Israeli Terrorism, Have The Abused Become the Abusers?

Great Debates
101

Zev
Thanks ;j

But before we get right off Ireland, I think there is one important lesson to be learned. The GFA became a possibility only after the major backers of the IRA (people in the good old US of A who gave it money, political clout and weapons) started to rethink their position. If the backers of the PLO (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Lybia et al) would have done the same, then Oslo would have stood a chance.

DMC
Like you, when I am wrong, I’ll gracefully (not!) admit I am wrong. Alan Little works for the BBC. The matter at issue from the beginning, which you have not yet answered, is why IRA are called terrorists and Hamas are called militants? That is pure bias, and the BBC shouldn’t be guilty of it. Maybe it’s not bias in favour of the PLO, maybe it’s bias against the Irish (not that I think so), but bias it is!

Of course honestreporting.com is “biased” - they wouldn’t be fulfilling their mandate if they weren’t. It’s not up to them to look out for bias against Palestinians, which I am sure does occur. That doesn’t make their reports any less relevant or reliable.

102

Edwino why do you say that Israel is western and therefore good? What do you mean by western? It is a middle eastern country. Nazi Germany was western, that does not automatically make it good.

Sorry I took so long to reply. Had work to do. :slight_smile:
*Originally posted by rampisad *
**I would like to make some rebuttal to your statements
By whom? Please cite an independant source for such an opinion. (BTW SBS has less than 5 per cent of the market, so you’re making quite a serious allegation about your fellow-Australians’ taste). **

SBS and ABC win all the awards. They are considered ‘quality’ though most people prefer to watch tabloid type programs.

** Remember, SBS is the network that chose to screen the viciously distorted series by John Pilger. Pilger is a supporter of Saddam Hussein, if that’s any guide to his “fair mindedness”
**

What !!? He supports Saddam Hussein does he? That is a bit rich.

This is someone who has won ‘International Reporter of the Year’, ‘United Nations Association Media Prize’, an ‘American Television Academy Award’ and many other awards.

You are starting to sound a bit biased here.

**
You have cited as your main sources of information three consistently left-wing, pro-Palestinian organisations. SBS is as above, the ABC, like the BBC, has had a long and convoluted love-affair with Arafat and the PLO. Universities both in Australia and the US are notoriously anti-US and anti-Israel.
**

Good greif. This is getting ridiculous. I hope you are not having a lend of me. Are you serious. Maybe we should start book burning and get rid of those nasty universities.

**
define “inhumanely”.
**

From people I have spoken to that have travelled to the middle east, they say that many Israelis treat the Palestinians like second class citizens.
This appears to be reflected in all the media.

Israel consists of 5 million people, surrounded by a sea of 100 million in Arab countries who declare the Palestinians as their blood brothers. We have fought and won 5 wars in 50 years against them all. We win because we have to - the alternative is another holocaust!

I dont think population counts here. It is military power. We all know that Israel has a massive military presence in the middle east.

rampisad you have a seriously distorted view on all this. I am assuming you are serious and not just being provocative.

103

Good Luck Istara!

rampised,
In my mind a “settlement in occupied land” is new Jewish homesteading in areas that were not annexed by Israel but occupied after military victory without annexation. I have not enough knowledge to argue whether or not a particular settlement is in a town that had been occupied by Jews for twenty years or so, or was once upon a time Jewish, and it isn’t really relevant to me. If that was the belief then the Israeli government should have annexed it after '67. She did not. She occupied it. Which signaled the intent of not wanting to keep it. And as an occupier you are supposed to have your people there to provide for those who are under your jurisdiction.

To the others,
a) A “massive military” doesn’t provide security from terrorism. While Israel has permeable borders unchecked terror organizations in the West Bank represent a real threat. The PA has never demonstrated any ability or real interest in controlling those who plan and execute such terror attacks (and some evidence points at substqantial complicity). Terror organizations have stated that even a complete unilateral withdrawl would not be enough; they want Israel gone. Terror existed before the occupation, before Israel was a state. A unilateral pull-out with permeable borders would result in many more terror attacks suceeding in Israel.
b) Once again MC’s cite doesn’t support the claim … or at least the one I can link to doesn’t. It does not state that Jewish residents of the OT subject to Israeli courts are non-citizens. There is no reason to believe that both groups - Israeli residents and Jewish residents of the OT - are not Israeli citizens. The distinction is citizenship status, not “racial.”
c)

Well sadly at this point I guess not, or even one that did. What you state is that the Palestinians are totally uninterested in negotiation … you know the process that includes both give and take? Unless they are offered all that they want, they will continue to choose a future of no hope. No give. 1 or 2% of the OT would be enough to continue to condemn their children and their children’s children to an ever worsening situation.

104

DSeid
Yes, a massive military does not provide 100% security from palestinian terrorist groups. It does provide military muscle in securing settlements in occupied territory.

The palestinian government does not seem to be doing much to curb the violent activities of terrorist groups. However, it would be difficult to govern a country when your government buildings and infrastructure are continually under attack.

I just wish both sides would come to their senses and stop this violence. Unfortunately sense cannot prevail when emotions run so strong.

105

Yes you are right, this is because I linked to the wrong report.

This is from the summary of the relevant one:

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

Full report:

http://www.btselem.org/Download/Law_Enforcment_1994_Eng.doc

106

antechinus

If you want to hold John Pilger up as a shining example, then this is what you are saying

I’m not going to go on wasting my time on this garbage. John Pilger’s opinion is as supportable as Chumpsky’s is. If they’re in your camp, you’re welcome to them both.
Back to you …

Sorry, but I could post hundreds of links here that would say exactly the same thing about Aborigines in Australia. Do you want to get into this argument?

My answer to this …

I am deadly serious. It’s my life, and the lives of my grandchildren, you’re playing around with. The armies of the surrounding Arab countries outnumber and outspend Israel by more than 10 to 1. We very, very nearly lost in 1973. You are saying we must lay down and die!
Question : SBS and ABC win awards from whom and for what? BTW - I have spent many hours in company with ABC journalists in Israel, and have a very clear idea of where their sympathies lie!

107

sorry, forgot the link to Pilger’s shit

108

MC, thanks for the accurate link. Now I see the quote. Interesting though, this eight year old report says that such was policy provides documentation for what they consider preferential treatment of Israeli citizens only. I am curious if any cases actually exist of a Jewish non-Israeli citizen recieving Israeli citizenship rights in OT. Or if that policy is still in place. Bluntly put, such a policy, if accurately portrayed, would be wrong (not racist or apartheid but wrong) but I have a hard time imagining settlers who did not already have or bother to get Israeli citizenship under The Law of Return (if an immigrant). So it seems of no real significance. And BTW, I feel that any settler committing a crime should have the full weight of the law thrown at them. There is inequitable treatment and it is wrong, but remediating that situation is made less likely by extreme characterizations. B’Tselem’s recommendations seem to make some sense to me, at least on a quick read.

109

rampisad

Thank you for the article by John Pilger. Very interesting. As with any reporting you should attempt to verify the information reported. Nearly all of what he has written here has been reported from various other reputable sources.
You are right about aboriginies in Australia being treated as second class citizens. It is a shame that our prime minister does not apologise for the poor treatment they have suffered in the past. There are many proactive groups, such as legal centres and commissions, that try to improve the lot of aboriginal welfare. This is positive. It is unreasonable to compare the the treatment of aboriginies and palestinians. The former are never denied access to places that new australians can go. There is no apartheid. There are no gunships destroying their homes.

I am sure that the Israeli army is far greater than the Palestinian. There is no point including other nations in the region. This is illogical. What about Greece and Turkey; with those armies, I am sure the Israelis would be outnumbered 20:1.

I can only try to understand how threatened you feel - living in a nation where several countries around you are angry at your presence. It must be very disturbing, to say the least. I am optimistic there is a path to peace, however that path can never be navigated if both sides are not willing to give to the peace process.

The Palestinians must accept that Israel does exist. It was a big mistake in the first place, but they should learn to live with the errors of the past. Israel has been in existence for over 50 years now - there are many people who have made this piece of land their home in that time.

The Israelis should respect the Palestinians and not continue to take over more of their land by attrition. They are people just like you. They should not be considered as vermin. Remember the Balkans in 1998 and Germany in 1935.

Yes, I know this simplifies things greatly but that would be a start.

110

I did not, and never would, do such. The point I made is that others do both, and you had simply repeated it as a fact.

If you are saying that establishing Israel was a mistake, then we have nothing more to talk about