Sent this to Newsweek. Too harsh?
Well, the settler/Nazi comparison is unfair because it is too broad. I have absolutely no problem with a comparison between certain political movements in Israel, which are more predominant amongst the settlers than in the population at large, and Naziism.
As for the Newsweek article, I found it absurdly alarmist. Its basic contention is that the survival of Israel equals the survival of Israel as a Jewish state. I don’t think that Israel 50 years from now is going to be a Jewish state - apartheid doesn’t work. I also dont’ think that this means Israel will not have “survived” - indeed, I look upon the prospect of an egalitarian, non-secular Israel as a positive development.
Sua
By your own admission, “the Palestinians aren’t being exterminated.” No. They’re being harassed. Dispossessed. Killed at random."
Even if this were true, it would not compare to the holocaust. Harassment is not genecide. The Israelis are not trying to kill all Palestinians; the Nazis tried to kill all Jews and succeeded in kill 6 six million of them.
When Arafat joined the Fatah wing of the PLO in 1964, a terrorist organization whose charter did and still does call for the complete destruction of Israel by any means neccesary, the Palestinians lived freely in the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem.
Thus, even if your claim were correct, that Palestinians are justified in placing bombs in discos, school buses, and crowded streets, because they are fighting some sort of oppression, what would your excuse have been for them in 1964.
What was the excuse in 1948 of the five Arab nations that attacked Israel to destroy it? What oppression were they fighting then?!
When the Arabs captured the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem in 1948, they burned and looted over 60 synagogues and force relocated the entire Jewish population from the city. Contrast that to the behavior of Israel when they took the city back in 1967. After being shelled by mortors from Jordan, the IDF entered the Old City and secured it. They did not burn or loot anything. The allowed free access to all people of all religious cites in the city. They allowed all of the Arab residents to remain in Jerusalem and they made them voting citizens of the only democracy in the Middle East. They also enjoy the freest Arabic language press in the Middle East.
Israel has put all its cards on the table in this peace process and made the most reasonable offer it could possibly have made. It offered the Palestinians Gaza, the West Bank, and the Arab section of Jerusalem, and the offer was turned down with no counter proposal.
You claim that Hamas is fighting back against oppression. Hamas publicly states that its goal is to destroy Israel and replace it with an Arab nation. Its leader has issued religious rulings permitting the killing of all Jews anywhere they may be found.
There is an organized attempt at genecide in Israel and there is a comparison to Nazi Germany to be made. The difference is that, thank god, Hamas has not been as successful as Hitler was.
Well, I think the truth of the situation lies somewhere in between the OP’s and MHand’s interpretation of it. (Okay, I admit, that ain’t exactly going out on a limb.)
For reasons that have already been mentioned by others here, I think comparisons to the Nazis are pretty absurb. That said, I find the views of the current Israeli government quite repugnant and the views of some of the settlers and others on the extreme right in Israel to be comparable to the Nazis. Of course, as MHand points out, that is also true of some of the extreme militants on the Palestinean side.
The whole settlements thing is a real thorn in Israel’s side. I think Israel has really lost so much moral authority that they would otherwise have by building the settlements on disputed land. There is moral justification for keeping control of land won in war until such time as your security can be guaranteed. But there’s no moral justification for trying to permanently take over that land and to set up “settlements” to change the facts on the ground. And certainly, these crazy folks who try to claim the land on the basis of the Bible should be treated with the complete contempt and repugnance that any religous zealots of that sort deserve…My little religious book saying I have some sort of historical claim to the land carries absolutely zero weight.
An apt analogy indeed. Just like how Israel is the lone Jewish, secular state surrounded by fundamentalist, undemocratic Islamic regimes, Germany was the sole democratic state in Europe, surrounded by fundamentalist Jewish nations intent on its destruction.
Like Israel, Germany was attacked upon its formation by a number of Jewish nations, and again several decades later. After soundly trouncing its numerically superior enemies, Germany seized surrounding land from its neighbors for protection. It reached settlements with several of these countries to return land in exchange for recognition of its existence.
It tried to negotiate a peace for land settlement with one of the remaining holdouts, which was rejected by the Jews, who then chose to carry out premeditated terrorist attacks on German civilians. The violent Jewish terrorists intentionally packed their bombs with nails and screws, and detonated them in public marketplaces, buses, and pizza parlors, all to maximize civilian casualties. Most Jews believed that Germany did not have the right to exist as a state, and supported its total destruction.
Finally, Germany got fed up with all this crap and decided to exterminate all the Jews.
Yes, the analogy is perfect.
First let me commend you on your choice of handle. (at least the first part)
Quote:
You sound shocked that Jews are compared to Nazis. Of course the Jewish people are not equivalent to the Nazi party. Neither were the German people equivalent to the Nazi Party. But when extremists are killing people in “liberated Judea & Samaria” f
for the crime of living there, & being non-jews and when these extremists run the government; to deny that this is comparable to the Nazis is so blind as to inspire suspicion that you are either an ignorant fool, or complicit in their crimes.
First of all cite please.
Quote:
I am not a Muslim. I am not an anti-Semite. I am simply someone who recognizes that Hamas is responding to very real, very violent persecution. Their acts of violence are the crimes of the desparate, trying to strike back at a state that would annihilate them. The Jewish settlers in the West Bank have no such excuse. They are the exterminators, not the victims.
You might not be muslim, you MIGHT not be anti-Semitic I don’t think I can aptly describe what you are in GD and I might even take it to the pit to do you justice. :mad:
Quote:
“Ah,” you say, “but the Palestinians aren’t being exterminated.” No. They’re being harassed. Dispossessed. Killed at random. Imprisoned in their own hometowns, & told that this not only is no longer their country, it never really was. They are being terrorized.
I am going to stop here because your post has been so inflamitory and so ill informed that I am not sure I can remain civil. Why don’t you put down those damn phamplets you got from either the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or PLFP and read a fucking history book.
:wally
You may disagree with foolsguinea’s characterization of events, but are you honestly denying that (a) innocent Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes (hint: “collateral damage” means people); (b) the Israeli army has blockaded Palestinian cities and towns, preventing access and egress; © the Israeli army has had a long-standing policy of bulldozing Palestinian homes, etc.?
Debate the validity/necessity of these events/tactics. Don’t deny that they are occurring.
Sua
I’m unclear about the exact meaning of “etc.” in this sentence.
Does it mean “gassing millions of people to death because of their religion or ethnicity”?
Certainly there is harassement.
Even this morning I heard a reporter recount how he was stopped at a roadblock with soldiers around his car him looking straight up the barrels of their guns and their fingers on the triggers. He didn’t even dare reach for his presscard.
Imagine not even having a presscard in such a situation…
But then again, why are there roadblocks with armed soldiers in the first place?
Isn’t it because some Palestinians have a tendency to suddenly explode? And those attacks are usually not against the state or a symbol thereof but random attacks against civilians.
In the 70’s even non-jews could be targeted by hijacking and blowing up planes. That is not what I call rebellion.
foolsguinea, I’d say it’s too harsh. If your argument has legs, you cut them off at the knee when you suggest that the Israelis are exterminating Palestinians and that it is just a matter of time before the Israelis move on to the Final Solution. After reading that part, I forgot everything else you wrote and just focused on that portion.
By adding that into your letter, I believe you’ve identified yourself as another extremist on the issue - and extremists in this area are only persuasive to the people on their side. I have no idea whether you are an extremist on this issue, I only have the words you wrote.
Ok Sua I’ll bite.
Sua Quote:
You may disagree with foolsguinea’s characterization of events, but are you honestly denying that (a) innocent Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes (hint: “collateral damage” means people); (b) the Israeli army has blockaded Palestinian cities and towns, preventing access and egress; © the Israeli army has had a long-standing policy of bulldozing Palestinian homes, etc.?
I quoted the whole thing but will take it bit by bit…
His characterization of events… go back and read his original post.
Fools Quote:
any non-Jews living in the occupied West Bank
But when extremists are killing people in “liberated Judea & Samaria” for the crime of living there, & being non-Jews;
He seems to be implying that the settlers living in the WB are roaming around killing at random or even strapping C-4 to their asses killing for the sake of being arab. THAT IS NOT THE CASE. It is exactly this type of inflamatory language and distortion of the truth that pisses me off at people. First off get your facts straight…who are we supposed to be pissed at the IDF or the settlers? The second thing is he/she seems to think that an the Israelis (lets not specify right now because we don’t know who he is talking about) are randomly killing people. THIS IS NOT THE CASE EITHER.
Sua Quote:
but are you honestly denying that (a) innocent Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes (hint: “collateral damage” means people); (b) the Israeli army has blockaded Palestinian cities and towns, preventing access and egress; © the Israeli army has had a long-standing policy of bulldozing Palestinian homes,
Well yes and no I don’t deny that SOME innocent civilians have been hit in Israeli strikes. Does this number even come anywhere close to the infamous what is it up to now 1200 or 1600 palestinians killed? Answer: NO Funny thing about November or December of last year I think it was CNN reported that something like 5-10 Israelis had been killed and 30-40 palestinians had been killed in a single week. The number was so shocking that I went back and referenced that same week on JPost and the funny thing was that out of those 30-40 palestinians that CNN (and the rest of the western media) was reporting 18 of that same 30-40 where suicide gunnmen or suicide bombers. Now that was just a single week but I started keeping up with the numbers for about a month and a half after that and guess what the “innocent victim” numbers of palestinians reported by western media also includes the bombers and gunnmen who are killed durring their operations so the numbers are skewed wouldn’t you say.
I currently live in California on land which was taken from the Mexicans, who captured it from from the Aztechs, who captured it from other smaller tribes. Am I a settler with no moral justification?!
War is a bad thing, and in addition to ruining many peoples’ lives, it has permanent consequences on national boundaries. If the Jordanians didn’t want their land taken, perhaps they should have considered that before shelling Israel in 1967.
There was a thriving Jewish community in Hebron until they were massacred by Arabs in 1929. After Hebron was recaptured in 1967 (without a shot being fired), Jews moved back, including survivors of the 1929 massacre. Are they also “settlers with no moral justification”?!
Most of the West Bank is empty dessert (rolling hills with grass two months during the year). How does a Moshav in the middle of a empty rolling hills, where you can’t see another city as far as the eye can see, hurt Israel’s moral authority? Or, is it that th Palestinians just don’t want Jews on “their” land. Who is guilty of aparteid.
I was in Israel just last month and had exactly the same experience. In fact, Jews, Arabs, soldiers, reporters, and suicider bombers are all stopped at checkpoints in exactly the same maner. That’s how it works. There’s a sign that a checkpoint is coming. At the checkpoint, there is a cement roadblock constructed of offset Jersey Barriers. A soldier points his gun at you from behind a reinforced booth, while another soldier comes to your window to inspect you.
They wouldn’t have shot the reporter for not having a press-card. I didn’t have a press card and here I am, safely back in California.
How would you design a checkpoint that allowed innocent people through with minimal hassel, stopped guilty people, and protected soldiers from ambush attacks?
Writing in all caps doesn’t make something true. And, of course **
[/QUOTE]
it is the case.
See above link. In addition, there are many other instances of “vigilante” murders by West Bank settlers.
Actually, I wouldn’t say the numbers are skewed. It’s a number. What that number means may be skewed by people with an agenda.
But anyway, let’s look at the sample you provided. 18 of 30-40 Palestinians killed in the week to which you refer were gunmen or suicide bombers. That means that 40-55% of Palestinians killed in that week weren’t gunmen or suicide bombers - the “innocent victims” to whom you refer. So your “some innocent civilians” should really read “many to most”.
Now I’m not a military man, and for all I know “collateral damage” in the range of 40-55% of casualties may be the best we can expect in modern warfare. But I tend to doubt it.
Sua
I haven’t read you link yet I will go back and do that later.
First of all I did not say there have not been “reprisals” by Israeli settlers, but lets make on thing clear for the uninformed shall we Israeli settlers who conduct “vigilanti reprisals” are swiftly dealt with by the Israeli government. Does you link state that? I’ll go see for myself I guess.
I don’t really know how to use the quote feature but would be more than happy to learn should you be willing to teach.
Quote:
Actually, I wouldn’t say the numbers are skewed. It’s a number. What that number means may be skewed by people with an agenda.
But anyway, let’s look at the sample you provided. 18 of 30-40 Palestinians killed in the week to which you refer were gunmen or suicide bombers. That means that 40-55% of Palestinians killed in that week weren’t gunmen or suicide bombers - the “innocent victims” to whom you refer. So your “some innocent civilians” should really read “many to most”.
Here is the deal with the numbers the 18 number were people that were killed either (a) because they self detonated or (b) killed while conducting what has become just as popular a tactic, spray and pray until someone blows you away. These numbers did not reflect the number or armed militants who where killed durring IDF operations into the WB and Gaza. The reason I didn’t include those numbers is (A) how can you confirm they where really armed and (B) I didn’t want to include the infamous targeted assassinations because who are you to believe that they are really terrorist masterminds?
If you would like I can go back and dig all this stuff up for your review and include the other numbers also it only makes my argument stronger, and the point you are try to make moot.
Here is a
LINK for you to munch on, and we are supposed to feel sorry for these poor, peace loving, defensless, palestinians?
:rolleyes: give me a break.
By the way I went and read your link first of all TNT was a group as the article somewhat halfheartedly explained that was linked to Goldstien it was also strongly associated with Kahane. You do realize the Israeli government has outlawed any teachings by Rabbi Kahane don’t you? Contrary to what you would have us believe by posting your link the Israeli government is extremely harsh dealing with “unsanctioned” killings of palestinians. To bad we can’t say the same about the PA.
OK, your point seems to be that the actions of settler extremists should not reflect on all settlers or all Israelis. Fine - indeed, that was precisely what I said in my first post in this thread.
But then you go on to write this …
Why the double standard? Why should the actions of one Palestinian ambulance driver reflect on all Palestinians?
You’re new, so I won’t be my usual extremely unpleasant self to people who put words in my mouth. I posted the link to rebut your inaccurate assertion that there aren’t Israeli settlers who have randomly killed innocent Palestinians. That was the entire purpose of the link. I have made no comment, expressed or implied, about the Israeli government’s response to settler vigilantes.
Though, now that you have brought up the issue twice, please provide evidence for your assertions that the Israeli government “swiftly” and “extremely harsh[ly]” deals with settler vigilantes. Your saying it doesn’t make it so.
Sua
The very article that you posted, which described this TNT Jewish Terrorist Organization, also listed incidents of Israeli crack-downs on the organization. In the 20 year history it gave of this terrorist group, it listed a few incidents involving 1 or two people, and the infamous Baruch Goldstein incident.
Even if, as your link claims, Baruch Goldstein worked as part of a larger group, you must admit that Jewish terror hasn’t been very active. An article cronicling Jewish terror for 20 years has one noteworthy incident. Arab terror has taken more lives each week for the last 5 weeks that all of the actions of this Jewish Terror Organization.
The article listed larger plotted incidents (destroying Al Aksa) which were foiled by the Israeli government. By contrast, show me one example of Arafat foiling a terrorist plot. On the contrary, much of the recent terror comes from the Al Aksa Martyrs of his very own Fatah organization. The bombers are on his payroll, and the shooters are using weapons supplied by him.
This isn’t a mater of “there are some extreme Jews and some extreme Arabs”. Polls from Newsweek found that 87% of Palestinians support suicide bombings. With the exception of the WTC attacks, you will NEVER hear of an Arab leader in the Middle East condeming a terrorist attack. Occationally you might hear a “all violence is wrong; we must find a peaceful solution” argument, but that’s not the same.
By contrast, ALL major world Jewish organizations immediately condemned the Baruch Goldstein attach mentioned in your article. It shocked the world Jewish community precisely because, Jews just don’t do that sort of thing. It was the first and only Jewish suicide attack in the last 2000 years and it was shocking.
I don’t know anything. I only know what I get in the media. And yeah, I think I did overreact in my letter. The article wasn’t that bad. But that they put it strictly in terms of “How will the Jews survive?” plays into the Western prejudice of “Jews good, Arabs bad.” Where is the acknowledgement that the Arabs in the West Bank are falling into self-destructive chaos? That this is a bad thing for more immediate reasons than that they might blow up some Jews?
Israel has the power. The Palestinians do not. Israel is not in imminent danger of helplessly watching its own destruction. Palestine is. The state of Israel is explicitly trying to take the Palestinians’ land for Jews. I’m not talking about Jerusalem 54 years ago, I’m talking about Hebron today. But as I say, I only know what I see on TV & read in the magazines. See the April 2002 issue of Harper’s for “No Exit: Israeli soldiers discuss the occupation.” Yeah, maybe Harper’s is part of some anti-Semite conspiracy. :rolleyes: Excuse me while I roll my eyes. :rolleyes:
But maybe I am unfair. If I am consider this: If I, as an American, am this mad, how much worse must it be for those under the gun in the West Bank & Gaza?
The Nazi=Jewish settler analogy is about as relevant as the Dwight D. Eisenhower=Adolf Hitler analogy. I mean they both presided over the building of a superhighway system, right?
Extremists of any ilk are bad, I suppose. There are certainly bad things done by Jews and Israeli settlers, by groups with names like Kach, and the aforementioned TNT. There are certainly bad things done by Palestinians in groups with the names of Fatah, Hamas, PFLP, and Islamic Jihad. The individual terror attacks are morally equivalent – targetting of civilians is bad, right?
TNT and Kach are illegal in Israel. Terrorist members are prosecuted and locked up. This makes attacks and incidents perpetrated by members relatively rare. They are considered extremists by all of Israel. OTOH, Fatah runs the PA, and Hamas, PFLP, and IJ are only encouraged by the PA. There is no attempt by the PA to crack down on these groups, or even strongly condemn them. The PA media only plays up their actions, and they are correspondingly wildly popular. So they attack often, with deadly intention.
Lone extremists are always a wild card, and lone incidents are hard to prevent completely. You can only decrease the number – like Israel has done by keeping tight reins on extremists. The PA OTOH has not, and turned isolated extremists into the mainstream.
I sometimes feel I stand alone on a rocky crag, but…
The term “Nazi” is becoming meaningless.
The Nazis engaged in an automated, government-run program to first de-humanize and then exterminate a whole people. They launched a war that tore Europe apart and in which millions died. They persecuted and murdered any political dissenters, or any minority they didn’t like (including the disabled, homosexuals, Gypsies, etc etc.)
They came to represent an ultimate Evil, the more so because they came from the country that many viewed as the most civilized, the most intellectual, in the world – the country that gave us Beethoven and Goethe, among many.
Nowadays, the term “Nazi” is being slowly but surely eroded to lose it meaning. Any unfavorable act, no matter how trivial, is described as “Nazi” – didn’t Seinfeld have a “soup Nazi”? Oh, oh, that traffic cop gave me a speeding ticket, that Nazi. We’ve had moderators on the message boards called “Nazis.”
I hate this destruction of the term “Nazi.” We’re slowly but surely cheapening the term until it will have no meaning.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree, in one sense, that any persecutions or oppressions are “evil.” But there are degrees of evil, and there are degrees of oppression.
The fact that Palestinian civilians are sometimes killed when the Israeli’s target terrorist centers does not make the Israeli’s “Nazis.” Hell, there were civilian casualties in the U.S. bombings of Taliban strongholds, does that make the U.S. “Nazis”?
The reason the comparison of Jews to Nazis is not apt:
- Israel has not launched a war that engulfed all the world.
- Israel has not engaged in deliberate government-sponsored murders
- Israel has not persecuted political dissent – to the contrary, Israel allows freedom of speech and the press, and has democratic elections (ASIDE: unlike the Palestinians or any of the surrounding Arab states.)
If you want to describe the comparative evils of the actions of the Israelis and the Palestinians, by all means do so, but leave the Nazis out of it.
Well I agree with almost everything you say C K Dexter Haven. Godwin’s law just keeps rolling. However I take issue with
Israel has engaged in extra-judicial (and often extra-territorial) killing of persons not at that moment engaged in a violent crime (see here for a reputable cite). It seems to me this is indeed government-sponsored murder, and the fact that the victims may well usually have been nasty people doesn’t change that.