainly evidenced by the behaviour of Israeli soldiers at the checkpoints that leaves citizens feels humiliated, helpless and hopeless.

As civilian population continues to face the hardships of occupation this often includes journalists like Amina Awda from the Palestinian Al-Quds newspaper. She recently wrote about her last trip from Ramallah to her home in Bethlehem, a mere 50 km away.



First stop - Qalandia

The Qalandia checkpoint, next to the refugee camp of the same name blocks the road between Ramallah, the administrative capital of Palestine, and the south of the West Bank. Amina and her travelling companions asked the taxi driver who took them there what the situation was like. His answer was: 'Very difficult, as usual. The choice is up to you'. The journalist decided to cross anyway.

At the checkpoint there were hundreds if not thousands of people unprotected standing under the blazing sun. Amina took her place in the queue and prepared to accept whatever arbitrary decision the soldiers made. She could hear them barking orders and, as she got closer the could see them checking documents and belongings without any display of kindness or respect. When it was finally her turn, she was told: 'You are not getting through today. Go complain to Arafat'.




Looking for an alternative road map

The journalist looked for another route to the other side of the checkpoint. To the east of Qalandia lies a dirt paths. They are long and arduous without any guarantee of success, but Palestinians who have not been able to get through 'officially' regularly resort to them. Unfortunately, after Amina and her party had walked for several kilometres they heard that there were Israeli patrols ahead; the soldiers had detained a number of men, women and children, who were being held at gunpoint. The wisest thing to do was to go back?

Everybody looked depressed and exhausted not knowing how long this nightmare would continue. Amina made a new attempt: the road that leads to Rafat, southwest of Jerusalem. The only problem was that the so-called 'security wall' now blocks the road, and there is only a dirt track so full potholes that many attempting to cross via this route end up with neck or back injuries and pregnant women are at risk of aborting. In addition, transport on these secondary and very hazardous roads is about twice as expensive as normal fare. Once again, the trip was unsuccessful heeding a new warning of difficulties ahead the driver decided not to venture any further.

[Cleopatra]

A request:
Is it possible to link the photos instead of posting them? I have problems with my connection today and it took me half an hour to load the page.

Of course this is just a request to make things easier it has nothing to do with the content of the photos which is ok.

Thank you.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I did not forget to mention it. I was pointing out the process of creating a terrorist.

When detailing the process of creating a terrorist, you left out a few points:

1) Anti-Semitism taught in Palestinian-Arab schools.

2) Anti-Semitism taught in Palestinian-Arab Mosques.

3) Public glorification of “martyrs” by Palestinian-Arab political and religious leaders.

4) The naming of public streets, hospitals and other institutions after suicide-bombers.

5) The prominent display of pictures of suicide-bombers in shops, schools, mosques and homes. The printing of suicide-bomber trading cards. Showing tapes made by suicide-bombers on Palestinian-Arab TV. Television commercials that tell children to “drop your toys and pick up rocks”

6) Palestinian-Arab summer camps that teach children to use weapons and practice kidnapping techniques.

7) Printing maps that label all of Israel and the disputed territories as “Palestine”.

8) Arafat taking Palestinian-Arab sales tax money and passing it to terrorist organizations.

9) Syria and Iran passing funds to Hamas, who’s stated goal is to destroy Israel.

10) Egypt turning a blind eye to weapons smuggling through tunnels at the Gaza border.

11) The paying of cash awards and pension to the families of suicide-bombers.

12) Families celebrating the deaths of their own children if they die as a suicide-bomber.

13) Public mass celebrations of vicious terrorist attacks, not just against Israel but the 9/11 attacks as well.

14) Schools letting children out so they can participate in demonstrations.

15) UNRWA and it’s policies of perpetuating Palestinian-Arab misery and turning a blind eye to terrorist activity.

16) http://www.geocities.com/arabracismplusjihad/kidblood.art


Next to these (and more) a mere delay at a check-point is nothing.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
How do we know they were terrorists? The IDF told us? Must be true then. Even if they were, why were they summarily shot? If Israel wants to play by legal rules, let it, if it wants to play a dirtier game, don't be surprised if both sides do.

It’s a sad fact of life that enemy combatants in a war zone don’t get due process. However, if you feel they should, you and I can agree on that point. Instead of messing around with check points and other defensive measures, Israel should just conquer the disputed territories, erase all signs of Palestinian-Arab government and social institutions, and engage in a massive reeducation program. Then in a few short generations, the Palestinian-Arabs will be ready for peace.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I don't supply just anecdotes. I have members of the IDF, soldiers, generals and pilots, backing me up.

What about the other 99.7% of the IDF?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
This was not my point. The routine humiliation of innocent people is akin to murder.

Being stopped at a check point is not akin to murder. Being stopped at a checkpoint is akin to having to go through a security check at an airport, or a sobriety check at a police roadblock. It’s a reasonable precaution that rational people put up with when they know there is a danger of violence.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It makes a person feel like they wish they were dead. This is being done on a much larger population on a much more sustained basis. About 30 years, in fact. Many people have grown up knowing only life under military occupation.

Many people have grown up with a constant threat of terrorism. If the Palestinian-Arabs dislike the checkpoints so much, they should renounce the intifada, and protest their leaders who choose these hardships for them.

[renata]

Mycroft, I wish you would not post inflammatory pictures. I know some try to make their point across by posting pictures of dead bodies and anecdotes, I don't think there is the need for images from either side. At least the link would be sufficient to make your point. I posted the HRW report showing PA was releasing prisoners, subsidizing them, lying about their location, and terrorist organizations credited that with rise in terrorism. I posted the excerpts showing terrorist organizations actively recruited and used children in attacks against Israel. Someone posted information from a recent 60 minutes investigation showing Arafat is worth anywhere from 300 million to a billion dollars, as I recall- mostly money stashed away, hidden, stolen, while his people are in poverty.


I did not forget to mention it


Hmmm,.....this is what you said

The recent example of a suicide bomber was home when her brother, sitting outside drinking coffee with his cousin, was summarily executed by the IDF, who were after his cousin.


Ok...you did not "forget". Would you prefer...chose not to? Did not find that information relevant? Fact is, you did not mention it, did you?

How do we know they were terrorists?

I did not say they were terrorists. Here is what I said

both brother and cousin were both wanted members of Islamic Jihad....her brother, who belonged to a radical terrorist organization,
I also helpfully provided a BBC link, to tell you exactly how we knew they were members of Islamic Jihad.
Islamic Jihad says the 29-year-old Jenin trainee lawyer was driven to become a mass murderer by the need for revenge.

Jaradat's younger brother Fadi, a 25-year-old Islamic Jihad militant, and their similarly militant older cousin, 34-year-old Salah - were killed by Israeli forces in a raid on Jenin in June.


The BBC article does not mention anything about them being "summarily executed" while "drinking coffee"- you must have gotten it from another source. I do not know who BBC's source is, but from the way the article is structured, it sounds like it is Islamic Jihad itself. And, in case you have not been following the news, Islamic Jihad is indeed a radical terrorist organization, with a goal of attacking Israel. So it looks like my comments, supported by BBC sources (not known to have a huge pro Israel bias) is correct.

Even if they were, why were they summarily shot?

I don't know. First of all, I have not seen your sources for that yet. If they are anything like that claim of- Israel targets peace activists, which upon examination by people who knew things about ammo, tactics, cinder block walls and other things turned out to be utter ridiculousness, there is nothing to talk about.

If Israel wants to play by legal rules, let it, if it wants to play a dirtier game, don't be surprised if both sides do.


Before we figure out who is violating legal rules, don't forget- when Israel had that magic block wall X ray vision, they also retrieved armed militant hiding in a hospital- against legal rules. Oh, and did you know, that it is against legal rules for militants to be in Jenin, which is technically UN refugee camp, I believe. And, PA should have cracked down on them long ago...Oh, yes, those pesky legalities....

But do tell- are you actually justifying what this woman did?

The routine humiliation of innocent people is akin to murder. It makes a person feel like they wish they were dead. This is being done on a much larger population on a much more sustained basis.

Humiliation same as murder? Interesting viewpoint you have there. Humiliation is indeed devastating, I agree. But the terror impacts not only the people that are dead, you know. It impacts the larger population, on a much more sustained basis, you seem to forget that. Instead of having majority of Palestinians support their thieving government and suicide bombings, have them rise up, support peace. All intifada brought them is more misery. They thought resistance would get more concessions, and they made fools of Barak and every peace proponent in Israel. Now they must earn back the trust of hardened public, and it will be much harder this time. It may be true that the peace offer was not perfect. It may be true it was not fair. But while negotiations were going on, even at the hardest time- it was much better than this. Arafat pushed Abbas aside, kept control, directed the violence, stole the money, and in the process gave the hardliners like Sharon who never trusted him a permanent and best excuse to never want to negotiate with him. Until there is a true peace movement in PA, or Arafat gets pushed aside by a strong voice, willing to reign in militants there will be no peace.

[renata]

Hey, I found a link about how they were summarily executed while peacefully sipping coffee on the terrace! And the source has awful bias towards Israel, too.

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-06/13/article01.shtml

Two Palestinians were killed in exchanges of fire with Israeli troops in the northern West Bank city of Jenin Thursday night, and an Israeli intelligence officer was shot dead in a nearby area, as Israeli tanks entered Gaza and cut the territory into two halves.

Palestinian security sources identified the two as Saleh Jeradate, 34, a local leader of the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, the Al-Quds Brigades, and Fahdi Jeradate, 25. It was not immediately clear if they were related, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

They said three others, including a seven-year-old girl, were injured in the fighting, which they described as "fierce".

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


As I have said before. If you want a debate on whether other countries should improve their human rights records, such as many Muslim countries, you won't get it here.

Irrelevant.

Please don't try to derail the discussion. I didn't say that they are worse cases than Israel so, Israel is excused for what is doing but I said that although Israel is to blame equally with other countries and although Israel doesn't committ attrocities to the extend other countries do, some people like you. Mr. Manifesto and others are connecting only the Israelis to the Nazis.

Why is that, can you explain it?

It is not a fence, it is a wall, and it is being used to steal more land.

Does the fence make Israel a Nazi state? I want a yes or no answer to that.

I saw an interview with Israelis at a coffee shop after a suicide bombing. The people clearly were suffering strees. But they also acknowledged that both sides are suffering, that both sides are also tenacious, and will not give in.

Palestinians never know, from day to day, when they will be shot at, arrested, humiliated, have their land taken, their home destroyed. There is no legal process. It is just summary action. And this is the reality they face on a daily basis.

Israeli and Palestinian civilians face this stress equally and on a daily basis. But Israelis are in a worse position because the enemy doesn't respect schools, hospitals and temples.

You are wrong about the legal process of arrests in the occupied territories.

I have explained to you at least two times by now which is the legal process and the zone division system in the OT but of course you continue your claims. The IDF has a legal process, of course it's far from perfect but it exists.

Israelis have to live with the blinded hatred. According to your theory I must blame it on the collective trauma Palestinians suffer or those theories concern Jews only?

The point I was making was that the humiliation is a reasoned part of the checkpoint process, and that this author saw humiliation as a huge crime against humanity. The Palestinians are not killed, for the most part, but they are kept in daily fear of their lives, as they know they can be shot at for just going to work their farms, or made to feel worthless and less than human for just travelling.

When the police stops you while driving for a control, this can be easily turned into a very humiliating experience.This is hardly a crime against humanity.

Jews were humiliated not only because they were shaved, tattoed, left to starve, tortured in medical experiments in the camps etc etc etc but because they experienced a very humiliating death. The final result is that counts.

And unlike other people who lost their lives in the Holocaust, unlike the gypsies, homosexuals , political prisoners etc etc Jews are the only ones who continue to suffer that humiliation after their death.

It's seems that their misfortune has no end. Sophocles has written a beautiful verse in "Oedipus Rex" about that but I hate to use high poetry into the mud of racial hatred.

When you make someone feel like they are not human, they may not act with humanity.

Are you talking about the Jews or the Arabs now?

The IDF does not seem to have the same standards.

The fact that you are not interested in searching the issue doesn't mean that IDF doesn't have such standards. Of course if your prejudice let you think clearly you would never say that.

If IDF didn't have such procedures it would be doomed. You are either terribly prejudiced or you don't know at all how an Army functions. Ask the military officers of the forum and they will verify that one of the founding dogmas of an Army is to punish severely those who resort to unnecessary violence. If you don't believe me, goggle a bit and you will find everything you need to know. I am not suggesting that everything functions perfectly!!! But things are not the way you believe.

IDF has regulations and since in Israel there are no military Academies our Army is an Army of the People of Israel. The rules are very severe.

Collective trauma can be just one reason for brutality. In the US, the fear and paranoia appear to be a cultural thing, ref" Bowling for Columbine.

I know very well that the rise of Nazism wasn't a result of the collective general trauma. Also, I suggest we avoid referencies to cultural standards. Slipery slopes...

As I noted, there are many in the IDF who do not like what the IDF is doing, and what being in the IDF does to them. At least there is free speech in Israel that allows such thoughts to be aired, as distinct from Nazi Germany, where such actions would have brought instant death.

Unique. You must have observed by now that I am not hiding my thoughts. Your remark above is very dirty and from this moment I stop giving you the benefit of the doubt. I consider that you post those things on purpose especially when you address to me since you know my ideas. I have had enough.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Irrelevant.

Please don't try to derail the discussion. I didn't say that they are worse cases than Israel so, Israel is excused for what is doing but I said that although Israel is to blame equally with other countries and although Israel doesn't committ attrocities to the extend other countries do, some people like you. Mr. Manifesto and others are connecting only the Israelis to the Nazis.

Why is that, can you explain it?



Does the fence make Israel a Nazi state? I want a yes or no answer to that.



I think I was ticked off for comparing Nazis to the US the other day. I think there is a little bit of Nazi in all of us. It is hardly something that the Isrealis have a monopoly on.



Israeli and Palestinian civilians face this stress equally and on a daily basis. But Israelis are in a worse position because the enemy doesn't respect schools, hospitals and temples.



One of the pictures at check points was of a Palestinian woman, in labour, trying to get to hospital, but having difficulty negotiating the route due to the presence of check points, so that she had to scale the steep side of a hill.



You are wrong about the legal process of arrests in the occupied territories.

I have explained to you at least two times by now which is the legal process and the zone division system in the OT but of course you continue your claims. The IDF has a legal process, of course it's far from perfect but it exists.



I find it hard to believe it is being observed. People can be attacked for no provocation. Eg, a peaceful protest march, sitting doing embroidery, children playing, harvesting crops. Mr Google will show such instances very quickly.



Israelis have to live with the blinded hatred. According to your theory I must blame it on the collective trauma Palestinians suffer or those theories concern Jews only?



And Likud has stated it will not accept a Palestinian state. I think that 30 years of military occupation indicates a certain amount of blind hatred. Military occupation is an act of war, war is an act of hatred.



When the police stops you while driving for a control, this can be easily turned into a very humiliating experience.This is hardly a crime against humanity.

Jews were humiliated not only because they were shaved, tattoed, left to starve, tortured in medical experiments in the camps etc etc etc but because they experienced a very humiliating death. The final result is that counts.



In the book, the author, although a committed Nazi, found he was troubled by the fact that Jews had to slink onto the tramcar, and off again, so as not to arouse any attention, lest it result in some attack on them. He felt that this was no way to live, that it was surely very close to having no life at all, to being dead. If you look at the photos of the checkpoints, you see pictures of Palestinians having to adopt this attitude too, nothing can attract attention, existence has to be expressed in the most minimal way.



And unlike other people who lost their lives in the Holocaust, unlike the gypsies, homosexuals , political prisoners etc etc Jews are the only ones who continue to suffer that humiliation after their death.

It's seems that their misfortune has no end. Sophocles has written a beautiful verse in "Oedipus Rex" about that but I hate to use high poetry into the mud of racial hatred.



That is a shame. I love hearing the old wisdom. It reminds me how much we have learned and lost. The Romans, Greeks, and others, have much to teach us still. Since they did not have access to all the modern wonders that we do, they learned to express powerful ideas with an economy of words.



Are you talking about the Jews or the Arabs now?

The fact that you are not interested in searching the issue doesn't mean that IDF doesn't have such standards. Of course if your prejudice let you think clearly you would never say that.

If IDF didn't have such procedures it would be doomed. You are either terribly prejudiced or you don't know at all how an Army functions. Ask the military officers of the forum and they will verify that one of the founding dogmas of an Army is to punish severely those who resort to unnecessary violence. If you don't believe me, goggle a bit and you will find everything you need to know. I am not suggesting that everything functions perfectly!!! But things are not the way you believe.

IDF has regulations and since in Israel there are no military Academies our Army is an Army of the People of Israel. The rules are very severe.



The IDF may have all these rules. Yet it is also very simple to ask Mr Google for examples of gratuitous violence and humiliation. Overt acts, such as the attacks against civilians with flechettes, grenades, machine guns, are also easy to find.



I know very well that the rise of Nazism wasn't a result of the collective general trauma. Also, I suggest we avoid referencies to cultural standards. Slipery slopes...



It was very much a result of trauma. The aftermath of WWI gave a race that was well educated and cultured reason to follow a madman into hell.



Unique. You must have observed by now that I am not hiding my thoughts. Your remark above is very dirty and from this moment I stop giving you the benefit of the doubt. I consider that you post those things on purpose especially when you address to me since you know my ideas. I have had enough.

I am afraid I do not understand. I am grateful to hear that there are many in the IDF who do not approve of what they are ordered to do. It gives me hope that there will be a reasonable and rational result from what is a crazy situation. You read too much into what I write. Although I enjoy word games, I am also a computer programmer. It is to be taken literally and logically, even if I do try to play some simple games with the words themselves.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I think I was ticked off for comparing Nazis to the US the other day. I think there is a little bit of Nazi in all of us. It is hardly something that the Isrealis have a monopoly on.

I don't know about you but I don't have a serial killer in me. Nazis weren't common criminals. What they did was unique in History and it didn't have any precedent.You cannot use Nazis as an example. You remind me of those people of PETA who used the famous photo from the concentration camp and in the place of the skeletal jewish prisoners they put chicken.

Those people died in that camp once and PETA killed them once more.
One of the pictures at check points was of a Palestinian woman, in labour, trying to get to hospital, but having difficulty negotiating the route due to the presence of check points, so that she had to scale the steep side of a hill.

One? Only one? I bet more than one have faced this situation. Propably the kids at the check points who serve their country took their belly for a bomb.

You know the last time I was in Jerusalem I observed that I tended to look people( I mean Arab people) trying to figure out if they carry a bomb. I remember that I was looking pregnant women quite suspiciously.

It's unbelievable what terror can do to people.


I find it hard to believe it is being observed.

You reply to something irrelevant. Again. In your previous message you said :

It begs the question, would the Australian army perform this role? In East Timor, there was a recent military investigation because some soldiers were accused of violating the dead body of a terrorist. The IDF does not seem to have the same standards.

And I replied to you that IDF has the same and maybe more severe standards. Now you say that IDF might have such standards but they are not observed.

So do you retract your previous comment about IDF?

And Likud has stated it will not accept a Palestinian state. I think that 30 years of military occupation indicates a certain amount of blind hatred. Military occupation is an act of war, war is an act of hatred.

PLO until yesterday was declaring that they do not want Peace but Israel's destruction.So? Out of the 30 years of occupation only during the last 8-10 years PLO is talking about Peace.

In the book, the author, although a committed Nazi, found he was troubled by the fact that Jews had to slink onto the tramcar, and off again, so as not to arouse any attention, lest it result in some attack on them. He felt that this was no way to live, that it was surely very close to having no life at all, to being dead. If you look at the photos of the checkpoints, you see pictures of Palestinians having to adopt this attitude too, nothing can attract attention, existence has to be expressed in the most minimal way.

You seem to overlook that Jews in Nazi Germany weren't attempting to "enter" cities in order to explode themselves and kill numerous unarmed civilians. Unfortuantely Arab terrorist use even the abulances of Red Cross in order to kill people.

Unless you are implying that Nazis were reacting to a real danger the Jews posed to their society as Israelis react to the blind Arab terrorism.

Were Jews a potential danger to the German society?

That is a shame. I love hearing the old wisdom. It reminds me how much we have learned and lost. The Romans, Greeks, and others, have much to teach us still. Since they did not have access to all the modern wonders that we do, they learned to express powerful ideas with an economy of words.

Yes indeed. But still the old wisdom loses its strength in inappropriate discussions. The Greeks had no idea of the notion of the racial hatred.

The IDF may have all these rules.

So, I guess that you actually retract your previous argument.

Yet it is also very simple to ask Mr Google for examples of gratuitous violence and humiliation. Overt acts, such as the attacks against civilians with flechettes, grenades, machine guns, are also easy to find.

But the same is everywhere unfortunately. We were talking about what makes you think that Israel is a Nazi state. You haven't proven so far that there are attrocities that occur exclusively in Israel.

It was very much a result of trauma. The aftermath of WWI gave a race that was well educated and cultured reason to follow a madman into hell.

This is an oversimplification and unfortunately is rather prevailing as an idea regarding what caused Nazism whereas is only one of the reasons. The rise of Nazism has to do mostly with the structures of the German Society. I can expand of that if you are interested.


I You read too much into what I write.

What you write is all I have from you. I don't know the computer programmer and I don't know the person that hides behind your nick-name. I do have to read into what you write.

Are we fooling around here?


BTW Thanks for replacing the photos with links. I appreciate it :)

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The IDF may have all these rules. Yet it is also very simple to ask Mr Google for examples of gratuitous violence and humiliation. Overt acts, such as the attacks against civilians with flechettes, grenades, machine guns, are also easy to find.

Yes, whenever any army is involved in action, there will be reports of excesses and abuses. Sometimes these reports will be exaggerations, reporting from a biased source. Sometimes it will be disinformation or propaganda put out by the opposing side or its allies, and sometimes they will be real, the result of circumstances that arise from the chaos of war. War is, after all, brutal by definition.

In this, Israel has several disadvantages: First, the conflict has lasted a very long time. This, along with Israel’s open society, insures that there will be more to report. Second, Israel gets an unbelievable amount of media attention, far out of proportion to her importance in world events. Third, Israel has a cadre of critics who are bent on exaggerating every fault and reporting every event in the worst possible way.

The truth is that even if you disagree with the policies that put Israeli troops into action, their behavior while in action is as good as or better than any other NATO force.

I think it’s interesting to contrast your reaction to allegations of misconduct of Israeli forces to your reaction to similar allegations of misconduct of Australian forces. When the forces are Australian, you’re willing to give them the benefit of the doubt by questioning if the charges are true and adding further commentary of the character of their opponents. When the charges are against Israeli forces, you make a comparison to Nazism.

[a_unique_person]

Now four former directors of Shin Beit agree with me. I must have something right.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/21/1069027328507.html



Four former Israeli security chiefs have created a stir, accusing the Sharon Government of "immoral" conduct.

Israel's Government is behaving "disgracefully" in the occupied territories, with an "immoral" and "vindictive" policy of settlement and fence-building that "creates hatred... expropriates land, and annexes hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to the state of Israel".

These allegations are sending shock waves through the Israeli political and security establishments - not because of what was said but because of who said it.

In an unprecedented joint interview with the Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronot last week, four retired directors of Israel's Shin Bet internal security agency came together to openly criticise the present Government's policy - or as they see it, lack of policy - for ending the Arab-Israeli conflict.

The four former directors - Avraham Shalom, Yaakov Peri, Carmi Gillon and Ami Ayalon - warned that if the present situation was left unchecked, the result could ultimately be the end of Israel as a democratic, Jewish state.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Now four former directors of Shin Beit agree with me. I must have something right.


Excuse me, how do they agree with you?

You were comparing the “humiliation” of Palestinian-Arabs at checkpoints to the suffering of Jews in the Holocaust while (unfairly) smearing the IDF for not following rules.

This article doesn’t support any of that. What this article shows is former Shin-Bet security chiefs criticizing the Sharon government for not having a policy to resolve the conflict. While both ideas are critical, they are critical in very different ways.

In your mind, is criticism of Israel the only important factor? Or are you backing away from previous assertions and starting a new topic?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Excuse me, how do they agree with you?

You were comparing the “humiliation” of Palestinian-Arabs at checkpoints to the suffering of Jews in the Holocaust while (unfairly) smearing the IDF for not following rules.

This article doesn’t support any of that. What this article shows is former Shin-Bet security chiefs criticizing the Sharon government for not having a policy to resolve the conflict. While both ideas are critical, they are critical in very different ways.

In your mind, is criticism of Israel the only important factor? Or are you backing away from previous assertions and starting a new topic?

Sorry, they agree with the basic premise of the thread, that there are important Israeli figures and representatives who doubt the validity of Sharon's strategy. They also feel that the treatment of Palestinians is not good.

My only point about the Nazis was that their humiliation of Jews was seen by the author of a book to be a terrible thing that was as bad as killing someone, that is, taking away their life in principal, if not in fact. There are many more features of the Nazi regime that do not apply to Israel.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

My only point about the Nazis was that their humiliation of Jews was seen by the author of a book to be a terrible thing that was as bad as killing someone, that is, taking away their life in principal, if not in fact. There are many more features of the Nazi regime that do not apply to Israel.


So far you haven't demonstrated a single feature of the Nazi regime that can be applied to Israel unless I missed it and in that case please, do me the favor to re-post it.

Also, the Israelis are responding--often in questionable ways--to a real danger,the suicide terrorists attacks are real. You haven't replied if you think that Jews constituted a real danger to the German society during the Nazi period.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra



So far you haven't demonstrated a single feature of the Nazi regime that can be applied to Israel unless I missed it and in that case please, do me the favor to re-post it.



I thought I was referring to the humiliation and need for passes, etc of Jews. However, I was not saying that Israel is itself a Nazi state. Just that this person who was a Nazi felt that this treatment, when handed out to Jews, was inhuman.

I would point out that many members of the IDF feel that treating Palestinians in a such a way is not something they feel comfortable about.



Also, the Israelis are responding--often in questionable ways--to a real danger,the suicide terrorists attacks are real. You haven't replied if you think that Jews constituted a real danger to the German society during the Nazi period.

I thought I already did, when I said that Hitler and the Nazis were the only danger. (well, there were plenty of communists too, but France had communists as well, without turning into a totalitarian state.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I thought I was referring to the humiliation and need for passes, etc of Jews.

One can’t reflect on the history of the Palestinian-Arabs without feeling sorry for these people. They have been used as pawns by the greater Arabic nations, manipulated and robbed by their own leaders, and brainwashed into continuing a losing struggle that only brings them more misery.

Yes, the checkpoints are a part of the Palestinian-Arab hardships, but is it fair to criticize them without acknowledging the reasons behind them? Is “humiliating” a good word to describe them? Do they make for a good comparison to Nazism?

No.

As great a hardship as the checkpoints are, there is a reason behind them, and that reason is terrorism. Unfortunately, Palestinian-Arabic society supports terrorism to a greater degree than any other society in the world. While the majority of Palestinian-Arabs are not terrorists, the ones that are are relentless and fanatical, willing to go to extremes if it will kill just a few Israelis. The truth is there is no society in the world that would not take similar measures in self-defense. Further, placing the blame on the Israelis without acknowledging the role Palestinian-Arabs play in creating the problem is unrealistic. Creating a lasting peace and removing the checkpoints will require cooperation from both societies.

On “humiliation.”: Honestly, I can’t understand why this word is used in conjunction with Israeli checkpoints. Nowhere in the world except in the disputed territories in Israel is a checkpoint considered “humiliating.” Yes, they are Inconvenient, annoying, and time consuming, but humiliating? No, that’s absurd.

In the United States people go through checkpoints all the time. I used to have a job where a search was normal both coming to and leaving work. In addition, we have kids being searched before they go to school, we have checkpoints where people are searched before going into federal buildings, people who want to fly are searched before boarding an airplane, and even driving on the street at night, a person may encounter a police sobriety checkpoint.

Are all these people being humiliated? No. While few people like them, most understand that these inconveniences are a matter of public safety and that a greater good is served.

You want an example of humiliation? Imagine being a third generation Palestinian-Arab living in Syria who still can’t become a citizen and is thus a second-class citizen without access to the same educational opportunities, employment opportunities and social services. That’s humiliating.

I have a problem with the Nazism comparison for several reasons:

1) It’s an insult to the survivors and the descendents of survivors of Nazism. Jews, communists, political dissidents…all of them. While there are some events in human history that can be compared, this isn’t one of them.

2) Using terms inappropriately robs them of their meaning. Nazism, holocaust, genocide… these are all real events in history that deserve to be remembered for what they were. It’s wrong when PETA uses Holocaust imagery to evoke sympathy for chickens because people are not the moral equivalent of livestock. Palestinian-Arabs and Israelis are both human, so they can be compared, but it’s absurd to compare being delayed at a checkpoint to systematic robbery, slavery and extermination.

3) As a comparison, it’s just not a very good one. While Jews of Nazi Germany did face travel restrictions, that’s about as far as the comparison goes. The truth is that for the Jews of Nazi Germany, travel restrictions were a hardship, but they were really low on the list of things to worry about. For the Palestinian-Arabs, it’s pretty high on the list.

[a_unique_person]

I think everyone confuses the use of the example I wrote about. I was not comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, but saying that one aspect of it, in it's treatment of Jews, was reminiscent of the current treatment of Palestinians.

Like I said in another thread, there is a lesson in there for all of us. Eg, I have never really like the growing fashion, taken from the Americans, of having an Australian flag in your front yard. This book only confirms my dislike. Collective pride is something to be wary of.

Israel is not Nazi Germany, but it does remind me of some aspects of Nazi Germany in it's treatment of Palestinians.

However, as to your point about the treatment of Palestinians. There are now four influential groups who agree that the treatment of Palestinians is about much more than preventing terrorism, it is about degrading them. IDF Pilots, Generals, former intelligence directors and rank and file members of the military. These people should know what it is really about, and they are saying the Palestinians should not be treated like this.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I thought I was referring to the humiliation and need for passes, etc of Jews. However, I was not saying that Israel is itself a Nazi state. Just that this person who was a Nazi felt that this treatment, when handed out to Jews, was inhuman.

Humiliations in the check points exist. I'd say that they happen everyday and I wish this madness stopped but the humiliation of the opponent is in the menu of every conflict since antiquity.The humiliations that Jews suffered are not what makes Nazism unique in History. Since the 3th ce BC and until the end of WW II Jews did nothing but suffering every sort of humiliation.

So, it's wrong to compare Israel with Hitler based on what happens to the check points.

Humiliation of the victims is not what made Nazism unique and I am sure that you know that.

I would point out that many members of the IDF feel that treating Palestinians in a such a way is not something they feel comfortable about.
Yes and many citizens as well. I feel very bad about it, on the other hand the terror numbs your mind and as I have told you many times before, the Arabs who have lost the war do nothing to help us to help them. We don't expect them to love us, we just want they stop the blind terrorist attacks. We want to stop making us, the pacifists look like idiots.

One last thing. I am asking you to stop allying with the extremes. I am asking you to stop triggering extreme responses to your messages, I am asking you to stop using provocative titles to your threads , it's childish and meaningless.

I am a Jew by experience. For me being jewish is an everyday habit, I am not a fanatic because I don't need to read the Bible to learn what being a Jew means. If you believe that there is a meaning in the above sentences don't behave to me as if I am a caricature of Shyloc because I am not.

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra:
So, it's wrong to compare Israel with Hitler based on what happens to the check points.
I don't know how credible the anecdote is, but it does make a telling point. The Nazis should not be brought up lightly in a discussion, but on the other hand the actual demonstration in 30's Germany of how people can be taught brutality must be examined and learned from. (The anecdote is suspicious in that it makes the point of incremental brutalisation rather too nicely.) This brutalisation is another thing I hold against nationalism.

Israel does represent decent Western values in many ways, which is what limits people like Sharon. Sharon has left a trail of civilian dead behind him throughout his career, and I don't think for a moment that questions of scale matter a fig to him. If he could, and thought it would serve his purposes, he would happily annihilate the Palestinians. He can't because Israel wouldn't let him. Will Israel allow the creation of "bantustans" in which the Palestinians (Muslim and Christian) will be imprisoned? By incremental steps it might be done. Especially when the Israelis that might prevent it don't live there or see it depicted on their televisions except when there's an attack on Israelis. Just as few Germans lived in Poland.

[Cleopatra]

Capel Dodger

Thanks for you lecture it's time for questions now.

Do you believe that Israel can be compared to the Germany of the Nazi period?

Yes or no?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Humiliations in the check points exist. I'd say that they happen everyday and I wish this madness stopped but the humiliation of the opponent is in the menu of every conflict since antiquity.The humiliations that Jews suffered are not what makes Nazism unique in History. Since the 3th ce BC and until the end of WW II Jews did nothing but suffering every sort of humiliation.



They suffered humiliation long before then. But they were one of the few to write it down, even if they followed the time honoured practice of turning a defeat into a 'victory' of the spirit, like the Australians at Gallipoli. Hence we have a good history of them. Many others were totally wiped off the face of the earth. They did not live to tell us the history.

However, taking on the Romans was not a good idea. Or having a mass suicide when they lost.



So, it's wrong to compare Israel with Hitler based on what happens to the check points.

Humiliation of the victims is not what made Nazism unique and I am sure that you know that.



All I did was read a book about a man who grew up as a Nazi, and was struck by what he saw was wrong with the treatment of the Jews. He did not know about the death camps till after the war, but he knew that the dehumanising treatment of them was wrong, despite what his father taught him about the 'sinister Jew'.

There members of the IDF who are standing up and saying that they believe they are doing something that is morally wrong and strategically stupid are only doing the same thing. They are feeling the human reaction to having to carry out orders they know to be wrong.



Yes and many citizens as well. I feel very bad about it, on the other hand the terror numbs your mind and as I have told you many times before, the Arabs who have lost the war do nothing to help us to help them. We don't expect them to love us, we just want they stop the blind terrorist attacks. We want to stop making us, the pacifists look like idiots.



I think that is the point. A military occupation, in which armed troops patrol the street, some of them committing ad hoc atrocities, will also numb the mind. I cannot imagine what it would be like for me, if I was to, say, take my child to play basketball. Along the way I had to stop at a checkpoint, where a man I had never met before pointed a loaded military weapon at me, searched my car, then made me wait 20 minutes to get through for no reason other than to humiliate me. My whole day would then be one of numbness, and hatred for the person who had done this to me. My child would be seeing this, and learning also how to hate.

When the Soviet Union crumbled, they wave of human beings throwing off the military shackles that bound them to Russian was overwhelming. These people had also lived a mind numbing life. The Russians, and their proxies, knew also that what they were doing was wrong, and that they just had to leave these countries. It was a humiliation for Russia, but one that they could not put off forever.

It reminds me of another story, this time from the film "Withnail and I". A character is telling the story of a person who is holding on to a helium balloon, and going for a ride up to the sky. This is very enjoyable, but then they have to make a decision. At what point do they let go. The longer they hold on, the worse it gets.



One last thing. I am asking you to stop allying with the extremes. I am asking you to stop triggering extreme responses to your messages, I am asking you to stop using provocative titles to your threads , it's childish and meaningless.



Which part of "Israeli Army has Doubts" is the provocative bit?



I am a Jew by experience. For me being jewish is an everyday habit, I am not a fanatic because I don't need to read the Bible to learn what being a Jew means. If you believe that there is a meaning in the above sentences don't behave to me as if I am a caricature of Shyloc because I am not.

There are in fact a few pawn shops in Melbourne that a stereo-typically Shyloc. Mean, rundown and usurious. The fact that there are only a few of them indicates to me that most Jews do not fit this stereotype.

I do not believe I have ever indicated you are anything like this. If you can point me to a place where I have, I will apoligise for it.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


One can?t reflect on the history of the Palestinian-Arabs without feeling sorry for these people. They have been used as pawns by the greater Arabic nations, manipulated and robbed by their own leaders, and brainwashed into continuing a losing struggle that only brings them more misery.

Yes, the checkpoints are a part of the Palestinian-Arab hardships, but is it fair to criticize them without acknowledging the reasons behind them? Is ?humiliating? a good word to describe them? Do they make for a good comparison to Nazism?

No.

As great a hardship as the checkpoints are, there is a reason behind them, and that reason is terrorism.



That is your opion. Mine is that a large part of the reason is to disrupt Palestinian life. It is part of a pattern of behaviour to cut up the Palestinian people into ghettos that are not a viable society. Look at a map of the settlements that have been created. It reminds you of a disease like smallpox. The wall to 'protect' these settlements does not follow the 'green line', it cuts deep into Palestine. Why? So it can protect the settlements from terrorism. But why are the settlements there? Where is the sense in the reasoning behind, "These Palestinians are a threat to me, so I will build my home as close to them as I can".


Unfortunately, Palestinian-Arabic society supports terrorism to a greater degree than any other society in the world. While the majority of Palestinian-Arabs are not terrorists, the ones that are are relentless and fanatical, willing to go to extremes if it will kill just a few Israelis. The truth is there is no society in the world that would not take similar measures in self-defense. Further, placing the blame on the Israelis without acknowledging the role Palestinian-Arabs play in creating the problem is unrealistic. Creating a lasting peace and removing the checkpoints will require cooperation from both societies.

On ?humiliation.?: Honestly, I can?t understand why this word is used in conjunction with Israeli checkpoints. Nowhere in the world except in the disputed territories in Israel is a checkpoint considered ?humiliating.? Yes, they are Inconvenient, annoying, and time consuming, but humiliating? No, that?s absurd.

In the United States people go through checkpoints all the time. I used to have a job where a search was normal both coming to and leaving work. In addition, we have kids being searched before they go to school, we have checkpoints where people are searched before going into federal buildings, people who want to fly are searched before boarding an airplane, and even driving on the street at night, a person may encounter a police sobriety checkpoint.

Are all these people being humiliated? No. While few people like them, most understand that these inconveniences are a matter of public safety and that a greater good is served.

[/b][/quote]

How many times have you had to wait while the person checking you leaves you in the hot sun, after aiming a military weapon at you, and talks to his friends for a while? I think I know the answer. It is zero.

The checkpoints you refer to are there for a reason. Many of the West Bank check points serve no purpose at all. A road will be blocked, but you can just walk around the check point. It is interdiction designed to harrass a society.



You want an example of humiliation? Imagine being a third generation Palestinian-Arab living in Syria who still can?t become a citizen and is thus a second-class citizen without access to the same educational opportunities, employment opportunities and social services. That?s humiliating.

I have a problem with the Nazism comparison for several reasons:

1) It?s an insult to the survivors and the descendents of survivors of Nazism. Jews, communists, political dissidents?all of them. While there are some events in human history that can be compared, this isn?t one of them.

2) Using terms inappropriately robs them of their meaning. Nazism, holocaust, genocide? these are all real events in history that deserve to be remembered for what they were. It?s wrong when PETA uses Holocaust imagery to evoke sympathy for chickens because people are not the moral equivalent of livestock. Palestinian-Arabs and Israelis are both human, so they can be compared, but it?s absurd to compare being delayed at a checkpoint to systematic robbery, slavery and extermination.



You do not appear to have heard about the systematic robbery that is indeed taking place, of land. It is a relentless process. Every new or expanded settlement is another act of theft.



3) As a comparison, it?s just not a very good one. While Jews of Nazi Germany did face travel restrictions, that?s about as far as the comparison goes. The truth is that for the Jews of Nazi Germany, travel restrictions were a hardship, but they were really low on the list of things to worry about. For the Palestinian-Arabs, it?s pretty high on the list.

You do not appear to have noticed the recent reports in the paper of Palestinians being shot at and harrassed for harvesting their crops. Death is a real prospect for Palestinians.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Capel Dodger

Thanks for you lecture it's time for questions now.

Do you believe that Israel can be compared to the Germany of the Nazi period?

Yes or no?

I don't think there is a yes/no black/white answer to this. All countries can be compared to Nazi Germany in some ways. They just measure up in smaller of larger extents to that similarity.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

That is your opion. Mine is that a large part of the reason is to disrupt Palestinian life. It is part of a pattern of behaviour to cut up the Palestinian people into ghettos that are not a viable society. Look at a map of the settlements that have been created. It reminds you of a disease like smallpox. The wall to 'protect' these settlements does not follow the 'green line', it cuts deep into Palestine. Why? So it can protect the settlements from terrorism. But why are the settlements there? Where is the sense in the reasoning behind, "These Palestinians are a threat to me, so I will build my home as close to them as I can".

I think comparing Israeli settlements to a disease is one of those provocative phrases Cleopatra was talking about.

I can certainly see that checkpoints are disruptive to Palestinian life, but so is terrorism disruptive to Israeli life. Of the two, I think I’d rather have my life disrupted by a checkpoint, even an arbitrary one. In any case, isn’t the rational thing to do is to address the underlying reason for checkpoints, terrorism?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
How many times have you had to wait while the person checking you leaves you in the hot sun, after aiming a military weapon at you, and talks to his friends for a while? I think I know the answer. It is zero.

How about being held at gun-point in my underwear while police searched my home while making disparaging remarks about my housekeeping? Thinking back on the event, “humiliating” is not among the words I would choose to describe it.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You do not appear to have heard about the systematic robbery that is indeed taking place, of land. It is a relentless process. Every new or expanded settlement is another act of theft.

I am aware of settlement building, though relentless isn’t the word I would use to describe it. New settlements are not being built, and getting approval to expand existing settlements is very hard as there is a lot of political opposition against it.

You call it theft?

Maybe, but you can make a pretty good argument against it.

In order to steal something, it must first have an owner. In this situation, we’re not taling about personal ownership, but political ownership, as in The United States owns Guam.

But how can anyone but Israel claim political ownership? There is no state called Palestine and the previous political entities of Jordan, the British government and the Ottoman empire have all either renounced their claims, withdrawn, or dissolved.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You do not appear to have noticed the recent reports in the paper of Palestinians being shot at and harrassed for harvesting their crops. Death is a real prospect for Palestinians.

I’ve seen reports from the ISM, but haven’t been able to verify them through any other sources. I can see how it would happen so I’m not claiming it’s made up, but neither do I have any idea how widespread the issue is. I do know that settlements are frequently the targets of terrorist attacks.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I don't think there is a yes/no black/white answer to this. All countries can be compared to Nazi Germany in some ways. They just measure up in smaller of larger extents to that similarity.


You will have to list the countries and societies in History that consented to the industrial extermination of almost 12.000.000 people if you insist in supporting this claim.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


I think comparing Israeli settlements to a disease is one of those provocative phrases Cleopatra was talking about.



You tell me what it reminds you of then.

http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Land_Grab_Map.asp

http://www.btselem.org/Images/Maps/Settlements_Map_Eng.GIF



I can certainly see that checkpoints are disruptive to Palestinian life, but so is terrorism disruptive to Israeli life. Of the two, I think I’d rather have my life disrupted by a checkpoint, even an arbitrary one. In any case, isn’t the rational thing to do is to address the underlying reason for checkpoints, terrorism?



But after a lifetime of checkpoints, tanks and guns, you might decide you want to be free of it all. Perhaps the underlying cause of the terrorism is the means of defeating the terrorism? The English experience in Ireland demonstrated that heavy handed use of power is counter-productive.



How about being held at gun-point in my underwear while police searched my home while making disparaging remarks about my housekeeping? Thinking back on the event, “humiliating” is not among the words I would choose to describe it.







I am aware of settlement building, though relentless isn’t the word I would use to describe it. New settlements are not being built, and getting approval to expand existing settlements is very hard as there is a lot of political opposition against it.



Tenders for new settlements are being raised. Sharon has already argued that those in existing settlements should be allowed to expand them.



You call it theft?

Maybe, but you can make a pretty good argument against it.

In order to steal something, it must first have an owner. In this situation, we’re not taling about personal ownership, but political ownership, as in The United States owns Guam.

But how can anyone but Israel claim political ownership? There is no state called Palestine and the previous political entities of Jordan, the British government and the Ottoman empire have all either renounced their claims, withdrawn, or dissolved.



http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Hebron_2003.asp
H-2, Hebron
Status Report, August 2003



Hebron. Photo: Nati Shohat, Reuters

Upon the signing of the Hebron Agreement, in January 1997, Hebron was divided into two parts: Area H-1, an area of eighteen square kilometers (80% of the city) with 115,000 Palestinians, was handed over to complete Palestinian control. Area H-2, in which 35,000 Palestinians and 500 settlers live, remained under Israeli security control, with the Palestinian Authority being given only civilian powers. During the al-Aqsa intifada, Israel again took control of Area H-1.


Since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Intifada, the living conditions of Palestinians in H-2, primarily in the Casbah (Old City) area near the settlements, have deteriorated significantly. As a result, those families who could afford to do so moved to other neighborhoods.



Among the factors leading to their leaving the area are the following:


Palestinians in this area suffer almost daily physical violence and property damage by settlers in the city. Settlers throw stones at them, curse them, damage their property, and take over their apartments. At its worst, the violent acts resulted in the death of fourteen-year-old Nibin Jamjum. Security forces do not protect Palestinians against settler violence and almost never enforce the law against the lawbreakers. Even in cases in which the security forces anticipate settler violence, they fail to make preparations to prevent the attacks. A report prepared by Israel's Civil Administration stated that, "The image of the State of Israel is extremely bad in all matters related to law enforcement in Hebron."
The restrictions on Palestinian movement in the city are among the harshest in the Occupied Territories. The IDF imposes curfew on Palestinian residents of H-2 both in response to violence by Palestinians and violence by settlers, and to enable settlers to hold public events. Between 2,000-2,500 shops and businesses have been closed in the area since the beginning of the current intifada. Business life in the Casbah and Bab a-Zawiya area, which constituted the commercial center of the city, has come to an almost complete standstill. The inability to move about freely and to earn a living has increased the unemployment rate and the number of people living in poverty. These restrictions also affect the ability of residents to receive medical services and for children to attend school in a normal and regular manner.

Palestinian residents of H-2 also suffer from serious acts of violence by border policemen and IDF soldiers. Testimonies provided to B'Tselem indicate a phenomenon of routine, daily violence by security forces, including beatings, hurling of stun grenades, and theft of money and goods, sometimes by threat. The most egregious incident of violence was the killing of 'Imran Abu Hamdiya by four border policemen, who were interrogated only after B'Tselem and other human rights organizations pressured the authorities. State officials stubbornly sought to present this case and others as "unusual cases." However, B'Tselem has documented many other cases, even after the killing of Abu Hamdiya. In fact, violence by security forces is a widespread phenomenon, which began before the killing of Abu Hamdiya and still continues.

Israel has continually ignored its duty to protect the safety and welfare of the Palestinians living in Area H-2. Most IDF effort is directed toward protecting settlers in the city, while grossly violating the human rights of the city's Palestinian residents.


The primary cause of the grave violation of Palestinian human rights is the presence of the settlers within the city. Therefore, Israel must remove the settlers. As long as settlers are living in the city, Israel must protect their safety and welfare. It cannot do so, however, while ignoring almost completely its obligations toward the city's Palestinian population, and while systematically and continually violating their rights.



I’ve seen reports from the ISM, but haven’t been able to verify them through any other sources. I can see how it would happen so I’m not claiming it’s made up, but neither do I have any idea how widespread the issue is. I do know that settlements are frequently the targets of terrorist attacks.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
They suffered humiliation long before then. But they were one of the few to write it down, even if they followed the time honoured practice of turning a defeat into a 'victory' of the spirit, like the Australians at Gallipoli. Hence we have a good history of them. Many others were totally wiped off the face of the earth. They did not live to tell us the history.

I am sorry you lost me. I replied to you that humiliation is part of the menu in any conflict and the humiliation of the "enemy" is not what distinguishes Hitler.

What does the paragraph above has to do with that?

However, taking on the Romans was not a good idea. Or having a mass suicide when they lost.

:confused:

All I did was read a book about a man who grew up as a Nazi, and was struck by what he saw was wrong with the treatment of the Jews. He did not know about the death camps till after the war, but he knew that the dehumanising treatment of them was wrong, despite what his father taught him about the 'sinister Jew'.

In that case the book is bad. If what impressed a Nazi from that period is the humiliation of th jewish people then you shouldn't spend time reading his book. He suffers from a poor judgement and I think that it should be obvious to you.

There members of the IDF who are standing up and saying that they believe they are doing something that is morally wrong and strategically stupid are only doing the same thing. They are feeling the human reaction to having to carry out orders they know to be wrong.

Again wrong. Nazis didn't just humiliate people don't you know what Nazis did to people?

Along the way I had to stop at a checkpoint, where a man I had never met before pointed a loaded military weapon at me, searched my car, then made me wait 20 minutes to get through for no reason other than to humiliate me. My whole day would then be one of numbness, and hatred for the person who had done this to me. My child would be seeing this, and learning also how to hate.

Have in mind that the guard in the check point might have his relatives killed in a suicide bombing, he might have a child that was killed in a bus while it was returning from school. Some guards in the check points see in the Arabs a potential but real danger.

You have to understand that Israelis have a real danger to fear you cannot compare them with the Nazis.

Which part of "Israeli Army has Doubts" is the provocative bit?

It's the fact that you compare an episode from the check points with a book of a nazi author who wasn't aware of the camps!!! Please, pity me.
There are in fact a few pawn shops in Melbourne that a stereo-typically Shyloc. Mean, rundown and usurious. The fact that there are only a few of them indicates to me that most Jews do not fit this stereotype.

I do not believe I have ever indicated you are anything like this. If you can point me to a place where I have, I will apoligise for it.

When my grandmother exited the ship that brought her to Palestine, a couple of American Jews that were with her in the ship fell on their knees and kissed the soil. My grandmother was left speachless looking at them with horror. Somebody saw her looking at them with astonishment and he asked her rather provocatively " Why do you look at them like that? They kiss the land of our Fathers" and my grandma with her imperial style ( I can imagine what look she had in her face :) ) replied to him that Our fathers have died in the Camps and they were real persons not mythical personae.

She used to call the people who enjoyed kissing the soil of our father Abraham as "caricatures of Shyloc".

I am not a caricature of Shyloc so stop talking to be about Judea and Samaria and behaving to me as if I have ever claimed here that I can hear the voice of my father Abraham asking for me to go to the West Bank...

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


You will have to list the countries and societies in History that consented to the industrial extermination of almost 12.000.000 people if you insist in supporting this claim.

There was much more to the tragedy of the Third Reich than the Holocaust. That was perhaps it's worst excess, but many of it's actions were reprehensible or the stuff of grand tragedy.

Eg, the first use of propaganda and mass hysteria in a scientific manner. Without that, there probably wouldn't have been a holocaust.

I was amazed to read at the end of the book, "A mind in prison" that many Germans were not even aware that Germany had started the war. They had such an overwhelming impression that the world was out to get them, (built on the abuses by the Allies of the treaties at the end of WWI), that they always thought they were fighting of the hordes that were at the borders.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


There was much more to the tragedy of the Third Reich than the Holocaust. That was perhaps it's worst excess, but many of it's actions were reprehensible or the stuff of grand tragedy.

Eg, the first use of propaganda and mass hysteria in a scientific manner. Without that, there probably wouldn't have been a holocaust.

I was amazed to read at the end of the book, "A mind in prison" that many Germans were not even aware that Germany had started the war. They had such an overwhelming impression that the world was out to get them, (built on the abuses by the Allies of the treaties at the end of WWI), that they always thought they were fighting of the hordes that were at the borders.


I remind you that this thread is not about the tragedies of the Third Reich in general but about a specific issue that you brought.

You made a specific statement. You said that every country can be compared to the Nazis.

What Nazis did for the first time in History was to exterminate industrialy almost 12m people.

I want you to list the countries that have done similar things.

You have either to prove or retract this statement.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra



I remind you that this thread is not about the tragedies of the Third Reich in general but about a specific issue that you brought.

You made a specific statement. You said that every country can be compared to the Nazis.

What Nazis did for the first time in History was to exterminate industrialy almost 12m people.

I want you to list the countries that have done similar things.

You have either to prove or retract this statement.

A brief list of features of the Nazi regime. As best I can remember, in no particular order.

The use of modern propaganda, eg, film and mass media.
The modern use of 'spin'.
Enslaving the minds of the young, Hitler Youth.
Military adventurism.
The Holocaust.
Development of advanced weapons, eg as the ballistic missile, jet fighter and bomber, assault rifle.
New forms of warfare, The Blitzkreig.
Adolf Hitler.
The mass Rallies.

Any state can be compared to these to see how it compares.

Some were new, some old. All added up to Nazi Party.

[Cleopatra]

Unique

You are not doing a very good job in proving your statement.

Pericles was among the first in History who used State Propaganda.
Alexander the Great improved the war techniques his father Philip the II had introduced.


How many people voted for a goverment that murdered the way it did 12m people, 6m of which were Jews?? How many countries have had somebody like Hitler as their elected leader?

How many?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


I am sorry you lost me. I replied to you that humiliation is part of the menu in any conflict and the humiliation of the "enemy" is not what distinguishes Hitler.

What does the paragraph above has to do with that?



:confused:



In that case the book is bad. If what impressed a Nazi from that period is the humiliation of th jewish people then you shouldn't spend time reading his book. He suffers from a poor judgement and I think that it should be obvious to you.



It can't be a bad book. It was just his impressions of growing up as a young boy into Nazism. It just related what he experienced. He had heard some rumours that the Jews were being subject to worse atrocities than just being tagged and humiliated. At first the concentration camps were portrayed as just that. Places to concentrate the Jewish population. It was only after the war that the full horror of what had really been done was revealed to him. Before then, as a soldier in a war, most of his time was taken up with military life, worrying about his parents and starvation.



Again wrong. Nazis didn't just humiliate people don't you know what Nazis did to people?



Crikey, it was just a passage from a book I happened to be reading at the time. I was just struck by how he saw humiliation such as the Jews were subject to as inhuman. They had to wear the distinctive badge, would not dare to impose their presence on anyone, and had to subject themselves to routine harrassment, not to mention the continual portrayal of them as the source of all evil in the world, so that they were fair game for anyone to attack and insult and kill with impunity.



Have in mind that the guard in the check point might have his relatives killed in a suicide bombing, he might have a child that was killed in a bus while it was returning from school. Some guards in the check points see in the Arabs a potential but real danger.



There was no such claim of that from the article I quoted. The guard just did it because he could. The imposition of curfews, as far as the residents are concerned, appears to be haphazard and arbitrary. It also constitutes collective punishment. One of the pictures showed people who had rushed out to buy food, only to find that the curfew had been imposed earlier than they expected.



You have to understand that Israelis have a real danger to fear you cannot compare them with the Nazis.



I think the Palestinians experience real danger too.



It's the fact that you compare an episode from the check points with a book of a nazi author who wasn't aware of the camps!!! Please, pity me.



Ex Nazi, if you don't mind. He was brought up to hate the Jews by his father. He only came to realise later in life that his father had been seriously misleading him. The fact is, the Germans believed what Hitler and his propaganda machine told them to believe. Right up to the end of the war, many of them still believed they could win, even though the country was being bombed to oblivion.


When my grandmother exited the ship that brought her to Palestine, a couple of American Jews that were with her in the ship fell on their knees and kissed the soil. My grandmother was left speachless looking at them with horror. Somebody saw her looking at them with astonishment and he asked her rather provocatively " Why do you look at them like that? They kiss the land of our Fathers" and my grandma with her imperial style ( I can imagine what look she had in her face :) ) replied to him that Our fathers have died in the Camps and they were real persons not mythical personae.

She used to call the people who enjoyed kissing the soil of our father Abraham as "caricatures of Shyloc".

I am not a caricature of Shyloc so stop talking to be about Judea and Samaria and behaving to me as if I have ever claimed here that I can hear the voice of my father Abraham asking for me to go to the West Bank...

I think I used the Judea and Samaria terms because that is what the area is called by Israel.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Unique

You are not doing a very good job in proving your statement.

Pericles was among the first in History who used State Propaganda.
Alexander the Great improved the war techniques his father Philip the II had introduced.


How many people voted for a goverment that murdered the way it did 12m people, 6m of which were Jews?? How many countries have had somebody like Hitler as their elected leader?

How many?

I was referring to the use of film. The Nazis made it a new artform. For most Germans, if I read it right, the propaganda made it impossible for many to break away from Hitlers lies.

I don't recall Hitler being elected as leader. IIRC, he manipulated the German political system with various underhand and illegal tactics to sieze power. He achieve much of his success by ridding the Germans of the suffering from the WWI treaties. This gave him much credibility with many. As he had no regard for legal processes or human rights, any people who could see what was coming only spoke up if they had no fear for their personal safety.

He created a kind of political whirlwind that he rode to power. The film of the rallies and speeches are terrifying in the presentation of a population of learned and intelligent people succumbing to mass hysteria. Once the war was over, talk of blaming the Jews for everything that went wrong all but disappeared, except for a few diehards. It was quite apparent who had caused the biggest problems for Germany.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


It can't be a bad book. It was just his impressions of growing up as a young boy into Nazism.

Poor boy! In that case he wasn't a Nazi. We don't call every German who served the Army in the war Nazi. At least I don't.

Crikey, it was just a passage from a book I happened to be reading at the time. I was just struck by how he saw humiliation such as the Jews were subject to as inhuman. They had to wear the distinctive badge, would not dare to impose their presence on anyone, and had to subject themselves to routine harrassment, not to mention the continual portrayal of them as the source of all evil in the world, so that they were fair game for anyone to attack and insult and kill with impunity.

Now this is why I say that you behave to me as if I am a caricature of Shyloc. You used this passage on purpose. Just to provoke. If the passage can't show any similarities between Israel and Nazi Germany why you used it? Why?

If you insist that the check points in the occupied territories remind you of the Nazis then you will have to show the similarities between the two cases one by one.

I think the Palestinians experience real danger too.

The do experience a danger but it's of different nature. If the PLO guerillas didn't use the population as their human shields they wouldn't have to suffer anything. You can't say the same about the Israeli citizens.

Ex Nazi, if you don't mind. He was brought up to hate the Jews by his father.

There is no such a thing as an ex-Nazi. We don't use the term ex-murderer either, so the term ex-Nazi is not valid.

The fact is, the Germans believed what Hitler and his propaganda machine told them to believe. Right up to the end of the war, many of them still believed they could win, even though the country was being bombed to oblivion.

I am sorry but the majority of the German people were antisemites and a reason why they embraced Hitler was because of the later's open antisemitism. It was their leader.

I think I used the Judea and Samaria terms because that is what the area is called by Israel.

You think wrong. Although the right term geographically is Judea and Samaria we don't use those terms anymore for political reasons. Those who use them in Israel though are much fewer than those Arabs who wish the annihilation of Israel judging by the polls who show high rates of support of Hamas action among the Arabs.

[Cleopatra]

BTW Ariel promises a State to the Palestinians if they stop the attacks (http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Mideast_Conflict)

Of course, whether he wants the State or not it's not up to him anymore.

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra:
Thanks for you lecture it's time for questions now.

Do you believe that Israel can be compared to the Germany of the Nazi period?

No need to thank me; any time you want a lecture, I'm your man.

This may be a problem of semantics. Israel obviously isn't the same as Nazi Germany was. Both are/were ruled by psycopathic monsters on the back of minority support (made possible by a flawed democracy), but Sharon is less of a megalomaniac and anyway doesn't yet have absolute power. Both officially promote an attitude towards the outside world based on hate and fear (cf Sharon's recent rants), but there is still an effective opposition that can voice another opinion. The de-humanisation of other "races" and social groups is another commonality; again, that can be and is opposed. They're clearly not the same (no two states are). They can, however, be compared with other to see what commonalities and differences exist.

My lecture was concerned with the deliberate step-by-step process that turns ordinary people into oppressors. That's not unique to the Nazis, I could also cite Milosevic from more recent times. To quote from Ben Gurion, with reference to the expulsion of Arabs (code-named "transfer"):
The thing must be done now [1937] - and the first step - perhaps the crucial step - is conditioning ourselves for its implementation.
Which is pretty chilling, considering how this thread started.

[Cleopatra]

First of all Capel Dodger

You will have to prove that Ariel Sharon has expressed his willingness to annihilate the Palestinians the way Hilter has declared his willingness to annihilate the Jews long before the Nazi Party took over Germany.

You speculate but you know very well that you cannot support claims on speculations.

I can quote Hitler declaring that Jews are not humans and they must go, can you quote me Ariel or any other Israeli official declaring something similar for the Palestinians?

Also, the step by step process can't work in the case of Israel.

You seem to ignore that Germany as the rest of Europe carried a long antisemitic tradition.

The step by step process needs the help of the society and whatever you might believe about the jews, we do not hate other people the way other people hate us for centuries now, unless you provide evidence for the contrary.

But you didn't reply to my question. Are Israelis Nazis?

BTW I want to ask you something regarding the Welsh candidate of the conservatives, do you want me to do it here or do you want me to revive this unique thread about Wales. I prefer the former. I kinda missed this discussion...

[Cleopatra]

Capel Dodger

Another thread (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870202981#post1870202981) , reminded of an example that shows that what you named "step by step process", needs the collaboration of the population.

During the '30ies many German mayors hired poets in order to compose verses where the word Jew would rhyme with the word " pig", " garlic" and "dirt" in order to make the numerous signs that ordered Jews to do this or that in their cities more pleasant to the locals.

In Israel the population is not engaged in such poetry contests. Of course we are not the land of the civilized Europeans, we are not the land who gave birth to a Beethoven,a Bach, a Schiller but if we had such tendancies you would have read about them in "Guardian" :)

[a_unique_person]

This young boy was taught those rhymes. I was wondering where they came from. He even recited one once, and felt ashamed of himself.

I was wondering if you have heard about the Palestinians being referred to as 'cockroaches'?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
First of all Capel Dodger

You will have to prove that Ariel Sharon has expressed his willingness to annihilate the Palestinians the way Hilter has declared his willingness to annihilate the Jews long before the Nazi Party took over Germany.

You speculate but you know very well that you cannot support claims on speculations.

I can quote Hitler declaring that Jews are not humans and they must go, can you quote me Ariel or any other Israeli official declaring something similar for the Palestinians?



You have never done it, but the claim has been made many times that Palestinians do not exist. They are really this, or that. Nobody lived there. There were only a few nomads. They didn't do anything to the country. They had no culture or history. Intellectual genocide.

[Cleopatra]

Unique

Again your prejudice doesn't let you think clearly and it seems that you miss the point.

Capel Dodger, mentioned correctly that Germany didn't turn into a Nazi regime into a day. The process can be described as a "step by step" process.

Whilst he admits that he can't trace such a process in Israel because the legislation and above all the mentality of the population would't consent into that, he doesn't miss the opportunity to spill his poison for something totally irrelevant.

Capel Dodger tends to turn himself into a case study. If somebody wants to see what prejudice does to a clever person he should study CD's posts about " that" matter.

You do a far more lousy job by trying to immitate him. Even if the sporadic examples you mention were true, they don't constitute a proof that there is anything in the Israeli society that could remind you of the Germany of the Nazis, unless you are terribly prejudiced towards Israel.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
BTW Ariel promises a State to the Palestinians if they stop the attacks (http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Mideast_Conflict)

Of course, whether he wants the State or not it's not up to him anymore.

Not quite true. As the USA, "USA, USA", has shown, might is right. And Israel has the might.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Unique

Again your prejudice doesn't let you think clearly and it seems that you miss the point.



There are a lot of points floating around here. Which point have I missed?



Capel Dodger, mentioned correctly that Germany didn't turn into a Nazi regime into a day. The process can be described as a "step by step" process.

Whilst he admits that he can't trace such a process in Israel because the legislation and above all the mentality of the population would't consent into that, he doesn't miss the opportunity to spill his poison for something totally irrelevant.



What happened to the Germans, who are just ordinary people like you and me, is a warning to all people.



Capel Dodger tends to turn himself into a case study. If somebody wants to see what prejudice does to a clever person he should study CD's posts about " that" matter.



Not necessarily true. If someone was to observe that Israel might not be all that is good and holy in the world, when the press is saying it is, then they are taking a definite risk in saying so.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
There are a lot of points floating around here. Which point have I missed?

The point of my posts.

What happened to the Germans, who are just ordinary people like you and me, is a warning to all people.

The reason why what happened to the Germans cannot happen to you and me is because we don't live in the specific society that was fiercly and continously antisemitic since the Middle Ages.

You might know that when Nazis came to power, Jews suffered humiliations in various countries. Why do you think that the citizens of some countries like Denmark or Greece didn't find the Nazi occupation of their country as a good opportunity to clear -up their differences with the Jews? Because antisemitism in those societies was marginal and not dominant as it was in Germany and in Central Europe.

Not necessarily true. If someone was to observe that Israel might not be all that is good and holy in the world, when the press is saying it is, then they are taking a definite risk in saying so.

I am sorry but I don't understand. It is one thing to criticize a policy of a country and another thing to blame the victims of Holocaust for what happened to them as Capel Dodger has repeatedly done in this forum.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


The point of my posts.



An Excellent Point! It reminds me of some of the more pertinent points I have myself made.




The reason why what happened to the Germans cannot happen to you and me is because we don't live in the specific society that was fiercly and continously antisemitic since the Middle Ages.

You might know that when Nazis came to power, Jews suffered humiliations in various countries. Why do you think that the citizens of some countries like Denmark or Greece didn't find the Nazi occupation of their country as a good opportunity to clear -up their differences with the Jews? Because antisemitism in those societies was marginal and not dominant as it was in Germany and in Central Europe.



I am sorry but I don't understand. It is one thing to criticize a policy of a country and another thing to blame the victims of Holocaust for what happened to them as Capel Dodger has repeatedly done in this forum.

I think that Capels only problem is that blaming victims is only criticised for certain groups at certain times.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

An Excellent Point! It reminds me of some of the more pertinent points I have myself made.

*rolleys smilie *

I think that Capels only problem is that blaming victims is only criticised for certain groups at certain times.

Dearest Unique, I think that you have embraced surrealism lately and I don't undertand what you are saying. :) Seriously, I don't understand what do you mean with the comment above.

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra

Just to clear this up:
It is one thing to criticize a policy of a country and another thing to blame the victims of Holocaust for what happened to them as Capel Dodger has repeatedly done in this forum.
I don't blame the victims, I attach some blame to the Zionists who promoted the idea of a Jewish Cabal that secretly ran the world. They weren't the victims, the Jews of Europe were.
You will have to prove that Ariel Sharon has expressed his willingness to annihilate the Palestinians the way Hilter has declared his willingness to annihilate the Jews long before the Nazi Party took over Germany.
I really don't feel that I have to prove that. Ariel Sharon is hardly likely to say such things openly. By their friends shall you know them, and he happily includes people who have said such things in his cabinet and his entourage. When he has shown himself capable of killing thousands of civilians in pursuit of his goals why should anyone assume that some scale of atrocity would be beyond him? I know what I know of him and I form my opinions when there's sufficient evidence.

(from various threads):
You seem to ignore that Germany as the rest of Europe carried a long antisemitic tradition.

The reason why what happened to the Germans cannot happen to you and me is because we don't live in the specific society that was fiercly and continously antisemitic since the Middle Ages.

Why do you think that the citizens of some countries like Denmark or Greece didn't find the Nazi occupation of their country as a good opportunity to clear -up their differences with the Jews? Because antisemitism in those societies was marginal and not dominant as it was in Germany and in Central Europe.
This flies in the face of the Jewish participation in German society, in politics, business and academia. The Nazis never gained a majority of votes, and what gained most support was the usual nationalist "Make Germany Great Again" guff, not anti-semitism. German anti-semitism was strong only in the Catholic areas, so lets see this for what it was - Catholic anti-semitism, not German. This fierce and continuous anti-semitism somehow left a large and thriving, emancipated Jewish community in Germany before the Nazis. How is that?
Whilst he admits that he can't trace such a process in Israel because the legislation and above all the mentality of the population would't consent into that ...
This mentality - is it that of the Russians, American settlers, Tel Aviv Gay Pride, Likudniks, Sephardics, Orthodox, Kach? Israel is a manufactured state, built from wildly disparate peoples. It doesn't have a "mentality". It's a civil war waiting to happen, because any conceivable settlement reached will not satisfy some of the population. (When politicians summon up nationalism they have a tiger by the tail; any compromise with maximalist aims can be equated with treason by other nationalists. When a state religion is brought into it as well you're really in trouble.) As to tracing such a process, I thought that was evidenced in the newspaper article that started this thread, Corporal Milstein finding he was "sinking into this". OK, the particular anecdote may be contrived, but this sort of brutalisation has been pointed out by many Israelis.
Capel Dodger tends to turn himself into a case study. If somebody wants to see what prejudice does to a clever person he should study CD's posts about " that" matter.
I've been aware of Zionism and Israel all my life, and my opinions are arrived at after long study, thought and discussion, not from prejudice. Israel was presented to me as the "good guy" and the Arabs as "bad guys", which I accepted at first, but the more I found out about the reality (and the more aware I became of the lies that are routinely provided as "history") the more I questioned the whole project. This is not pre-judice, this is post-judice. Was your opinion derived in the same way?

A case study in what, anyway? Atheistic anti-nationalists? Whisky-drinking, pipe-smoking, fire-sitting-by, book-reading, essentially harmless pontificators?
BTW I want to ask you something regarding the Welsh candidate of the conservatives, do you want me to do it here or do you want me to revive this unique thread about Wales
Please, lets poke fun at Welsh Tories. Was that old thread on the Banter forum?

[Cleopatra]

Coup d'Etat!!



Capel Dodger

I decided to cut this discussion into two parts. In this thread we will continue your favorite sport of Israel bashing and to another one we will discuss about the nature and the historical evolution of antisemitism and the possible role of zionism to the Holocaust. We have to resolve this matter once and for good, I am fed up with you.
It's not the Welsh candidates of the Torries that I had in mind but Michael Howard. He is a Jew you know.

I have an indecent proposal for you. You will vote for Howard and with your vote you will help the Jews to dominate the world and I-in return- will make sure that when this happens your garden will be appointed as one of the few cat-free places of the world, because as you might have realized the cats ( since they are smarter)have allied with the Jews for the final battle...

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
... because as you might have realized the cats ( since they are smarter)have allied with the Jews for the final battle...

I suspected, but I didn't know for sure. If the cats speak well of their owners, can they ally with the Jews too? Is there an application to fill out?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Mycroft


I suspected, but I didn't know for sure. If the cats speak well of their owners, can they ally with the Jews too? Is there an application to fill out?


LOL

Mycroft, there is no such a thing as a cat owner.We are talking about people who are owned by cats. So, since the cats have already made up their mind, people should obey... :p

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Cleopatra



LOL

Mycroft, there is no such a thing as a cat owner.We are talking about people who are owned by cats. So, since the cats have already made up their mind, people should obey... :p
May cat disagree with that, specially when I take him to the veterinarian and he takes his temperature.

[Cleopatra]

Capel Dodger

I will reply here only to the points that have to do with Israel.


Originally posted by CapelDodger
I really don't feel that I have to prove that. Ariel Sharon is hardly likely to say such things openly. By their friends shall you know them, and he happily includes people who have said such things in his cabinet and his entourage. When he has shown himself capable of killing thousands of civilians in pursuit of his goals why should anyone assume that some scale of atrocity would be beyond him? I know what I know of him and I form my opinions when there's sufficient evidence.

I am afraid that you do have. Think. What if somebody claims that Yasser Arafat is a serial killer and a Nazi like Hitler--judging by the number of terrorist attacks he has taken part in and he has personally ordered during the previous years? It sounds irrational, right? This is what you do when you claim that Sharon is a paranoid who wouldn't hesitate to order the mass murder of civilians.

As always, you play chess with the rules of backgammon. None forces you to play chess,my friend but if you decide to, you have to play by the rules.


This mentality - is it that of the Russians, American settlers, Tel Aviv Gay Pride, Likudniks, Sephardics, Orthodox, Kach? Israel is a manufactured state, built from wildly disparate peoples. It doesn't have a "mentality". It's a civil war waiting to happen, because any conceivable settlement reached will not satisfy some of the population. (When politicians summon up nationalism they have a tiger by the tail; any compromise with maximalist aims can be equated with treason by other nationalists. When a state religion is brought into it as well you're really in trouble.) As to tracing such a process, I thought that was evidenced in the newspaper article that started this thread, Corporal Milstein finding he was "sinking into this". OK, the particular anecdote may be contrived, but this sort of brutalisation has been pointed out by many Israelis.

I am sure that if this madness ever ends, we will have a civil war in Israel. I am positive about it BUT I have started to believe that there is a point in every nation's History that it has to clear up things and this is possible only through a civil war. The Greeks called this katharsis and as far as I know there is no katharsis without a bloodshed. I am not afraid of the civil war. In fact the outbreak of a civil war would mean the end of rotten apsects in the jewish mentality. I am sure you understand what I mean.

The example in the article was ridiculous. Everybody , even Unique, knows it.

I've been aware of Zionism and Israel all my life, and my opinions are arrived at after long study, thought and discussion, not from prejudice. Israel was presented to me as the "good guy" and the Arabs as "bad guys", which I accepted at first, but the more I found out about the reality (and the more aware I became of the lies that are routinely provided as "history") the more I questioned the whole project. This is not pre-judice, this is post-judice. Was your opinion derived in the same way?

I was born in Israel not because my parents --especially my dad--loved Israel so much and had decided to spend their lives there. Ironically I was born in Israel for the same reason my mother was born in Israel and not in Greece. My father was arrested by the Greek Junta in 1970 and he was sent in a labor camp for political prisoners. My mother was forced to leave the country 8 months pregnant because she was deprived of the Greek citizenship like heer mother who was practically forced to leave Greece and to migrate to the country she was mocking when she was a little girl in Salonika. I don't want the same to happen to me but there is a jewish proverb:" If something happens once ignore it, if it happens twice, wait for one more time for it to occur". I find the thought terrifying.

So, my knowledge about Israel comes by experience. I was born in the Arabic sector of Jerusalem, as a kid I was playing with Arabs this is why I feel more comfortable with them than with people from Western Europe. I served the Israeli Army and this is an experience I will never forget. It is not the fondest memory of my life but I am glad I did it. I quit my illusions about the human nature for good...

I don't know any Israeli who considers Palestinians as cockroaches,as Unique said, we live with them, we are not afraid of all of them, we don't see them as the "bad guys" BUT we don't feel the need to apologize for establishing that country and for protecting it.

If somebody is to apologize for this country these are the Europeans who stole our lives and I mean our lifestyle for ever.Nazism was a European phaenomenon. The Europeans sent us there, the Europeans before the war were screaming, asking for the Jews to go to Palestine now they scream and they ask for us to leave.

Well, no we won't.

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra:
It's not the Welsh candidates of the Torries that I had in mind but Michael Howard. He is a Jew you know.
Have you still not got the point that I don't give a monkey's if he's Welsh or Jewish? He a damned Tory with the look of a cat-lover and that's all I need to know. I don't care about people's religion or nationality. People should be judged by their natures not some inherited label.
I am afraid that you do have. Think. What if somebody claims that Yasser Arafat is a serial killer and a Nazi like Hitler--judging by the number of terrorist attacks he has taken part in and he has personally ordered during the previous years? It sounds irrational, right? This is what you do when you claim that Sharon is a paranoid who wouldn't hesitate to order the mass murder of civilians.
"Psychopath", not "paranoid". What's your point? Sharon is murderous gangster. Just listen to him and look at his record. What Arafat is has no bearing on it.
I am sure that if this madness ever ends, we will have a civil war in Israel. I am positive about it BUT I have started to believe that there is a point in every nation's History that it has to clear up things and this is possible only through a civil war
I can only assume it's your religiosity that gives you the impression that life and history are not in out hands. You put more store in symbols such as nation and religion than you do in real people. The individual interest eclipsed by the national interest, and the cost in blood and pain? Well worth paying. The Soul of the Nation will be forged the stronger by the sacrifice. Bugger that.
The Greeks called this katharsis and as far as I know there is no katharsis without a bloodshed. I am not afraid of the civil war. In fact the outbreak of a civil war would mean the end of rotten apsects in the jewish mentality. I am sure you understand what I mean.
You are not afraid, so bugger those that are afraid and will still get caught up in it. Let's be frank here, these aspects of "jewish mentality" only exist in people, so when you speak of eliminating them you mean eliminating certain types of Jews.

The most likely result of the civil war will be domination by the settlers and the other followers of the New Judaism - the nationalist, bigotted, blood-and-iron version. Those Israelis that want a life for themselves and are in a position to do so will leave. The result will be a horror story.
I've decided to cut this discussion into two parts. In this thread we will continue your favorite sport of Israel bashing and to another one we will discuss about the nature and the historical evolution of antisemitism and the possible role of zionism to the Holocaust. We have to resolve this matter once and for good, I am fed up with you.
Knock yourself out.

[a_unique_person]

I am sure that if this madness ever ends, we will have a civil war in Israel. I am positive about it BUT I have started to believe that there is a point in every nation's History that it has to clear up things and this is possible only through a civil war. The Greeks called this katharsis and as far as I know there is no katharsis without a bloodshed. I am not afraid of the civil war. In fact the outbreak of a civil war would mean the end of rotten apsects in the jewish mentality. I am sure you understand what I mean.



What do you mean?

I also don't think there has to be a civil war. In the case of the religious extremists, I think the secular Jews are being bullied more than they realise, and would be an easier mob to stand up to than they realise. These guys are all bluster and cowardice, IMHO. They won't even fight in the army that they demand protects them.

However, if you are correct, and there is to be a civil war, then I would be very afraid. Anyone mad enough to start a war in these circumstances might having an itchy trigger finger on the Nukes.

I would just note that, although it has a short history, Australia has never had a civil war. I think it is better for it. Just look at how long the after effects of the American civil war persist.

There were attempts to have a coup, during the Great Depression. The one man they needed, General Monash, who was the most respected military man in the country and could have had anything he wanted if he had gone along with the plotters, did not back them, but upheld his duty to defend Australia, not divide it. I have mentioned him before, (he was Jewish, BTW), but without him, Australia would have gone the politically unstable route of South America, with it's recurrent bloodbaths and violence.

[demon]

Oh well, lets not forget you can count on this guy if you feel like going down the civil war road.
A Jewish anti-Semite eh? I think people like this are a little more dangerous than the European anti-Semite fantasies that are the popular currency in this forum.

quote:
Jewish tensions boil over
Wednesday 26 November 2003, 15:56 Makka Time, 12:56 GMT

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef: All evil stems from Ashkenazis

Attacks on two synagogues and a school have caused various Jewish groups around the world to start blaming each other for deteriorating security.

The spiritual leader of Israel's ultra-Orthodox Shas party for Sephardic Jews has accused Ashkenazi Jews of being the source of all evil, according to the Maariv daily on Wednesday.

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef said during a lecture on the Torah in Jerusalem that "all evil stems from the Ashkenazis".

The 80-year-old rabbi is not a representative of some fringe movement - Shas has 11 MPs in the 120-member Israeli parliament.

The party claims to represent Sephardic Jews from the Mediterranean and Middle East and Rabbi Yosef is considered a leading expert on the Torah.

Fire and brimestone

The religious scholar has previously caused controversy with a speech in which he called for Arabs to go to hell.

But this time he targeted Israel’s Ashkenazi Jews – who migrated from central and eastern Europe following World War II.

"You the Jewish Ashkenazis, you have been in the West, in hell. Why did you come here? What you say or do is of little importance," he said.

Internationally, tensions are just as high.

Scores of self-styled “Torah True Jews” based in the United States have criticised Israel’s continuing attempt to refer to itself as ‘the Jewish State’.

Jewish anti-Zionists

In a high profile email campaign last Wednesday, thousands of people received a stark warning of "the danger Zionists were placing on Jews worldwide".

Rabbi Dovid Feldman told Aljazeera.net that a silent majority of Jews opposed the Zionist ideology which led to the creation of modern Israel.

Calling themselves True Torah
Jews, some rabbis denounce Israel

Feldman claims there are many more rabbis and others who sincerely practice their faith that hold similar opinions all round the world.

The message urged would-be-emigrants not to believe that events in Istanbul or France “make it necessary for Jews to leave their native countries and move to the most dangerous place on Earth for the Jewish People.”

Response to Sharon

The campaign came in response to comments made on 17 November by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

The PM told journalists at a hotel in Rome: “The best solution to anti-Semitism is immigration to Israel. It is the only place on Earth where Jews can live as Jews.”

The invitation has been received coldly by The True Torah campaign and by some eminent religious scholars.

Feldman and the late rabbi, Yoel Teitelbaum, extensively promoted a theological position that requires Jews to condemn the foundation of the secular state of Israel.

The rabbi claims the Zionist movement rejects all of the fundamental principles of Torah and insists Jews do not need a state of their own, adding the very establishment of a “Jewish” state is a grave violation of tradition and law.

Second campaign

In a letter addressed to US President George Bush and published in the Washington Post in September, the website "jewsagainstzionism" applauded the sentiment.

“They [Israelis] don’t represent the Jewish people in any way whatsoever. They have no right to speak in the name of the Jewish people.

“We deplore acts and policies carried out by those who – misusing the name of Israel – have substituted the ideal of nationalism for the teaching of the holy Torah.”

The website also criticised Tel Aviv’s policy of filling people with fear and paranoia in order to realise their goal of bringing more immigrants into the country who are to “serve as cannon fodder in the Zionist war against the Palestinians”.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/2943BEB3-FF4E-4436-B5E8-91C494187230.htm
__________________________________________________ __________________________

mwuahahahaaaaaa!!!!
'Eeez are good, eez are good, eees eberneza good'
Israel and the huge Extacy market?
Maybe this is a turf war between the 'bloods and the cips' of South Central TA?;)

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by demon
Jewish tensions boil over
Wednesday 26 November 2003, 15:56 Makka Time, 12:56 GMT

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef: All evil stems from Ashkenazis

ALWAYS trust the Arab media to learn about Jewish thought. There is no better source of information!:rolleyes:

Originally posted by demon
Scores of self-styled “Torah True Jews” based in the United States have criticised Israel’s continuing attempt to refer to itself as ‘the Jewish State’.

Jewish anti-Zionists

In a high profile email campaign last Wednesday, thousands of people received a stark warning of "the danger Zionists were placing on Jews worldwide".

Rabbi Dovid Feldman told Aljazeera.net that a silent majority of Jews opposed the Zionist ideology which led to the creation of modern Israel.

Rabbi Dovid Feldman represents the Neturei Karta. I told you about them, remember?
Originally posted by demon
Second campaign

In a letter addressed to US President George Bush and published in the Washington Post in September, the website "jewsagainstzionism" applauded the sentiment.

Does buying advertising space count as being published? I don’t think so, but it’s a neat trick to try to borrow some of the credibility of a major publication.

We also talked about Jews against Zionism before. It’s one guy, Russell Waxman, who tries very hard to make it seem like he’s an organization rather than just one guy with a web site.

[demon]

"ALWAYS trust the Arab media to learn about Jewish thought. There is no better source of information!"

ALWAYS eh? Hmm, you`d like to think so wouldn`t you.
You imply the Arabs can`t tell the truth ? Heavens forbid, do you know how many of them have the vote in France? How awful!

"I told you about them, remember?"...and?...Your point?... Uri Geller told me about spoon bending...Tony Blair told me about WMD being launched in 45 mins...I don`t succumb to appeals from authority if that`s what you are expecting, least of all a Zionazi apologist.

Anyway, you are avoiding the point that some Jews are total fvcking nutters that are actually more dangerous than any fairytail anti-Semitism you want to accuse people of.

You have nothing to say about Rabbi Ovadia Yosef? He doesnt fit into your neat little world of Holocaust Industry defences does he? He kind of blows the lid of it all.
You got nothing Mycroft, or the rest of the Zionist apologists here...just a litany of regurgitated half truths and lies and a transparant recourse to semantic games and nit picking history.

I can tell you fellow, you don`t fool anyone who has any real involvement in this sad sorry saga...that`s what makes it so sad.

[Cleopatra]

What's up Capel Dodger?

Do you get upset when you realize that your theories regarding remote countries concern real people with real lives?

If you had some religiosity in you, it would be easier to understand that some people never had the opportunity to create their own History because irrational hatred kept them at the margin.

I have told you many times before. Everybody hasn't been born in a Metropolis. Some people lived in the cyclon, some people had seen their lives changing within five minutes and they were unable to do anything.

Don't lecture me about History. "You" read about History ( not specifically you, but people who are in the same condition ). So, "you" read history "I" live it.

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Have you still not got the point that I don't give a monkey's if he's Welsh or Jewish? He a damned Tory with the look of a cat-lover and that's all I need to know. I don't care about people's religion or nationality. People should be judged by their natures not some inherited label.

I was joking of course and you know it. People should be judged by their nature? That is funny. I guess that apart from other things you are in the position to judge other people's nature too.

"Psychopath", not "paranoid". What's your point? Sharon is murderous gangster. Just listen to him and look at his record. What Arafat is has no bearing on it.
Are you suggesting that he is paranoid by nature and he doesn't just respond to the violence of the other side? This is my point.If you claim that Sharon is evil by nature you will have to prove it.

I can only assume it's your religiosity that gives you the impression that life and history are not in out hands. You put more store in symbols such as nation and religion than you do in real people. The individual interest eclipsed by the national interest, and the cost in blood and pain? Well worth paying. The Soul of the Nation will be forged the stronger by the sacrifice. Bugger that.

I have alrteady replied to that. I have never seen you complaining about the fact that some people --like the Jews-- never had the opportunity to create their own History even in the societies they lived before the war. As for Nationalism knock it off ok? Knock it off or do us the honor for a change to show us what people should had done instead of creating national states.

You are not afraid, so bugger those that are afraid and will still get caught up in it. Let's be frank here, these aspects of "jewish mentality" only exist in people, so when you speak of eliminating them you mean eliminating certain types of Jews.

Again if you had some religiosity in you you'd know that mentalities do change.

The most likely result of the civil war will be domination by the settlers and the other followers of the New Judaism - the nationalist, bigotted, blood-and-iron version. Those Israelis that want a life for themselves and are in a position to do so will leave. The result will be a horror story.

I am not so sure about it. If you knew more about the Israeli society you' wouldn't jump into conclusions that easily.

Knock yourself out.

I am glad you see it that way. You should have known better when you were repeatedly posting the things you did.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by demon
"ALWAYS trust the Arab media to learn about Jewish thought. There is no better source of information!"

ALWAYS eh? Hmm, you`d like to think so wouldn`t you.
You imply the Arabs can`t tell the truth ? Heavens forbid, do you know how many of them have the vote in France? How awful!

Wipe the froth off your mouth; I imply that the Arab press is not a good source of information of Jewish thought. If you read something more into that, that’s on you.

Originally posted by demon
Anyway, you are avoiding the point that some Jews are total fvcking nutters that are actually more dangerous than any fairytail anti-Semitism you want to accuse people of.

Yet your article quotes the nutters of Judaism. Neturei Karta? Oh, please! It’s not a coincidence that the article quotes them without identifying their organization, nor is it a coincidence that the article says that the Jews against Zionism letter to President Bush was published in the Washington Post without mentioning that it was a paid advertisement. Just like you, they’re not interested in the truth.

Originally posted by demon
You have nothing to say about Rabbi Ovadia Yosef? He doesnt fit into your neat little world of Holocaust Industry defences does he? He kind of blows the lid of it all.

Does he? How?

Originally posted by demon
You got nothing Mycroft, or the rest of the Zionist apologists here...just a litany of regurgitated half truths and lies and a transparant recourse to semantic games and nit picking history.

Nit picking history. I’ll take that as a compliment. I like being known for attention to detail.

Originally posted by demon
I can tell you fellow, you don`t fool anyone who has any real involvement in this sad sorry saga...that`s what makes it so sad.

Okay, I’ll bite. What’s your involvement?

[demon]

"Nit picking history. I’ll take that as a compliment. I like being known for attention to detail."

Don`t take it as a compliment from me, it was anything but.
My comment had nothing to do with detail, more about what color tie Barak was wearing at the Oslo Accords,

It`s journalistic and hack eyed, and it gets passed because we have the sad mass media and decetiful simpletons in attendance, plus the fully paid up members of the Holocaust Industry. What a shame.

[Cleopatra]

demon instead of trolling and playing this old broken record of yours regarding the Holocaust Industry why don't you get seriously involved in a debate?

I know that sock-puppets are not supposed to debate but to troll but give it a try to debate as a Palestinian.

Be a unique sock puppet! :)

[demon]

Why do you think I`m a sock puppet?
Why does it suprise you that when you refer to "checkpoints" as as an inconvenience I find that trolling too.
I`m not interested in swapping insults, well not anymore anyway.

To be frank, my problem with your position is that your professed liberalism allows, excuses and supports the ongoing racist and colonial policies of Israel.

[Cleopatra]

Well, demon, let me repeat to you why I think that you are a sockpuppet.

Your English is never the same in two messages. You pretend the foreigner but sometimes when you are in a hurry or when you are in the middle of an antisemitic crisis, your English improve significantly.

Also, you never debate. You jump in the threads only to upset people and usually in order to bash me.

If you disagree with my ideas you have the option to debate them but you never debate because it's difficult to maintain a sockpuppet in the Politics Forum without being busted.

You don't bother me anymore, I thought that you could do better than that but I was mistaken.

Of course you should be ashamed of yourself. A man at your age should know better but hatred can't only harm you but it can make you appear ridiculous in the eyes of people that have half your age.

[demon]

I pretend the foreinger? I`m English born and bred.
I`ve discussed many an issue on these forums, thankfully some have been more fruitfull that the Middle East question. As I said, I`m not into swapping insults anymore, it`s wearisome and boring but I wouldn`t be to quick to point out the weaknesses in other peoples debating methods.
I`ve been following Capel and Unique`s efforts to educate you for a long time now and I have to say, they have the patience of saints...I dont really know why they bother.

Incidently, your family are missing some art works? If they ever get them back (I hope they do), and they need some work doing, I restore oils if that`s any use to you, I`ll give you a good deal. ;)

[Cleopatra]

Please, demon do me the favor to join the two gentlemen's efforts to educate me.

Bring me examples, show me where I am wrong.

Thanks for offering to restore the paintings but according to Unique's education,those evil rabbis will force me to sell them in order to sponsor the causes of the Holocaust industry.

Oh well, that's life, I guess.Now go to bed, you shoudn't wake-up that early on Sundays :)

[demon]

Out of interest, nothing to do with the Holocaust Industry that is, (real or imagined), what sort of art work are we talking about here?
Genuine question, not being a troll here ok?

[Cleopatra]

My great grand father was a Sephardic Jew of the Nederlands, he lived in Amsterdam until he fell in love with a Greek lady and he followed her to Salonika where he opened the first bookstore in the Balkans and in Southeastern Europe. The bookstore still exists.

He was a dealer of gems but when he got tired of travelling around the world he got involved it the Art Market too. He was interested in paintings mostly. We are missing four Dutches that they were decorating his house in Salonika and they were stolen by Max Merten who is known as the "Butcher of Salonika" of course everything he owned in his shop in Amsterdam--gems, artwork and unfortunately and most importantly his notes-- was stolen too but we don't have a catalogue of those, so we can't claim them.My grandmother managed to hide some things before get arrested, things that weren't valuable for Nazis compairing to the the things they found in the house but they are priceless for me today.

If we find them, I will sell them and with the money I will open a restaurant of Sephardic Cuisine in Salonika.I think that this is the best monument for them, they'd love it.

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra:
Do you get upset when you realize that your theories regarding remote countries concern real people with real lives?
I do get tetchy sometimes, especially when I'm called "prejudiced" and generally misrepresented. Of course, my position is that real people with real lives are far more important than symbols like "nation" or "religion". I don't know how I can put it more plainly.
If you had some religiosity in you, it would be easier to understand that some people never had the opportunity to create their own History because irrational hatred kept them at the margin.
Are you actually claiming that the Jews have no history? The Jewish community has surely been the most remarkable phenomenon in the human story. Empires come and go, concepts such as feudalism and nationalism come and go, and all are just further examples of stock products. Yet since the time of Moses and his confederates (not without evolution, of course) this unique idea of a community defined by loyalty to a shared Law has survived. Kingship and nation were add-ons that didn't survive - they couldn't, since they put the community into a competition it couldn't win. Making a fetish of Jerusalem and the Temple wasn't necessary, or helpful, either. All through history we find Jews rising to prominence in business, politics, science and philosophy. (In fact, it's resentment of just such success that is often put forward as a reason for anti-semitism.) What other group of its size has comparable prominence in modern times?
Don't lecture me about History. "You" read about History ( not specifically you, but people who are in the same condition ). So, "you" read history "I" live it.
I do read history, and I think about it, and I discuss it. I wish to understand it. I don't want it to provide some desired story-line that somehow enhances my own self-image. As to "living" history, presumably you mean that you let the past dictate who you are and how you live. It's an easy way of avoiding making your own judgements and decisions, I suppose, but I prefer to live in the present.
I guess that apart from other things you are in the position to judge other people's nature too.
Yes, I do make judgements about people's natures. Don't you?
Are you suggesting that he is paranoid by nature and he doesn't just respond to the violence of the other side? This is my point.If you claim that Sharon is evil by nature you will have to prove it.
When there was a prospect of a settlement after Oslo, Sharon denounced it immediately and did everything he could to undermine it, not because of Arab violence but because he cannot countenance any solution short of complete possession of Greater Israel. Is that evil? He knows that achieving this will cause death, destruction and tragedy on a huge scale but he continues; is that evil? He sent the Falange into Sabra and Chatila knowing they were eager for atrocity, and ignored reports of what was happening (as if he didn't know); evil? I'd say yes.
Knock it off or do us the honor for a change to show us what people should had done instead of creating national states.
Sadly it is not in power to demonstrate an alternative to nation states. Were I given a chance to try something different I would favour a system of regions and cities that rule themselves democratically, with larger groupings to decide on issues that are not confined to one region, all the way up to a world organisation that exists to guarantee basic human rights at the local level (with the ability to enforce them). Transparency of operation at all levels would be crucial, as would an educational system that taught truth rather than nationalist myths. In its way, the USA is a trial attempt at this. The EU is moving in that sort of direction. *The UN is a broken reed, of course.)

I have mentioned this before, but it doesn't seem to have got through.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by demon
Mr Manifesto
"Well, it's probably a crap analogy, but I thought I'd float the idea anyway."

It`s not a crap analogy at all.
Very fitting considering the history of the much vaunted Jewish persecution. Sums up the perverse nature of the Zionazis very well ie. the repression and bullying of a much weaker victim.
The number of children murdered by the IDF just adds an extra unfortunate but fitting layer to the analogy.

Zionazis?

Demon,...go back to your pals at Stormfront.org.

[demon]

Hi Rik,
Put the porn video back on and crack open another beer...aahhh, isn`t that better?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
I do get tetchy sometimes, especially when I'm called "prejudiced" and generally misrepresented. Of course, my position is that real people with real lives are far more important than symbols like "nation" or "religion". I don't know how I can put it more plainly.

Hello Capel Dodger

How do you expect me to call you when you suggest that the victims of the worse kind of massacre in Human's History are to blame for what happened to them? How do you want me to call you when you suggest that Weitzmann is to blame about the Holocaust and in that way you claim that antisemitism appeared in History in the 20th ce? How you dismiss centures of procecutions against the Jews? How you overlook the transformation of the Religious antisemitism to the official ideology of the German State since 19th ce?

Nope, we will have to resolve this. I will start a thread tonight when I return home. The old house with its ghosts inspires me.

Are you actually claiming that the Jews have no history? The Jewish community has surely been the most remarkable phenomenon in the human story. Empires come and go, concepts such as feudalism and nationalism come and go, and all are just further examples of stock products. Yet since the time of Moses and his confederates (not without evolution, of course) this unique idea of a community defined by loyalty to a shared Law has survived. Kingship and nation were add-ons that didn't survive - they couldn't, since they put the community into a competition it couldn't win.

I knew that you'd say that. The profile of the Jewish communities was shaped by centuries of procecution and misery. The phaenomenon is unique indeed but it turned out that way because the hatred against the Jews is unique in History.

Making a fetish of Jerusalem and the Temple wasn't necessary, or helpful, either.

Of course you are wrong but I apologize we don't fit to your personal theories.I sound ironic but I am not. Such comments from your part make me furious.

All through history we find Jews rising to prominence in business, politics, science and philosophy. (In fact, it's resentment of just such success that is often put forward as a reason for anti-semitism.) What other group of its size has comparable prominence in modern times?

The devotion of the Jews to education is another result of the continuous procecutions. It's not that Jews are smarter than other people. I was born in 1970 and yet my grandmother was pissing me off by reminding me all the time that the only wealth in life is education. "Procecutions occur" she said" you can lose your fortune but never your education" Education was the only thing that none could steal from them.
I do read history, and I think about it, and I discuss it. I wish to understand it. I don't want it to provide some desired story-line that somehow enhances my own self-image. As to "living" history, presumably you mean that you let the past dictate who you are and how you live. It's an easy way of avoiding making your own judgements and decisions, I suppose, but I prefer to live in the present.
The present is meaningless if you don't put it in a timeframe.Present is meaningless with the stories of your ancestors. Living History BTW means that today I live in Greece and within an hour somebody forces me to go. I understand that it's difficult for a Welsh to understand that. Has anybody ever come to your relatives, to your parents and asked them to leave their house just because they were Welsh? Has anybody of your family faced death just because he was Welsh or Christian?

I have told you before , Capel Dodger. You are privileged! I envy you.I am not afraid of anything, I am not afraid to die but my only phobia is that one day somebody will knock on my door and he will ask me to leave.

Yes, I do make judgements about people's natures. Don't you?

:) Come-on Capel Dodger, only religious people make judgements about people's natures, you know that.

When there was a prospect of a settlement after Oslo, Sharon denounced it immediately and did everything he could to undermine it, not because of Arab violence but because he cannot countenance any solution short of complete possession of Greater Israel.

Do you forget how Ariel Sharon won the elections? Well, I don't. The Palestinian side made Barak look like an idiot. He is not very smart but one can discuss with Barak. But no. Palestinians forced the Israeli people to vote for the person who promised to protect them.

Probably when you take your walks in Cardiff you are not afraid for a bomb to explode . Again, you don't know how it is to leave with the continuous fear of death. In case of the suicide terrorism, if you are lucky you die. Because none ever talks about those who survive those bombs that are packed with steel nails...

Sadly it is not in power to demonstrate an alternative to nation states. Were I given a chance to try something different I would favour a system of regions and cities that rule themselves democratically, with larger groupings to decide on issues that are not confined to one region, all the way up to a world organisation that exists to guarantee basic human rights at the local level (with the ability to enforce them). Transparency of operation at all levels would be crucial, as would an educational system that taught truth rather than nationalist myths. In its way, the USA is a trial attempt at this. The EU is moving in that sort of direction. *The UN is a broken reed, of course.)

I have mentioned this before, but it doesn't seem to have got through.

First of all, you haven't mentioned it before because I would remember it. Second this deserves a thread of its own. I don't disagree but I think that I am able to demonstrate why such a system wouldn't work on the benefits of the citizens.Will you wish me again to knock myself out? :)

Capel Dodger we will never agree on that matter but I don't mind when we disagree. I don't intend to burn any grey cells to defend Israel and Sharon but don't forget that I don't accept the tinest comment against the jewish people that lived in Europe before the war.

[Cleopatra]

Capel Dodger

I started a new thread about antisemitism here (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31558) , you will be notified by a PM too :)

[hgc]

Originally posted by Cleopatra

...

The devotion of the Jews to education is another result of the continuous procecutions. It's not that Jews are smarter than other people. I was born in 1970 and yet my grandmother was pissing me off by reminding me all the time that the only wealth in life is education. "Procecutions occur" she said" you can lose your fortune but never your education" Education was the only thing that none could steal from them.
...Not necessarily relevant to this thread, but I prefer the explanation that Jews tended throughout history to be educated simply because it's a religious requirement. All Jewish men were always expected to be able to read the Torah and Talmud and other religious texts. That's the reason to teach them to read. This is practically unique in world history. This also may explain why Jews are not likely to be found in occupations thoughout much of history that didn't require literacy, such as agriculture, as there were much better economic opportunities in other occupations.

This also may help to explain why there aren't so many Jews. To educate your children is and always was expensive. People tend to flee expensive obligations. Some would say that lots of Jews became non-Jews throughout history to escape this requirement.

[Cleopatra]

Oh yes this is important too and maybe this is the most important. I had in mind to mention that the reason why many Jews were enganged in Philosophy was because of their Religion.

This happens when I don't take down my thoughts before posting...

Thank you hgc

[demon]

"Israeli Commandos Refuse to Serve in W.Bank, Gaza

Dec. 21 — By Megan Goldin
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Thirteen fighters in Israel's most celebrated commando unit have publicly refused to serve in the West Bank and Gaza Strip because they believe the army's operations there are immoral, Israeli media reported.

The commandos announced their refusal to serve in a letter sent to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has come under increased pressure to halt efforts to quash a three-year-old Palestinian uprising and instead engage in peace treaty talks.

"We will no longer be party to an oppressive rule in the territories and the disregard for the human rights of millions of Palestinians," the 13 Sayeret Matkal reservist commandos wrote in their letter, according to local television stations.

"We will no longer be a defensive wall against settlements," added the letter, in a reference to Jewish settlements in lands Israel occupied in the 1967 Middle East war.

The Sayeret Matkal, or General Staff Reconnaissance Unit, is Israel's most elite commando unit and has often been compared to the U.S. military's Delta Force or the British army's SAS...."

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters20031221_154.html

[Mycroft]

And yet the other 99.997% still on the job are doing excelent work!

The last suicide attack hit Israel on October 4, killing 22 people including the bomber in a seaside restaurant in Haifa.


Shaul Mofaz, Israel's defense minister, has said that the situation has been deceptively quiet because the Israelis have thwarted 22 attempted suicide attacks since the October 4 blast.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1312&ncid=1312&e=18&u=/afp/20031213/wl_mideast_afp/mideast_israel_alert_031213113559

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
And yet the other 99.997% still on the job are doing excelent work!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1312&ncid=1312&e=18&u=/afp/20031213/wl_mideast_afp/mideast_israel_alert_031213113559

You are arguing a different point. What you are talking about is defending Israel, what this whole thread is about is oppressing Palestinians. I don't recall any examples of IDF refusing to defend Israel.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


You are arguing a different point. What you are talking about is defending Israel, what this whole thread is about is oppressing Palestinians. I don't recall any examples of IDF refusing to defend Israel.

Was I arguing a point, or was I just giving a kudo for a job well done?

Israeli soldiers that refuse to carry out orders are making decisions on how best to defend their country, and that's not a soldiers job. One can appreciate that they are making a political statement, but that statement should be held until the soldier leaves service.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Was I arguing a point, or was I just giving a kudo for a job well done?

Israeli soldiers that refuse to carry out orders are making decisions on how best to defend their country, and that's not a soldiers job. One can appreciate that they are making a political statement, but that statement should be held until the soldier leaves service.

So what Americans who refused to serve in Vietnam?

[CapelDodger]

Hi Cleopatra:
I knew that you'd say that. The profile of the Jewish communities was shaped by centuries of procecution and misery. The phaenomenon is unique indeed but it turned out that way because the hatred against the Jews is unique in History.

Exactly the thing that irritates me so much. The outcome of the Mosaic Revolution has survived for over three thousand years not because it has been constantly persecuted but because it is successful. It takes more than persecution to be successful. Ask the Ismaelis, amongst many others whose names have not even survived. (Persecution tends to cause that.) The Jews have a history, and it isn't all misery and marginalisation.
Of course you are wrong but I apologize we don't fit to your personal theories.I sound ironic but I am not. Such comments from your part make me furious.
Why am I wrong? Was the validity of kingship within the Mosaic system not an issue? Was Jerusalem not a personal possession of David, and nothing to do with Israel? Was the Temple established for strategic reasons or not? Where do I give you the impression that I know less about Judaism than you do? And please, don't tell me it's because I haven't been oppressed or served my time in the IDF because that doesn't define Judaism. Like the man said, if you want to be an atheist you have to know your Bible better than they do.

Sorry about the tardy reply, but the impromptu celebration of Saddam's capture seems to have kick-started the usual pre-soltice inebriations and the last week is pretty hazy.
Yours,
seriously solticed,
CapelDodger.

(Another solstice, and still no rapture).

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
(Another solstice, and still no rapture).

:nope:
I have told you many times that you are not eating well... you just don't listen to me.
As for the essence of your post go sell those tricks to somebody else, your charm doesn't sell here, nice try though :)

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Mycroft



Israeli soldiers that refuse to carry out orders are making decisions on how best to defend their country, and that's not a soldiers job. One can appreciate that they are making a political statement, but that statement should be held until the soldier leaves service.

Generally I agree with you but Israeli Army is a bit peculiar because it's not a professional army and Israeli citizens serve the Army for many years, practically during all their life also the bond with the country is different and really strong, we don't really separate those things.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
So what Americans who refused to serve in Vietnam?

Do you mean to ask what about U.S. citizens who refused to serve in Vietnam?

I don't know, what about them?

[a_unique_person]

They also broke the law, and refused to attack an 'enemy' they did not want to fight.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
They also broke the law, and refused to attack an 'enemy' they did not want to fight.

And?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


And?

citizens still have an obligation to act morally.

For example, todays story.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/22/1071941666170.html



Elite soldiers take a stand against Sharon
By Megan Goldin
Jerusalem
December 23, 2003

Print this article
Email to a friend



Thirteen fighters in Israel's most celebrated commando unit have publicly refused to serve in the West Bank and Gaza Strip because they believe the army's operations there are immoral.

The commandos announced their refusal to serve in a letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is under increased pressure to halt efforts to quash a three-year-old Palestinian uprising and engage in peace talks.

"We will no longer be party to an oppressive rule in the territories and the disregard for the human rights of millions of Palestinians," the 13 Sayeret Matkal reservist commandos wrote in their letter, according to local television stations.

"We have long ago crossed the line between fighters fighting a just cause and oppressing another people," the three officers and 10 soldiers wrote. The letter was made public by the soldiers, who signed with their ranks, first names and the first letter of their last names.



This is not just 1% protesting. You can be sure that when elite troops, pilots and even generals are unhappy with the treatment of Palestinians, then those who would be too afraid to speak up for fear of reprisal are there in the ranks too.

This appears to be a part of a campaign, perhaps organised, to pressure Sharon into real compromise. He may be able to lie to the Israeli population, those who have to carry out his orders appear to know that what they are doing is not moral.

Those most vocal in their support of Israel appear to be those who have to take no part in maintaining Sharon's fantasy.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


citizens still have an obligation to act morally.



What does that have to do with U.S. draft dodgers?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


What does that have to do with U.S. draft dodgers?

They were opting out of a war they didn't believe in or could see the sense in fighting for. A moral decision.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

They were opting out of a war they didn't believe in or could see the sense in fighting for. A moral decision.

A moral decision? I think that's questionable.

Citizenship carries responsibilities. For the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.

If one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

[CapelDodger]

from Mycroft:
Citizenship carries responsibilities. For the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.
"Need" being defined by the state, presumably. You apparently see the individual removed of all moral duties expect that of following the leaders. This is known as "patriotism" and, like religion, only impresses fools.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


A moral decision? I think that's questionable.

Citizenship carries responsibilities. For the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.

If one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

In Australia during the Vietnam war, those who refused to be drafted were referred to as "conscientous objectors". It would have been good if Germany had had a few of them before WWII.

IIRC, soldiers are not required to perform illegal acts. For example, those US troops at Mai Lai.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
"Need" being defined by the state, presumably. You apparently see the individual removed of all moral duties expect that of following the leaders. This is known as "patriotism" and, like religion, only impresses fools.

Oh spare me your pretensions, I’m not impressed. One doesn’t need to embrace patriotism to recognize a duty to his state, nor does one need to remove himself from moral duties to fulfill those obligations. Your disdain for both patriotism and religion is noted. I’m happy to say I don’t share it, but you have my pity on both counts.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

In Australia during the Vietnam war, those who refused to be drafted were referred to as "conscientous objectors". It would have been good if Germany had had a few of them before WWII.

IIRC, soldiers are not required to perform illegal acts. For example, those US troops at Mai Lai.

And what is your point this time?

Is this your strategy? To make statements that vaguely seem like they might have something to do with the topic and let us guess how? Do you think that better minds might draw conclusions that you're not capable of making on your own?

If you think that Australian conscientous objectors from the Vietnam era have something to do with this argument, then please tell us how. Are you saying they're the same? Are you saying they're different? Are you saying anything at all?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


And what is your point this time?

Is this your strategy? To make statements that vaguely seem like they might have something to do with the topic and let us guess how? Do you think that better minds might draw conclusions that you're not capable of making on your own?

If you think that Australian conscientous objectors from the Vietnam era have something to do with this argument, then please tell us how. Are you saying they're the same? Are you saying they're different? Are you saying anything at all?

The same point I have been making all along. There sometimes comes a point in a soldiers or potential soldiers time when he has to ask himself if what he is being asked to do is immoral. There are plenty of IDF members, some of them quite senior and elite, who are doing exactly this. Now, I realise they are only Jews, so I apparently hate them either way, but I am impressed with their moral courage.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The same point I have been making all along. There sometimes comes a point in a soldiers or potential soldiers time when he has to ask himself if what he is being asked to do is immoral. There are plenty of IDF members, some of them quite senior and elite, who are doing exactly this. Now, I realise they are only Jews, so I apparently hate them either way, but I am impressed with their moral courage.

Except that talking about Australian conscientious objectors doesn't demonstrate any of that. All it demonstrates is that in Australia at the time of the Vietnam War, there were people who didn't want to fight.

Citizenship carries responsibilities. In return for the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.

If one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

There are some people who feel, for whatever reason, that it’s wrong to kill under any circumstances, even war. It’s for these people that the rules on conscientious objectors were made, not for people who are already in the military who suddenly decide they don’t want to follow orders anymore.

And doesn’t this make you a hypocrite for bashing Orthodox Jews who don’t serve in the IDF?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Except that talking about Australian conscientious objectors doesn't demonstrate any of that. All it demonstrates is that in Australia at the time of the Vietnam War, there were people who didn't want to fight.

Citizenship carries responsibilities. In return for the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.

If one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

There are some people who feel, for whatever reason, that it’s wrong to kill under any circumstances, even war. It’s for these people that the rules on conscientious objectors were made, not for people who are already in the military who suddenly decide they don’t want to follow orders anymore.

And doesn’t this make you a hypocrite for bashing Orthodox Jews who don’t serve in the IDF?

Very well said. First Gulf War we had people "suddenly" become conscientious objectors. I found it odd that they were surprised by possibly being sent to war when they signed the same contract I did which said I understood I may have to.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Except that talking about Australian conscientious objectors doesn't demonstrate any of that. All it demonstrates is that in Australia at the time of the Vietnam War, there were people who didn't want to fight.

Citizenship carries responsibilities. In return for the protection of the state, one also has obligations to the state, and sometimes that may include military service when needed.

If one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

There are some people who feel, for whatever reason, that it’s wrong to kill under any circumstances, even war. It’s for these people that the rules on conscientious objectors were made, not for people who are already in the military who suddenly decide they don’t want to follow orders anymore.

And doesn’t this make you a hypocrite for bashing Orthodox Jews who don’t serve in the IDF?

One obligations to the state do not include acting immorally.

They are not serving because they don't believe in the war, they are the hypocrites, they don't serve because they seem to think they are too 'holy'. That is, they are quite happy to cause a war and want people to put their lives on the line for them, but not do so themselves.

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


One obligations to the state do not include acting immorally.

They are not serving because they don't believe in the war, they are the hypocrites, they don't serve because they seem to think they are too 'holy'. That is, they are quite happy to cause a war and want people to put their lives on the line for them, but not do so themselves.

Do you read what you write?

You just said some obscure and hard to understand thing, that Orthodox Jews "don't serve because they seem to think they are too holy", yet they are "quite happy to cause a war and want people to put their lives on the line for them, but not do so themselves".

And you got the balls to call someone a racist or a bigot?

Earlier, in this thread or the other one where you're losing credibility points at a rapid rate, you stated something about people having a moral obligation and that not serving their country if they didn't feel they should was living up to that. But you failed to recognize the difference between one's moral obligations out of their own beliefs and the moral obligations one has to society.

If you decide to serve your country you are morally obligated to obey all lawful orders. Note the word "lawful". Now if you really don't understand that then I suggest you check out the various countries versions of what the US calls the UCMJ

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Troll


Do you read what you write?

You just said some obscure and hard to understand thing, that Orthodox Jews "don't serve because they seem to think they are too holy", yet they are "quite happy to cause a war and want people to put their lives on the line for them, but not do so themselves".

And you got the balls to call someone a racist or a bigot?



That's because that is what many of them do. It's a fact. Just like there are Mullahs who want war, or Republicans.



Earlier, in this thread or the other one where you're losing credibility points at a rapid rate, you stated something about people having a moral obligation and that not serving their country if they didn't feel they should was living up to that. But you failed to recognize the difference between one's moral obligations out of their own beliefs and the moral obligations one has to society.

If you decide to serve your country you are morally obligated to obey all lawful orders. Note the word "lawful". Now if you really don't understand that then I suggest you check out the various countries versions of what the US calls the UCMJ

I have told this story before, but I will tell it again. My family had some friends some years ago. They were also devout Catholics, and their oldest son went off to serve in Vietnam, like a good anti-communist. He was ordered to drive an armoured vehicle through a cottage full of Vietnamese civilians, which he did. This act also caused him to crack up and become a drug addict. When he returned to Australia after his tour, he said picked up his things, and they never saw him again.

He should have disobeyed the order he was given. Those who did not want to fight the war were acting in their own interests, but also in the interests of the Vietnamese.

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


That's because that is what many of them do. It's a fact. Just like there are Mullahs who want war, or Republicans.



I have told this story before, but I will tell it again. My family had some friends some years ago. They were also devout Catholics, and their oldest son went off to serve in Vietnam, like a good anti-communist. He was ordered to drive an armoured vehicle through a cottage full of Vietnamese civilians, which he did. This act also caused him to crack up and become a drug addict. When he returned to Australia after his tour, he said picked up his things, and they never saw him again.

He should have disobeyed the order he was given. Those who did not want to fight the war were acting in their own interests, but also in the interests of the Vietnamese.

Yeah he should have disobeyed it as it was an unlawful order. So you've merely proven that your family has a history of people acting in a less than intelligent manner. Good for you,I guess, since that seems to be the point you were trying to make.:confused:

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Troll


Yeah he should have disobeyed it as it was an unlawful order. So you've merely proven that your family has a history of people acting in a less than intelligent manner. Good for you,I guess, since that seems to be the point you were trying to make.:confused:

Not my family, some a family who was friends of our family. If you think that this sort of thing was an isolated incident, then you are pretty naieve. It sounds very much like the reason there is a growing revolt in the IDF. Such blatant tactics are not used, but the harrassment and worse of Palestinians is not what the members of the IDF feel is their job.

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Not my family, some a family who was friends of our family. If you think that this sort of thing was an isolated incident, then you are pretty naieve. It sounds very much like the reason there is a growing revolt in the IDF. Such blatant tactics are not used, but the harrassment and worse of Palestinians is not what the members of the IDF feel is their job.

Now don't call me a racist, but what is with you Australians getting backed into a corner and then calling someone naive ( note the spelling for later use, please)?

Isolated incident? Doubtful, we have idiots in the US too. Common as you would like some of the US idiots to gather or assume? Nope

And our last posting had no mention of Israel or Palestinians. But i noticed you needed to bring that up in this post. Now I'm not calling you a racist or a bigot, but the last time I saw that happen tom Metzger had a big ass smile and was thinking he was right and the sane world was wrong.

[CapelDodger]

from Mycroft:
One doesn’t need to embrace patriotism to recognize a duty to his state, nor does one need to remove himself from moral duties to fulfill those obligations
I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state". The fact that a state demands that you fulfill what it calls your "obligations" doesn't mean that you are excused any moral obligations. The same applies when the orders come from a religion. If what the state demands is immoral it should be avoided.
Your disdain for both patriotism and religion is noted. I’m happy to say I don’t share it, but you have my pity on both counts.
You, on the other hand, have my contempt.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state".

Spoken like a true narcissist. I’m sure you’re quite fashionable in some circles.

You receive the benefits of a state. You receive its services, are protected by its laws, and earn your living through the commerce it regulates. It doesn’t take a patriot to understand that these services, protections and regulations are necessary to maintain the life that you enjoy, and that there exists obligations among the citizenry to preserve them.

Originally posted by CapelDodger
The fact that a state demands that you fulfill what it calls your "obligations" doesn't mean that you are excused any moral obligations. The same applies when the orders come from a religion. If what the state demands is immoral it should be avoided.

If you truly believe your state or religion demand of you something that offends your sense of morality, and if your own ego-centric worldview can’t admit the possibility that another’s judgment could be as good or better than your own, then you also have an obligation to reform that state or religion. If you don’t have the moral character to do that in such a way that you still fulfill your obligations, then perhaps renouncing your state or religion is the best option for you.

Originally posted by CapelDodger
You, on the other hand, have my contempt.

Thank you, I’ll take that for the gift it is.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Spoken like a true narcissist. I’m sure you’re quite fashionable in some circles.

You receive the benefits of a state. You receive its services, are protected by its laws, and earn your living through the commerce it regulates. It doesn’t take a patriot to understand that these services, protections and regulations are necessary to maintain the life that you enjoy, and that there exists obligations among the citizenry to preserve them.



Crazy talk. The state is a collective attempt to create benefits for all with the citizens consent. Now, for me, that includes compulsory voting. I don't see how it can include going out and killing or oppressing people you don't want to.

[Skeptic]

from Mycroft:

I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state". The fact that a state demands that you fulfill what it calls your "obligations" doesn't mean that you are excused any moral obligations. The same applies when the orders come from a religion. If what the state demands is immoral it should be avoided.

You, on the other hand, have my contempt.

(Shrug)

The "humanity is my state" idea is very popular in some circles. It sounds cool... but in practice, what it REALLY means is "I won't do anything for the state".

Unlike "humanity" at large, or "your community", the state tends to make specific, often hard, demands. It is very easy to have "obligations to humanity"--"humanity" doesn't demand you pay taxes or risk your life in the army.

So, naturally, when the state demands something that might hurt your comfort or even risk your life, it turns out that these demands are "immoral" which you "have no obligation to fulfill". You are made for greater things. Let the peasants fight, silly creatures.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
from Mycroft:

I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state". The fact that a state demands that you fulfill what it calls your "obligations" doesn't mean that you are excused any moral obligations. The same applies when the orders come from a religion. If what the state demands is immoral it should be avoided.

You, on the other hand, have my contempt.

(Shrug)

The "humanity is my state" idea is very popular in some circles. It sounds cool... but in practice, what it REALLY means is "I won't do anything for the state".

Unlike "humanity" at large, or "your community", the state tends to make specific, often hard, demands. It is very easy to have "obligations to humanity"--"humanity" doesn't demand you pay taxes or risk your life in the army.

So, naturally, when the state demands something that might hurt your comfort or even risk your life, it turns out that these demands are "immoral" which you "have no obligation to fulfill". You are made for greater things. Let the peasants fight, silly creatures.

Skeptic, (shrug), what a moron you truly are. I do not want to commit crimes in the name of the state, therefore I logically do not want to do anything for my state. Makes perfect sense, if you do not have any ability to reason.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
from Mycroft:

I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state". The fact that a state demands that you fulfill what it calls your "obligations" doesn't mean that you are excused any moral obligations. The same applies when the orders come from a religion. If what the state demands is immoral it should be avoided.

Capel Dodger

Can you point to me a moral value that it's older than Religions and therefore it doesn't spring from them?

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Can you point to me a moral value that it's older than Religions and therefore it doesn't spring from them?
Do not die, and don't let your friends die.

[Ed]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


That's because that is what many of them do. It's a fact. Just like there are Mullahs who want war, or Republicans.



I have told this story before, but I will tell it again. My family had some friends some years ago. They were also devout Catholics, and their oldest son went off to serve in Vietnam, like a good anti-communist. He was ordered to drive an armoured vehicle through a cottage full of Vietnamese civilians, which he did. This act also caused him to crack up and become a drug addict. When he returned to Australia after his tour, he said picked up his things, and they never saw him again.

He should have disobeyed the order he was given. Those who did not want to fight the war were acting in their own interests, but also in the interests of the Vietnamese.

Nice anecdote.

[Ed]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
from Mycroft:

I have a commitment to my community and to humanity in general, but not to anything as artificial as a "state".

It appears that you wish to choose your own artificial definitions. Unfortunately a "commitment to humanity in general" is so vague as to be meaningless.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Ed


It appears that you wish to choose your own artificial definitions. Unfortunately a "commitment to humanity in general" is so vague as to be meaningless.

Damnit, and I was gonna use that excuse the next time I killed someone I thought was going to do harm to others. Way to take the fun out of murder and my defense, ED.:p

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Skeptic, (shrug), what a moron you truly are. I do not want to commit crimes in the name of the state, therefore I logically do not want to do anything for my state. Makes perfect sense, if you do not have any ability to reason.

If one truly believes the state is demanding something immoral, one can act to reform the state without betraying the state. To hold oneself above the state is simple narcissism. To cloak such a thing in a mantle of “morality” is a rather ugly affectation indicative of an immature mind.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


If one truly believes the state is demanding something immoral, one can act to reform the state without betraying the state. To hold oneself above the state is simple narcissism. To cloak such a thing in a mantle of “morality” is a rather ugly affectation indicative of an immature mind.

Once again, what about the example of the American Revolution. Armed rebellion against the legal authority.

Or the Germans who obeyed the Nazi orders to round up and kill Jews.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Once again, what about the example of the American Revolution. Armed rebellion against the legal authority.

Or the Germans who obeyed the Nazi orders to round up and kill Jews.

Saying that one should act to reform the state rather than betray the state presumes that the state can be reformed through citizen action. Neither monarchies nor dictatorships fit that description.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Saying that one should act to reform the state rather than betray the state presumes that the state can be reformed through citizen action. Neither monarchies nor dictatorships fit that description.

OK, so Mai Lai was OK then? There was only ever one person found guilty, he was given house arrest, then pardoned.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

OK, so Mai Lai was OK then? There was only ever one person found guilty, he was given house arrest, then pardoned.

I'm a little vague on why you think the Mai Lai massacre is somehow connected to our discussion. To me, it seems a text-book example of the tragedy that can happen when you have the fear and stress of war combined with bad leadership. I don’t know how to create a single policy or guiding principle that will sanitize war, it is by its very nature ugly and brutal. Even so, sometimes war is the lesser evil.

I said earlier that if one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

In the example of the Mai Lai massacre, witnesses brought the events to the attention of the public and that led to criminal prosecutions. That you feel that those responsible for the massacre were not punished enough may point to a need to reform our system of criminal justice, but that's a different topic.

In the larger example of the Vietnam War, it was public protests within the United States that ultimately led to the end of the war. These are the sort of protests that are supported by a democracy that grants its citizenry the freedom of speech. Similar protests from within the military, even if you agree with their sentiments, are wrong because they do more than just push for a change in public policy; they also undermine the ability of the state to act in its own defense.

[demon]

Mycroft
"I don’t know how to create a single policy or guiding principle that will sanitize war, it is by its very nature ugly and brutal..."

Stop creating one for the Palestinians then.
They have every right to use every means at their disposal to rid themsleves of the occupying and invading forces that are overwhelming them.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by demon
Stop creating one for the Palestinians then.
They have every right to use every means at their disposal to rid themsleves of the occupying and invading forces that are overwhelming them.

Stop creating one for the Israelis then.
They, Israelis, have every right to use every means at their disposal to rid themselves of the fanatic/genocidal forces that are a threat to their lives and security.

Except that they don't, do they? Every measure Israel uses to defend itself, no matter how non-lethal, draws criticism from the international community who applies the same double-standard you do.

[demon]

Mycroft
"They, Israelis, have every right to use every means at their disposal to rid themselves of the fanatic/genocidal forces that are a threat to their lives and security."

You would make a fine Mother Goose in a christmas panto. You are second only to Cleopatra as the resident drama queen on these forums. The idea that Israel is at the mercy of fanatical, genocidal forces that actually have a chance or a prayer to disrupt the ongoing modus operandi of fascist Israel is laughable and you know it. Let`s not leave out the US involvement here to the tune of billions of dollars in military aid and if you had an ounce of integrity you would walk away in shame at any attempt to defend Israel in it`s very own holocaust.
Do you cosy up at night with Goldhagen too?

"Except that they don't, do they? Every measure Israel uses to defend itself, no matter how non-lethal, draws criticism from the international community who applies the same double-standard you do."

Actually I`m not going to advocate a double standard here, I haven`t in any of my other posts concerning the Zionazis and their "suicide bomber" opponents in the Occupied Territories. It`s a war ok? Reap what you sow.
In a fairer world, the odds would be fairer too.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


I'm a little vague on why you think the Mai Lai massacre is somehow connected to our discussion. To me, it seems a text-book example of the tragedy that can happen when you have the fear and stress of war combined with bad leadership. I don’t know how to create a single policy or guiding principle that will sanitize war, it is by its very nature ugly and brutal. Even so, sometimes war is the lesser evil.

I said earlier that if one wishes to protest the actions of the state, there are methods that are acceptable and those that are not. Speaking out, campaigning or demonstrating against the policy you don’t like are among the acceptable actions, failing to live up to ones obligations to the state are not.

In the example of the Mai Lai massacre, witnesses brought the events to the attention of the public and that led to criminal prosecutions. That you feel that those responsible for the massacre were not punished enough may point to a need to reform our system of criminal justice, but that's a different topic.

In the larger example of the Vietnam War, it was public protests within the United States that ultimately led to the end of the war. These are the sort of protests that are supported by a democracy that grants its citizenry the freedom of speech. Similar protests from within the military, even if you agree with their sentiments, are wrong because they do more than just push for a change in public policy; they also undermine the ability of the state to act in its own defense.

One person was tried, given home arrest, and pardoned. The whole legal process that was followed was a sham. Put it on TV for a big show, then when it has been forgotten, unwind it all.

However, I am glad you agree with me that people subjected to the stress of military action start going ratty. Given that these soldiers were only there for a defined, short amount of time, you can imaging what a military occupation of over 30 years is going to do to people. Maybe drive them to do such acts as suicide bombing, etc.

Given that such people are committing terrorist acts, you can wonder why so many IDF members are speaking out against the occupation. They know that Israelis are being killed, but still do not want to be a part of a military action that is against their moral principals.

Do you know why the holocaust was created? It was not because the Germans were after a hi-tech solution from the start. At first they resorted to the usual means of killing of people which was to just corrall the victims up and shoot or otherwise kill them all. The problem was that perpetrating sustained acts of brutality takes it's drain on people, no matter how fanatical. The mechanised means was invented to remove one level of horror from those carrying out the executions.

The IDF members who have to personally harrass the Palestinians with arms and force have had enough. They don't want to do it any more. One way of getting around this has been to employ militias to carry out the dirty work. There are not enough of these, however, to go around.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
However, I am glad you agree with me that people subjected to the stress of military action start going ratty. Given that these soldiers were only there for a defined, short amount of time, you can imaging what a military occupation of over 30 years is going to do to people. Maybe drive them to do such acts as suicide bombing, etc.

Of course you’re overlooking a great many other factors. How suicide-bombers are glorified, their pictures hung is schools, shops and mosques. How the families get their debts paid off and then receive a monthly pension. How their political and religious leaders make public speeches glorifying these “martyrs”. With all these other factors, I’d expect suicide-bombings from the youth of the suburbs of Boise Idaho.

These people are the authors of their own destruction. If anything, that makes it even more tragic than if they were simply the innocent victims of oppression. Just think how nice it would be if they had achieved statehood back in 1998 by living up to their obligations under the Oslo plan.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Of course you’re overlooking a great many other factors. How suicide-bombers are glorified, their pictures hung is schools, shops and mosques. How the families get their debts paid off and then receive a monthly pension. How their political and religious leaders make public speeches glorifying these “martyrs”. With all these other factors, I’d expect suicide-bombings from the youth of the suburbs of Boise Idaho.

These people are the authors of their own destruction. If anything, that makes it even more tragic than if they were simply the innocent victims of oppression. Just think how nice it would be if they had achieved statehood back in 1998 by living up to their obligations under the Oslo plan.

The shift to religious extremism has only been a relatively recent phenomenon. For a desperate people, it have appeared to offer a solution, unfortunately.

Don't blame the Palestinians alone for the Oslo failure. The rate of terrorist attacks dropped significantly during that time. The real problem was that the issues that were put in the too hard basket to be solved at a later date were never resolved. For example, right of return, compensation, settlements, provocation from Zionist extremists, Arafats inability to actually rule a state. It is not that simple to just blame the Palestinians.

[Troll]

AUP, you and others often mention the Israelis as being teh "invaders" or the "occupiers" of the land. Can you tell me who 's land it is that they are occupying?

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

The shift to religious extremism has only been a relatively recent phenomenon. For a desperate people, it have appeared to offer a solution, unfortunately.

A solution to what? What does it get them?


Originally posted by a_unique_person
Don't blame the Palestinians alone for the Oslo failure. The rate of terrorist attacks dropped significantly during that time.

Liar. The death rate doubled. You yourself posted statistics that prove it.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The real problem was that the issues that were put in the too hard basket to be solved at a later date were never resolved. For example, right of return, compensation, settlements, provocation from Zionist extremists, Arafats inability to actually rule a state. It is not that simple to just blame the Palestinians.

It's truly Orwellian of you to claim that these other issues somehow prevented Oslo from working when they took no action on the very first issue; the cessation of terrorism.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


A solution to what? What does it get them?




Liar. The death rate doubled. You yourself posted statistics that prove it.



It's truly Orwellian of you to claim that these other issues somehow prevented Oslo from working when they took no action on the very first issue; the cessation of terrorism.

Bullsh!t. The rate did drop, after an intial period of time. The figures I supplied clearly showed that.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Bullsh!t. The rate did drop, after an intial period of time. The figures I supplied clearly showed that.

Your figures showed that for the three years following Oslo, the Israeli death rate more than doubled. Then, only after intense pressure from the United States and the international community, the Palestinian-Authority rounded up some of its rivals and put them in jail. They were never charged with any crime or brought to trial.

The whole process was a sham. Put on for a big show, then the moment it was convenient it was all undone.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Your figures showed that for the three years following Oslo, the Israeli death rate more than doubled. Then, only after intense pressure from the United States and the international community, the Palestinian-Authority rounded up some of its rivals and put them in jail. They were never charged with any crime or brought to trial.

The whole process was a sham. Put on for a big show, then the moment it was convenient it was all undone.

Can you read?



http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.09.19/ed.html



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By the Numbers
The biggest rise in terrorism began in September 2000 with the outbreak of Palestinian violence known as the second intifada, when the Oslo accords, as most everyone agrees, collapsed. In the three years since then some 830 Israelis have been killed by terrorists. In other words, terrorism exploded not when the Oslo accords took effect, but after they broke down.

But that, too, is only part of the truth. Some 60 Israelis were killed during the first five months of the intifada, or 12 per month, while Ehud Barak was Israel's prime minister. In the 31 months since March 7, 2001, when Ariel Sharon took over, the death rate has exploded to nearly 25 per month, or about 770 deaths in all.

Three per month under the Oslo accords. Twenty-five per month under the Sharon plan. Those are the numbers.



Maybe you are getting your intifadas mixed up. Oslo say, after an intial period of five months, a huge drop in terrorism.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Can you read?

Maybe you are getting your intifadas mixed up. Oslo say, after an intial period of five months, a huge drop in terrorism.

Do we have to have this argument again? Can't we just cut & paste the old one?

To begin with, those 216 people killed in the 15 years before Oslo. Most of them — 120, to be precise — were killed in a four-and-a-half year period between January 1989 and August 1993, during the first Palestinian intifada. During the 10 years before that, terrorists were killing Israelis at a rate of less than one per month. Between January 1989 and August 1993 the rate tripled to 2.8 per month.

So we have a ten-year period where the death rate is abut 1 person per month. Then we have the first intifada where the death rate jumps to 2.8 per month.

But that in itself is slightly misleading. During the accords' first three years, from 1993 to 1996, terrorism deaths rose to 5.8 per month.

So after a peace agreement the death rate more than doubles compared to an intafada. The increased violence lasts for three years before international pressure forces the Palestinian Authority to take action.

I'll also point out that the death rate dropping after the Palestinian Authority finally took action also proves they had the ability to do so all along, but simply chose not to.

When they did take action, instead of filing charges against the terrorists and having trials, they were just locked up without charges. Later, they were all realeased and the violence skyrocketed. To paraphrase your own words, The whole process was a sham put on for a big show. The moment it was convenient it was all undone.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Do we have to have this argument again? Can't we just cut & paste the old one?



So we have a ten-year period where the death rate is abut 1 person per month. Then we have the first intifada where the death rate jumps to 2.8 per month.



So after a peace agreement the death rate more than doubles compared to an intafada. The increased violence lasts for three years before international pressure forces the Palestinian Authority to take action.



RTFL again.



To begin with, those 216 people killed in the 15 years before Oslo. Most of them — 120, to be precise — were killed in a four-and-a-half year period between January 1989 and August 1993, during the first Palestinian intifada. During the 10 years before that, terrorists were killing Israelis at a rate of less than one per month. Between January 1989 and August 1993 the rate tripled to 2.8 per month.

The rate of killing did rise following the signing of the Oslo accords, but not by much. The architects of the accord predicted that rejectionists would resort to terrorism to try and halt the progress toward peace, and they were right. From September 1993 to September 2000, the death rate was 3 per month.

But that in itself is slightly misleading. During the accords' first three years, from 1993 to 1996, terrorism deaths rose to 5.8 per month. In late 1996, following a series of horrific bus bombings and a pitched gun battle between Israeli and Palestinian troops, heavy American pressure was brought on the Palestinians to begin honoring their agreements, and for the next three years deaths dropped to just over 1 per month.



As expected, those who rejected Oslo among the Palestinians did their best to scuttle the peace moves. This has been expected. If you look at Norther Ireland, a similar pattern shows up. As soon as there are moves for peace, a minority tries to ensure these moves fail. After that the rate of terrorism drops. What did you expect, all of a sudden, after 30 years of military occupation and land theft, all would be sweetness and light? The US is still fighting the civil war in many areas.

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


RTFL again.



As expected, those who rejected Oslo among the Palestinians did their best to scuttle the peace moves. This has been expected. If you look at Norther Ireland, a similar pattern shows up. As soon as there are moves for peace, a minority tries to ensure these moves fail. After that the rate of terrorism drops. What did you expect, all of a sudden, after 30 years of military occupation and land theft, all would be sweetness and light? The US is still fighting the civil war in many areas.

Fighting bigotry and racism or the civil war? One seems to have pretty much ended already or are you suggesting that we're still fighting over slaves? Or are you just being a complete idiot and grasping at straws. I'm kind enough to give you a choice, but according to your postings you're not bright enough to see reality

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Troll


Fighting bigotry and racism or the civil war? One seems to have pretty much ended already or are you suggesting that we're still fighting over slaves? Or are you just being a complete idiot and grasping at straws. I'm kind enough to give you a choice, but according to your postings you're not bright enough to see reality

You haven't seen the Confederate flags flying around the South? The war is over, but many in the South still resent what happened, and as our friend Hammegk shows, many still think the blacks were better off as slaves.

Norther Ireland is still inching forward, in a process that is going to take a long time, just as Israel and Palestine still have to. Even if a cast iron agreement is signed by all, there will still be killing and bitterness for hundreds of years to come.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
RTFL again.

What does RTFL mean?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
As expected, those who rejected Oslo among the Palestinians did their best to scuttle the peace moves. This has been expected. If you look at Norther Ireland, a similar pattern shows up. As soon as there are moves for peace, a minority tries to ensure these moves fail. After that the rate of terrorism drops. What did you expect, all of a sudden, after 30 years of military occupation and land theft, all would be sweetness and light? The US is still fighting the civil war in many areas.

One might expect a temporary increase in terrorism, but for three years? And that the increase is in relation to an intifada...!

And your argument misses the point: The Palestinian Authority was supposed to arrest the terrorists and charge them with their crimes. No, you don't expect thirty years worth of animosity to go away overnight, but you do expect them to live up to their agreement. They didn't.

Your comment about the civil war is ignorant beyond belief. Even by your standards, it’s astonishing.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


What does RTFL mean?



One might expect a temporary increase in terrorism, but for three years? And that the increase is in relation to an intifada...!

And your argument misses the point: The Palestinian Authority was supposed to arrest the terrorists and charge them with their crimes. No, you don't expect thirty years worth of animosity to go away overnight, but you do expect them to live up to their agreement. They didn't.

Your comment about the civil war is ignorant beyond belief. Even by your standards, it’s astonishing.

Can you understand this



Three per month under the Oslo accords. Twenty-five per month under the Sharon plan. Those are the numbers.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Can you understand this


May I take this change in topic to mean that you're conceding the point that the Palestinian Authority did nothing to live up to their obligations under the Oslo plan, that violence did indeed more than double for three years due to this fact, and that once action was taken, it was just a show for the internationals that was undone later?

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


You haven't seen the Confederate flags flying around the South? The war is over, but many in the South still resent what happened, and as our friend Hammegk shows, many still think the blacks were better off as slaves.

Norther Ireland is still inching forward, in a process that is going to take a long time, just as Israel and Palestine still have to. Even if a cast iron agreement is signed by all, there will still be killing and bitterness for hundreds of years to come.

Yes I have, it's part of their history. I've seen some other pre-modern day flags as well, doesn't mean we're still fighting the Revolutionary war. You claimed we're still fighting the civil war. Those were your words. Perhaps you should choose them better in the future.

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

The US is still fighting the civil war in many areas.


Yes, indeed.

I hear there is a battle going on in my own state as we speak in a little town called Gettysburg.

:p

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mike B.



Yes, indeed.

I hear there is a battle going on in my own state as we speak in a little town called Gettysburg.

:p

Not a literal war, but you know what I am talking about. You can't go wrong if you are a politician bashing the North if you are from the South.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


May I take this change in topic to mean that you're conceding the point that the Palestinian Authority did nothing to live up to their obligations under the Oslo plan, that violence did indeed more than double for three years due to this fact, and that once action was taken, it was just a show for the internationals that was undone later?

The violence was not reduced after three years. It was reduced after five months. The IRA had a similar problem, how to discipline it's internal factions without appearing to be disloyal to it's own people over the interests of the 'enemy'.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The violence was not reduced after three years. It was reduced after five months. The IRA had a similar problem, how to discipline it's internal factions without appearing to be disloyal to it's own people over the interests of the 'enemy'.
From your own source:

But that in itself is slightly misleading. During the accords' first three years, from 1993 to 1996, terrorism deaths rose to 5.8 per month. In late 1996, following a series of horrific bus bombings and a pitched gun battle between Israeli and Palestinian troops, heavy American pressure was brought on the Palestinians to begin honoring their agreements, and for the next three years deaths dropped to just over 1 per month.
Your five month figure comes from this:

But that, too, is only part of the truth. Some 60 Israelis were killed during the first five months of the intifada, or 12 per month, while Ehud Barak was Israel's prime minister.

The intifada in reference being the second intifada, a completely different time period.

And just for the sake of irony, also quoted from your source:

Numbers are funny things, though. Once you publish them, they have a way of telling their own story, however hard you try to turn them around.

Yes indeed they do.

[Mycroft]

May I take your non-response to mean that you're conceding the point that the Palestinian Authority did nothing to live up to their obligations under the Oslo plan, that violence did indeed more than double for three years due to this fact, and that once action was taken, it was just a show for the internationals that was undone later?

[Mycroft]

AUP?

[a_unique_person]

I have a life to live,and a family who needs me. I will do some more research on Oslo when I have the time and reply. Eg, my son is calling me this instant to drive him to his friends house.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I have a life to live,and a family who needs me. I will do some more research on Oslo when I have the time and reply. Eg, my son is calling me this instant to drive him to his friends house.

So now you're doubting your own source?