babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Jewish gunman kills four on bus in Arab town

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Jewish gunman kills four on bus in Arab town
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 02:11 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
Jewish gunman kills four on bus in Arab town

quote:
Shooter was IDF deserter from W. Bank settlement

By Jack Khoury, Haaretz Correspondent, Haaretz Service and Agencies

A Jewish Israeli man in Israel Defense Forces uniform opened fire on bus passengers in a Druze neighborhood of the Israeli Arab town of Shfaram Thursday afternoon. Four people and the gunman were killed and 12 wounded, two of them moderately.

Security forces said the shooting was apparently a Jewish terror attack and that the attacker was a newly religious man, an IDF deserter, from the West Bank settlement of Tapuah. Security forces said the gunman, Eran Tzuberi, 19, was a member of the outlawed right-wing extremist Kach movement.


I'll have comment to add later.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 04 August 2005 02:20 PM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Violence like this must stop. No ifs ands or butts.

Every time blood is spilled it is a step backwards towards peace. Only when extremists are stopped will peace proceed.


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 04 August 2005 02:28 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's true -- the violence will only stop if the violence stops! Why didn't anyone figure this out before?
From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 02:33 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is it possible that there are underlying causes for the violence, which if removed might reduce or one entirely eliminate the violence? Just a thought.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 02:45 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
The solution is clear: surround all Jewish communities with checkpoints, hunt Kach members and any other armed Israelis with helicopters and tanks, and demand that moderate Jews restrain their Zionist breathren as a precondition to establishing Jewish statehood in surrounded, demilitarized Jewish cantons incapable of threatening the Palestinian nation. Problem solved! [/tongue-in-cheek]
From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 02:56 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well that would certainly cool tempers. Being cooped up all day makes one very placid.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DA_Champion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9958

posted 04 August 2005 04:21 PM      Profile for DA_Champion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A key point is that this individual will not be treated as a hero and role model for young children in Israeli society, but rather as a pariah. Few will see him as a 'martyr.'
From: montreal | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 August 2005 04:25 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wanna bet? Isn't Rabin's assassin still feted as a hero? Or do you not pay attention to those stories?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 04 August 2005 04:39 PM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
Isn't Rabin's assassin still feted as a hero? Or do you not pay attention to those stories?

yes in some extremists circles this murderer is feted as a hero. It is sickening that it happens.

In all societies where we find extremists who conduct acts of murder whether they kill one or hundreds their are those who elevate the extremists to god like status whether they be called heros or martyrs.

But extremists do have their followers amongst their fellow extremists.

The hope always remains when discussing the role of extremists that the rational people outnumber the extremists


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 04:41 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Is it possible that there are underlying causes for the violence, which if removed might reduce or one entirely eliminate the violence? Just a thought.

I thought this was an interesting post. Anyone have any ideas on that?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 04:44 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by DA_Champion:
A key point is that this individual will not be treated as a hero and role model for young children in Israeli society, but rather as a pariah. Few will see him as a 'martyr.'

There is still a shrine at Baruch Goldstein's grave. Not to mention of fact that admitted terrorists Begin and Shamir were both elected Prime Minister by the Israeli electorate, and reputed mass murderer Sharon has been elected twice -- suggesting that Jewish terrorists are, in fact, seen as heroes, except that, of course, they do that call them "terrorists."

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: rsfarrell ]


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 04:48 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
Nor did the disclosure that Rabin ethnically cleansed Lydda & Ramla make any noticable difference in his popularity.
From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 04:51 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by DA_Champion:
A key point is that this individual will not be treated as a hero and role model for young children in Israeli society, but rather as a pariah. Few will see him as a 'martyr.'

And it would be imprecise to call Israeli terrorists "matyrs," since in most cases they go on to enjoy a pampered and respected old age!


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 04:54 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of course the main thing is to keep a lid on community leaders such as politcians and clerics, who promote racism and historical revisionism:

DID OR DID NOT DR. BARUCH GOLDSTEIN MASSACRE 29 ARABS?

Oh shit! I thought to was linking to a site for an anti-semitic Immam, not the site of by Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons.

JPJ, do you think that in order to achieve peace we must first eliminate racist rhetoric. Whether views are in the minority or not.

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961

posted 04 August 2005 05:14 PM      Profile for ohara        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by rsfarrell:

There is still a shrine at Baruch Goldstein's grave. Not to mention of fact that admitted terrorists Begin and Shamir were both elected Prime Minister by the Israeli electorate, and reputed mass murderer Sharon has been elected twice -- suggesting that Jewish terrorists are, in fact, seen as heroes, except that, of course, they do that call them "terrorists."

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: rsfarrell ]



Sadly there are extremes in all societies. However if I read JPJ correcetly and Champion what they are saying is that there will be no public celebrations tonight in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. No shooting off rifles in glee in Netanya.

What you will see is mainstream condemnation from all levels of Israeli and Jeiwsh society.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 August 2005 05:22 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If I can interrupt for a moment: maybe I am reading the report wrongly, but to me, this sounded like a case of a guy whose temper suddenly flared in a confrontation -- maybe a guy with an overdeveloped sense of a lot of things, a guy armed when he shouldn't have been, a guy to be judged on all sorts of counts, but still ...

It did not sound planned to me.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 05:32 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ohara:

Sadly there are extremes in all societies. However if I read JPJ correcetly and Champion what they are saying is that there will be no public celebrations tonight in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. No shooting off rifles in glee in Netanya.

What you will see is mainstream condemnation from all levels of Israeli and Jeiwsh society.


How much do you want to bet there won't be a public celebration in Jerusalem? Cause I'll take your money. Lots of Kachites in Jerusalem.

In any case, electing a terrorist prime minister is a much more effective gauge of support for their actions than a few people shooting off rifles, wouldn't you say?

More of the time reports and footage of "celebrations" by Palestinians prove to be false or distorted, as in the case of the German television crew who gave Palestinian children candy and filmed them handing it out.

Meanwhile, Palestinian leaders, journalists and citizens have condemned attacks on civilians over and over, and large sections of the Israeli public justify attacks on civilians, yet the game is to ignore Palestinian moderates and Israeli extremists.

Moderates and extremists exist on both sides; Israeli propaganda on the subject is as simply as making Israeli moderates the "face" of Israel, while presenting Palestinian extremists as mainstream.

The evidence suggests otherwise. When the majority of an electorate supports admitted terrorists for high public office, it can reasonably be inferred that that population supports terror. On the other hand, few dozen or a few hundred people at a rally praising terror is anecdotal evidence at best.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 05:52 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
If I can interrupt for a moment: maybe I am reading the report wrongly, but to me, this sounded like a case of a guy whose temper suddenly flared in a confrontation -- maybe a guy with an overdeveloped sense of a lot of things, a guy armed when he shouldn't have been, a guy to be judged on all sorts of counts, but still ...

It did not sound planned to me.


Some Palestinian guy hasn't been out of the house for weeks, and his kids are in all day because they can't get to school. His wife is pissed because she spent 2 hours at the check point, and then it was closed for unknown reason. This guy and his wife have a fight, and he storms out of the house and digs up his old Ak-47 from the Lebanon times, sneaks into a settlement and starts shooting.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 August 2005 05:55 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, Cueball, I know. I agree.

I'm just saying that it makes a difference in every case to distinguish that kind of reaction from the colder plotting.

Or maybe not. I don't know. I have never been so desperate.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 August 2005 05:55 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We never hear those stories. No one seems interested in making those distinctions.

Which brings us how the occupation biases media reporting due to limited access to the territories.

[ 04 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 August 2005 06:03 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 04 August 2005 10:53 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
If I can interrupt for a moment: maybe I am reading the report wrongly, but to me, this sounded like a case of a guy whose temper suddenly flared in a confrontation -- maybe a guy with an overdeveloped sense of a lot of things, a guy armed when he shouldn't have been, a guy to be judged on all sorts of counts, but still ...

It did not sound planned to me.


I'm sorry, skdadl, but it was. Take a look at what the eyewittnesses are saying:

quote:
Avtihaj Salameh, a passenger on Egged bus 165 at the time of the shooting, said that when the bus, which set out from Haifa, entered Shfaram, the driver asked passengers to request that the man dressed in an army uniform come up to him. The driver asked the man if he hadn't made a mistake, and whether he really intended to reach Shfaram.

According to Salameh, the gunman stood by the driver for a few minutes. When the bus entered the Druze neighborhood, Salameh rang the bell signaling that she wanted to get off at the next stop, and stood by the rear door of the bus. She said that at that moment, the gunman, who was standing by the driver, opened fire inside the bus.

The shooting continued for more than five minutes, until youths, among them a security guard, arrived and subdued the gunman.

Haaretz


What happened? A Kach member took a rifle and got on a bus whose final destination was a Druze village. You can bet he wasn't meeting friends for dinner. His presence was unusual enough that the bus driver recognized that something was wrong.

There was no argument. He opened fire in response to Palestinians trying to get off the bus.

The shooter's mother: "We told everyone he's AWOL, that he could do something with his gun. We begged them to take away his gun. He also asked them to take his gun."

With these facts in hand, it becomes clear why the IDF and the government quickly identified this as a terror attack. Nevertheless, you deserve credit for wanting to believe the best of people. C. S. Lewis said that we can know if we have let ourselves hate our opponents if we wish them to be worse than they really are. Kudos for hoping they were better.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 05 August 2005 12:33 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sharon immediatley condemed this attack on innocent civilians. The Israeli public is outraged. Farrel your insistance that a few "Kachites" make up the Israeli public gives complete expression to your bias on matters Israeli.

This was an attack based on hate by an Israeli . Only the extremists in Israel will see this as anything else. And yes Farrel I will take your money and donate it to the UJA.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 12:37 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes but did he say it in Hebrew?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 05 August 2005 12:52 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually he did. Heard it with my own ears.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 05 August 2005 08:55 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kinda like how the PA condemns most terror attacks directed towards civilians?

The PA is still blamed (perhaps rightfully so) for enabling/failing to prevent such attacks. Insofar as the warning signs were available to the Israeli authorities (his own mother asked police to detain Eden and take his weapon), should we not consider the Israeli government complicit in this attack? Assuming that we are interested in applying the same standards for blame, of course.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 05 August 2005 09:06 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If there are hundreds more and all we see or hear from Israel are platitudes, then without a doubt.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 05 August 2005 09:16 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
rsfarrell, now that I've read more, I am forced to agree: it looks as though the poor dork had psyched himself up for a suicide mission and went through with it.

I honestly feel that way about all the suicide bombers. Of course I think that they all have to be stopped, but I've never found it that hard to imagine the bees buzzing around inside those troubled heads.

Damn. It is too sad for words.

I also agree with Briguy: the authorities were warned about this guy and, beyond that, they knew of the poisonous atmosphere of that entire settlement. And still they did nothing.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 12:52 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
Actually he did. Heard it with my own ears.

Your right. It is a stupid condition.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 05 August 2005 12:56 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:

I also agree with Briguy: the authorities were warned about this guy and, beyond that, they knew of the poisonous atmosphere of that entire settlement. And still they did nothing.



Im not sure how we know the authotities did "nothing". The soldier was AWOL . They may have been looking for him. Do you have information we dont have?

From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 05 August 2005 12:57 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Your right. It is a stupid condition.



From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 05 August 2005 01:03 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:

Im not sure how we know the authotities did "nothing". The soldier was AWOL . They may have been looking for him. Do you have information we dont have?

Um. His parents knew where he was (see links above). His parents begged the IDF at least to disarm him.

quote:
"Our fear was only from his being in a place like Tapuach with a weapon. We feared the gun would end up in enemy hands, that somebody would harm him, kill him just to take his weapon," said his father, Yitzhak Natan-Zada, on Thursday night.

How big is Tapuach?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 01:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:

Im not sure how we know the authotities did "nothing". The soldier was AWOL . They may have been looking for him. Do you have information we dont have?

Maybe they didn't care.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 August 2005 01:42 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
Farrel your insistance that a few "Kachites" make up the Israeli public gives complete expression to your bias on matters Israeli.

First of all, rsfarrell did not say that a few Kachites make up the Israeli public.

Secondly, I've told you too many times to quit inserting personal jabs into your arguments, just as I have with everyone else. So, third warning, and we'll be seeing you in a week.

And don't bother coming back with a new name after your suspension is up. If you do, I will ban you for good. Come back as Macabee or not at all.

Everyone else, just a pre-emptive moderating comment: let's move forward without gloating, please.

[ 05 August 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 01:44 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well now what am I going to do with my afternoon?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 05 August 2005 02:11 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Drink heavily, Cueball. It is Friday, after all.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 05 August 2005 03:16 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by rsfarrell:
How much do you want to bet there won't be a public celebration in Jerusalem? Cause I'll take your money. Lots of Kachites in Jerusalem.

. . . large sections of the Israeli public justify attacks on civilians . . .

Israeli propaganda on the subject is as simply as making Israeli moderates the "face" of Israel . . .

The evidence suggests otherwise. When the majority of an electorate supports admitted terrorists for high public office, it can reasonably be inferred that that population supports terror.



I make it a policy not to respond to American trolls on Babble. I'm making an exception in this one case. You are clearly accusing the Israeli public of supporting extremists. This sort of biased attack should not part of a rational progressive discussion.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 August 2005 03:23 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wilfred, he is not "clearly" saying that at all. He's not saying all Israelis are extremists, nor is he claiming that most Israelis will support this gunman's actions.

Listen, there is a rhetorical device happening here. People talk about Israeli state-sponsored "terror" the way they talk about American state-sponsored "terror". During certain points of the Iraq conflict, which many people consider to be terror actions on the part of the US, the approval rating for Bush was very high. And therefore, it could be said by people who consider US actions in Iraq to be "terror" that the majority of the US population supports terror. Does that mean someone is saying everyone in the US is a terrorist, or that everyone is an extremist? No.

However, if the majority of the US supports Bush, and people believe Bush is an extremist, then yes, I think it is fair to say that the majority of Americans support an extremist.

Does that mean that Sharon is the same kind of extremist as someone who steps onto a bus and shoots a bunch of people? No. Did he say that the majority of Israelis support the gunman who did this? No.

As for your reference to rsfarrell as an "American troll", I'm sure you wrote it fully knowing from the past several days of following this forum that those kind of remarks are completely out of bounds. So this is your first warning.

[ 05 August 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Américain Égalitaire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7911

posted 05 August 2005 03:42 PM      Profile for Américain Égalitaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

A Real American Troll

(PS: graphic is from The Daily Show!)

[ 05 August 2005: Message edited by: Américain Égalitaire ]


From: Chardon, Ohio USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 05 August 2005 03:50 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You Americans get all the really good douchebags. Up here, we're just a douchebag backwater. sniff.
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 August 2005 03:56 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, that's because we donate all our good ones to the US. Like David Frum, for instance.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 05 August 2005 03:56 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, we've still got Jason Kenney. Ugh. We need a 'holds nose' icon.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 05 August 2005 03:59 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And we've got Ezra Levant. Yay us!

AE, you're up against some tough competition, I tell you.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 05 August 2005 04:23 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
As for your reference to rsfarrell as an "American troll" . . .

My apologies. I meant to say "I make it a policy not to respond to Americans or trolls." I think.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 August 2005 04:31 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And you think it would be acceptable to talk about your "policy" of not responding to people on the sole basis of their nationality, whether American or otherwise?

Knock it off, Wilf. Find some forum other than the Middle East forum if you want to pick fights.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 05:36 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Again! Now what am I gonna do?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 05 August 2005 05:47 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What do you mean, again? He's not banned. He's only racked up one warning so far.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 August 2005 05:52 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No. I know, but I think he took your suggestion to go to another forum.

I'm just joking anyways, I like Wilf.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 05 August 2005 11:13 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
The reaction of the Druze community is important:


Stunned Shfaram residents furious with state over attack

quote:
A young soldier in an IDF uniform stood trembling with fury, or shock, at the sight of the bus in which four people had been murdered an hour earlier.

"Tomorrow I'm taking off my uniform, and I'm calling on all the Druze to take theirs off. This is a lousy state that incites against us all the time," he said.

The terrorist attack in the heart of Shfaram yesterday aroused a host of emotions, mainly deep fury. Residents are furious with the state they say has been discriminating against them all these years, and with the atmosphere in the Israeli street that makes it permissible to kill Arabs with impunity. . . .

The chairman of the Histadrut's Galilee Center District, Aboud Hasib, a Shfaram resident, said: "From today, I'll be afraid of sending my son on the bus. The government enables free incitement against us, therefore giving the radicals a free reign."

Shfaram municipal council member Ahmed Hamdi stood weeping at the roadside. "This is a sad day in our history. I'm still upset by the crime committed here. A settler killed citizens in cold blood. This is the result of the incitement against us Arabs. Fascism has taken over the country, and the government is not acting -to stop it."

The residents said the police at first tried to disperse the angry crowd by force. "I never saw them use such force against settlers. But obviously it's okay to use force against us," another resident said.

Shfaram Mayor Ursan Yassin, a devoted Likud activist who frequently hosts right-wing ministers, was also in the crowd. "See that, Ursan?" asked a young man beside him. "They chose to do that to you here in your town, although you wrap yourself up in the Israeli flag all day long."



From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 05 August 2005 11:25 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
The anger of the Druze should be placed in the context of their ongoing disillusionment with their second-class status in a Jewish state, despite complete loyalty and dedicated service:

Where the `alliance of blood' has led

quote:
Jewish Israeli society liked to see the Druze as a nice folkloristic group, a kind of "Arab-lite," whose delicacies and shops one could enjoy, and whose friendship one could boast of. The uniform-wearing Druze, who even have reached officer ranks, broadcast a false image of integration. But the alliance already assumed an ugly face during the first intifada: The harsh policing jobs that were given to the Druze pushed them into the twilight zone between the Jews, who try hard to boast of their purity of arms, and the Palestinians, for whom the friction with the Druze has given rise to insult and a burning and focused hatred of the group. "The occupation has destroyed our youth, and, in effect, our entire ethnic community," Druze intellectuals and members of the academic world said at a conference held three weeks ago in the Galilee village of Yarka.

The intifada, the recession and unemployment, and the accelerated disintegration of civic solidarity in Israel in light of the strengthening of the internal Jewish discourse have pushed the Druze even further into a corner. Whereas their rate of enlistment in the Israel Defense Forces has remained particularly high (about 85 percent), the rate of unemployment among discharged soldiers is increasing steadily. The young men, whose IDF uniforms gave them a false sense of belonging and mobility in Israeli society, have found themselves on the periphery, alienated, unemployed and uneducated, some in mixed communities of Druze, Muslims and Christians.


Those who think a state can define itself as "the state of the [insert ethnicity]" and not be racist in practice, would do well to consider the plight of the Druze, who never took up arms against Zionism, but rather went to the state and asked to be drafted along with the Jews.

Perhaps now they will reconsider their unsuccesful campaign to sever their fate from the rest of the Palestinians. If so, I'm sure their military experience can be put to good use.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 06 August 2005 01:05 AM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by rsfarrell:
Those who think a state can define itself as "the state of the [insert ethnicity]" and not be racist in practice, would do well to consider the plight of the Druze, who never took up arms against Zionism, but rather went to the state and asked to be drafted along with the Jews.


Oh, and how about the state of Germany, France, Japan, China, Arabia, or Canada? Its been almost ten years since Delgamuukw vs the province of British Columbia was upheld by the highest court in the land yet only one aboriginal group has achieved title to its land.

quote:
Perhaps now they will reconsider their unsuccesful campaign to sever their fate from the rest of the Palestinians. If so, I'm sure their military experience can be put to good use.

Doing what exactly?


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 06 August 2005 02:39 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think he means as part of the generaly Arab insurgency against Israel. That makes sense to me.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 06 August 2005 03:38 AM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball et al,
Can you please stop covering for Mr.Farrel for once? If that IS all he means then he's bright enough to explain it himself, and maybe even try to make an effort to stop sounding like an advocate for civil war. Another one that the Palestinians are bound to lose in the foreseeable future BTW. You don't know what he actually has in mind anymore than I do.

I understand your views on the occupation, even when I disagree with them, because they're consistent with your views on others, so our differences are basically just political. RsFarrel OTOH seems to take satisfaction out of making outrageous statements then stepping back to watch the fireworks. Then pushing the boundries a little further again. If he truly believes that Israel as a Jewish (majority) state is doomed by its Jewish (mostly) character then he can defend that view up front. I'm really not looking for a fight; just some forthrightness to begin with.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 06 August 2005 03:45 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let me calrify. He is saying that these Druze people will become involved in killing Israelis as part of the general Arab insurgency. I think that is pretty clear what he is saying.

You think me asserting that is "covering for him?"

And why shouldn't he advocate violent resistance in the face of violent opression? Sometimes it seems this idea only outrageous to people when they attack us, it is then that we discover Ghandi.

[ 06 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 06 August 2005 03:50 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Palestinian Gandhi

quote:
"Where is the Palestinian Gandhi?" is a quite popular question, especially abroad. You won't often hear it asked (with the inevitable self-righteous shrug) here in Israel: after all, the Israeli culture itself worships violence, with the semantic field of "war" being the richest in the modern Hebrew language, with militarism as the state religion, and with popular wisdom expressed in rules of thumb such as "where force won't do, try more force."

But Americans love the Gandhi riddle. While their governments give Israel gigantic military aid, private Americans with the best intentions – and Britons such as actor Ben Kingsley – translate the film Gandhi into Arabic and screen it all over the occupied territories as an example for the Palestinians to follow.



From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 06 August 2005 04:48 AM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Let me calrify. He is saying that these Druze people will become involved in killing Israelis as part of the general Arab insurgency. I think that is pretty clear what he is saying.

You think me asserting that is "covering for him?"

And why shouldn't he advocate violent resistance in the face of violent opression? Sometimes it seems this idea only outrageous to people when they attack us, it is then that we discover Ghandi.


I don't think it would take another Ghandi, just leadership with some idea of what the hell to do besides egging frustrated young men on to their certain deaths. And possibly many others. And that goes for Israel's self destructive approach as well, with the qualifier that they at least have some coherent plans. I'm not interested in debatin this further until or unless I see what if anything RSF himself has to say. Thats not really my point here but I can't debate with anyone anyhow unless I understand the terms they're using and what their thinking is behind them. Pointing out the many sins commissioned by the State of Israel for the nth time doesn't do it.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 06 August 2005 04:57 AM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And to clarify my own particular question, what is it specifically about Israel and Palestine that precludes less if not non-violent tactics (if suicide bombings can be dignified by the term tactic) which have worked in other similar situations? That should make it a bit easier to address.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 06 August 2005 10:32 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik the Red:
what is it specifically about Israel and Palestine that precludes less if not non-violent tactics (if suicide bombings can be dignified by the term tactic) . .

That raises a point which has always puzzled me. By comparison with typical terrorist tactics like IRA car bombs in Northern Ireland, suicide bombings kill no greater number of people. Well, one more - the suicide bomber. If the suicide bomber is a brainwashed youth that's sad, if a genuine martyr that's noble in a self-deluded way, but either way, the same number of innocent civilians is dead. Why do some people consider suicide bombers worse than other bombers?

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 06 August 2005 11:11 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik the Red:
And to clarify my own particular question, what is it specifically about Israel and Palestine that precludes less if not non-violent tactics (if suicide bombings can be dignified by the term tactic) which have worked in other similar situations? That should make it a bit easier to address.

Nothing precludes less violent tacttics. Palestinians have relentlessly applied less violent tactics. The fact that some of their leadership support militant violent resistance does not change the reality that most of resistance is quite peaceful.

The reason that Palestinian resistance is seen as violent, for the most part, is has a lot to do with the nature of the media and the way it plays the story, and the limited access the media have to the Palestinian story.


The media feels that no one in Toronto is going to be that interested in the specifics of a Palestinian legal challenges to specfic house demolitions, or gathering of people peacefully protesting the construction of the wall (unless it turns violent of course,) on the other hand lethal explosions draw a lot of attention.

Between 1967 and 2000 the number of Israeli's killed by Palestinian militants averaged 35 per year, (in 1999 it was precisely nine)substantially less per capita, to the murder rate of Toronto. Not really much of an international story, actually, and the Palestinian complaint more or less disapeared from the radar screen, and the process of Israeli occupation and land expropriation continued an in increased during that period, until of course they started killing Israeli in signicant numbers.

When those explosions go off, the Israeli government is more than happy to escort reporters to the scene and capture the carnage on film, as well large numbers of Israelis speak english, so picking up personal testimonies of injured, or the families of the victims or incidental passers-by, is realtively easy, adding colour to the story. On the other other hand it is difficult, if not exactly impossible, to enter the occupied zones to get direct reporting on incidents in the West Bank or Gaza, because jounrnalists must navigate the extensive security system Israel has put in place. Travel is not easy. Yesterdays news is, yesterdays news, so much of impact and colour of the results of Israel's quite often lethal operations in the West Bank get lost in a 10 word byline.

[ 06 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 06 August 2005 11:31 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Not really much of an international story, actually

The other side of the coin is, what is Canada's role?

The overriding difference between Canadians and Americans is that residents of the imperial state feel a self-imposed responsibility to the world, either to re-make it in America's image or to rescue it from Bush & Co. Canadians know our limits. We may be no wiser than the Palestinians and Israelis, and we are certainly less well-informed. Most of us see the merit in acting locally -- to paraphrase Reinhold Niebuhr, changing the things we can change. Is it an addiction to American news that makes some of us want to focus on the things we cannot change? Is that more fun than tackling our own problems?


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 06 August 2005 11:53 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I understand this point and see its value.

For me it is a problem that directly relates to me. I have a good number of friends whom have served in the IDF, and also other whom are Palestinian. They are among us.

Also, while I oppose interventionism, I don't think this means we live in isolation. What happens in the rest of the world does have impact. And Canada funds projects in Israel and the West Bank. Canadians make key diplomatic decisions that have wide impact: Embassy in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, anyone?

My view is that resolving this issue will do more to secure Canadians by cooling the tensions that are spiraling into a true international conflict unlike any seen since ww2. I think, in the pardigm of World War one, Palestine is is the Serbian powder keg.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 07 August 2005 05:31 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik the Red:
Cueball et al,
Can you please stop covering for Mr.Farrel for once?

Why, because it interferes with your strategy of jumping on the pile?

quote:
If that IS all he means then he's bright enough to explain it himself, and maybe even try to make an effort to stop sounding like an advocate for civil war.

I'd say Cue did a good job of explaining what was written. You seem to want me to react with some kind of elaborate defense, and enable you to respond with a criticism of that, and get into a little fencing match. As you know very well from other threads we have shared, I can fence 'till the cows come home, but I'd rather not. I think the reasons why the Palestinians fight are very clear, as are the disadvantages of fighting a much better-armed, richer and better-connected foe. How each person choses to resist to their oppressor is a choice only they can make; whatever choice a Palestinian makes, I stand with them.

quote:
RsFarrel OTOH seems to take satisfaction out of making outrageous statements then stepping back to watch the fireworks. Then pushing the boundries a little further again.

I started this thread. I've posted to it repeatedly, as I usually do when I care enough to participate in a thread. Occasionally I have to go to work. Or school. Or spend time with my wife, who has taken to muttering darkly about attractive male co-workers when she sees the babble logo on the computer screen. That's not "stepping back to watch the fireworks." It's called "having a life."

quote:
If he truly believes that Israel as a Jewish (majority) state is doomed by its Jewish (mostly) character then he can defend that view up front. I'm really not looking for a fight; just some forthrightness to begin with.

I have said that a "Jewish state" in Palestine won't work. I've posted article after article, made arguement after argument, pasted the one-state case up and down entire thread. If you spent a little more time on the ME forum, you would know that.

I'm glad to hear that you're not looking for a fight, because I'm not going to give you one. It does sometimes seem like you want one, however.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 August 2005 07:47 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thank-you for your measured response, rsfarrell. Erik, if we need an analysis of the personality or posting patterns of others in the thread, we'll be sure and let you know. Otherwise, please refrain - it causes problems.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 09:30 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry Michelle, I don't think he explained anything really but then I have a bad habit of reading what others say in context of what else they they say on a subject. That's fine though, I'm not particularly interested in RsFarrell's particular obsession with whatever he considers 'Zionism' to be; I'm very much an opponent of the occupation myself.

I just find it a little disturbing that these suicide bombings are actually being accepted on the left as a valid means of 'self defense' now, while apparently giving up hope for more peaceful and productive methods of resistence. I won't make an issue of this again though, unless I happen to see what I honestly believe are more gross characterizations or calls for violence, in which case I'll just post them somewhere else like Rabble Reactions. Others are just as free to disagree with me then if they think I'm out of line too.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 09:41 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Farrel's obsession seems to be nothing more than a well articulated arguement based on research. I hardly think peoples specific interests, even if they are unusual should be called obsessions. If that were the case an argument could be made that I am obsessed with Soviet History, the NATO intervention in Kosovo, and US interventions in general, militarily.

You and I have gone post to post on Kosovo, and I never characterized your dilligent critcisms of Serb nationalism as obsession. I mean what is your obsession with Serb attrocities, all about?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 09:55 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
RSF: I'd say Cue did a good job of explaining what was written. You seem to want me to react with some kind of elaborate defense, and enable you to respond with a criticism of that, and get into a little fencing match.

Yes, Cueball did a fine job of explaining his views but I wanted to see what yours are. No, I don't care much for fencing matches either, they're usually a waste of time. I got a life too.

I think the reasons why the Palestinians fight are very clear, as are the disadvantages of fighting a much better-armed, richer and better-connected foe. How each person choses to resist to their oppressor is a choice only they can make; whatever choice a Palestinian makes, I stand with them.

Fine sentiments, so do I for what little it's worth. Depending, that is, on what a Palestinian chooses as his/her means of resistence. Now, can you tell me one tactical or military objective that's accomplished by blowing up civilian targets, like children riding a bus to school or mothers eating in a cafe? Or how about some evidence that groups like the Hamas or Jihad are in reality looking for any sort compromise that could be accepted by any Israeli Jew? Those aren't trick questions.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 10:06 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik the Red:
Yes, Cueball did a fine job of explaining his views but I wanted to see what yours are. No, I don't care much for fencing matches either, they're usually a waste of time. I got a life too.

That's great.

I'm interested in why you are pursuing the focus on the violent asepects of the Palestinian resistance, when I just carefully explained that the Intifada is a multi-layered resistance of which the violence of a small number is only a very tiny part. This interests me, given that your attention seems drawn to this one exceptional aspect, in a manner which proves the point that it is the violence that draws attention to the issue in general.

This focus seems to prove the value of the violence itself, given that without it no one seems to notice the Palestinian issue at all, and the violence is the only aspect of the issue you are pursuing with dilligence.

You don't seem to be interested in the persistant court challenges, the individuals appealing to have their homes saved from demolition by the IDF, the Jews and Palestinians marching peacefully to oppose the construction of the wall, the Arab-Israeli MK's trying to change the basic laws of Israel, etc. etc.

Why is that?

[ 07 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 10:14 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Farrel's obsession seems to be nothing more than a well articulated arguement based on research. I hardly think peoples specific interests, even if they are unusual should be called obsessions. If that were the case an argument could be made that I am obsessed with Soviet History, the NATO intervention in Kosovo, and US interventions in general, militarily.

You and I have gone post to post on Kosovo, and I never characterized your dilligent critcisms of Serb nationalism as obsession. I mean what is your obsession with Serb attrocities, all about?



But that's just it Cueball, most of us also have also some interest in other political issues and states, and we both go to some lengths to clarify what we're saying if the subject's open to some misunderstanding. If there's any disagreement it's at least understood what the issue is. And all I asked earlier is for him to watch what he says a bit more closely, so there wouldn't be more of this. I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech among grownups, but that freedom also includes my own right to say 'hold on, what are you really driving at here'? That's all. What Farrel is really saying, I couldn't say for sure, I'll just say that some things he continues to say makes me abit suspicious, while others don't really fit the usual pattern, no. Maybe I'm wrong, if noone else sees it then I'll cease and desist, as I said. I also trust the judgement of most others here, fine.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 10:22 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that if you did a careful study of my record here you would see that I post 30% to 50%, here in the forum from below the Windows Task Bar. A lot of that is actually because of the irritating knee-jerk swill spewed by a lot of Zionists. It comes across as so much illogical hocus-pocus justifying racism in the name of opposing racism, and other logical conundrums, you just have to respond to it or go insane.

I knew many people who had similar political fixations on Aparatheid and Nicaragua. Who knows perhaps Farrel spent a week in Qatar and fell in love with the desert sands -- it does happen.

[ 07 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 10:26 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why am I pursuing it? Because others too often don't (A) and because I think it weakens the case being made to the vast majority out there who will actually decide the issue, one way or another. I personally don't believe that the 'tactics' used by suicide bombers have done their own people any good no, and I don't accept Farrel's idea that 'Israel' only reacts sensibly under threat of violence, becoming worse when they feel secure. Sometimes thats been true, others, no I don't think so. That's just a political disagreement, but if someone tries to imply that that makes me a some covert sympathiser of Israeli policies then I'll just point out that I have never in Years of arguing over this accepted the demolishin of Arab homes as punishment for suicide bomers eithers. Even if some do happen to operating in the neighbourhood. Collective punishment has to end in any form and from an ethical perspective that has to apply to everyone. To me that's a much more powerful as well as easy argument to make than simply choosing sides without conditions, or pointing out the obvious imbalance in power and trying to use That as a justification for Anything, no matter how mutually destructive. I hope that isn't what youre now arguing.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 10:30 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But this is what you don't see: The occupation went on for nearly 35 years and no one gave a shit until the Palestinians committed themselves to an extremely violent program. It was strictly back burner stuff geopolitically.

Fact: More Israelis have died due to Palestinian violence in the last 5 years, than in the previous 30.

No one gave a fucking shit.

[ 07 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 10:32 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
I knew many people who had similar political fixations on Aparatheid and Nicaragua. Who knows perhaps Farrel spent a week in Qatar and fell in love with the desert sands -- it does happen.

That's possible too, yes, and if he's only as he's saying then I guess I'll owe him something of an apology. Fine too, I can admit when I'm wrong, no sin either. I have spent far too many hrs myself trying to dismantle alot of the nonsense spewed out defending Israels aparthied policies (mostly on other lists) which is why I don't bother much with the ME forum here. Most others here seem to see it no problem and those that refuse to never will.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 07 August 2005 10:47 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
But this is what you don't see: The occupation went on for nearly 35 years and no one gave a shit until the Palestinians committed themselves to an extremely violent program. It was strictly back burner stuff geopolitically.

Fact: More Israelis have died due to Palestinian violence in the last 5 years, than in the previous 30.

No one gave a fucking shit.


Maybe because it wasn't much of an issue with anyone but a handful of activists and academics like Chomsky till the mid to late eighties, the first intifada started to change that and for awhile it looked like it would under the Oslo accord. Into the seveties most people probably also assumed as I did -that eventually the occupied territories would be turned over like the Sinai was. I don't believe colonization by settlers began in earnest until the eighties then accelerated in the nineties and again under Sharon.

Look, I'm not entirely against retaliatory violence, if one nation is being oppressed by others then I understand, it's at least a mitiating factor ok? Everyone has a right to defend themselves, no matter what anyone else has to say, including peace activists. And Israel is the only one who can really resolve the violence by pulling out, there's no other way, that much is clear. The campaign of suicide bombings however appeared to be doing the cause more harm than good to Everyone after a point -in my own view yes- as it just gave Sharon more grounds to justify and accelerate his own campaign of active dispossession. At no point was the PA or the Hamas et al able to repel Israeli 'incursions' into their territory again, nor were they able to do any real damae to the miltary infrastructure used to hold them down. So maybe, just maybe, I'm thinkin, theres other ways that really haven't been actively pursued enouh. OC the Israeli lobby will oppose it, as will Likud and a good number of Labour members, but the rest of the world can still do more to put pressure on them regardless. As Farrell himself has said, few really believe the Israeli line anymore, even in the States.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 10:57 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I can see the problems but it seems to me that those "other ways" are in play and have been forever.

It says a lot that Dr. Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi first polititcal campaign against the occupation was a completely non-violent organizing drive to get Palestinians to stop paying taxes to Israel, and only later helped form Hamas with Amhed Yassin.

[ 07 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 August 2005 11:09 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
An interesting interview with some Hamas people:

quote:
"It's a difficult situation. But on the other hand, even if Palestinians stop the resistance and the struggle, there will not be a solution, the humiliation and the occupation will continue, and thus they will rise up again. We learned the lesson in the not-so-distant past: We started the intifada in 1987, then came Oslo, the negotiations, a cessation of all resistance after 1996. And what happened? The occupation continued, the building of settlements continued, the Judaization of Jerusalem, the building of bypass roads. All kinds of acts of aggression on Israel's part, which pushed people to launch the uprising."

What will happen if the struggle goes on not for 200 years but for 500? Can people think in such time frames?

"I say the fighting will not go on day in and day out, but there will waves of fighting. Because the Palestinians will not forget and will not forgive, and the Israelis, for their part, will not stop the aggression. If at a certain stage they succeed in stopping the conflict anew, I believe it will erupt again afterward. The final result will be the restoration of the Palestinians' rights to their land. Without that, I believe the conflict will continue for even 500 years."

When you say restoration of rights, you mean the removal of all the Jews?

"I am not talking about the Jews but about Palestinians who are living a tragedy. Without an end to that tragedy, no solution will hold fast."


What the doctor orders


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 August 2005 01:29 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Did you notice the loaded question in that interview?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 08 August 2005 01:16 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh yeah. But it was a good loaded question.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 08 August 2005 03:47 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One person's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter, and so on and so on, yadda yadda. Peaceful settler or violent occupier, the occupied or the forsaken.
From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 August 2005 08:13 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Oh yeah. But it was a good loaded question.

Still, it was a question deliberately designed to try and make the guy look bad in the eyes of Westerners, who have unpleasant associations with words like "removal of all Jews". (and with good reason, I add)


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 08 August 2005 10:42 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Has the Hamas shown any signs of recognising the right of Jews to any part of Palestine yet, or is that just the PA position still?
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 08 August 2005 10:59 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

That raises a point which has always puzzled me. By comparison with typical terrorist tactics like IRA car bombs in Northern Ireland, suicide bombings kill no greater number of people. Well, one more - the suicide bomber. If the suicide bomber is a brainwashed youth that's sad, if a genuine martyr that's noble in a self-deluded way, but either way, the same number of innocent civilians is dead. Why do some people consider suicide bombers worse than other bombers?

Sorry Wilf, I missed this one earlier. I doubt it has much to do with blowing themselves up along with their victims so much as the targets they choose. When the IRA or Ulster Unionists blew up military or political targets or trained their fire on each other, the public reaction was likely to be less than when then they targetted civilians shopping in malls. And the IRA and ETA etc often warned people before they hit a major target or timed it for when most would be safely home again. The recent attacks on subways passengers during rush-hour weren't received any better because some of them walked away, from what I could see. Just gave Blair another chance to repeat Bushes 9/11 line about 'hating us for our freedoms' while limiting the civil rights these freedoms depend upon.

There maybe some added element of fear with suicide bombers, for some perhaps, in that guys who are willing to kill themselves too are immune to the usual deterents and probably tougher to bargain with, I dunno. The leadership of these Islamic groups show some signs of rationality in their decisions though, and some like Al Sadr clearly aren't eager to sacrifice themselves for their supposed cause. I mostly just make a distinction between Kamikaze style attacks which target troops or military installations and ones which kill civilians for the crime of being an American or Jew. Particularly women and children.

[ 08 August 2005: Message edited by: Erik the Red ]


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 12:47 AM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik the Red:
Has the Hamas shown any signs of recognising the right of Jews to any part of Palestine yet, or is that just the PA position still?

Is that a trick question? How do you recognise something that doesn't exist?

It was easier to say what Hamas' thinking was before Israel started killing off their political leaders. But my sense is that they are taking their case to the public, and if the public wants two-state, they will support two-state, and work peacefully within the political system for reunification.

To respond to the implied criticism of Hamas, I think that to come at it by setting preconditions on what legimate demands are is neither morally sensible nor tactically wise. We all want what we want. Should we ask if the ruling Likud has accepted the Palestinians right to return? Or their soveignity in East Jerusalem? Yet everyone accepts that you have to talk with the Likud -- because they're there, and they're not going away. The same could be said of Hamas.

Jews have no intrinsic right to any part of Palestine. They have human rights as individuals, period. Nevertheless, they may end up with a lot of it, or rather the state that claims to represent them will. That will be determined by negiotiations -- eventually. Those who want the Palestinians and the Israelis to do a deal sooner rather than later, as I know you do, Erik, ought to ask themselves if delegimizing the inevitable partners in any agreement serves that end.


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 01:00 AM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:
Did you notice the loaded question in that interview?

You find those in every interview with a Hamas man, and not just them. Journalists in a free market give the public what it wants, and what the public wants is to have its prejudices confirmed; we all know that. The way a story turns in the public mind determines the questions that are asked, and not just in interview. And in Israel, the story of the Palestinians is always turning in the same way. Sayed Kashua muses, in response to the recent shooting:

quote:


What joy. At long last we have a terror attack of our own, at long last we are on the side of the good guys. True, deep mourning and terrible sadness descended on Shfaram this weekend, but still, for the Arab sitting in front of the screen there was also a kind of achievement in the terror attack, a consolation.

How long was it before MK Azmi Bishara (Balad) was interviewed on television? And not only Bishara, but all of them were there: MK Mohammed Barakeh (Hadash), MK Abdulmalik Dehamshe (United Arab List), Ahmed Tibi (Hadash-Ta'al). And they weren't even invited to condemn and to defend themselves. When was the last time an Arab MK who appeared on television wasn't there in the role of the accused who is attacked by a skeptical broadcaster?

And now this weekend it happened, because of the blood that was spilled in vain in Shfaram. Now we are on the map, in the role of the victim, purely the victim. By virtue of the terror attack maybe they will let us alone a bit, because of the blood that was spilled in Shfaram, thinks the naive Arab. Maybe they will regard us differently.

After all, every group has to pay the blood tax, and everyone knows that there is nothing like a terror attack that claims lives to create a sense of belonging. At long last we are part of the family of blood. True, it wasn't a Palestinian, someone from Islamic Jihad or Hamas, who blew himself up in a bus in the middle of an Arab neighborhood, knowing without a doubt that he was killing only Arabs. In that case, the situation would have improved immeasurably.

But still, even a Jewish terror attack is something. Perhaps now they will let us alone a bit, perhaps we will stop being a security threat for a moment. Perhaps now they will have pity on us a bit, will say to themselves those poor Arabs, we didn't know that they also get sad when their sons are killed. And they even showed restraint, no doubt about that. The police were there, there was a strike and a funeral and they behaved all right. Maybe after all they aren't all that dangerous. That is to say - most of them.

Nevertheless, there are always a few rotten apples. True, Arabs died in previous terror attacks, restaurant workers, tourists in hotels. And then too an Arab sat in front of the television and hoped that there was an Israeli Arab among the casualties, because somehow this is supposed to soften the anger of the masses. Look, we're dying too. Please don't blame us. Please, we're really sorry.

Perhaps by virtue of the terror attack in Shfaram, thinks the Arab who was educated from earliest childhood to be afraid of the authorities, we'll stop being a demographic threat. Perhaps learned and balanced experts will stop suggesting solutions like exchanges of territories. Perhaps the rightists who are proposing transfer will become a bit more delicate.

Now we have a terror attack of our own, a terrorist - I swear that this is what they called him on television, a terrorist by the name of Natan Zada, who had dark skin and whose father has a mustache and who grew up in a shaky building. A terrorist, they said so many times that the viewer surely got confused and thought of him as an Arab. A Jewish terrorist killed civilians, citizens. How long have we waited for them to tell us this, how long for this definition, citizens.

For this is the fear of every Arab who dwells in Zion, the threat, morning and night, of the denial of his citizenship. Isn't he shouted at from childhood, true, you are a citizen, but this is an administrative matter and it's mainly because of a mistake. This is not a long-term thing. Your citizenship is temporary.

By virtue of the terror attack in Shfaram, we have received a full acknowledgment from Prime Minister Ariel Sharon himself that we are citizens. This what he said in his official condemnation of the attack. He called us citizens and not just citizens but "innocent citizens, civilians."

Gentlemen, this is heavy for us, all at once. It is hard for us to digest titles like that and manifestations of solidarity that come at a single stroke. Please, serve them up to us in small portions, gradually. We are accustomed to being a cancer in the heart of the nation, a fifth column, members of minority groups, abettors of illegal sojourners and now one soldier, a terrorist named Natan Zada, has turned us into innocent citizens.

Thank you, Natan Zada, for the sweet illusion. Thank you, Natan Zada, for having fulfilled a dream, though momentary, but still a big dream. With a submachine gun you have succeeded in doing what a million Arabs had not succeeded in doing. Ever since the establishment of the state, we have been begging to be part of it. We learned to keep quiet when necessary, to bend our backs, to be grateful for the discrimination, to accept the hatred with understanding, to forgive Kafr Qassem and the events of October 2000, even to bear the guilt.

Thank you, Natan Zada, for having brought us such moments of illusory grace and thank you for stirring in us once again the vain hope that there is still a chance, that there is reason to dream that we will be equal citizens in the Jewish state.


(Only the bold part is on point, but I was so struck by the bitter majesty of this writer, I found myself unable to cut him.)


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 01:39 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The problem is that Rantisi can not bring himself to answer, and so he is trapped.

quote:
"I am not talking about the Jews but about Palestinians who are living a tragedy. Without an end to that tragedy, no solution will hold fast."

That was evasion. Its too bad that Hamas does not have a clearer, and more egalitarian position on this.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 01:54 AM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Gaess: Earlier this year The New York Times quoted you as saying that the focus of Hamas is an end to the occupation. But to that quote the Times writer added, "by that he (Yassin) means an end to the Jewish occupation of historic Palestine," which is all of Palestine. That's totally different from an end to the 1967 occupation, and it suggests that the goal of Hamas is the destruction of Israel. So I need to ask you, when you refer to ending the occupation, do you mean the occupation since 1967 or the whole deal?

Yassin: All of Palestine is occupied. And there is an entity for the Zionist movement on Palestinian land which embodies apartheid. We want a place that absorbs Palestinian Muslims, Jews and others without differentiation.

Q: But as I understand it, Hamas is an organization formed to end the 1967 occupation, or am I wrong about that?

Yassin: I accept the 1967 border as a stage of the struggle but not as the definitive solution because we still have the right to our land. My home is in Ashkelon [on what is now Israel's southern coast] and not within the 1967 boundaries, and millions of refugees still have homes inside Israel.

Q: I understand that time often creates opportunities we can't even see right now, but, given our limited horizon, is a two-state solution at least a possibility? Can we think of a two-state solution without necessarily thinking that there has to be continued armed struggle after that?

Yassin: Our recognition of an Israeli state is conditioned on their recognition of our rights. Since we still don't have a state -- I don't have a home to settle on -- that means we're not in a position to recognize Israel.

Q: Is a two-state solution possible if Israel recognizes a Palestinian state?

Yassin: To predicate a question on "if" isn't practical in this situation. We can't say "if Israel is not there." If it were that easy, there would be no problem. What we can say is that a solution based on 22 percent of the land for the Palestinians and 78 percent for the Israelis is unjust. Still, Israel has not even acknowledged the Palestinians' right to 22 percent of our homeland.

Q: I'm trying to understand as an outsider what a mutually acceptable solution might be. Short of the idea of an Islamic state in all of Palestine -- most of the international community and certainly the Jews of Israel would oppose that idea -- I'm thinking, as we talk, that perhaps ending Israeli apartheid is one of the longer-term goals for achieving a settlement. But I'm also wondering, do you think the only alternative is an Islamic state in all of Palestine, or is there another alternative?

Yassin: Our core position is that the Israelis stole our land and our homes and the whole world supported them, and now, when we are asking for our land back, the world is not supporting us, and this is unfair.

Q: America was founded, in part, on the same injustice. The Indians -- the native Americans -- were dispossessed of their land bit by bit, put on reservations and then essentially marginalized, but at least they are almost equal citizens now because there's substantially an end to apartheid in America.

Yassin: And my own best vision for Palestine is of a land for Christians, Jews, Muslims -- a state where everyone has equal rights.

Q: And it doesn't necessarily have to be an Islamic state?

Yassin: That question should be left for the democratic process. Let the people select the kind of state they want, in the same way that the United States is a state for all its people and they solve their differences democratically as equals.


That's what Yassin, Hamas' founder and greatest political leader, thought. Israel wanted this voice silent so badly they killed 13 other people along with him, including 9 children. That would be the Israeli state's own declaration of principles.

[ 09 August 2005: Message edited by: rsfarrell ]


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 02:04 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yassin: And my own best vision for Palestine is of a land for Christians, Jews, Muslims -- a state where everyone has equal rights.

It bothers me that Rantisi has a problem in articulating that. Furthermore, nothing that plain is stated in the Hamas charter.

Also, a link to the source, would be cool.

And also I think only eight people were killed with Yassin, his two body guards, and six others. And I really don't think it was relevant to his importance as a target. The amount of value that Israelis put on Palestinian life is really pretty low. They have killed more for less.

[ 09 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 03:01 AM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
It's all very well to interrogate a movement about its attitude towards human rights. I'm supportive of that. Nor am I going to say "Why don't you interrogate so-and-so value, and go searching their convenents for evidence of compromise" because that kind of non-answer is very frustrating to me when it is offered by the other side.

I will just say that not all people are going to be equally articulate, and not all are going to be equally far-seeing, and you are especially unlikely to get articulate and far-seeing leaders when they are assasinated one after the other. How many of Rantisi's predecessors have been killed in the past five years? What articulate moderate would want the job at this point? As with the PLO, Israel demands moderate leaders, ignores their moderation, and celebrates when they die. Then they wonder why there aren't more moderates.

Be that as it may, Hamas as a whole has both accepted the cease-fire and the idea of a long-term truce based on the 1967 lines. Google "hamas interview" and you'll find everybody saying "fight till victory," lots of people saying "peaceful methods after two states" and no one at all saying "we would kill or expel all the Jews."

Article 31 of the Hamas convanent

quote:
Article Thirty-One:
The Islamic Resistance Movement is a humanistic movement. It takes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religions. It does not antagonize anyone of them except if it is antagonized by it or stands in its way to hamper its moves and waste its efforts.

Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam. Past and present history are the best witness to that.

It is the duty of the followers of other religions to stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region, because the day these followers should take over there will be nothing but carnage, displacement and terror. Everyone of them is at variance with his fellow-religionists, not to speak about followers of other religionists. Past and present history are full of examples to prove this fact.

"They will not fight against you in a body, except in fenced towns, or from behind walls. Their strength in war among themselves is great: thou thinkest them to be united; but their hearts are divided. This, because they are people who do not understand." (The Emigration - verse 14).
Islam confers upon everyone his legitimate rights. Islam prevents the incursion on other people's rights. The Zionist Nazi activities against our people will not last for long. "For the state of injustice lasts but one day, while the state of justice lasts till Doomsday."

"As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly." (The Tried - verse 8).



From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 04:01 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am completely aware that Hamas has offered, and undertaken ceasefires even on their own volition. I see it as a multifaceted movement, and do not characterize it in the simplitic manner that many other do.

Rantisi is a completely articulate spokesman. In fact other than Yassin, he was the spokesman. It troubles me that Rantisi was evasive.

quote:
The Zionist invasion is a vicious invasion. It does not refrain from resorting to all methods, using all evil and contemptible ways to achieve its end. It relies greatly in its infiltration and espionage operations on the secret organizations it gave rise to, such as the Freemasons, The Rotary and Lions clubs, and other sabotage groups. All these organizations, whether secret or open, work in the interest of Zionism and according to its instructions. They aim at undermining societies, destroying values, corrupting consciences, deteriorating character and annihilating Islam. It is behind the drug trade and alcoholism in all its kinds so as to facilitate its control and expansion.

I certainly don't demand perfection from any politcal movement, nor do I think that Hamas, or any other group must conform to my particular world view in order to sustain positive value. That said I reject the principle that Islam should have sovereignty "in this region," just as I reject the idea that Judaism should be allowed sovereignty in this region, or any region.

I do not want to live in a world defined by the infintely mutable hermeneutic of relgious texts.

[ 09 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 09:52 AM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
I'm not saying I agree with the idea of an Islamic state. But Yassin and others have said repeatly that they would seek an Islamic state democratically. If the electorate as a whole doesn't want it -- no Islamic state. And they have shown in many instances and in many aspects of their movement that unlike, say, al-Queda, to whom they bare a superficial resemblance, that they regard public support as esssential and respond to the wishes of the majority of their public. As long as a religious movement is willing to submit to the democratic process -- the whole democratic process, and not one that includes only one ethnicity -- I don't have a problem with a religious state as a goal. Most Palestinians don't want it, in any case.
From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 03:27 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Repeatedly? I have read a lot of Hamas stuff, and this is the first time I have seen Yassin, or anyone establish that principle. The fact that it is not clearly expressed in the charter in the manner which Yassin states it in that interview is a problem. It is not a policy plank, it is Yassin's personal opinion.

quote:
And my own best vision for Palestine is of a land for Christians, Jews, Muslims -- a state where everyone has equal rights.

Obviously, Yassin feels able to assert this principle, yet Rantisi does not. Likely this is because the organization has not clearly defined this principle as policy, refering instead to a vague interprestation of the Qu'ran. No doubt the charter accrods status for Jews inside a futre state, which indicates that a wholesale ethnic cleansing is not mandated by the charter, but the status of those Jews as equal citizens is not clearly defined.

[ 09 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 04:00 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Repeatedly? I have read a lot of Hamas stuff, and this is the first time I have seen Yassin, or anyone establish that principle. The fact that it is not clearly expressed in the charter in the manner which Yassin states it in that interview is a problem. It is not a policy plank, it is Yassin's personal opinion.

The charter is not a policy platform either. Your criticism is specious -- like saying that the US Constitution doesn't mention energy independence, or that the Israeli Declaration of Independence doesn't mention the Palestinians. These are historical documents, not point-by-point agendas.

Yassin was the spirtual leader of Hamas. His word defined Hamas for many years. I wouldn't be so quick to dimiss his statements as a "personal opinion." And Hamas leaders and members have reiterated the importence of democracy over and over. If you haven't seen that, it's probably because your exposure to Hamas is coming through a media filter.

Another example:

quote:
Q: In terms though of dealing with their fears, what Israeli Jews are afraid of is that at some point the Arabs will grow to a majority in Israel and then vote to change the nature of the state in a way that puts Jews at risk.

Abu Shanab: If there is a willingness to live in peace, then the Israelis and Palestinians will jointly find a better way of living together. And if we live together, demographics doesn't have to be a problem. Demographically, Israelis are already outnumbered by Arabs in this part of the world, but there is nothing to prevent them from living their lives as Jews, just as Arabs can live as Muslims. If we treat people as human beings rather than as merely members of particular religions, we can solve the problem.

I raised this question with an Israeli officer while I was in an Israeli jail. He told me, look, Ismail, if you want to live in peace, why don't you want settlers to settle in Gaza? I said, OK, we'll accept Israeli settlers in Gaza, but can Palestinians who are willing to live in peace resettle in their homes in what's now Israel? Would you accept this? He said no. I told him that his understanding of peace meant peace for him but not for me. This is our argument with the Israelis. The problems are complex, but they can be solved with good will from both sides, from Palestinians and Israelis -- and also on the part of the international community, because the international community has to pay something for the sake of absorbing the refugees.

Q: Even if they had reached an agreement at Taba, and 90 percent of the people on both sides were satisfied, over time this whole thing would probably evolve into forms that people can't even anticipate today. In another hundred years, there may be a single state with really good human-rights guarantees that assure equality for everyone.

Abu Shanab: And at that time, what will we have? We wouldn't have an Israeli state but a state based on democracy.

Q: Which ideally would be neither a Jewish nor an Islamic state.

Abu Shanab: No, let's speak about a democratic state, because an Islamic state is compatible with democracy. In this way, we see the Israelis as part of this community, if they want to live as equals. But if they want to maintain apartheid, they will never join this community. This is the critical issue for the Israelis and the Zionist movement, as well as for those in the West who support this state. Now the Israelis see themselves as Westerners in an Eastern area, and they live here as strangers.


http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/journal_vol9/0212_gaess.asp


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rsfarrell
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7770

posted 09 August 2005 04:09 PM      Profile for rsfarrell        Edit/Delete Post
BTW, isn't it just typical that we have moved from a discussion of a terror attack by a religious settler, not to a discussion of the radical rabbis who nurtured him, nor the settlers which inspired him, nor the state which armed him and set him loose: instead, we are debating the trustworthiness and moral character of Hamas. As Sayed Kashua predicted, it doesn't take long for the illusion of equality in victimhood to revert to the lexicon of Israeli accusation and Palestinian apology.

Let's move the discussion of Hamas here.

[ 09 August 2005: Message edited by: rsfarrell ]


From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 05:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No actually this is not typical at all. In that we are actually talking about what is said, and is not said, or what might be being said by the leaders of Hamas, in their own words without third party interpretations, except our own, as opposed to being asked to recite a catchesism of denounciation.

And I do not equate a simple declaration of the equality of all persons, which the constitution of the United States explicitly asserts (however that may have been interpreted at the time or now) with "energy independence," I consider them to be issues of an entirely different order, and actually I would assert that the fact that "the Israeli Declaration of Independence doesn't mention Palestinians" is one of its essential problems.

And the Hamas charter does specifically mention Jews numerously, and pardoxically and these pardoxes reveal themselves variously, for instance the assertion:

quote:
Abu Shanab: No, let's speak about a democratic state, because an Islamic state is compatible with democracy. In this way, we see the Israelis as part of this community...

Seems to imply that the "democratic" nature of the state is contained within the Islamic state, or alongside it (the Iranian model -- ?} not that the state is first democratic and then defined by its citizens as Islamic or not. This seems to contradict the statement from Yassin, which I excerpted earlier.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 09 August 2005 06:23 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As long as a religious movement is willing to submit to the democratic process -- the whole democratic process, and not one that includes only one ethnicity -- I don't have a problem with a religious state as a goal. Most Palestinians don't want it, in any case.

I could be wrong, but I believe Lenin and his croanies held elections after The Revolution which the social democrats won. Lenin didn't like the result. He took over the government, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Just because Hamas promises democracy to the Palestinians, it doesn't mean they'll get it. Besides, the whole idea of Wahabists controlling Palestine, a part of the Middle East once so famous for it's poets an intellectuals, makes me slightly ill.


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 09 August 2005 08:26 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll respond to this in the thread that Farrel just started about Hamas.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 August 2005 09:15 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good idea. And this thread is almost at a hundred posts, so...
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca