Dehumanizing settlers – and Palestinians

[shira]

I ask the same question Bret Stephens asked in The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday: “Are Israeli settlers human?” Why was the savage attack in Itamar, in which five member of a family were murdered, couched in terms like “settlers” and “occupied territories”? Do these (albeit inaccurate) epithets directed toward this group in the hills of Samaria somehow lessen the severity of the killings?

How is the murder of a three-month-old baby girl, along with her four-year-old and 11-year-old brothers and her parents, any different from one in Dublin or London? Would the Irish have slept any easier knowing that an IRA man had slashed the throat of a Protestant baby in Belfast, rather than shooting a soldier? I ask this as an Irishman, with childhood memories of daily news reports of murders and bombings.

<snip>

By performing this whitewash, however, we in the West not only dehumanize the “settlers”; we dehumanize the Palestinians. We do this by implicitly expecting a lower standard of behavior than that of the Israelis – and, indeed, ourselves. Whereas one solitary act of terrorism that Israel has suffered – one rocket attack, one stabbing, one suicide bombing – would have Ireland in a state of national emergency, we shrug our shoulders when it happens east of Europe’s Asian borders.

<snip>

Again, bring the issue closer to home: Can my fellow Irish imagine if, after a similarly horrific killing in Belfast, some gleeful, wide-eyed youth gave them a sweet? Would you be, to quote Ireland’s independence leader Eamonn de Valera, dancing at the crossroads in celebration of another strike toward national liberation? And the problem is, there is no “national” in the Palestinian question. What could at least have been said about the IRA is that it wanted a united Ireland and the British to quit Ireland’s shores. There is simply no question that bombings in London or Manchester or Birmingham would have ceased. But, to draw comparisons about Northern Ireland’s Troubles with those of Israel and the Palestinians is specious and misleading. While there are some groups of genuine peace-loving nation-builders among the Palestinians, for the most part the “nationalism” is based on one issue: destroying Israel.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=212475

[shira]

1. How could somebody slaughter Baby Hadas?

<snip>

In the West, too many people view the Fogels as “settlers,” meaning evil Jews and Zionists. As such, CNN reported their murder as a “terror attack” – in quotation marks -- while other media outlets called the murders “militants,” “extremists,” even “intruders” but not terrorists. If the t-word is reserved for targeting innocents, somehow these victims were guilty. When a deranged man slaughtered 6 people and shot another 13 including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, many media outlets immediately politicized the event, blaming the Tea Party. You wisely refrained from that rush to judgment. When Palestinians murder, many of those same institutions rush away from judgment, decontextualizing the event, insulating Palestinian political culture from the crime.

Defining the Fogels only as “settlers” dehumanizes them. It comes from blaming this multi-dimensional, century-long, two-sided conflict on settlements. Someone can advocate withdrawing from territory, including the Fogels’ village of Itamar, without believing this fable. In fact, more peace-loving Israelis should emphasize Jews’ legal rights to the disputed territories, thereby demonstrating their willingness to sacrifice land for peace. In focusing so much anger on Israel’s settlements, you have helped distort the conflict, absolving Palestinians of too much responsibility.

The Fogel massacre occurred during that intellectual abomination “Israel Apartheid Week.” On campuses, which should be centers of complex, critical thought, pursuing truth, hotheads accused Israel of “genocide” – although the Palestinian population has nearly quadrupled since 1967 – and of “apartheid” and “racism” when this is a national conflict. Exaggeration, distortion, obsession, and perversion of core values signify political fanaticism and bigotry. When such simplistic sloganeering and dehumanizing rhetoric becomes epidemic on our comfortable campuses, it is not surprising that it metastasizes into murder in the Middle East.

These Israel-bashers affix “apartheid” and “racist” as all-purpose adjectives to any Israeli action, disconnected from true meanings. The South Africa analogy treats Israel as so reprehensible it should collapse. The Soviet Union and Arab rejectionists invented this racism and apartheid libel in the 1970s, when trying to expel Israel from the UN.

As a skilled wordsmith you know that words can heal or kill, words can elevate or desecrate. If you seek Middle East peace, shouldn’t you try harder to demand that Palestinians use words that promote peace rather than fostering baby-killing?

more...
http://blogs.jpost.com/content/dear-president-obama-how-could-somebody-slaughter-baby-hadas-0

[LeftishBrit]

9. This is wrong on a number of grounds

First of all, it *is* implying that criticism of the settlements is wrong and an incitement to murder. Yes, using such terms as 'genocide' or 'Nazis' on EITHER side of the conflict is hyperbolic and against peacemaking; but 'settlers' is not a dehumanizing term. Nor is 'racist', even if it's inappropriate to what is a nationalist and to some degree religious, rather than racial, conflict.

Secondly: to turn it around, would it be OK to murder babies if one *did* consider their country to be racist/ practicing apartheid/ illegally established? The answer is a big No. The point should be that murdering children is Always Wrong. It is wrong whoever does it. If it is done in support of one side of a conflict, then there is a term for it: it is a *war crime*. It is a war crime, whether the war itself is justified or not, and whichever side of the war does it.

[shira]

17. "Settler" isn't a dehumanizing term except when the term is used to whitewash crimes like this one.

The term is used (for example WRT the Itamar murders) as a way to explain away the crime - it was "understandably" against Jewish settlers and as everyone knows they're not as human as Israelis within the green line, so of course that's the motivation behind the crime. Some media outlets describe the grisly murders as "terror" (in quotes) as though it really isn't b/c after all these were only settlers and it's just Israel defining these acts against innocents as "terror" when it's really not. Nothing is mentioned WRT the huge role PA state-sponsored antisemitic incitement plays in these acts which the PA glorifies, cheers on, and rewards (all in Arabic which means it doesn't exist since it's not in English). The PA cheers on these Samir Kuntar style murders whether they happen within the green line or outside it.

Imagine the Baruch Goldstein massacre being reported as an act against extremist Palestinian antisemites who support terror against Israel. That would be blaming the victims for their own suffering, much like what is happening WRT the evil "settlers".

[shira]

2. Palestinian incitement: Jews receive 'Der Stürmer' depiction

Chairman of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs Brigadier General (Res.) Yossi Kuperwasser will present data on Palestinian Authority incitement against Israel at Sunday's government meeting. According to Kuperwasser, the Israelis are "depicted in caricatures like eastern European Jews in 'Der Stürmer' (a Nazi propaganda newspaper), that you can justifiably attack. Hence, the struggle against them is legitimate."

Kuperwasser said that the Palestinian Authority incitement against Israel has been going on for over a year: "The events of Friday night are, in a way, an expression of the way the Palestinian Authority presents an attitude of hatred and demonization towards Israelis in general and especially towards settlers. These phenomena create a situation where it occurs to someone to carry out an attack like the appalling events in Itamar."

He said that even today the Palestinian Authority clearly states that an armed struggle is the preferable method to 'liberating' Palestine. This was approved by the last Fatah convention which was held in Bethlehem, there has been no change on that issue."

Kuperwasser also presented an example of the Palestinian incitement. "For example, over the last few months a song by an Egyptian singer calling for people to carry out terror attacks has been aired in the Palestinian media.

"The song justifies carrying out acts of Jihad. This also comes up in songs studied in schools in the eighth grade. Palestinian girls sing songs filled with promises of give Israel a severe beating. These are then praised and glorified by the Palestinian Authority," he said.


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4041358,00.html

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

5. Settlers are like Nazis? Settler children are terrorists too, by definition?

That makes murdering them 'understandable', right?

I suspect that you'd regard anyone as racist who thinks this way about Palestinians...

:eyes:

What's racist is the thinking that when Israel kills Palestinians it's Israel fault AND when Palestinians kill Israelis that's ALSO Israel's fault. Palestinians are faultless and unaccountable for their actions.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftishBrit]

7. To be blunt, you sound like a RW hawk on the subject of one of America's 'enemies'

I assume you would object to people who said that 'every adult Iraqi/ Iranian/ (in 1960s) Vietnamese/ (in 1940s) Japanese/ etc.' was a 'terrorist' or 'enemy' and that therefore it is perfectly justified to murder every adult citizen of these countries?

Your statement is coming across the same way.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftishBrit]

10. The confluence of dates is not nonsensical...

because it's an age-old tendency: to regard ALL the citizens of the country with which a country is at war as acceptable targets.

You don't have to be a pacifist to not consider CIVILIANS as acceptable targets.

The Israeli hawks also claim to be 'defending their land'.

Personally I think the settlements should be disbanded yesterday, but that doesn't mean that suicide bombings, or any bombings of civilian targets, are justified.

I am glad that you do at least exclude children from your list of 'terrorists'.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftishBrit]

12. I'm not.

I'm saying that those who do condone it use similar arguments.

[shira]

18. Thousands of settlers are Arab Israelis. Are they terrorists too? n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. how many specifically? do you have any sources on that?

I know that there have been cases where Arab residents of East Jerusalem have applied to live within Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem. But I have not found any information that indicates how many, if any Arab citizens of Israel live in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. If there are any, I would be interested to see a reliable source and figures on how many there are.

[shira]

24. Here are some numbers...

About 13,000 in East Jerusalem or 5% of the Arab population there are Israeli citizens...
http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=203269

As to Arab citizens of Israel living in the settlements, here's one article showing at least 3000 live there...

In 2007, the latest year with available statistics, about 1,300 of Pisgat Zeev's 42,000 residents were Arabs. In nearby French Hill, population 7,000, nearly one-sixth are Arabs, among them students at the neighboring Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Neve Yaakov, with 20,000 people, had 600 Arabs, according to the Israel Center for Jerusalem Studies, a respected think tank.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32702595/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

And here's a video about Israeli Arabs buying homes in the settlements...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZyEmn4wjnY

[shaayecanaan]

25. I assume many such Arabs would be East Jerusalem residents who have taken out Israeli citizenship

it seems ridiculous to refer to such people as settlers.

In fact, the video you posted featured Palestinian East Jerusalem residents, who complained that they could not get planning permission to build their own houses, and so had to buy houses in the settlements.

I have no qualms about this - Palestinians should naturally be able to purchase property anywhere in Palestine. Maybe they should buy a few houses in Ariel - it would probably make the peace process a lot easier to resolve.

[shira]

26. So you're okay with Israelis purchasing property anywhere...

...so long as they're Israeli Arabs.

Not so much for Israeli Jews.

This has nothing to do with Israel or Israelis vs. Palestine or Palestinians. It's about Arabs vs. Jews.

-------

And WRT the OP, only Jews can be evil settlers - not Israelis b/c there are Arab Israelis and by definition they cannot be evil settlers. Jews from the middle East and those who were there prior to 1948 are settlers, but not Arabs.

Let's just drop the pretense, shall we?

[Douglas Carpenter]

27. as long as both Palestinian-Arabs and Jewish-Israelis can buy property and live anywhere they want

in Israel and Palestine. That would be a fair and non-discriminatory.

[shira]

28. That'd be nice but Abbas has repeatedly said not one Israeli (Jew) will be allowed...

...to live within Palestine.

In addition to that, Abbas and the PA have seen to it that Jews living among Arabs in a future Palestine will be all but impossible due to years of PA state-sponsored antisemitic hate that saturates their media, politics, religious organizations, etc.

It's beyond far-fetched to believe the PA would be even half as accomodating towards Jews as Israel has been to its Arab citizens.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. Did he refer to Israeli or Jew? I suspect you may be conflating the terms yet again n/t

[shira]

34. Abbas is a holocaust denier and his PA is grossly antisemitic but for some reason...

...you give him and his cronies the benefit of the doubt time after time.

I wonder why b/c I'm certain you'd never cut Avigdor Lieberman any such slack.

-----------

After Abbas' comments, Fayyad was asked about a Jewish presence in a future Palestine...
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/135325

Fayyad said 'YES' to Jews in a future Palestinian state (only in english of course).

Later, here was his boss...
http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=200923

No Israeli presence whatsoever, neither soldiers or settlers (Jews).

And Erekat...
"Those who are willing to hand over Al-Aqsa to the Muslim countries are talking only for themselves, and do not represent the PA president, the PLO, or the PLO negotiation department. Some say that we will grant the settlers citizenship. We reject out of hand..."
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

------------

Of course, you don't believe most Palestinians in E.Jerusalem want that area to remain part of Israel than Palestine in a future deal, or that most Palestinians outside Israel prefer Israeli democracy to any other democratic rule on the planet, or that the PA media, religious and the political organizations are saturated with the most vile and disgusting antisemitic memes, or that Abbas has a history of Holocaust denial and denying Jewish history within Israel, or that more than 95% of the Arab world surrounding Israel has negative attitudes vs. Jews.....

:eyes:

Why should this be different?

[Violet_Crumble]

35. You didn't answer the question you just got asked...

Did he refer to Jews or Israelis? See, I suspect yr conflating the two yet again....

[shira]

36. He said Israelis but it's obvious, that like Helen Thomas, he meant Jews. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

37. So people can only conflate when it suits you, hey?

And because it suits you to try to portray 97% of Palestinians as antisemites, you doggedly insisted there was no way they could conflate the two terms, and now it suits you to paint Abbas as an antisemite, yr insisting he does do it. That 'logic' makes absolutely no sense at all...

[shira]

38. EDITED: Hard to admit Abbas and his PLO cronies are hardcore, vile antisemites, isn't it?

Watch the first 20 seconds of Erekat in this BBC interview...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm

Can't get more clear than that.

He very clearly and explicitly stated that only Christians and Muslims can become citizens of Palestine, not Jews - at least without converting first.

Erekat reports directly to his boss, the "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas.

=========

In addition, here's Abbas' PA recently denying Jewish history and Jewish claims to parts of Jerusalem...
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=197576

=========

Finally, and to remove ANY DOUBT whatsoever, there's this massive collection of PA state-sponsored atrocious antisemitic filth that is deliberately and routinely aired under the direction of Mahmoud Abbas...
http://www.palwatch.org/

Why would anyone give this bigot the benefit of the doubt?

[Violet_Crumble]

39. Hard to admit that you conflated Jews and Israelis, innit?

I'm not interested in you trying to go off on one of yr silly tangents. You conflated Jews and Israelis yet again, then claimed Abbas was doing it as well, right after you'd spent so much energy and time insisting that there was no way that Palestinians wouldn't conflate them. Yr logic is so incredibly bizarre...

on edit: Erekat did NOT say what you claimed he said at all! He said he doesn't think Palestinian Muslims and Christians would convert to Judaism and he doesn't think Israeli Jews would convert. That's not at all what you accused him of saying.

[shira]

40. EDITED: What, pray tell, was Erekat's point in your opinion in that BBC interview?

Anyone taking 10-20 minutes reading this...
http://www.palwatch.org/

...wouldn't give the PA or its spokesman the benefit of the doubt that they are not rabid, disgusting antisemitic bigots. The evidence is 1000x more damning that anything Helen Thomas said, and you admit she's a bigot.

Why do you give the PA the benefit of the doubt?

[Violet_Crumble]

41. Do you want to try reading the post yr replying to and addressing it?

Why did you falsely claim Erekat said something he hadn't?

on edit: just in case you go back and edit what you said out, here's what you falsely claimed was said by Erekat: 'He very clearly and explicitly stated that only Christians and Muslims can become citizens of Palestine, not Jews - at least without converting first.'

[shira]

44. Okay, I should've written that's what he MEANT, otherwise what else could he be implying?

Remember, Erekat was quoted saying the following...

"Likewise, nobody should agree to Israeli settlers remaining in the Palestinian state. We must not compare a Palestinian whose family lived in Palestine long before Netanyahu or his forefathers arrived, and who is still living there, to a settler who is living on Palestinian soil and maintaining his presence there through coercion, oppression and unacceptable use of force. We must not talk of land swap before we establish our sovereignty in practice...

"Those who are willing to hand over Al-Aqsa to the Muslim countries are talking only for themselves, and do not represent the PA president, the PLO, or the PLO negotiation department. Some say that we will be willing to grant the settlers citizenship. We reject this idea out of hand..."
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

That's pretty damned clear.

I don't know why anyone would wish to give such bigotry a pass.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. You intentionally made a false claim. Good thing I watched the video...

That's pretty damned misleading, imo. Sad and pathetic...

Instead of ignoring what I said to you about how you selectively say that people do or don't conflate the terms Jew and Israeli based on whether it helps in portraying Palestinians as raving antisemites, I wish you'd acknowledge it and not just try to keep on trying to move the 'discussion' away from it...

Uh, what you posted wasn't bigotry, btw.

[shira]

48. No I didn't. What was Erekat implying with what he said? Answer that one please.

And I'm not sure why you feel the need to defend an outright bigot like Erekat.

[Violet_Crumble]

49. What you said: "He very clearly and explicitly stated..."

On watching the video I saw that he didn't say what you falsely claimed he had. Why would you claim he'd 'clearly and explicitly' stated something he hadn't?

Anyway, about what I originally asked. How is it that you so regularly conflate Israel(i) with Jews, eagerly claimed Abbas did the same, yet objected strenuously to the suggestion Palestinians might conflate the terms when it was a possibility such a suggestion might blow a hole in the accusation that 97% are raving anti-Semites?

And for the record, Erekat didn't say anything bigoted. you falsely claimed he had said something he hadnt. Sorry, but even if he was a bigot (which he's not) that doesn't give anyone the right to claim he said something he clearly didn't say.

[shira]

50. Yeah, the implication was clear. So you don't have any idea what Erekat was talking about?

You think whatever he said is not bigoted but you can't offer an alternative interpretation WRT what he was really saying?

I also don't understand what's not bigoted about wanting the West Bank completely emptied of Jews.

[Violet_Crumble]

51. You said he very clearly and explicitly stated

You didn't say he implied something. You very specifically accused him of saying something he hadn't. That's incredibly misleading and I urge everyone to check what you claim in future as this isn't the first time it's happened.

Yet again you totally ignore whats been said to you about conflating Jews and Israel(I) so I'll let yr implication speak for itself.

Nothing that erect has says is bigoted and making misleading accusations about what he said doesn't magically make it so. I don't give a shit how u now want to twist something. I'm interested in what people actually say, not in yr creative interpretations

[shira]

52. Yr playing games. If what Erekat said wasn't bigoted, explain his words.

If you can't explain how what he said isn't bigoted other than just claiming they aren't without any explanation, then why should you be taken seriously?

I doubt you'd give Avigdor Lieberman a pass as you're doing with Erekat.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that very little passes for antisemitic bigotry in your view. I asked you earlier to name one credible organization dedicated to fighting antisemitism that you find credible. I'm still waiting for that one...

[Violet_Crumble]

54. Hey, I'm not the one who conflates Jews and Muslims. You are...

Let me repeat again. You falsely claimed that Erekat had specifically said something he didn't say. And yr still totally ignoring the original point which was that when you accused Abbas of saying something about Jews, he'd actually said Israelis and you were yet again conflating the two terms while in a very recent thread insisting that there's no way Palestinians could do it. Instead of ignoring it and trying to change the subject to something else that's got nothing to do with what's being discussed in this thread, how about you try and focus on what gets said to you. I asked you why you'd falsely accuse Erekat of saying something he didn't say when all it took was me watching to video to see that he said nothing of the sort? Did you even watch that video? Or have you got a link to it from somewhere where someone's claimed that;s what he said and you didn't bother to check it for yrself? Instead of trying to change the subject in what's a very clumsy way, how about answering the questions you've been asked?

[Douglas Carpenter]

55. ""[Likewise], nobody should agree to Israeli settlers remaining in the Palestinian [state]. "

link as you listed above:

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

That is an exact word for word quote that goes without saying - no Israeli settlers . If one want to read anti-Semitism into that - it is quite a stretch to say the least. But let those who are interested read the link you provided and decide for themselves.

and again I would encourage anyone to listen to the link to the video of Saeb Erekat you listed above and they can decide for themselves if there is anything remotely anti-Semitic about it. Again, if one wants to read anti-Semitism into that - it is only because they want to and it is quite a stretch to say the least. But let those who are interested or curious watch the video for themselves:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm

And to quote from one of your other links:

Palestinian prime minister: Jews would be welcome in future state

by Brent Gardner-Smith, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer
Sunday, July 5, 2009

Palestinian National Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said Saturday that Jews would enjoy freedom and civil rights in a future Palestinian state.

Fayyad addressed the subject in response to a question from former CIA director James Woolsey at the Aspen Institute’s Aspen Ideas Festival, which included a day of panels on different aspects of the current state of the Middle East.

snip:

“In fact the kind of state that we want to have, that we aspire to have, is one that would definitely espouse high values of tolerance, co-existence, mutual respect and deference to all cultures, religions. No discrimination whatsoever, on any basis whatsoever.

“Jews to the extent they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine will enjoy those rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs enjoy now in the state of Israel,” Fayyad said.

http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/135325

[Violet_Crumble]

56. Here's a transcript of what Shira falsely claimed to be antisemitic....

Here's what Shira falsely claimed:

'Watch the first 20 seconds of Erekat in this BBC interview...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525....

Can't get more clear than that.

He very clearly and explicitly stated that only Christians and Muslims can become citizens of Palestine, not Jews - at least without converting first.'

Well, that's a load. Here's what Erekat very clearly and explicitly stated, and it's nothing at all even resembling what Shira claimed it was.

Erekat: Look, I am against the one-state solution. I'm against the current situation. I'm a firm believer of the two-state solution. I don't think Christian and Muslim Palestinians will convert to Judaism and become Israelis. I don't think Jews would convert to Christianity and Islam and become Palestinian, but at the same time when I say the two states on '67 is my option, Netanyahu, the PM of Israel that the continuation of settlement activity........facts on the ground is destroying the two-state solution...' (I gave up at about 35 seconds into it after realising there was nothing antisemitic at all about what he said and he was being misrepresented....

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. mind boggling, isn't it?

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Violet_Crumble]

58. Just a bit...

Y'know, there's people in this forum who I tend to disagree with, and I'll argue with them about their interpretation of something, but in most if not all cases with them, I can see to some extent how they've interpreted it the way they have, and they don't ever claim that someone has clearly and specifically said something they haven't. Which is why, despite how annoyed I might get when we argue, I have no doubt at all that they're genuine and not deliberately trying to mislead. In this particular instance, unless the video wasn't watched at all and the accusation was based on something that was said about the video on another site, I don't feel the same way at all...


btw, good to see you in the forum again, Douglas! :hi:

[shira]

62. Come on Douglas, put 2 and 2 together...

The MEMRI quote and the BBC quote together make it perfectly obvious.

"No Israeli settlers" + "I don't think that Jews would convert to Islam and Christianity and become Palestinians" = No Jews in Palestine.

That's ethnic cleansing.

And you have no explanation for what he said on BBC other than to assert w/o justification that it's not bigoted.

So it's not bigoted b/c you say so. No further explanation necessary.

:eyes:

Now if that wasn't enough, then consider all the disgusting PA state-sponsored (Abbas, Erekat) anti-Jew bigotry in Palestinian media and political and religious institutions...
http://www.palwatch.org/

...as well as the fact that Abbas, Erekat, and Fayyad would never say in Arabic to Palestinians, or even better, in front of Hamas that a future Palestine would have no problem accomodating and being friendly to Jews in a future Palestine.

:eyes:

Be serious. The PMW site alone should be more than enough evidence to conclude the PA is extraordinarily bigoted - moreso than David Duke at his worst.

If this all applied to Israel, you guys would be the first to accuse Israel of the most foul and disgusting blatant racism/bigotry.

On edit

Fayyad backtracked a little later...

Before tossing goods made in Israeli settlements into a fire on Tuesday, Prime Minister Salam Fayyad affirmed the dedication of the Palestinian Authority to ridding local markets of the goods, and ridding the West Bank of the settlements entirely.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=252203

An old Arafat trick. Say one thing for Western audiences and the total opposite to an Arab audience.

[Douglas Carpenter]

64. then if that is the case he also advocating the expulsion of Arabs from Israel

when he says that he doesn't think Christians and Muslims will convert to Judaism and become Israelis. But obviously he is not saying either.

Palwatch is an overtly racist right-wing pro-settler hatesite and has no more credibility than Stormfront.

Again I hope everyone listens to the video you posted and reads the entire MEMRI article that you also posted and then decides for for themselves:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm


http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

[shira]

65. Nonsense. He's suggesting (wrongly) that since Israel's a Jewish state, they won't accept...

...new Christians and Muslim immigrants, just as Palestine won't accept Jews unless they convert.

What makes PMW an overtly racist RW website, other than you saying so? And even if they are - not that I believe you'll be able to prove they are - can you admit the PA is about 100x more Rightwing than PMW?

Also, do you have any evidence whatsoever that they have misrepresented the PA at any time in their history?

Lastly, do you really want to go on record here claiming the PA isn't horribly antisemitic?

[Douglas Carpenter]

66. Again I hope that everyone listens to the video you posted and reads the entire MEMRI arfticle that

you also posted and then decides for for themselves:

links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm


http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

In every conflict which springs up between two or more ethnic groups you will hear a lot of unfortunate language from all sides, be it the conflict between, Greeks and Turks, Polish and Russians or Shiite versus Sunni Bahrainis. One could argue that many civil rights groups in America are notoriously anti-White if one focused only on how some words are used. Of course there are many Palestinians who make the same error - just as there are many Israelis who do the same.

Israeli Youth believe Arabs dirty, uneducated

Recent poll reveals 75 percent of Jewish students believe Arabs uneducated, uncivilized, unclean. Similar stereotypes found amongst Arab students toward Jews, but in lower percentages

The poll showed that 75 percent of Jewish students believe that Arabs are uneducated people, are uncivilized and are unclean.
On the other hand 25 percent of the Arab youth believe that Jews are the uneducated.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3350467,00.html

Poll: Israeli Jews shun Arabs

Some 63 percent of the Jewish public sees Arab civilians as a security and demographic threat, and 34 percent of the Jewish public sees Arab culture as inferior compared to Israeli culture. Half of the population, according to the poll, is anxious and uncomfortable when hearing Arabic on the street.

On another front, 18 percent of respondents said they feel intense hatred for Arab citizens of the country.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3231048,00.html

[oberliner]

67. Must you post large font sizes with big spacing?

This is not an infrequent habit of yours.

[Douglas Carpenter]

68. okay

your suggestion is duly noted.

I trust you will speak up against this case of blatantly misrepresenting what was said.

[shira]

69. Douglas, before moving on, do you not believe the PA is horrendously antisemitic?

Please answer that one first.

Maybe you don't believe so, and you believe labeling the PA as antisemitic is bigoted in and of itself?

:shrug:

=====

If you think what Erekat said in the BBC video wasn't antisemitic, then what was he really talking about?

Can you explain that please?

How is anyone to take his statement as anything other than "Jews can't be citizens of a Palestinian state" w/o first becoming Christian or Muslim? What other way is there to understand it?

=====

It looks like you're doing the same thing Violet is doing. If you claim that what Erekat was saying is not antisemitic, that's good enough, end of discussion and no explanation necessary.

:eyes:

Justify your position please.

[Douglas Carpenter]

71. I cannot argue against things he did not say.

If you are taking it that way - you are looking at it through such unbelievably biased eyes - I cannot even conceive of it. How earth can anyone justify words that were not said? He certainly never said that Jews cannot become citizens of a Palestinian state without converting first. He said nothing of the sort. He said the settlements have to go. That's not news. This is getting crazy!


Again everyone should read the article you posted and watch the video you also posted and decide for themselves:

links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm


http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm


.

[shira]

72. So first, PMW is lying and the PA is not horrendously antisemitic, right?

Maybe you believe it's bigoted to claim that the PA is ridiculously antisemitic?

[oberliner]

75. I think you guys got that one covered

Always good to go directly to the source and draw one's own conclusions when such a thing is possible.

I think that is one of the positive things about a site like MEMRI. They provide primary source material that is generally not widely available in English, if at all.

Would that there was as much primary source material available in English from Palestinian and other Arab media sources as there is for the Israeli ones.

[azurnoir]

60. well that's nice and makes for very compelling copy

however Erekat is not exactly in charge of matters on the ground is he and for that matter neither is Abbas, in fact the man in charge is Salam Fayyad whao has stated that the Israeli's currently residing in the West Bank would be welcome to stay on as Palestinian citizens

It always strikes me as odd that it seems some to forget about Fayyad and his role in constructing a Palestinian State

[shira]

63. See #62 above about Fayyad reversing himself in front of an Arab audience...

...as opposed to presenting himself as reasonable before a Western one.

[Douglas Carpenter]

70. oh nonsense he said nothing of the sort - certainly not in the article you linked to

He again spoke of ending the occupation and ending all Israeli settlements inside a Palestinian state and of ending the sale of goods inside the Palestinian Territories that are made on the illegal settlements:

but I will not put words in his mouth - again here is the article you linked to. Again, I hope everyone reads it and decides for themselves:


http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=252203


.

[shira]

73. Oh yes of course, ridding the W.Bank of the settlements entirely = keeping its Jews. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

74. Palestinian prime minister: Jews would be welcome in future state

Not on settlements under Israeli government control - but living as equals. The Palestinians can no more agree to Israeli settlements under Israeli government control inside a future Palestinian state - then if American independence had come with keeping British settlements under the British government control inside the United States when independence was won. That's not so hard to understand. No government in the world would agree to foreign government controlled settlements inside their country. The alternative to removing Israeli settlements under Israeli government control inside a future Palestinians state is a single-state solution. That's also not so hard to understand. Those who support keeping or even expanding the Israeli government controlled settlements inside the Palestinian Territories are blocking the two-state solution and making in the long term a single-state solution inevitable and the only plausible future scenario.

Palestinian prime minister: Jews would be welcome in future state

by Brent Gardner-Smith, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer
Sunday, July 5, 2009

Palestinian National Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said Saturday that Jews would enjoy freedom and civil rights in a future Palestinian state.

Fayyad addressed the subject in response to a question from former CIA director James Woolsey at the Aspen Institute’s Aspen Ideas Festival, which included a day of panels on different aspects of the current state of the Middle East.

snip:

“In fact the kind of state that we want to have, that we aspire to have, is one that would definitely espouse high values of tolerance, co-existence, mutual respect and deference to all cultures, religions. No discrimination whatsoever, on any basis whatsoever.

“Jews to the extent they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine will enjoy those rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs enjoy now in the state of Israel,” Fayyad said.


http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/135325

[oberliner]

76. Are you in favor of the two-state solution?

I thought in previous posts, you indicated that you were not.

Though I may be mixing you up with another poster.

[Douglas Carpenter]

77. IF it is possible, yes.

But it is simply a matter of facing reality that continual settlement expansion is rapidly making the two-state solution highly unlikely. The changing political demographic and political realities within the state of Israel is making the two-solution increasingly politically implausible. Those who want to drag their feet about removing the settlements are making the two-state solution impossible. That is the point I have always tried to make.

I agree with what Professor John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago said about the matter in his address last year to the Palestine Center in Washington D.C.:

It seems clear to me that the two-state solution is the best of these alternative futures. This is not to say that it is an ideal solution, because it is not; but it is by far the best outcome for both the Israelis and the Palestinians, as well as the United States. That is why the Obama administration is intensely committed to pushing it.

Nevertheless, the Palestinians are not going to get their own state anytime soon. They are instead going to end up living in an apartheid state dominated by Israeli Jews.

The main reason that a two-state solution is no longer a serious option is that most Israelis are opposed to making the sacrifices that would be necessary to create a viable Palestinian state, and there is little reason to expect them to have an epiphany on this issue. For starters, there are now about 480,000 settlers in the Occupied Territories and a huge infrastructure of connector and bypass roads, not to mention settlements. Much of that infrastructure and large numbers of those settlers would have to be removed to create a Palestinian state. Many of those settlers however, would fiercely resist any attempt to rollback the settlement enterprise. Earlier this month, Ha’aretz reported that a Hebrew University poll found that 21 percent of the settlers believe that “all means must be employed to resist the evacuation of most West Bank settlements, including the use of arms.” In addition, the study found that 54 percent of those 480,000 settlers “do not recognize the government’s authority to evacuate settlements”; and even if there was a referendum sanctioning a withdrawal, 36 percent of the settlers said they would not accept it.

snip:


The story I will tell is straightforward. Contrary to the wishes of the Obama administration and most Americans – to include many American Jews – Israel is not going to allow the Palestinians to have a viable state of their own in Gaza and the West Bank. Regrettably, the two-state solution is now a fantasy. Instead, those territories will be incorporated into a “Greater Israel,” which will be an apartheid state bearing a marked resemblance to white-ruled South Africa. Nevertheless, a Jewish apartheid state is not politically viable over the long term. In the end, it will become a democratic bi-national state, whose politics will be dominated by its Palestinian citizens. In other words, it will cease being a Jewish state, which will mean the end of the Zionist dream.

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/10418

[shira]

79. If the PM really welcomes Jews in a Palestinian state, then how do you reconcile that w/ PMW reports

http://www.palwatch.org/

Why should any Jew feel welcome in a future Palestine when the PA sponsors the most vile antisemitic filth not seen anywhere else since 1940's Germany?

If you choose to just 'shoot the messenger' and pretend something is wrong with PMW and not the PA - as if the PA isn't the least bit antisemitic even though we all damned well know they are - kindly supply me with at least one example showing PMW falsely or dishonestly portraying the PA. Shouldn't be difficult considering PMW has been around for years and has released thousands of documents and videos showing how disgustingly antisemitic the PA is.

Again, why should any Jew take Fayyad up on his offer, which of course he's never once articulated in Arabic to a Palestinian or Arab audience? Nevermind Erekat and Abbas have recently argued just the opposite (no Jews in a future Palestine).

[Douglas Carpenter]

80. your attempt to dehumanize and demonize the Palestinians as Nazis reflects a fundamental

misunderstanding of the conflict at the most basic level.


Again you have provided no evidence whatsoever that Erekat or Abbas have suggested that there would be no Jews in the future Palestine. Because they have not. That has already been debunked by the links you provided.

Do Palestinians frequently interchange the use of the words Jews and Israelis? Yes, just as others like many of those in Israel interchange words like Palestinians or Arabs in exchange for Hamas or terrorist or other pejoratives. This is common in virtually all conflicts all over the world.

As far as evidence of how the views of the positions of the PA are misrepresented I encourage everyone to watch the video you linked to and read the two other articles you referenced in their entirety at the links you provided and decide for themselves:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/135325

.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Douglas Carpenter]

82. The Myth of Incitement in Palestinian Textbooks

Since 1998, the “Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace” has persistently published reports claiming that Palestinian textbooks incite hatred against Israel and the Jewish people. While the Center claims “to encourage the development and fostering of peaceful relations between peoples and nations, by establishing a climate of tolerance and mutual respect founded on the rejection of violence as a means to resolving conflicts,” its attitude towards the Palestinian National Authority and the Palestinian Curriculum has been described as prosecutorial in nature. Being overly suspicious of their produced reports is well advised given that the Center’s first director, Itamar Marcus, is a right wing Israeli supporter and resident of the West Bank settlement of Efrat.

The Center’s work reveals a deeply flawed methodology aimed at misleading the reader. Furthermore, evidence reveals that the Center is fair, balanced, and understanding towards Israeli textbooks, but tendentious on Palestinian books. In short, the purpose is clearly to indict the textbooks and the PNA, rather than analyze and understand the content of the books. Were the Center to take a similar approach in other countries, including Israel, it could easily find comparable material.

Studies of Palestinian textbooks have revealed that any strong anti-Israel and anti-Semitic material in the curriculum comes from books that the Palestinians did not author and are replacing. (Ironically, these same books that were actually authored by Jordanians and Egyptians were distributed by Israel in east Jerusalem after only removing the cover.) Furthermore, books that were written by the Palestinian Authority in 1994, 2000, and 2001 are free of such material. Information gathered by the EU missions on the ground, as well as independent studies carried out by Israeli and Palestinian academics and educators that have examined the new textbooks, show that allegations against the new textbooks funded by EU members have proven unfounded

The article list the various reports, articles, and studies conducted on Palestinian textbooks exonerating them of inciting hatred towards Israel and the Jewish people:

http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=3060&CategoryId=21

[shira]

83. It goes way beyond textbooks, Douglas. There's no excusing the vile bigotry of the PA.

And no amount of obfuscation from you makes PA bigotry any more palatable.

You can't expect anyone to take you seriously WRT anti-Muslim or anti-Arab bigotry when you refuse to condemn, much less even recognize or admit to, the most blatant, obvious antisemitic bigotry. If what the PA practices isn't antisemitism of the worst kind, then nothing is antisemitic.

Pathetic.

=====

BTW, there's still incitement within Palestinian textbooks...
http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19560&Itemid=86

[Douglas Carpenter]

84. nothing excuses the racism and bigotry that is propagated against Arab and Palestinian people

by people such as the current Israeli Foreign Minister and half the cabinet of the current Israeli government - a government that has publicly ruled out any possibility of removing even one single settler or even halting settlement expansion and whose actions are making the two-state solution absolutely impossible.

You have not provided one single nonpartisan, neutral or unbiased source that the PA is notoriously anti-semitic. The non-partisan sources you provided have in fact shown just the opposite.

I don't doubt that many Palestinians do at times use the word Jews when they should the word Israelis anymore than anyone can deny that many Israelis use the words Arabs or Palestinians when they should use say the word of the specific group they are accusing. This is common in every conflict from the beginning of time that people at times use unfortunate language when they are in a state of conflict. But to see Palestinian or Arab anger against Israel as simply anti-semitism is intellectually dishonest to the extreme and is certainly an impediment to peace.


Again, I would encourage everyone to watch the video you linked to and read the two article you referenced in the links you provided:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9391525.stm


http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3413.htm

http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/135325

.

[shira]

85. More obfuscation, excusing the inexcusable. Tell me Douglas, is this antisemitic....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NINZS7vUnjk&feature=player_embedded

Or this?

http://www.youtube.com/user/pmwvideos#p/u/8/1wVJviDcVBc

See anything wrong with this video?

http://www.youtube.com/user/pmwvideos#p/u/32/qo5fYkByU0k

How about this one?

http://www.youtube.com/user/pmwvideos#p/u/9/vEqeKdjJto0

Here's Arafat...
http://www.palwatch.org/SITE/MODULES/videos/pal/videos.aspx?fld_id=140&doc_id=479

That's what a Palestinian state will look like someday if good people remain silent and ignore or minimize what the PA is doing. And that's just the PA, as Hamas is even worse. Imagine a unity government. Oh happy day!

Liberals rejoice!

:sarcasm:

You do the Palestinians no favors by covering for the PA. The PA is destroying Palestinians and are deliberately perpetuating the conflict.

[Douglas Carpenter]

86. one of those videos used Jew rather than Israeli the others were not anti-semitic

but were indeed videos of a violent resistance movement of a violently occupied people. Liberation movements throughout history have always been violent and the propaganda has always been ugly. There is nothing exceptional about that. This is the real world of a people living under a cruel and violent occupation. As long as there is a cruel and violent occupation there well be a cruel and violent reaction. Using the term anti-semitism to describe this is either cynical and disingenuous or reflects an utterly naive understanding of the real world. Expanding the settlements is perpetuating the conflict and making a future resolution physically impossible - not little snips from tv shows. Israel almost doubled its settlement expansion during the Oslo period from 1993 to 2000 and used the whole Oslo process to cut up and dissect the Occupied Territories into multiple cantons - restricting movement and making life far more difficult and living standards far lower for the vast majority of Palestinians than it was even before Oslo.

Let's remember what the reality on the ground really means:


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621.html?nclick_check=1


“ there is no Palestinian state, even though the Israelis speak of one.” Instead, he said, “there will be a settler state and a Palestinian built-up area, divided into three sectors, cut by fingers of Israeli settlement and connected only by narrow roads."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/world/middleeast/11road.html?_r=14&pagewanted=2&ei=5070&en=22948d4799a34065&ex=1187496000&emc=eta1&oref



Last updated January 21, 2011

Deaths of Israeli and Palestinian Children

TOTALS SINCE SEPT 2000:
Israelis: 124

Palestinians: 1457


TOTALS FOR 2010:

Israelis: 0

Palestinians: 15


http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/remember2010.html

The answer is simple, end the occupation. There is not going to be a more moderate political party then Fatah leading the Palestinians until the occupation ends. That is not going to happen.

[shira]

90. Here's more proof. Try denying this PA antisemitism....

PA television allowing its religious preachers to repeatedly call Jews pigs and monkeys...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=786

Jews praying in sin and filth...
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=758&fld_id=758&doc_id=3108

Jews worry over money...
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=4769

Jews living in Jerusalem are cancer, Jews worse than smallpox, Jews are virus like aids, ...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=760

Jews caused sunami, Jews behind all world catastrophes, behind every conflict on earth...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=764

Jews crucified Palestine, Israelis worse than Nazis, PA television shows painting of armed religious Jews with Palestinian skulls..
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=762&page=2

Quran says Jews are evil, Jews are sadists and liars, Evil Jews occupying Palestinian home, Jews abandoned commandments...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=762&page=3

More Jews...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=762&page=4

(Cartoon) US ruled by Jews...
http://networkedblogs.com/cOrPU

Jew eating dome of rock...
http://networkedblogs.com/cOrPU

Douglas, have you or will you ever condemn what the PLO has done and is still doing to Palestinians and their children? Or is the PLO the 'victim' here and all criticism against it racist vs. Palestinians, as though they are one with the Palestinian people they rule and abuse?

Seriously, what on earth are you attempting to defend?

[Douglas Carpenter]

91. these are reprehensible opinions expressed in interviews- they are not PLO/PA positions

That were cherry picked by ultra-right, pro-settler groups like palwatch. Reprehensible anti-Arab propaganda is in the media all the time Palestinians are constantly dehumanized and demonized. Try denying the intense racism of the occupation and of the current Israeli government. Not that this is any excuse.

Palestinian television stations also carries interviews with Jewish people seeking dialog and understanding. Palwatch and other ultra-right groups don't want people to know about that.

[shira]

92. Bullshit. That's like saying views expressed daily on Faux News are not Fox News positions...

Just like Fox News, the PA/Fatah is without any shred of doubt in total control of their own media.

Like a recent PA sponsored antisemitic program commemorating Arafat's death 5 years later...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYj4Li4Dc_s&feature=player_embedded

You realize leading experts in antisemitism like the ADL, Bernard Lewis, and Matthias Kuntzel have all harshly criticized the PA/PLO for its anti-Jew incitement? Do you think they're partisan and bigoted? If so, which leading experts on antisemitism do you find credible or reliable? Or are they all conveniently rightwing bigots in your opinion?

I suspect you find any criticism of the PA/PLO to be racist/bigoted due to the PA/PLO being "victims".

Here's PMW on the PA teaching the Protocols of the Elders of Zion...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=2067

Mein Kampf is still one of the top best sellers in PA territory.

How does all that happen if the PA's position isn't obscenely antisemitic?

[Douglas Carpenter]

93. you are seriously saying the ADL is not partisan and Bernard Lewis is not a bigot?

come one. Your are not serious, are you? If someone can read Bernard Lewis and not sense a bigot or read the ADL's statements and not at the very least recognize them as partisan on the Israel/Palestine conflict ---- well, I just don't know what to say.

Lots of people believe Arafat was poisoned. I don't believe it. He was sick a long, long time. But I can see how people living under a brutal occupation would be inclined to believe it.

It is unfortunate that both Israelis and Palestinians use the word Arabs or Jews interchangeably in a way that is not at all helpful. Interviews with children who have never known anything but occupation and probably never met a Jewish person except from the occupation forces are hardly the positions of the PA and the PLO. Anymore than the fact that Israeli polls reveal that 75% of Israeli Jewish youth believe that Arabs are dirty and uneducated hold the same position as Labor or Meretz.

Israeli Youth believe Arabs dirty, uneducated

Recent poll reveals 75 percent of Jewish students believe Arabs uneducated, uncivilized, unclean. Similar stereotypes found amongst Arab students toward Jews, but in lower percentages

The poll showed that 75 percent of Jewish students believe that Arabs are uneducated people, are uncivilized and are unclean.
On the other hand 25 percent of the Arab youth believe that Jews are the uneducated.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3350467,00.html

If one wants to end anti-Jewish feelings among Palestinians - stop occupying them and stop doing so in the name of the Jewish people. Those who do these crimes in the name of the Jewish people are the real defamers of the Jewish people. Those who occupy the Palestinian people in the name of the Jewish people are doing more to sell anti-Jewish propaganda than all the propaganda of the most wild extremist of Hamas and Hezbollah could dream up in their wildest imaginations. Jewish people and organization who speak up for justice for the Palestinian are the real heroes in the fight against anti-Jewish propaganda in the Arab world. They are the ones who really change peoples minds and genuinely make a difference.

People like this:

Association for Civil Rights in Israel"

http://www.acri.org.il/en/



http://www.btselem.org/english/Video/

Bat Shalom:

http://www.stoptorture.org.il/en

Binkom:

http://eng.bimkom.org/

Guerrilla Tarbut:

http://www.gerila.co.il/he/Content.aspx?iid=14

HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual

http://www.hamoked.org/home.aspxe

Machscom Watch

http://www.machsomwatch.org/en


Physicians for Human Rights - Israel - link:

http://www.phr.org.il/default.asp?PageID=4


Rabbis for Human Rights is the rabbinic voice of conscience in Israel. - link:

http://www.rhr.org.il/index.php?language=en

Public Committee Against Torture in Israel

http://www.stoptorture.org.il/en

Yesh Din

http://www.yesh-din.org/

.

[shira]

94. As I thought. Leading experts on antisemitism are too "partisan" and bigoted for you...

Does that also go for the folks at the Simon Wiesenthal center?

How about Eli Wiesel?

Robert Wistrich? He heads the Vidal Sassoon Center for the study of antisemitism.

=============

Where do you get that Bernard Lewis is bigoted?

=============

Also, do you realize that the most vile and disgusting Jew hatred is state sponsored throughout the mideast? In addition to Holocaust denial, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf are best sellers in Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

But mentioning this is bigoted in your view? All criticism of Arab regimes is racist?

Or are you okay with criticizing mideast regimes for their gross bigotry? They're not being occupied or settled by Zionists, so what's their excuse, Douglas?

=============

Finally, allow me to throw you some easy questions, okay?

Is Hamas bigoted vs. Jews? How about the Muslim Brotherhood?

Is the UNHRC antisemitic in your view?

[shira]

95. Douglas, do you think Helen Thomas is an antisemitic bigot? n/t

[pelsar]

16. actually we're all terrorist by your definition...

i thought i would just clarify..dont forget that many israelis from pre 67 israel go out during their army service to the west bank and protect those settlers....others may not be there physically but support those who do, via information of logistics....so i would expand you definition of terrorists to include more israeli citizens.

and dont forget whereas there is a draft in israel, its easy to get out of it, so its probably reasonable to assume that israelis in the IDF if not volunteers, they are in the least passivly accepting their own induction.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. "Former members of an organisation that perpetrates terrorism" isn't quite the same as "terrorists".

Most Israelis have served willingly in the IDF, an organisation which, among its other activities, does deliberately inflict violence and suffering on civilian populations with the goal of terrorising them.

But most of the IDF's activities are not terrorism, and most Israelis are not active members of it.

[pelsar]

21. lets not play around with word games....

The israeli population does indeed support the general activities of the IDF..the IDF members for the most part are the more stable, active participants within israeli society and make up the bulk of its present and future "movers and shakers".... i.e. its policies be they internal or external.

Most of the israeli population have family members either serving, served or will serve.....

we surly don't want to misrepresent the culture of israel for some kind of feel good PC version..now do we?

[azurnoir]

22. nope never ever misrepresent you do just fine n/t

[pelsar]

29. i realize i live in a different culture...

where the language is different, the culture is different and i guess most of the posters here have never even visited the region....

nothing like a bit of elitist ethnocentrism to explain why so many believe they know more than me about israeli culture..(if not elitist ethnocentrism it could be that religion thing-they both kind mesh when it comes to the I/P conflict).
______________

but it does have its humorous angles..here, reminds me of "laugh-in" sometimes

[azurnoir]

30. ok so the 'different' culture you live in is Israeli culture right?n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

33. Just curious, but doesn't that also apply to Palestinian culture?

It's just that there's only been one regular in this forum who's lived in Palestine, yet despite the fact that she had first-hand knowledge of Palestinian culture, people from the US who'd never even visited there regularly went on about Palestinian culture (and in the most negative ways possible) and made out they knew more than she did. Isn't that elitist ethnocentrism? It's just that what yr arguing is something that also must apply to the Palestinian, and not just Israeli culture...

[pelsar]

78. the Palestinian culture is a very very different world altogether....

and the ONLY one here that i gave real credit for knowing what was going on on that side of the wall was her (PM).....that sad part was, was that both she and i left about the same time for the same reason, that our knowledge and credibility was "doubted" by many of the posters here, the irony was not lost on us.

I have very little understanding of the Palestinian culture..enough to know, that it has multiple layers and that it makes israeli politics looks like nursery school. But there are two aspects that always come clear with israeli TV interview the "man in the street."

Palestinians interchange israeli and jew as part of their conversation, just as they interchange muslim, arab and Palestinian....which is important if one is to understand what is going on......

and far more fun, is the way they interact with the israelis who are interviewing them, all are at ease, as they make fun of israeli culture....
____________

as far as what they say and how they say it, and what they really mean, i don't go there, but i do understand TV programs, and other media that celebrates their attacks on israelis and or jews. Its not something one should deny nor excuse since it has an affect upon their culture and their education today.

[shira]

4. Palestinians Condemning Murder

Translated:

I've been reporting in the Palestinian territories for many years, and the responses I recorded today in Shchem (Nablus) really surprised me. They seem to show a substantial distance between the PA leadership and regular people. The leadership (he cites Abbas and others) are muttering a condemnation of the murder, mostly not in Arabic and not in front of their public, and then they're condemning Israeli settlements. Nothing new here. On the other hand, I went to Shchem today, and was very surprised. People on the street were willing to condemn the murder unequivocally, in Arabic and in Hebrew, with no embarrassment, in front of the camera, and even identify themselves. . I've been covering the Palestinian territories for years, but this I've never seen before. In the middle of town, publicly, people had no compunctions openly to condemn the murder of children.

At this point one of the two anchormen asks if this is real, or perhaps a one-off encounter with unusual townsmen. Eldar insists: the interviews I've just shown were representative, and I made lots of them, not only the snippets I just screened. Moreover, I didn't find anyone saying the usual things about how it's settlers and Israelis and IDF violence and all that. The atmosphere in Shchem today is that the murder of the Fogel family was a terrible crime.

http://lnk.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleId=787431&sid=182

[pelsar]

87. there has been a change....

the reasons are multitude.....but one of the biggest reasons as far as i understand is gaza and hamas.....The gaza take over by hamas was a watershed moment for many of the Palestinians, both in gaza and in the westbank. Suddenly they've discovered something much worse than the occupation, something far more evil with a much longer lasting time line.....

and that is the hamas and their style of govt, that doesn't even bother with lip service about democracy to appease the west. Today the PA is actively fighting the hamas in the westbank, very much aware that the gaza takeover was not by chance, but a well thoughtout political/miitary plan.

another aspect is probably more down to earth.....with the wall up, attacks on israel from the westbank down to almost zero, the checkpoints are virtually all gone and once again they have freedom of movement, within their own areas. Hence the concept of consequences for ones actions or lack of maybe sinking in. Security, economic and personal is a powerful motivation.

of course one might add the eye opener of the latest uprisings in egypt, and the muslim brotherhood taking the referendum (the secular left wanted a no vote), other attempts at removing their dictators, with a democracy, aren't doing so well, the arab govts firing live ammo into crowds.... (hamas put down their own local protests as well...and trashed the news offices as well.-tunisia being the sole exception)


suddenly they discovered a far worse scenario to the occupation and its all around them.
_______

personally i see this as a silver lining, the first real step away from blind nationalistic land ownership mentality to the first possible baby steps toward the creation of a democracy within the PA.......its coming from some of the "people" the Palestinian people, rejecting what they've been taught and what others have been making excuses for their past actions.

[azurnoir]

88. so the people of gaza feel Hamas is worse than Israel?

how interesting, I am sure as an Israeli you would just somehow know these things, but in reality the people of Gaza were demonstrating for unity until quite recently when Israeli and other Western papers said Hamas claimed responsibility for some recent rocket attacks, JPost as I remember said 10 but the LATimes said 30. and Haaretz said Hamas was being held responsible, so who knows, earlier today 5 Gazans were killed by an Israeli mortar, but yes I am sure Hamas is worse BTW I read on another thread that IDF has a 'pinpoint' automatic return fire system is that true? It seems odd that such a system would pinpoint a family playing football outside their house, doesn't it?

and this rather curious part

"personally i see this as a silver lining, the first real step away from blind nationalistic land ownership mentality to the first possible baby steps toward the creation of a democracy within the PA.......its coming from some of the "people" the Palestinian people, rejecting what they've been taught and what others have been telling them to do."

so is it your contention that the Palestinians have woken up to the fact that wanting their own state is "blind ownership mentality" something quite unlike I am sure the mentality of the Israeli's who chose to reside in the West Bank no blind ownership mentality or nationalism there huh?

[pelsar]

89. some choose to remain blind...

so is it your contention that the Palestinians have woken up to the fact that wanting their own state is "blind ownership mentality" something quite unlike I am sure the mentality of the Israeli's who chose to reside in the West Bank no blind ownership mentality or nationalism there huh?

it appears to me that some have......yes, but your wrong again, because the blindness of landownership that many Palestinians and their supporters have can been seen also with the settlers. I'm surprised you didnt know this.

[bemildred]

13. Three buckets, I would say ...

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[oberliner]

14. Some of the responses on this thread may cause you to choke on your popcorn

Chew sufficiently.

[bemildred]

15. I've been here a long time. nt

[shira]

19. As Israelis have their throats slit, can anyone explain this BBC headline?

PALESTINIAN PRIME MINISTER ADMITS ITS TERRORISM, BBC DOESN’T

Even though many Western media failed to report the attack at all, and those that did (such as the BBC) refused to use the word “terror”, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said he “clearly and firmly denounces this terror attack.”

Hamas Spokesperson Sami Abu Zuhri, welcomed the attack. Fatah’s military wing – the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades – claimed responsibility for the attack.

<snip>

CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN THE BBC’S USE OF QUOTATION MARKS IN THIS HEADLINE?

Even more extraordinarily, for the first 24 hours after the attack, the BBC piece was headlined:

Palestinian ‘kills five Israelis’.

Can anyone explain the BBC’s use of quotation marks in this headline? Are they disputing the fact that five Israelis were murdered?

After all, the BBC’s own article started: “A Palestinian has killed five Israelis in an attack on a settlement in the West Bank, the Israeli military says.”

(Update – the BBC has now changed this headline after complaints.)

The BBC went on to give a lengthy explanation of just how wrong it is for Jews to live in Judea, as if these kids “had it coming”.

I am certainly no fan of the settlements, but this kind of de-humanization of settlers – they are after all human beings – is highly dangerous. One can only imagine the outcry if the BBC employed the same tone about the Arab minority in Israel.

The BBC isn’t interested, of course, either in explaining the Palestinian Authority’s culture of anti-Semitic incitement which leads to such murders, or of Palestinians celebrating the murders afterwards. Other news agencies did report on it. For example, here is a picture from Getty images, or here from The Australian.

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/001177.html

[Violet_Crumble]

31. There's an easy solution if they don't want to be 'demonised'...

And that solution is that Israel removes all settlers from occupied territories and moves them back to Israel. They claim to love Israel so much, yet so many of them appear to be almost allergic to living in Israel...

[Shaktimaan]

42. You sleeping ok?

That kind of post doesn't sound like something you'd normally say. "humph! Well if them animals don't like getting propagandinated and havin them's throats slit then maybe they should move."

You know, back in the late 90's I lived in a neighborhood in Brooklyn that was getting gentrified really fast. When I first moved there in 97 it was about 95% black. two years later is was only 80% or so. One night I'm walking down the street and a bottle smashes open at my feet. "Whitey go home." the kid yelled at me. "I am home!" I yelled back.

That kid had probably lived on that street his whole life. 12-13 years maybe. I'd been there for 18 months and suddenly all the groceries are more expensive and soon he has to move because his family can't afford the rent hike that coming. That kid disliked me. I, and others like me, were stealing him home. If he had a knife instead of a bottle and I got cut would it have been an "understandable crime" from your perspective? Would you have said, "well if he didn't want to get a little cut then he could have just stayed on long island with his parents." what if I grabbed the knife away and in my fear accidentally killed him? Then what? Who's at fault then?

More to the point, I've noticed a lot more black people moving into my current neighborhood. Do you think this means that they don't mind being demonized?

[Violet_Crumble]

43. I'm fine. The OP was complete and utter garbage, though...

And what I said was absolutely correct. Israel needs to bring those settlers back to Israel. Yr anecdotes about racism have got zero to do with Israeli settlers in occupied territory that isn't part of Israel. If the OP is sooo worried about 'demonisation' he should be urging Israel to remove all Israeli settlers from the West Bank. Of course he wouldn't do that because I suspect the settlers returning to Israel is something that he wouldn't have even have thought of...

[Shaktimaan]

45. Yr missing the point.

My analogy holds up pretty well actually.

You might not think these settlers had any right to live there. But according to Israeli law they did. More importantly, according to Palestinian peace treaties they did too. So they had every legal right to be there.

Now I'm sure you disagree. Many people do. But does that mean that this is a suitable response by the people feeling disempowered by them? Murdering children like that? The thing is, crimes like that aren't sparked over settlements. They happened before Israel even had settlements. But back then it was "if they don't want to get killed then they'll leave Israel."

And when Israel HAS withdrawn settlements, does this shit cease to happen? Of course not. Just the rationale shifts a little. The key argument stays the same. "They shouldn't have been there. What did they expect?" well, clearly they didn't expect to get cut into ribbons while sleeping (or whatever).

You could put a Palestinian family anywhere in Israel and not worry about that happening. But if it somehow did occur, would your first instinct still be to blame it on the victim?

[Violet_Crumble]

47. No, I'm not and the analogy was flawed...

It doesn't matter what Israel thinks is legal or not. What matters is that the occupations are illegal under international law and the settlers shouldn't be there. Yr analogy was about racial issues and people who weren't insisting on living on land that's not part of their own country. That's not the situation at all with the settlers. They shouldn't be there, and that should be a no-brainer for everyone, as I can't imagine anyone at DU should be arguing that the settlers have every right to stay where they are...

[shira]

53. It's happening in London too, where the A-Z crowd forbids Jews protesting...

“I am totally shaken and distressed by what happened. One of the most disturbing things is that the people involved, fearing negative publicity…started accusing us shouting, “how dare you come here? It’s a Celebrate Palestine event, you knew what would happen. You asked for it.’ I didn’t think I would ever get to a stage in which I would feel like a Jew in Nazi Germany, and I don’t say it lightly,” reported StandWithUs-UK Coordinator Gili Brenner who was one of the pro-Israel demonstrators.

http://cifwatch.com/2011/03/21/standwithus-press-release-condemning-anti-jewish-hate-speech-and-violent-attack-at-soas/

[Violet_Crumble]

59. Did anyone else notice this guy referring to Samaria?

That's the name used by hardline American (and in this case, Irish) types who don't want a Palestinian state to emerge in the West Bank and who believe the territory is part of Israel, which is why they refer to it as Judea and Samaria....

[azurnoir]

61. I will agree on one point 'settlers' should be referred to as Israelis

It strikes me as odd that those that are commonly only called 'settlers' in both the Western including Israeli press and Arab press only get the recognition of who they truly are when they are killed and then only it seems when the killers are presumed to be Palestinians