Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumNew Israeli search method at West Bank checkpoint worries Palestinians
According to eyewitness reports, Israeli police officers have begun searching Palestinian vehicles at a Bethlehem checkpoint through use of nausea-inducing chemicals.
By Amira Hass
Israel Police have begun implementing a new method of searching Palestinian vehicles through use of nausea-inducing chemicals at a Bethlehem checkpoint, international aid workers have reported.
Since December, Israeli police officers have introduced what they call a sophisticated method of tracking explosive materials.
Palestinians with Israeli license plates, usually residents of Jerusalem or foreign residents are allowed to pass through the checkpoint. Cars traveling to Jerusalem are often asked by Border Police soldiers to park their car in a side lot with eight parking spaces near the checkpoint. Once parked, the passengers are asked to roll up all windows, apart from that of the driver – and exit the vehicle. Two tubes are then connected to the vehicle – one is connected to an air pump, the other, which passes through a tiny filter, is attached to the vehicle. A policeman with a stopwatch flicks the air pump switch.
According to Palestinians, police officers who carried out the search refused to describe the procedure. An official in the Israel Police told Haaretz that it is an approved procedure, and another police source said there is no use of any chemicals, but would not expand on the new search method.
remainder: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/new-israeli-search-method-at-west-bank-checkpoint-worries-palestinians-1.409211
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
King_David
(14,851 posts)Than this :
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Or was I misinformed?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Must have missed it. All I've seen is someone thinking it's okay to carry out collective punishment on Palestinians....
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)one should justify or attempt to refer to what Israel is using here, a chemical
as part of their security measure. No more than Israel should be allowed to detain
children with no legal recourse for throwing stones and there are many
more examples that define collective punishment.
27 August 2008
Trapped – collective punishment in Gaza
"The Israeli siege has turned Gaza into a big prison. We cannot leave, not even for medical care or to study abroad, and most of what we need is not available in Gaza. We are not living really; we are barely surviving and the outlook for the future is bleak." – Fathi, a Gaza resident.
With Gaza locked down and cut off from the outside world by a stifling Israeli blockade, 46 peace activists from the world over set sail for Gaza on 22 August to, in their words, “break the siege that Israel has imposed on the civilian population of Gaza…, to express our solidarity with the suffering people of Gaza, and to create a free and regular channel between Gaza and the outside world”.
An Israeli peace activist on board the Free Gaza boats, Professor Jeff Halper, said: “The mission is to break the Israeli siege, an absolutely illegal siege which has plunged a million and a half Palestinians into wretched conditions: imprisoned in their own homes, exposed to extreme military violence, deprived of the basic necessities of life, stripped of their most fundamental human rights and dignity. The siege violates the most fundamental principle of international law: the inadmissibility of harming civilian populations… I cannot stand idly aside… To do so would violate my commitment to human rights”.
The blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip over a year ago has left the entire population of 1.5 million Palestinians trapped with dwindling resources and an economy in ruins. Some 80 per cent of the population now depend on the trickle of international aid that the Israeli army allows in. This humanitarian crisis is man-made and entirely avoidable.
Even patients in dire need of medical treatment not available in Gaza are often prevented from leaving and scores of them have died. Students who have scholarships in universities abroad are likewise trapped in Gaza, denied the opportunity to build a future.
The Israeli authorities argue that the blockade on Gaza is in response to Palestinian attacks, especially the indiscriminate rockets fired from Gaza at the nearby Israeli town of Sderot. These and other Palestinian attacks killed 25 Israelis in the first half of this year; in the same period Israeli forces killed 400 Palestinians.
However, the Israeli blockade does not target the Palestinian armed groups responsible for attacks – it collectively punishes the entire population of Gaza.
In April 2008, Robert Serry, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the UN Secretary General, called on Israel to restore fuel supplies to Gaza and allow the passage of humanitarian assistance and commercial supplies.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/feature-stories/trapped-collective-punishment-gaza-20080827
Demolition for Alleged Military Purposes - Collective Punishment
Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention forbids collective punishment and states that a person shall not be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. This article explicitly relates to administrative punishment imposed on persons or groups because of acts that they did not personally commit. Article 50 of the Hague Regulations states a comparable prohibition.
The IDF Spokesperson contended that, "The purpose of these exposing acts is not to punish the Palestinian populations, but rather to provide a solution for a specific and defined security need." In light of the extensive use of the policy and its horrendous consequences for the civilian population, this argument cannot be accepted.
The houses and the orchards destroyed by the soldiers belonged to Palestinians whom even Israel does not contend were involved in any way in attacks on Israeli civilians or security forces. Despite this, these Palestinians lost, as a result of the IDF acts, their homes and livelihood. Furthermore, they were not even given the opportunity to be heard by any official and were not compensated at all for their losses (on this issue, see below). The IDF is likely very aware of these consequences of its policy. Therefore, its argument that it does not seek to punish the Palestinian population is meaningless.
http://www.btselem.org/razing/collective_punishment
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)At some point, the collective retribution has to stop. Palestinians don't deserve this treatment AS A GROUP...ok?
(unrelated second question...why is your icon now an Australian flag?)
King_David
(14,851 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 26, 2012, 08:19 PM - Edit history (1)
( was in reply to: ''(unrelated second question...why is your icon now an Australian flag?) ""
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I don't have an objection about the second...just curiosity.
As to the first...because collective retribution is always unjust. It's not as if all Palestinians were responsible for that attack, any more than all Israelis were responsible for what Baruch Goldstein did or for the insane settlers that keep stealing Palestinian olive trees and leaving innocent Palestinian farmers with no livelihood, driving those farmers will fall into poverty for no reason.
At some point, you're going to have to accept that the majority of Palestinians, like the majority of people in any other nation(other than the nations allied with Hitler in the 1930's)are not irredeemable monsters.
And none of the Palestinians alive today are responsible for whatever was done to your grandfather in 1948. That responsibility fell solely on those who did what was done to him...not on everybody who is part of the Palestinian people "unto their tenth generation".
There will never be peace if the hatred doesn't die. Why do you nurture your hatred, when it does you no good?
King_David
(14,851 posts)I will not even dignify this DISGUSTING post with a response.
Nor will I alert.
Enough to see how disgusting it is.
This post by Shaktimaan about you is a dead on accurate.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=3651
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #3)
Post removed
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Objecting to forcing Palestinians to vomit at checkpoints does not equal hatred of Jews. You know perfectly well that I'm not an antisemite or anything close to it. Don't ever make a despicable insinuation like that about me again.
I've never said anyone should be passive...only that no one has the right to impose collective punishment on anyone else. It's not as though the only way that Israelis can be safe or that Jews anywhere else can be safe is for the IDF to attack all Palestinians for the acts of an extremist minority.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)ok so lets try this again...only this time you have to concentrate and really answer the question directly, it will be difficult for you, given your past posts of irrelevant information
i repeat, just answer the question directly..it should be no more than one or two sentences. if there is more, we know that you cannot answer the question and have wandered off to one of your "standard answers that require no thinking:
ready?
this is for tomorrow, to be implemented tomorrow or the day after by the IDF:
how should israel detect bombs, without checking everybody, when the in the past bomb carriers have included:
women with medical passes, mentally disturbed kids, kids unknowing having bombs in their packs, grandmothers, ambulances, to name a few
your answer should be brief....3 sentences maximum GO!
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)What I said was you can't blame everybody in Palestine for the incident King David cited. I wasn't even discussing the question of checking people.
And you were wrong to make the insinuation you made about me.
Don't every accuse me of wanting Jews(or anyone else) to be passive victims again.
As to your question...it would be enough to use full body scanners like they're bringing in at U.S. airports. That would show you every possible threat.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)That's what Israel should make every (primarily Muslim) Palestinian walk through to get into the country?
And their vehicles should be...? Parked at the bored perhaps?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... regardless of race, creed, colour, or political ideology.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It would also help to require the troops to treat Palestinians with courtesy, respect, and the presumption of innocence, AND to have medical stations, including cardiac care units, at the checkpoints(if an old man is at the checkpoint and he says his wife is having chest pains, you could take them aside and deal with it medically and quickly WITHOUT compromising anyone's security or safety).
But the part that gets missed is the degree to which these searches, as currently conducted, with people being made to wait for hours, given the "we know your kind" attitude, and collectively humiliated, has a lot to do with some Palestinians being provoked into supporting extreme actions. If you goad a person, ANY person, at some point that person will lose it. Therefore, it goes against any security interest to allow goading and humiliation to be part of the process. There has to be some way of searching people without making it a show of force on the one side's part and a collective humiliation on the other.
And there simply couldn't be any possible justification for forcing people to vomit at the checkpoints.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)do you really think that these scanners could possibly be interpreted as a sign of respect from the Israelis? I see no way that this policy could possibly do anything other than instigate another intifada. They are INCREDIBLY humiliating... they show pictures of you somewhat naked!
And no one has been vomiting at checkpoints.
There has to be some way of searching people without making it a show of force on the one side's part and a collective humiliation on the other.
Love to hear it. But this idea is a guaranteed riot.
pelsar1
(3 posts)you want EVERYONE...from 5 year old kids to 95 year old great grandmas to be "punished" by having to take off their shoes, wait for hours and hours, while everyone goes through, one at a time....
Not to mention that they 'll have to get up a lot earlier (just as they do to catch planes at US airports) to go through the humiliating and slow process of getting scanned and searched.
i would say thats a very very good example of how one defines: group punishment.
as far as accusing you of wanting jews or anyone else to be passive victims...as far as i'm concerned, the jury is still out on that, its easy to declare it, its far more gray when we look at what you post. (you seem to have little understanding of the consequences of what you write).
____
as far as the jury system here goes....clearly i disagree with it, the only way were going to get past the PC type answers is if some of use get mad, a bit pissed and write what we really think and believe, and thats when it gets interesting (as per my discussion with jefferson, it took a long time before he made his claim that egypt is afraid of israeli "consequences" if they dont do what israel does-that wouldn't have come out unless i pushed...
its a good example of how a poster, which posts reasonable quotes and articles actually believes in something so bizarre, as israeli power over egypt
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I'm not an idiot. I just disagree with you on some things. You don't get to talk down to people just for that.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)you constantly accuse other people who disagree with you of holding racist motives reminiscent of beliefs held by white supremacists and/or Nazis.
Not to mention your assumption that any and all security measures are merely excuses for inflicting punishment upon the Palestinian population. Once you shift the argument from "Is this security measure justified?" to "You can't keep inflicting collective retribution on all Palestinians" it seems unfair to complain about people's dismissive attitude towards you.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Ken does nothing of the sort, and there's absolutely no excuse for the revolting post aimed at him...
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)For example, in response to pelsar...
Do you really believe Palestinians and Arabs are pathologically incapable of struggling for freedom or wanting a better life for themselves? Do you really believe that Arabs are sub-human? It really sounds like you do, my friend, and that's an unjustiable attitude to have against anybody.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/depts.washington.edu/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=358320&mesg_id=358364
And this is hardly an isolated incident.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)What you said was: 'you constantly accuse other people who disagree with you of holding racist motives reminiscent of beliefs held by white supremacists and/or Nazis. '
btw, it's interesting that you never appear to have any problems with similar things being said about pro-Palestinian DUers...
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)What is it that you think is a difference? That I said "other people" but both posts were to pelsar? Is that SERIOUSLY your argument? That it was the SAME person he accused of harboring racist beliefs akin to white supremacists, not OTHER people? At any rate, by "other people" I meant people other than Ken. But I've seen him do it several times. He's done it to me.
btw, it's interesting that you never appear to have any problems with similar things being said about pro-Palestinian DUers...
I have never seen anyone accuse a Pro-Palestinian poster's motivation of being a belief that Jews were sub-human. But if I had, and then I saw that person complaining that he didn't deserve any condescension, that he merely had different views, I would certainly call him out on it.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)If you just haven't happened to notice the occasional accusations thrown at pro-Palestinian DUers, I'm more than happy to find the time to go back through the archives at DU and send a best of compilation to you 
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Okay, I'll bite. How is what I quoted NOT an example of what I accused Ken of saying? Ken accused pelsar of believing that Arabs were sub-human, which I think is a perfect example of the kind of thing white supremacists and Nazis really do think. And since ken and pelsar are not the same person, ken obviously directed his comment at an "other person", namely pelsar.
He said something similar in this very thread. At some point, you're going to have to accept that the majority of Palestinians, like the majority of people in any other nation(other than the nations allied with Hitler in the 1930's)are not irredeemable monsters. The only way to read this and have it make sense would be to assume that ken thinks that pelsar sees the majority of Palestinians as irredeemable monsters, unlike people in other nations. This implies that pelsar's criticism of Palestinians stems from bigotry, rather than politics or history.
And I have never seen anyone say the things Ken says and THEN complain that they are undeserving of condescending comments merely for having a difference of opinion. (I assume the difference of opinion is that Ken thinks pelsar is a racist who can't see the Palestinians as anything but sub-human, and pelsar disagrees.)
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)pelsar (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jul-16-11 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. ken ...your breaking a progressive rule...
one of the basic tenants is the separation of govt policy and actions vs the people and religion.
that is why we cant get mad at all muslims for the actions of hamas, al quida, etc who all claim they are/were killing people for the glory of allah.
now since no doubt you want to be consistent, you not supposed to excuse those people who dislike jews because of the actions of the israeli govt....remember? the israeli govt is not the same as the jews.
do you get it?
the poster in question also constantly demeans Progressives and Leftists
where is ken accused of anti-semitism?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You'd have to agree that nothing I said in this thread or any other could possibly justify that accusation.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)do you mean pelsar's post in this thread? It was obnoxious, but again, to be fair you had just accused King David of being racist against Palestinians yourself....
At some point, you're going to have to accept that the majority of Palestinians, like the majority of people in any other nation(other than the nations allied with Hitler in the 1930's)are not irredeemable monsters.
He didn't write anything indicating that he thought most Palestinians were monsters along the lines of the Nazis.
And none of the Palestinians alive today are responsible for whatever was done to your grandfather in 1948.
Is this about something specific that you discussed with him previously? Unless he actually admitted to feeling this way, accusing someone of harboring bigotry because of a personal event (particularly a tragedy) is extremely provocative.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Just another disgusting post.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)King_David
(14,851 posts)Why my Avatar is the flag of a great country?
Answer : Why Not...
And that is a bad post?
Okie Dokie Smokie....
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It struck me that that event might be at the root of his views today, and really, that it shouldn't be, because everyone that had anything to do with that was dead. Therefore, that it's unhealthy for him to refuse to let go of that.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)were in response to his disgusting statement that I wanted Jews to be "passive"
something he knows perfectly well isn't true) and, presumably, that I didn't care if Jewish people die. He also knows that THAT isn't true.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(that's what he meant, as far as I can see, by posting "Why Not?, when I said that it was wrong to do that).
What would you call THAT particular attitude?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Your post was disgusting and UGLY !!!
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Why?
And...if you didn't mean they should be held collectively responsible for that, why did you post "why not?" in response to that?
What happened in Netanya was horrible-nobody disagrees with that-but there are already enough measures in place to stop a recurrence of such events. There's no reason to force people to vomit at the checkpoints, as the new method discussed in the OP does.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Not even worth replying to this pathetic deflection.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts) pelsar1
(3 posts)hmmm...how do i put this?, your far more of a religious believer, than having a belief based on actual facts, events and history.
Your base belief, it appears, is that we, the collective of israel really are evil (yes, i'm including the reservists who voluntarily serve in the IDF, the politicians who live next door) and the Palestinians are collectively good. Now that is your belief and i have no problem with that base, but it definitely is "religious"
You may not see it as being religious, and there is hope for you yet.....
I believe the best example of how in the beginning you made claims that democracy can never come out of an occupation and your very firm about this and repeated it constantly. It took time and many many posts, but at the end you actually acknowledged that democracies did come out of germany, japan and israel during occupations (of course you added that the "Palestinian and israeli are different and it can't happen today-but I'll ignore that nonsense, and its nonsense because its a belief that has nothing to back it up).
so whereas you did adjust, and that is to your credit, it sure took a long time for such a black and white historical fact.....
as far as being an anti-semite...you i believe just have the "post modern version" that assumes us israelis are pretty evil as we like to humiliate the Palestinians and believe they are subhuman as per your posts to me. (do you need any of your quotes?)
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)or that Palestinians are saints.
It's just that I don't believe that the actions of some Palestinians are enough to justify making all Palestinians suffer for those actions by perpetuating the Occupation, or that the Occupation can ever be effective at changing the actions of the worst for the better.
And that I don't believe the Occupation is good for Israelis as a people.
BTW, why DID you violate the TOS to get back into a thread you were blocked from?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... Jews don't deserve this treatment AS A GROUP ... ok?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)So, would you agree that condoning collective punishment and blaming all Palestinians for the actions of a few is wrong?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... without stopping the other.
Stop the bombings PERMANENTLY and see if the vehicle checks continue.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Are you aware of something no-one else is? There haven't been any suicide bombings for ages, so I'm not sure why yr acting as though they're still happening...
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... because of the wall and the searches.
Has Fatah declared an end to armed resistance lately that didn't make the papers?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Here's what you wrote just one post back 'ou can't stop one...
... without stopping the other.
Stop the bombings PERMANENTLY and see if the vehicle checks continue.'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=3653
Well, there's been no suicide bombings for ages and the checkpoints are still there, and some people are keen to condone the collective punishment of Palestinians....
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)pelsar1
(3 posts)Incident marks second time in one week that security forces foil suspected terror attack on Israeli targets in West Bank
the success of the walls and checkpoints at stopping the bombs naturally brings down the number of attempts...but the attempts are still happening.
shira
(30,109 posts)...more humanely at checkpoints.
I suppose the answer is that it's more humane to allow bombadiers into Israel rather than stop Palestinians at checkpoints.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)I wasn't aware that if someone's pro-Palestinian that means they think exactly the same and agree on everything that anyone else who's pro-Palestinian says. Just like when it comes to pro-Israeli folk, there's a lot of different opinions and neither group is one single-thought mass....
shira
(30,109 posts)....into Israel? Let's pretend they start implementing your policy tomorrow. What's your policy if you're in charge?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)What yr doing is wrong. You need to stop posting now and stop using the new account you created to get round being blocked from this thread...
King_David
(14,851 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)That doesn't excuse anyone deliberately creating a new account to get round being blocked from a thread they've had a post hidden in. Is that clear enough for you?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Sounds like an old fashioned school teacer.
Yes Marm ,clear enough and sorry to have bothered you.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)In the past, you've regularly said you don't understand things, so I'm just helping you out. And what it boils down to is that even if someone disagrees with the reason their post was hidden and they were blocked from a thread, creating a new account and returning to post in the same thread is wrong....
btw, teacher is spelt with a 'h'
King_David
(14,851 posts)That apartheid wall? Never.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Do you draw a distinction between security measures and collective punishment at all?
Your post indicates that this procedure has no goal other than to punish Palestinians for previous terrorist attacks. The fact that it is a random search that affects a small percentage of travelers doesn't mitigate your belief that it is meant as punishment for all Palestinians?
You seem to think that all searches and security measures are so unnecessary that they can only be motivated by a desire to oppress Palestinians. What would you suggest as an alternative?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)If you'd read the thread, you'd have noticed that the discussion ensues from this post http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=3596
What my post indicates is that I was replying to someone who appeared confused and said collective punishment was being aimed at Jews.
Probably best to drop the 'you seem to think' stuff. You don't know what I think. If you want to know what I think about checkpoints, I'm more than happy to drop a lengthy post about it, but not tonight, coz it's getting late and I'm off to bed...
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)No one seemed confused, he was just referring to suicide bombing being a far more apt example of collective punishment than these security measures. But your response talks about collective punishment against Palestinians... what collective punishment are you referring to if not these security measures?
shira
(30,109 posts)As is paying higher taxes.
Or having to hear Justin Beiber when I go to the store.
But allowing bombers into Israel to kill as many innocents as possible is not collective punishment. Even if it is, it's not as bad as the checkpoints.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Palestinian resistance is not based on Israel claiming to be "the Jewish state". It's based on the repression Palestinians are subjected to under the Occupation. I don't approve of a lot of the tactics SOME Palestinians use in that resistance, but those tactics are not the point. If some OTHER army were in the West Bank and were treating Palestinians exactly as the IDF treats them, they'd STILL resist. Why would anyone think they wouldn't?
Yes, other Arab countries had their forces in the West Bank...but none of THOSE armies were there to permanently annex the place and drive the Palestinians out...THAT is the differerence...not the purported ethnicity or religion of the State of Israel or of the IDF. Insisting that the issue is antisemitism distorts reality and works to make it impossible to end the current, unsustainable situation.
Why is it so hard to accept that there's no difference between Palestinians resisting the IDF Occupation of the West Bank and any other occupied people resisting the occupation THEY live under? Anybody is going to resist having another country's army on their land, and you can't assume that nobody else would ever use any form of force.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)the Palestinians disagree with your assessment. It's about the Jewish state being there according to Hamas. Otherwise Hamas in Gaza would have ended their terrorism as soon as Israel left Gaza, right? Instead they increased it.
but none of THOSE armies were there to permanently annex the place and drive the Palestinians out
Actually Jordan DID try to permanently annex the WB and EJ. A move condoned by the PLO in their original charter.
When did Israel ever say that they intended to permanently annex the West Bank? When did they drive any Palestinians out?
Why is it so hard to accept that there's no difference between Palestinians resisting the IDF Occupation of the West Bank and any other occupied people resisting the occupation THEY live under?
Because there is actually a huge difference. The idea that the conflict centers around post 67 occupied land is very, very recent. Yet the conflict is old.
Insisting that the issue is antisemitism distorts reality and works to make it impossible to end the current, unsustainable situation.
If the issue isn't anti-semitism then how some there is not a single Jew living in the territories that isn't a settler? Why were they all killed and thrown out? There are Arabs in Israel. Where are the Jews in Palestine? And why has the PA said that they plan on keeping it Jew free?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)In that region, Jews and Arabs were not mortal enemies from time immemorial-and even after the 20th Century started-they often, though not always, coexisted in relative tolerance(compare and contrast the survival rates of the Jewish communities of North Africa versus those of the Jewish communities of Europe). So, it's just not reality to act as if Arabs and Muslims were obsessively anti-Jewish from the moment the Arab cultures and the Muslim religion came into being, as many, though not all, of those who self-identify as "pro-Israeli" have insisted they were.
It really ISN'T as simple as saying "they just hate Jews". And pretending that it is works against any effort to make peace in this conflict. Can't you see that?
Palestinians do what they do, whatever you can say about some of the tactics(and I do condemn violence from anybody)because they have legitimate grievances about what the creation of Israel and the dispossessions caused both by the events of 1948 AND the Six-Day War have meant for their lives. It's absurd to say that they'd be fine with being kicked out of their homes if only it wasn't the Israelis doing it. Nobody is THAT much of a masochist in the name of nationalist solidarity.
I'm just saying that, if "pro-Israeli" people want peace, they need to admit that, even if the existence of Israel should be defended, Palestinians have suffered needlessly at times in the name of that defense and that that suffering needs to be addressed. Just recognize their humanity already-is THAT too much to ask?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)While the idea of giving the OPT to the Palestinians began in earnest only 25 or 30 years ago. Until Jordan agreed to relinquish their claim there was no real option for a Palestinian state in the OPT. And that happened in '88.
It really ISN'T as simple as saying "they just hate Jews". And pretending that it is works against any effort to make peace in this conflict. Can't you see that?
When did I ever say anything like that? Never, that's when. But I'll tell you a secret. No one ever hates any other group "just because." There is ALWAYS a reason. The thing that identifies someone as a mindless bigot is that their reasons are stupid, but reasons always exist.
So of course the Palestinians don't "just hate Jews"! But generally speaking the rationales behind most Arab and Muslim hatred of Jews is really very, very stupid. To call them invalid would be an insult to invalids everywhere. This isn't a ploy to assign blame. How much can we blame an uneducated Arab in Tripoli who believes the news report stating that Jews have been using Palestinian blood to make matzoh? Or that they sing songs in school about gnawing on the bones of Arabs. Or that they put AIDS in the wells used by Muslims? We can't really... a whole cottage industry exists just to make up crazy shit about the Jews. Just as one existed in the 20s which spread brochures around accusing the Jews of planning to buy and demolish al Aqsa. These people were/are being used. But that doesn't make their motives legitimate. Their motives are retarded.
No one has ever said that "they just hate Jews". But I challenged your assertion that it is all because of the occupation. Unless you consider the occupation to include all of Israel, that is. Because Hamas is pretty good about sticking to their script saying their goal is Israel's destruction and ending the occupation will not alter that.
compare and contrast the survival rates of the Jewish communities of North Africa versus those of the Jewish communities of Europe
Compare and contrast both sets of numbers with the survival rates of Jews living in Jewish communities. Which of the three would you prefer? When your debate position centers on "less pogroms" it is a sign that your argument is going less than awesome.
It's absurd to say that they'd be fine with being kicked out of their homes if only it wasn't the Israelis doing it.
They may not be fine with it, but the Arabs have kicked them out of various homes, pushed them into shittier homes, and denied them homes at all far more often than Israel ever has. But no one seems to care enough to even help them, much less harp on it for 65 years.
I'm just saying that, if "pro-Israeli" people want peace, they need to admit that, even if the existence of Israel should be defended, Palestinians have suffered needlessly at times in the name of that defense and that that suffering needs to be addressed.
Of course they have suffered needlessly. That suffering is primarily the result of their own leaders' decisions or the oppression inflicted by other Arab states. But Israel has done its fair share too. But admitting this is hardly a key issue in the conflict. You can tell because it is never included in Palestinian's list of demands.
Just recognize their humanity already-is THAT too much to ask?
I never once denied their humanity. I question their ideology, strategy, motives, goals and tactics. But never their humanity, nor have I ever doubted that their suffering was very real and almost always undeserved.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Was the Zionist maxim "a land without people, for a people without land". This phrase denied the reality that there was a long-standing Arab population of considerable size in the lands of the Mandate. It denied that that population had any real connection to those lands. It denied, in short, any legitimacy to the Palestinian presence the area.
Had there been an acknowledgement that there was a large indigenous, or nearly indigenous(at least 13 centuries old by 1900)Arab community in Palestine, with developed agriculture, with culture, with a tradition of education, there could have been a much more conciliatory situation. Instead of that, the Zionist leadership acted as if Arabs were nothing in Palestine, had no real right to stay there, had no reality of their own, and could easily be ignored or driven away if the need arose. Can you not see how this could be a problem?
And I didn't say it was ALL because of the Occupation. But the occupation AND the settlements have played a massive role in deepening the tensions, tensions that existed, in significant part, because of the evictions of 1948(and Israel, today, would lose nothing in at least admitting that those people WERE forced out and that it should be admitted that they had and retain a real connection to the lands of the Mandate, a connection that has to be honored in some way). Yes, there were and are Arabs who hate Jews(though, unlike Europe, there weren't many that wanted them to be exterminated from the whole Earth). And it needs to be admitted that it was never fair to imply that Palestinians and the other Arabs should be considered the successors in villainy to the Caesars, the Inquisition, the tsars and Hitler. And the record of relative amity and tolerance between Jews and Arabs in North Africa(and Jews and Muslims in Iran for much of Iranian history)is important, because it shows that, if peaceful co-existence could happen between those groups in the past, it could happen in the future-that Arabs are not irredeemable antisemitic monsters in the way that people like Netanyahu and his apologists like to make them out to be.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I'm calling shenanigans on you.
One of the major reasons for the conflict was the Zionist maxim "a land without people, for a people without land".
You totally made that up, I've never heard of that as being a key cause of the conflict. A slogan? Come on!
Where are you getting this from? Just admit you made it up.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Because in this case the resistance PRECEDED the occupation. And in areas that the occupation was revoked, resistance INCREASED. It is true that the occupation and the resistance both exist at the same time. There is certainly a correlation between them. But correlations do not imply causation.
So far the evidence that does exist tells us the opposite. That the occupation reduces resistance. Conversely, the less occupation there is, the more resistance occurs.
Why do you think that is?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)By the logic of your argument, the occupation should not only have not produced Hamas, it should have wiped out the PLO(which it never did)and produced, instead, a Palestinian leadership that would happily have settled for Begin's proposals for Tibetan-style "autonomy", giving up on self-determination forever(which, the Israeli government liked to pretend, Palestinians supposedly never actually wanted until some "leadership" put ideas in their heads). Yet, nothing remotely like that occurred, did it?
BTW, you do realize that, in Northern Ireland, military occupation was utterly useless at stopping violent resistance there-as it was in North America in the late 18th century, right? Or in Afghanistan at ANY point since the Brits were driven out of the Khyber Pass?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I just drew a correlation between ending occupation and increased violence. It happened during Oslo's re-deployment, in Gaza and in Lebanon. And then Israel's RE-redeployment back into the west bank saw violence decrease.
I don't know where you are getting these crazily specific extrapolations from. I said violence increases and decreases. You're saying that the "Palestinian leadership that would happily have settled for Begin's proposals for Tibetan-style "autonomy", giving up on self-determination forever" which actually doesn't even have anything to do with terrorism rates.
Yet, nothing remotely like that occurred, did it?
No. What occurred was an inverse correlation between occupation and violence, like I said.
I feel like a meteorologist who noted a 1/16th inch increase in ocean levels this year and my colleague replied, "Impossible! If water levels rose like that then the squid monsters would have already taken over the globe and enslaved us! Did that happen, huh? NO, it didn't!"
That said, the PLO was thoroughly defanged during the occupation's lifespan. And Hamas and Hezbollah greatly grew in strength and size immediately following their occupations' end.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I asked you to explain why a whole series of negative events, including the rise of Hamas, occurred as a result of the occupation, when, by the logic of the argument in your previous post, not only should Hamas NOT have emerged, but all forms of resistance should have declined.
And yes, the PLO was "defanged"-which ended up being a horrible tragedy, since the PLO leadership were people Israel could have negotiated with, had they treated the PLO leadership as equals deserving of equal respect in the peace process, instead of simply trying to weaken them, an objective that ended up having no positive consequences whatsoever. A Palestine dominated by the PLO would have had no chance at all of going "Islamist", and would have had a much greater chance of being a secular democracy.
And, had the PLO not been weakened by Israel, Hamas and Hizbollah would never have grown in strength no matter what. It should bother you that the weakening of the PLO DID, in fact, have the effect of strengthening groups that the Israeli government always knew would be much, much worse.
It should bother you, that is, if you actually wanted peace-since you knew that peace was always going to have to mean accepting an independent Palestinian state comprising the West Bank and Gaza.
shira
(30,109 posts)But somehow Israel's peace partner, the PLO, despite being the authority responsible for law and order in the territories, could do nothing to stop that.
The PLO waged a 2nd Intifada in response to Israel accepting the Clinton Initiatives, which was a reasonable offer. But what did the PLO do? They didn't even come back with a reasonable counter-offer. Worse, your side never even pressured them to do so. And you're talking about Israel and its supporters not wanting peace? Are you serious? All your side did was blame Israel for not offering more. What more could they offer when the PLO refused to negotiate reasonably for more?
=======
That's the PLO, Ken. They didn't meet Israel halfway for the cause of peace. They not only rejected moves toward peace by Israel, they chose to attack Israel more.
=======
Leaving Lebanon in 2000 only strengthened Hezbollah.
Leaving Gaza in 2005 only strengthened Hamas.
The PLO again in 2008 rejected an even better proposal by Israel (Olmert) and didn't counter with a reasonable proposal in response. And once again, your side never even pressured them to do so. Just more excuses that Israel wasn't reasonable enough.
But you say Israel isn't doing their part for a peace deal? That the PLO was and still is Israel's best peace partner? Seriously? That Israel 'dissed' them?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)and deny him the respect he was entitled to as head of the PA government.
And can you still seriously argue that discrediting the PLO had any positive results at all? It didn't lead, and clearly never could have led, to an alternative Palestinian leadership that would have accepted Israel's insistence that Palestinians settle for less-than-full sovereignty(such as no control of their own airspace, no control of the water supply, and no means to defend themselves against IDF military incursions-in, other words, sovereignty-on-sufferance and sovereignty that would always be provisional). What it DID lead to was Hamas. You would agree in retrospect, I hope, that no good whatsoever actually came of the PLO being "defanged", right? Anyone would have to agree on that, since the only result of the PLO being "defanged" was the rise of Hamas.
shira
(30,109 posts)....being a credible peace partner.
I want you to admit you're wrong about Israel doing all it can to stop a Palestinian state.
As to defanging the PA, they defanged themselves by choosing Intifada 2 as a response to a very reasonable offer the Israelis agreed to (the Clinton Initiatives).
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The "no partner for peace" meme was never about anything but making excuses for keeping the war going. Why on earth should I embrace something that disgusting?
And it's not true that the Palestinian leadership was never interested in peace...they made many proposals for it...
The PLO is secular. Hamas isn't. By itself, that should be enough for you to accept that no good came of the PLO being discredited and replaced by Hamas(especially since that was the only thing that could ever have come of trying to discredit the PLO-it was always clear that going after the PLO was NEVER, under any circumstance, going to create any leadership the Israelis would find more acceptable, and you always knew that it was clear).
And the PLO had been offering negotiations SINCE the 1970's. For almost two decades, the Israeli leadership had refused to negotiate with it. Then, when they finally did, even Rabin refused to say the words "Palestinian state" despite the fact that there was never any real alternative to letting the Palestinians have one)and the settlements kept getting built and/or "expanded", despite the fact
that more settlements were always going to make it harder to make peace and were always going to discredit, in the eyes of the Palestinian people, ANY Palestinian leadership that kept negotiating while the settlements were being built.
If you want peace, you HAVE to support removing the West Bank settlements. You can't be pro-settler AND pro-peace. Any decent human being would have to agree with that.
shira
(30,109 posts)Instead of negotiating reasonably for more from Israel they chose Intifada 2. Again in 2008, an even better offer was rejected by the PLO without a counter-offer. So what makes the PLO a real "partner for peace"? Be clear. It can't be that they're secular, as their charter calls for an Islamist state with sharia law. You think that's secular? That doesn't sound like they want a secular democracy.
And who cares what the PLO wanted in the 1970's? At that time they were claiming Israel WITHIN the 1948 borders for themselves. How do you negotiate with that? Even if we pretend they wanted 2 states at that time, Intifada 2 and the rejection of 2 credible peace offers without counter-proposals in response is proof the PLO isn't a credible peace partner. What's difficult about this?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Israel strengthened the PLO in comparison to Hamas. They brought the PLO back to life by dealing with Arafat re: Oslo, allowing him back into the country, etc. If not for Israel's help the PLO would have disintegrated long ago. And then it was the PLO itself that lost Gaza to Hamas. It was because of the PA's rampant corruption that Palestinians decided to favor Hamas. Not because of anything that Israel did.
If you think that disrespecting Arafat led to his losing respect among Palestinians then the best thing for Israel to do now would be to do the same, even more so to Hamas. In other words, their actions re: Gaza are the best course of action to hurt them politically.
You say that Hezbollah and Hamas are much worse than the PLO ever was? What makes you say that? I would say that they are about the same. But fear of the next terrorist organization is a poor reason to refrain from protecting oneself against current terror groups. Should Israel stop defending itself against Hamas because Islamic Jihad might be even worse themselves? No, of course not.
Why should Israel take actions that have thus far been shown to increase terrorism?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Not to punish but to suspect them as potential threats worthy of security protocols. This isn't retribution, it is security. Should we pretend that no security threat exists because the SECURITY measures are possibly reinforcing bad feelings?
gaelic
(8 posts)According to eyewitness reports, Israeli police officers have begun searching Palestinian vehicles at a Bethlehem checkpoint through use of nausea-inducing chemicals.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)and how is it apartheid?