Israel and the Palestinians, pt.1
1. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 4:57:19 AM Hmmm.
2. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:00:43 AM
This will require work (I hate work). Like - I'll have to put up links to maps and stuff, right?
Is there a maid to go along with a new thread? Like, to help me clean up clutter and stuff? Or a eunuch perhaps, to search for useful links and put them up?
The Old Days were so useful in so many things. Nowadays you can't have servants unless you're filthy rich.
3. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:04:52 AM
A thought I had this morning: if I were in charge of Israeli PR, I would cease calling the Occupied Territories by that name, or by the biblical Judea and Samaria. I would start calling them the Disputed Territories, or the Former Jordanian Territories. After all, there was never a Palestinian state there (or anywhere), and the only reason the Arab world is so adamant about giving the Palestinians self determination west of the Jordan is... well, you figure that one out by yourselves.
4. PelleNilsson - 7/30/2001 6:17:01 AM
Why not call them simply the West Bank?
Back in January I put together a some notes on the events after WWI which made the Middle East into what it is today. I could dig them out and make them linkable.
For maps this is probably the best site. Most, if not all, of those maps are produced by CIA.
Now I have to go and say quasi-clever things at a meeting. See you later.
5. stostosto - 7/30/2001 7:01:42 AM
Ruster,
regarding Ramallah pictures:
I don't like them. I don't like anyone to be exposed to such brutality anywhere, ever.
But I don't know why you think posting them again and again achieves anything.
They horribly document unfettered hatred and bestiality on the part of the people who committed that crime.
But your cause is not furthered unless you can establish:
1) that this is representative of Palestinians in general
and/or
2) that the PLO leadership incited it and condoned it, if not actually ordered it (you keep mentioning Arafat controlled media's systematic hate propaganda. Could you please provide an example, or, preferably some statistical documentation of how Pal media incites violence. It's undeniably relevant to the understanding of the situtation).
3) that the Palestinians have no comparable ugly experiences with Israeli tanks and bullets and combat helicopters and F-16s.
6. stostosto - 7/30/2001 7:38:58 AM
For your information:
Here is a radio spot announcing a radio reportage called "Three days on the West Bank" produced and broadcasted by Danish Radio.
"In Hebron 40,000 people are held captive by 16,000 Israeli soldiers in order to secure the protection and free movement of 400 Israeli settlers".
(Quoted from memory, I heard it this morning).
The reportage was made in February, broadcast in March, now re-broadcast this evening.
The Danish Radio has a site called Human rights in Palestine (sorry, it's in Danish)
On the front page, it says:
The UN, the EU and the USA criticises Israel for human rights violations in the occupied territories.
We ask:
* Can Israeli compliance with human rights reasonably be demanded?
* Is it possible to criticise Israel without being accused of anti-semitism?
* And what are human rights worth if the West does not dare to ask its friends in Israel to comply with them?
Then some quotes from a human rights report by UN high commissioner Mary Robinson plus a link to a listing of UNHCR reports and documents.
7. stostosto - 7/30/2001 8:08:01 AM
Oh, here it is, that text I quoted from memory earlier (my translation from Danish):
Since the Intifada - the Palestinian uprising - broke out on Sep. 29 of last year, 40,000 Palestinians in Hebron's old part of town H2 have been almost totally banned from exit because 1,600(*) Israeli soldiers are charged with securing the free movement for 400 Jewish settlers.
The Palestinians are allowed only a few hours per week in which to make their shopping. Otherwise the town has been totally closed to the Palestinians.
The Jewish settlers have been able to move freely all during the seige. Palestinian children have been able to hear Jewish children play right outside their doorstep. Most Palestinian schools are closed and have been turned into Israeli military forts.
Here - including a series of pictures
---
(*)Not 16,000 as I said earlier.
8. stostosto - 7/30/2001 8:24:05 AM
A list of links for the benefit of the host, courtesy of the Danish Radio site on Human Rights in Palestine
9. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 9:52:52 AM
sto3:
Could you please provide an example, or, preferably some statistical documentation of how Pal media incites violence.
This is from Palestinian Media Watch. It was written last year, and is very relevant to the Ramallah lynchings. You can either believe the guy or not - there doesn't seem to be any documentation - but I can tell you I saw that (amateurishly produced) footage of the 'rape scene' on TV here:
"This week on "Panorama", Palestinian television's cultural program, a brutal scene from a Palestinian movie was shown in which Israeli soldiers throw a Palestinian girl on top of their jeep and rape her, and then murder her parents. (See part 1).
"The messages on the religious broadcasts by the official Palestinian Authority religious leadership this summer, show that the religious worldview of the Palestinian Authority is identical to the principles of the Hamas. According to the Palestinian Authority religious leadership, Islam's war with the Jews is eternal, the peace agreements are temporary, and Allah will inevitably liquidate the state of Israel. (See part 2).
"One category of the heightened incitement that can be measured is the increase in quantity and heightening of the severity of violence clips on PA TV. As an established daily routine, clips showing violence against Israel and the Israeli army are shown daily between regular programming on Palestinian television. By using pictures of riots from different time periods, which have undergone careful editing, Israeli soldiers are presented as cruel and murderous while the Palestinians, especially the children, are presented as heroic fighters. Broadcasting these clips creates a perpetual warlike atmosphere..."
10. stostosto - 7/30/2001 10:45:43 AM
Rustler,
do you watch Pal TV? Can you understand their language? Do the Pals watch Israeli TV?
To what extent do Israelis and Palestinians understand each other's language?
11. jexster - 7/30/2001 10:52:48 AM
UR certainly closer to the scene than I RP and I cannot speak to the quality of Palestinian reporting. Even your selectively biased impressions are infinitely superior to anything I might add.
I do know however that "they kill our children" is a recurring theme. Widely shared, it is not made up out of whole cloth. There is enough real ground to it without resort to such garbage. I understand that Palestinians generally prefer Aljezeera TV if they can get it to their own news.
This brings up another one of those odd parallels. Partisans on both sides forever complain about the media. Jews rail. Palestians bitch and carp.
12. Jenerator - 7/30/2001 10:56:29 AM
Rustler,
This question may be premature to your current discussion, but what are your predictions regarding Jerusalem? (What do you think will happen? Do you think that the Mosque of the Golden Dome will be destroyed?)
13. rubberducky - 7/30/2001 11:11:02 AM
Re: Message # 2, RustlerPike.
Is there a maid to go along with a new thread? Like, to help me clean up clutter and stuff? Or a eunuch perhaps, to search for useful links and put them up?
you could request a co-host, but i doubt you'll get many takers for a 'maid'.
14. concerned - 7/30/2001 11:20:41 AM
The middle east, particularly the eastern shore of the mediterranean, has always been a cringe producing part of the world for me. Unfortunately, it still looks like it'll get worse before it gets better.
15. jexster - 7/30/2001 11:46:08 AM
No shit Concerned...me too...just got my morning propaganda briefing from the corner terrorist...exasperated I wondered aloud what might happen if every Israeli and Palestinian could manage to go just one week a year without saying something awful whether its true or no about the other.
16. jexster - 7/30/2001 11:48:06 AM
Serendipidously, I read this on my return:
On June 18, in broad daylight, Palestinian gunmen in a yellow taxi overtook Danny Yehuda--the father of three--as he drove on a highway near Homesh...and shot him to death at point-blank range. Taking responsibility for Yehuda's execution was a group calling itself "Battalions of the victim Thabet Thabet." The organization claimed to be avenging the death of Dr. Thabet Ahmed Thabet of Tul Karm, who until last December, when he was gunned down by undercover Israeli forces, had been a dentist and director-general of the Palestinian Authority's health ministry.
In killing Thabet, the Israelis were apparently retaliating for a terrorist attack in the coastal town of Netanya just hours earlier, though nobody has established a connection between Thabet and the fatal explosion. A profile in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz later revealed that Thabet and his wife had been open advocates of peaceful negotiation with Israel; moreover, she credited their ability to have children to an Israeli friend who had pleaded with her to be treated by a Tel Aviv gynecologist. ("The Israelis gave me my life," Mrs. Thabet said, "and then the Israelis took it 19 years later.") In a state of depression following Thabet's assassination, one of his relatives shot and killed Israeli restaurateurs Motti Dayan and Etgar Zeituni, themselves peace advocates, as they shopped for supplies. At Danny Yehuda's funeral--scarcely a week into the cease-fire declared after 21 Israeli youths were blown up at the Dolphinarium dance club--grief-stricken settlers denounced Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for failing to declare war against the Palestinian Authority. "We need another Goldstein," shouted some of the mourners. They were referring to Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who killed 29 Arabs at prayer in the Tomb of the Patriarchs in 1994....
Tribal Warfare
17. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 11:55:36 AM
Pelle:
Why not call them simply the West Bank?
For one thing, there is no added PR value in it. For another, 'West Bank' sounds bad to right-leaning Israeli ears: the terms refers to the West Bank of the Jordan River (as opposed to the East Bank - which is present-day Jordan). This is the territory as viewed from an Arab perspective. From an Israeli perspective, it's on the east.
Otoh, considering that the East Bank (Transjordan) which was 80% of British Palestine was handed over whole to the Arabs (in the 20s I think), it would make some sense to view all of the territory west of the Jordan as a single 'West Bank', which, if the British had chosen to effect a 20-80 split along the Jordan, would have gone to the Jews.
18. Francis Urquhart - 7/30/2001 11:57:20 AM
Barak - Separate or Die
Rustler,
Your thoughts --
"The only answer is to establish a border for Israel in which we will have a solid Jewish majority for generations to come. It might take three or four years to delineate the lines around settlement blocks. At the beginning, I would not dismantle settlements. But in due time, I would take isolated settlements into the settlement blocks or into Israel proper."
19. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 12:00:01 PM
Sto3:
do you watch Pal TV? Can you understand their language? Do the Pals watch Israeli TV?
No, no, yes (though I don't know to what extent.)
To what extent do Israelis and Palestinians understand each other's language?
Most male Pals seem to know Hebrew, while most Israelis do not know Arabic.
20. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 12:26:34 PM
Jen:
(What do you think will happen? Do you think that the Mosque of the Golden Dome will be destroyed?)
You really want to know what I think? Well - I can tell you what I would do and I can say that I believe it will happen but I can't give a very rational prediction of how it would happen, except to say that it would require a very charismatic, messianic-type Israeli leader, moreso than even Ben Gurion (who was a short, bald, evil party functionary). Someone like Herzl.
My view of what would happen is that the Temple Mount would be divided between the Jews (who would get the northern two-thirds) and the Muslims (who would get the rest). This way the holiest Muslim mosque on the mountain - the Al-Aqsa Mosque, built later than Al-Aqsa, on the ruins of the Jewish Temple - would remain in place and in Muslim hands. The golden dome - called As-Sahra if I am not mistaken - would be moved into the Muslim part of the Mount. What exactly would be built in its place - a full-fledged functioning Temple or something more symbolic - would be up to this man, I guess.
I have to be with my daughter now. I am overwhelmed by all these questions and feel the need to answer them all properly yet feel that I can't. I'll keep trying though.
21. Wombat - 7/30/2001 12:41:12 PM
Good job, RP!
22. jexster - 7/30/2001 12:46:23 PM
RP...If you feel up to it..I'd like your comments on the Tribal Warfare article posted above...I have read similar typographies of Israeli politics before but never anything quite like this guy's piece in terms of analyzing the peace process/prospects...
23. jexster - 7/30/2001 12:52:07 PM
And also, I am sure you have heard the Palestinian complaint "The sufferings of the Jews were caused by Europeans. Europeans should be the ones to answer with their blood and their land. Why us?"
From what I can gather, US Palestinians eventually give up this endless refighting of '47. What about those who live back your way?
24. PelleNilsson - 7/30/2001 1:30:42 PM
Rustler
The provisions of the Mandate for Palestine, as agreed at the 1920 San Remo Conference, specifically excluded Transjordan (the East Bank) from the projected Jewish national home. The British didn't "give it to the Arabs", it was Arab.
25. Jenerator - 7/30/2001 2:02:01 PM
Rustler,
The golden dome - called As-Sahra if I am not mistaken -would be moved into the Muslim part of the Mount. What exactly would be built in its place - a full-fledged functioning Temple or something more symbolic - would be up to this man, I guess.
When you say Temple, do you mean David/Solomon Temple? I have a feeling that if and when this happens, your country (especially Jerusalem) will be flooded with Christians thinking that the end is near.
The Temple being rebuilt is one of "the signs" in Biblical prophecy for the second coming of Christ.
Aside from the cultural hatred between the Israelis and Palestinians, I honestly don't know how the holy sites have survived the religious animosity. Are there any sites that if damaged or invaded, you think full fledged war would break out?
P.s. You're doing a great job!
26. jexster - 7/30/2001 2:13:55 PM
I totally agree with Kinsley's piece. It would have been flawless save for his statement about Liberal outcries against MAD during the freeze. The point being that there was nothing whatsoever in the Freeze proposal itself that would have changed MAD inasmuch as the freeze levels were many times higher than the level required for mutually assured destruction.
He should have dropped a footnote saying what I said and what Jay said. MAD in the 1980's was really about first strike capabilities and the corrolary he mentions later in the article about absorbing a first strike.
But that goes back to the fundamental charge of freeze advocates - instability of deterrence and spiraling arms races which in turn caused greater instability leading to greater spending etc..
Nuclear Arms Control Theory of that time - "Apes on a treadmill."
27. jexster - 7/30/2001 2:14:43 PM
OOPS sorry....am in a runnign battle with FU on AP thread...hit wrong link
28. Andonly - 7/30/2001 5:02:39 PM
From Ha'aretz:
On November 12 last year, when the Palestinian Intifada was already in full swing, Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, came on an official visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories. Mary Robinson was already well-known in the past, having served as the president of the Republic of Ireland. Whether because of her position in the UN, or for other reasons, she had a reputation as being anti-Israel. ...
While Robinson was visiting the area of Hebron and Kiryat Arba, those accompanying her proposed that she visit the Jewish neighborhood of Tel Rumeida, in the Israeli-controlled section of Hebron. Her bodyguards were provided by the UN force in the area known as TIPH - Temporary International Presence in Hebron.
On the way, shots were fired at her convoy. One tracer bullet hit the vehicle that was accompanying Robinson. The travelling party's immediate assumption was that the shots had been fired by Israelis, apparently Jewish settlers who were trying to target the important guest. ...
cont.
29. Andonly - 7/30/2001 5:02:56 PM
The remnants of the bullet were extracted from the UN vehicle and sent for ballistic tests. Ironically, these were performed by the ballistics department of the Danish police. The UN report on the ballistic tests was recently published, and the findings indicate that the bullet that hit the vehicle was fired from an AK-47 Kalachnikov rifle. This is a weapon with which Palestinians, including members of the security forces, are armed. Such weapons are not used by IDF soldiers or the Jewish settlers.
...[TIPH] personnel in the area [also] conducted a reconstruction at the site of the shooting, together with the Danish experts. The report containing the results of the reconstruction "clearly designated the origin of the shot: a house in the H1 area, north of Bal Al-Zawiya." A reminder: H1 is the area under Palestinian control in Hebron. From all this, it should have been concluded that those who fired at Ms. Robinson's convoy were Palestinians.
This concludes the affair, except that what is now missing is a statement by the honorable lady, Mary Robinson. More precisely, an apology for the blame she cast on Israel. But this has not happened. ...
30. Andonly - 7/30/2001 5:05:12 PM
Pike, have you considered copying recent pertinent posts to this thread from International?
31. stostosto - 7/30/2001 5:27:29 PM
[...] ballistic tests. Ironically, these were performed by the ballistics department of the Danish police.
Why "ironically"?
32. Andonly - 7/30/2001 5:30:47 PM
"Ironically" because of the recent Danish brouhaha over Israel's ambassador, which the article goes on to complain about.
I should have linked the rest of the piece, sorry...
33. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:34:19 PM
Ando:
Pike, have you considered copying recent pertinent posts to this thread from International?
Like which ones? I think we'll have enough posts here soon enough... but maybe you have some specific ones in mind?
34. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:37:03 PM
Jen:
Are there any sites that if damaged or invaded, you think full fledged war would break out?
Definitely, if any of the Muslim sites on the Temple Mount were moved or demolished by Israel, the result would be a furious, total regional war.
35. Andonly - 7/30/2001 5:38:43 PM
"UN Human Rights chief owes Israel an apology; Danes owe one to ex-Shin Bet head"
The author makes it sound like the Danish objection to Carmi Gillon is still playing itself out. I was under the impression it had been settled.
What sayeth thou, Sto?
36. Jenerator - 7/30/2001 5:40:05 PM
What about Jewish holy sites?
37. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:42:50 PM
Jex:
RP...If you feel up to it..I'd like your comments on the Tribal Warfare article posted above...
Very acute analysis of Israeli society (the 'Five Tribes'). I'll put up a link to it, I think. The description of the deal proposed in Camp David is also good.
The guy's conclusion in the end I disagree with. He sees us as becoming a 'nice Jewish boy' country somehow. Problem with that is the neighbors don't let nice Jewish boys live. This is not a nice neighborhood and you don't survive here by being nice. It's like Woody Allen evicting someone from his Harlem apartment and then expecting to stay alive just because he smiles to the neighbors on his way to his limo every evening. Matter of fact, it's even more hopeless than that.
38. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:47:31 PM
Jen:
What about Jewish holy sites?
Well, they tore apart Joseph's Tomb in Shchem (Nablus) and we didn't start WW3. There's not much to tear apart, now is there? The Romans already tore apart and burned almost everything we had.
Would war break out if they somehow tried to tear down the Western Wall? I guess it would, but I can't see how that would happen in any case, since it's in our hands. Also, tearing down the Wall would probably adversely affect the stability of the entire Temple Mount, which is holy to Muslims as well, of course (as are most Jewish shrines, come to think of it).
39. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:51:54 PM
Jex:
I am sure you have heard the Palestinian complaint "The sufferings of the Jews were caused by Europeans. Europeans should be the ones to answer with their blood and their land. Why us?"
Well, that's one Pal argument that has absolutely no chance with us Jews since the Holocaust. We don't expect or want anything to do with European soil - soil that holds six million tortured Jewish corpses.
40. stostosto - 7/30/2001 5:55:45 PM
Ah.
Yes.
We seem to have established quite a reputation with the Israelis recently.
I do think Gillon (the incoming ambassador) is at least partly to blame himself, though. His fault: Honesty. He publicly said he had been responsible for Israeli security using "moderate physical pressure" when interrogating terrorists (justifying it by the necessity to extract information that could save innocent lives).
This left the playing field wide open for human rights activists to bring the legal machinery down on him.
There is that awkward UN convention saying "moderate physical pressure" is torture; and that torture can never be excused by anything, be it war, civil war, state security or whatever.
This, goes the view of the anti-Gillons, left them with no choice but to file criminal charges.
Why not object to ambassadors from countries with worse human rights records than Israel? Well, they haven't publicly confessed to torture, and the burden of proof is impossible to lift.
Gillon's case, by contrast, is clear-cut. Exonerating him would amount to giving preferential treatment to Israel somehow considering Israeli justifications for torture reasonable even though the convention explicitly says there can be no justification under any circumstances. Equality under the law, you know. We do mean to comply the UN conventions that we sign, don't we? (Israel has signed it too, by the way).
I actually believe the legal(istic) case is water tight. However, as I have mentioned before, in this case it's trumped by diplomatic immunity conferred by another convention. Which does make sense, imo.
41. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 5:56:24 PM
FU:
Barak: "The only answer is to establish a border for Israel in which we will have a solid Jewish majority for generations to come. It might take three or four years to delineate the lines around settlement blocks. At the beginning, I would not dismantle settlements. But in due time, I would take isolated settlements into the settlement blocks or into Israel proper"
I don't see how anything like that can be done without a strong consensus in Israel, that would make it possible to shove such an arrangement down the Right's throat. There is no way to achieve such a consensus around a withdrawal unless it is accompanied by a very real and convincing peace treaty -which the Pals are unwilling to give. So it's all theoretical. Let's not forget this man was whupped mercilessly at the polls.
42. stostosto - 7/30/2001 6:10:17 PM
Andonly,
the case is settled, Gillon has immunity, no action will be taken against him by Danish authorities. He may be exposed to milk-hued rears or equivalent folksy actions, though.
But your columnist knows nothing:
What is worrying about Denmark is that the radical left in that country has succeeded in extracting anti-Semitic sentiments from the national hiding-place. Perhaps more suited to Denmark is the friendship of the radical Pol Pot, who is admired there by the left.
Rubbish.
They are not out to get Carmi Gillon, they are out to get Israel. Carmi Gillon, who never demanded that torture be carried out even though the Danish press has said so, is too good for Denmark.
Nonsense.
Some may be out to "get Israel". But that's out of sympathy with the underdog Palestinians. You can't automatically "anti-semitise" everyone who thinks the Palestinians have a just cause.
Because you know what? They do.
And Gillon has never said he condoned torture? That's the first time I've read that anywhere.
43. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 6:15:29 PM
The Middle East dispute boils down to this: the Arabs want everyone to zoom in on the small strip of land west of the Jordan, and on the fact that Israel has been ruling the West Bank by force since 1967. If this were the whole story - the Arabs would be in the right and we would be in the wrong, no doubt about it.
But one zooms out, in territory and time, and sees a completely different picture. Zoom out to the entire Mideast and Israel is a tiny sliver of land surrounded by endlessly huge Arab territories, some of which are the world's worst 'rogue states', and are declaredly developing weapons of mass destruction with intent to use them upon us.
Zoom out to a timeline that begins in the early-to-mid-20th century and you see a homeless people, savaged and raped like no people ever was, returning to its ancestral homeland to reclaim sovereignty and control over its destiny. You see - a bare three years after the crematoria at Auschwitz closed down - the entire Arab world swooping down on the Jews that remained - some of whom were Auschwitz survivors - with intent to 'throw them into the sea'. Then you see a similar attempt 20 years later, in 1967.
This is how the Pals came to be occupied. The settlements were born out of a feeling Israel's leadership had that there was no way anyway the Arabs would let us live in peace. If that is the case -and if the Arabs are going to find any excuse to come at us every decade or two - what do you lose by holding on to the West Bank? Nothing, really. If we gave every inch of the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinians, would we have peace? No. We would have war, and the Palestinians would be lobbing Syrian-supplied katyushas into Tel Aviv.
44. stostosto - 7/30/2001 6:22:54 PM
Hey, Rustler, that's not bad, actually:
Judging this dispute all depends on the zoom.
45. RustlerPike - 7/30/2001 6:24:00 PM
You can't automatically "anti-semitise" everyone who thinks the Palestinians have a just cause.
Because you know what? They do.
Yes, they do - but only if taken out of every possible context. And let me give you the Israeli corollary to the Palestinian 'why don't the Europeans give the Jews a state': why don't the Arabs give the Palestinians a state?
Isn't that a much more realistic and workable solution to this problem? Think about it: Abdullah steps down, the Pal majority in Jordan takes over in democratic elections, the rich Arab states and the West finance repatriation of Pals from the West Bank and Gaza and the various refugee camps in Lebanon etc. to Jordan, the new Palestine - problem solved, everyone lives happily ever after.
46. stostosto - 7/30/2001 6:25:15 PM
I completely fail to see what advantages the settlements have given Israel, though. Now, you are stuck with them.
47. stostosto - 7/30/2001 6:33:24 PM
Rustler, your "every possible context" is a dizzying mega-zoom of 2,000 years. One which you undertake with truly impressive, even convincing, unswervedness. But one which is and must be rather difficult for the Palestinians to undertake. And one which surely is without parallel anywhere else.
Hell, the East Germans weren't too happy when "Wessies" turned up and demanded their rightful property back -- and that was only 40 years.
48. stostosto - 7/30/2001 6:38:02 PM
Isn't that a much more realistic and workable solution to this problem?
"realistic and workable"? As opposed to just, you mean? But yes. Israel isn't going to disappear, so you do have a point. Its "realism" and "workability" depends, however, on whether the Palestinians can be made to consider it "just" as well. As any conceivable solution does.
49. Erinys - 7/30/2001 8:32:12 PM
RustlerPike, I grinned when I saw this new topic on the top of the list this morning.
If I was at war with someone, I'd want to know their language, as a devious tactic. What's your take on that, RP? Are you at a disadvantage, not knowing Arabic? Or does it make you feel 'superior' that more of them have learned your language, instead?
Going back to read more of the thread...
50. Andonly - 7/30/2001 10:57:35 PM
""realistic and workable"? As opposed to just, you mean?"
The Palestinian notion of justice in this case, and the Israeli notion of justice, are not the same. And unfortunately there is no court equipped to decide what is "just" here, other than the court of Palestinians and Israelis. As for the long zoom vs. the close zoom, you don't need a 2,000 year old vantage point from which to recognize that Israel had to come into being. 75-100 years will do, and if you actually look at that history--not just sound bites from it--you'll see there's ample fault on the Arab side to place the Palestinian's plight as much in Arab laps as Zionists'. Pike is right: were there real justice, Arab nations would set about absorbing some refugees. If there were justice, they'd do it in exchange for a real peace settlement, and like Sadat they'd take the lead in this rather than agreeing to it at Taba only when a) it was already manifestly too late (although I confess I still held out hope at that point), and b) they had gotten genuinely scared of the possibility of a regional war.
Now, we are where we are. I maintain that, unless Arafat does a sudden and dramatic turnaround, he will not be the Palestinian leader with whom Israel signs a final status agreement.
51. Andonly - 7/30/2001 11:17:21 PM
I do agree with you, Sto, that Ze'ev Schiff is over the top: "Some may be out to "get Israel". But that's out of sympathy with the underdog Palestinians. You can't automatically "anti-semitise" everyone who thinks the Palestinians have a just cause." On the other hand, it makes you wonder why the Palestinian cause is so readily perceived as underdog-ism (if you will).
Do Danes consider the Catholics in N. Ireland underdogs? Or is it the Protestants? Are Palestinians an oppressed regional minority, or are they the grossly manipulated proxy warriors of an oppressive majority?
"Because you know what? They do [have a just cause]."
Which just cause is that? The one which requires a state and self-determination? Or the one that seeks to reclaim Palestine "from the river to the sea"? The one which demands equal access to water resources and freedom from domination by the IDF? Or the one that insists on denying Israel the means to protect itself from this very people and its allies sworn to destroy Israel (Iraq, Iran, Syria)? How about the one which claims that the Wailing Wall is not actually a Jewish artifact at all?
Frankly, I don't know how you can believe maximalist "justice" isn't running the Palestinian show right this minute. Saying the Palestinians have rights is all well and good, but there are rights and then there's the wedge. Which is which depends on who's making and keeping agreements; Arafat is discredited.
52. Andonly - 7/30/2001 11:24:54 PM
Incidentally, did anyone see that Diarist by Martin Peretz in The New Republic last week, which quoted a translation of the "moderate" (and now dead from heart failure) Jerusalemite Faisal Husseini's interview in Al Hayat? He likened the Oslo process to a "wooden horse" out of which the intifada, and ultimately the complete reclamation of Palestine, would be accomplished.
Some moderate.
53. Andonly - 7/30/2001 11:28:54 PM
Oh, and a little noted development: in April, Douglas Feith was appointed Undersecretary of Policy at the Defense Department.
This man is as hardbitten, as unsentimental, as hard-core pro-Israel, pro-Likud as they come.
54. IrvingSnodgrass - 7/30/2001 11:38:13 PM
Andonly:
Re Message # 28 and Message # 29:
This concludes the affair, except that what is now missing is a statement by the honorable lady, Mary Robinson. More precisely, an apology for the blame she cast on Israel. But this has not happened. ...
Mary Robinson is not the sort of person who should be doing the job she is. She loses objectivity easily, decides one side of a dispute is the villain, and ignores all evidence to the contrary. Her handling of the East Timor situation in 1999 was appalling, and taught me that this is a woman who should never be trusted with any responsibility on the international scene. So it doesn't surprise me at all that she has decided the Israelis are in the wrong, and that she sees all evidence as pointing that way.
55. Andonly - 7/30/2001 11:38:46 PM
Some Feith links, ca. Netanyahu admin (Feith himself was a Reagan State Dept official):
Washington Times article
Detailed interview with Feith about Mideast
56. Andonly - 7/30/2001 11:57:59 PM
Correction, Defense Department official.
Irv, I didn't know Robinson had been in East Timor.
It was clear to me at the time of the survey she did in the territories/Israel that, based on anecdotal stuff I'd read and heard, something was not quite even-handed about Robinson's conclusions, but I saw not one press report question a single assertion made in her report. None outside Israel, that is. Plus, the shooting made Israel look dreadfully bad.
I am convinced now that the mood of the international press is part of what is driving Israelis into a corner, politically. They do not care what the Europeans think, because nearly all that's coming out of Europe publicly is Israel-bashing, which virtually no one I've spoken to from Israel thinks is not at least partially motivated by old-fashioned European antisemitism.
57. Andonly - 7/31/2001 12:23:07 AM
The American press is no better, by the way. Everything is done by innuendo and conflation of data--OK for internet polemic, but not good for reporting, IMO.
(There are fair reporters and analysts out there, of course--I mentioned the FT's Avi Machlis and Gareth Smyth in Intn'l--but they're in stark competition with the sensationalists who despise Israel.)
58. IrvingSnodgrass - 7/31/2001 12:28:02 AM
Andonly:
Yes, Robinson was in East Timor briefly during the hand-over... long enough to antagonize everyone. In fact, the situation sounds eerily similar to the Israeli one... she was "not quite even-handed" (a good phrase), she chose the popular villain, and spoon-fed her ignorance to the international press, which didn't squawk.
The Western media and the Western public always looks for a "bad guy" in any situation, and it's never quite that simple. It's very easy (and comforting) to blame Indonesia for East Timor (rather than the Indonesian military, which defied the president and commited atrocities along with the East Timorese "militias"), and it's easy to blame Israel for the Palestinian situation... these cheap shots play on existing prejudices, and are swallowed wholly.
59. RustlerPike - 7/31/2001 2:12:59 AM
This is what I'm trying to say.
60. RustlerPike - 7/31/2001 3:46:19 AM
I put over 90 minutes' worth of work and early-morning energy into that. I simply cannot keep up this pace of participation. I shall be working and doing other pressing stuff until Thursday. Please behave while I am gone. I don't want to find bubble gum on the chairs and sperm gobs on the keyboards when I get back, OK?
Cya. Be back Thursday or Friday, max.
61. IrvingSnodgrass - 7/31/2001 3:58:57 AM
Nice graphic, Rustler... makes your point well.
62. stostosto - 7/31/2001 6:35:58 AM
Ando #56
...nearly all that's coming out of Europe publicly is Israel-bashing, which virtually no one I've spoken to from Israel thinks is not at least partially motivated by old-fashioned European antisemitism.
And that's a reflection - understandable, of course - of paranoia and seige mentality in a nation born out of the Holocaust. It's also quite convenient wouldn't you say? Providing a blanket dismissal of any criticism.
My experience is people in Europe, certainly in Denmark, really don't have much emotional stake in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. (And if they do, it would most likely be pro-Israeli, a feeling reinforced by anxiety over the rising number of militant muslims here).
But it looks as if one of the parties is constantly denied their right to a state, and that doesn't look right.
You seem to agree with this. Your beef with PLO/Arafat is mistrust that they will ever settle for less than throwing Israel into the sea, hence making deals with them impossible until they realise they'll never get that. Ever. And you could argue, I suppose, that the outside world, including the Euros ought to put more pressure on the PLO in order to make them realise it. There's something in that too.
But now we're getting into a lot of details. It's much easier - and a lot less convolutely conspiracy-minded - to take the PLO at face value. Arafat acknowledged Israel's right to exist in 1988, as you may recall.
And, speaking of "making and keeping agreements" there is always the Israeli settlements...
63. stostosto - 7/31/2001 6:41:58 AM
I am not sure Rustler's graphic makes his point well. Unless it is that Israel brutally holds the Palestinians hostage while the Arab neighbours are trying to come to their rescue...
But it's a nice display of illustration and Flash skills.
64. stostosto - 7/31/2001 7:24:24 AM
Ando:
were there real justice, Arab nations would set about absorbing some refugees. If there were justice, they'd do it in exchange for a real peace settlement, and like Sadat they'd take the lead in this
That does sound like a good idea. A big part of the problem in the Middle East is the latent political instability and social strains in the Arab countries which is checked by authoritarianism, oppression, and the occasional populist sound bite - like Bashar Assad's remarks on Jews during the Pope's visit.
Corruption, incompetence, weakness, failure to achieve economic development, lack of democracy, lack of prospects for the young, breeding grounds for extremism. If only Israel's neighbours were sensible Scandinavians...
65. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:25:42 AM
"And that's a reflection - understandable, of course - of paranoia and seige mentality in a nation born out of the Holocaust. It's also quite convenient wouldn't you say? Providing a blanket dismissal of any criticism."
I agree completely. Except that you seem to think that antisemitism is gone, and that now all that remains is the Jewish paranoia that excuses criticism. Yet the anti-Israel bias of much news reportage of events in the ME mankes it impossible to conclude that no vestige of antisemitism exists. You can cite underdog-ism, and you'll surely be right (I would add European guilt over colonialism), but when you get right down to it people, including reporters, harbor assumptions they don't say out loud. And one such asumption sems to be that Israel's demise would be a nice capstone to the End of the Colonialist Era, and after all Jews are used to suffering, and anyway they deserve it for having become Zionists.
66. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:34:50 AM
"And you could argue, I suppose, that the outside world, including the Euros ought to put more pressure on the PLO in order to make them realise it. There's something in that too."
Gee thanks for that concession, but I wouldn't necessarily advocate Euro pressure on Arafat. The potential for backfire is pretty high. The Pals need a new leader, period. It's their show, they have to do what they're going to do.
"But now we're getting into a lot of details."
By all means, let's not let too many facts get in the way of preconclusions. Too many details. Must keep things easy.
"It's much easier - and a lot less convolutely conspiracy-minded - to take the PLO at face value. Arafat acknowledged Israel's right to exist in 1988, as you may recall."
The PA did not. It was a tactic, as I've already said, and which anyone who has followed events knows very well. Meaningless.
Anyway, you should read the second Feith link above. In retrospect, it damns the Netanyahu admin, it's hair-raising politically, but quite informative about the real nature of the negotiations process. (In short: people who take such things at face value are woefully deluded.)
67. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:36:14 AM
"If only Israel's neighbours were sensible Scandinavians..."
Heh! But they aint. All day long, too.
68. Andonly - 7/31/2001 9:45:34 AM
"The Western media and the Western public always looks for a "bad guy" in any situation, and it's never quite that simple. It's very easy (and comforting) to blame Indonesia for East Timor (rather than the Indonesian military, which defied the president and commited atrocities along with the East Timorese "militias"), and it's easy to blame Israel for the Palestinian situation... these cheap shots play on existing prejudices, and are swallowed wholly."
Irv has it right.
Frankly, I think the West is sick of seeing Jews as victims. Enough of the Holocaust already, and aren't Jews doing well now? Look, they're rich in America and prosperous enough everywhere else, no one is trying to shove them into ovens anymore.
So it's easy (and detail-free) to assume the mideast is no different, that all the Palestinians want is a country and some redress for past wrongs.
Unfortunately, the Palestinians who want that are not the ones Israel must worry about, or deal with, or rely on to keep commitments.
69. Andonly - 7/31/2001 9:55:47 AM
Here's an example of what Arabs tell each other (it's an Arab Free Press report linked to Lebanon Wire, out of Beirut). It's followed by what is obviously the correct story.
Beirut, militants blast Jewish temple stone laying
BEIRUT, July 30 (AFP) -
Lebanon, and militant groups Hezbollah and Hamas denounced Monday the Israeli government's "backing" of Jewish extremists who symbolically laid a cornerstone for a third temple by the gates of Jerusalem's Old City.
"The Israeli government continued to try to impose what it considers as a solution, with violence and force and the backing of extremists in their aggression against the Palestinians and the holy" al-Aqsa mosque compound, said Prime Minister Rafic Hariri.
Hariri called in a statement on the "international community to deter the occupation (Israel) from its plans to bury the Arab and Islamic identity of the al-Aqsa mosque."
On Sunday, a small group of extremist Jews laid the cornerstone in a brief ceremony but then removed it again, stirring a storm of protests in the Arab world and clashes between Palestinians and Israeli police.
Hariri also reminded that Israel had "refused a recommendation, backed by the Arabs and the international" community, at the recent summit of the Group of Eight leading industrialized nations in Italy for international observers to monitor the situation in the Palestinian territories.
[Note that there is no mention of the UN videotape fiasco here, or the fact that rebels in Macedonia have operated with impunity under the noses of UN peacekeepers there...]
A Hezbollah statement said the "enemy government has again carried out an ugly crime against Islamic holy places through its backing to Zionist gangs who desecrated the al-Aqsa mosque."
cont.
70. Andonly - 7/31/2001 9:56:00 AM
"The pretext of laying the cornerstone to build the alleged temple is part of relentless attempts to fulfill the Zionist dream of removing this Islamic holy place and Judaize Jerusalem and erase its Islamic identity," it said.
"The Zionists had to back down before the uprising of the Palestinian people and its revolutionary upheaval to defend its sacred places -- a fact that asserts the vitality of this people and its great sacrifices," it said.
[See following report to learn what "had to back down" refers to.]
Hezbollah pledged to "stand by the Palestinian people and we will not remain idle before the danger threatening Jerusalem."
"We call on the (Islamic and Arabic) nation, with all its forces, parties and governments to be up to the confrontation at this historical moment because the Zionists will do it again if they find laxity toward their crime," it said.
"Jerusalem is the responsibility of all of us, and defending it is a duty for every Muslim and Arab, and this can only take place if we stand together with the sacred uprising in Palestine," it said.
Meanwhile, some 500 veiled women militants of the Shiite radical Hezbollah gathered at the Fatima gate, at the border with Israel, to warn Israeli Prime Minister Ariel "Sharon not to play with fire because the Katyusha is awaiting you."
Hezbollah continues to spearhead the guerrilla war against Israeli forces in the Shebaa Farms disputed border area, since the Jewish state pulled out its troops from southern Lebanon after 22 years of occupation.
A group of Hezbollah women also threw stones on the other side of the border, as some of them waved Lebanese, Hezbollah and Palestinian flags.
In the Rashidiyeh Palestinian refugee camp, near the southern port city of Tyre, some 1,000 followers of the radical Islamic Palestinian group Hamas demonstrated to protest against the "aggression" against the al-Aqsa mosque.
71. Andonly - 7/31/2001 10:07:35 AM
[Not mentioned in Haberman's account is the fact that Palestinian demostrators refused to leave after police contained their rioting, and so there was a standoff, which is what Hizbullah means by "had to back down". The following is from the NY Times.]
Melee at Jerusalem's Most Sacred, and Explosive, Site
By CLYDE HABERMAN
JERUSALEM, July 29 — Jerusalem and its sacred places returned to the center of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict today when Palestinians on an elevated Muslim compound hurled stones at Jews praying below, provoking a battle with the Israeli police.
Hundreds of Israeli officers in riot gear rushed into the Aksa compound after a barrage of rocks, some quite large, sent Jewish worshipers fleeing from the Western Wall. The attack came on a day when Jews traditionally gather there to mourn the destruction of two ancient temples.
The police fired stun grenades and tear gas in skirmishes with scores of young Palestinians on the elevated plateau, referred to by Jews and many Christians as the Temple Mount and known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary. About 15 Israeli officers and more than 30 Palestinians were reportedly injured, none critically.
Compared with past clashes at the site, which over the years have sometimes ended in considerable death, this one could be deemed mild. What mattered was that it happened at all. The plateau is ground zero for conflicting religious sensibilities, and violence there produces reverberations that can be at least as loud as the boom of a stun grenade.
Adding to the tensions today was the fact that the current conflict had started at Al Aksa, although for much of the 10 months that have since passed, Jerusalem's Old City has been relatively trouble free.
cont.
72. Andonly - 7/31/2001 10:08:31 AM
The continuing Palestinian uprising — intifada in Arabic — began after Ariel Sharon, now the Israeli prime minister, visited the Temple Mount last September accompanied by 1,000 or more police officers. An investigation committee led by former United States Senator George J. Mitchell later concluded that "the Sharon visit did not cause the `Al Aksa intifada,' " but added that "it was poorly timed, and the provocative effect should have been foreseen."
The spillover effects of Jerusalem's problems were evident today with new exchanges of fire between Israelis soldiers and Palestinian gunmen in several parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. And in Pisgat Ze'ev, a Jewish neighborhood in northeastern Jerusalem that Palestinians consider occupied land, a car bomb exploded in the parking lot of an apartment building, lightly injuring one man.
But most people here focused on the violence in the Old City of Jerusalem, specifically the Western Wall, an enduring section of a supporting wall from the ancient temple complex above.
For observant Jews, today was Tisha b'Av, a day of fasting, and a day for recalling the destruction of temples in 586 B.C. and in A.D. 70.
cont.
73. Andonly - 7/31/2001 10:09:08 AM
By the thousands, they flocked to the wall overnight and through the day, many following customs associated with mourning the dead. They sat on low chairs or on the ground. They wore shoes made of canvas, or went barefoot. Some tore their clothes. All day, they read Lamentations, from the Old Testament.
But Tisha b'Av has another tradition here. It is when a fringe group called the Temple Mount Faithful tries to lay claim to the elevated plateau and pave the way for a third Jewish temple to supplant the mosques that have been there for centuries. The Faithful, whose numbers today could generously be put at 40, bring with them a 4.5-ton stone that they proclaim the cornerstone for the new temple.
Unvaryingly, the Israeli courts refuse to let them ascend the mount, and dozens of police officers block their path. This year, as before, Israel's High Court of Justice ruled that the closest they could bring their cornerstone was a parking lot outside the Old City's Dung Gate, some 300 yards from the mount.
They barely made it even that far today. A truck carrying the huge stone was allowed to linger for mere seconds before the police ordered it away. The small contingent of the Faithful then gathered, as ever, beneath the Moghrabi Gate leading to the mount. There, they chanted nationalist slogans and heard their leader, Gershon Salomon, denounce Prime Minister Sharon as "a wimp" who has caved in to Arab pressure.
But while it had been clear for days that Mr. Salomon and his followers would once again get nowhere near the Temple Mount, major figures among Palestinians and Israeli Arabs declared otherwise. They described the gathering as a genuine Israeli attempt to destroy Islamic shrines, and vowed to resist with bloodshed, if necessary. A "day of rage" was ordered.
cont.
74. Andonly - 7/31/2001 10:09:23 AM
In that atmosphere, a clash seemed inevitable.
It came midday with a shower of stones on worshiping Jews, thrown by young Muslims above. Women cried out in fear and ran, covering their heads with chairs or prayer books. In a separate section of the wall, men held prayer shawls above their heads to ward off the stones.
That was when the Israeli police charged into the Aksa compound, though they never entered the mosque itself. They fired stun grenades and a few volleys of tear gas, and fended off a cascade of rocks with plastic shields. Some Palestinians said the officers also fired rubber bullets, but police officials denied it.
"The Palestinians were just looking for an excuse for a party," said Mickey Levy, the Jerusalem police chief. But in Cairo, Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, blamed Israel for the violence, saying the police action showed "bad intentions."
As rough a day as it was, the fighting did not last long. Both the Israeli authorities and Palestinian clergymen worked to restore a fragile calm to Jerusalem. They succeeded to the extent that Muslims streamed peacefully from the Noble Sanctuary after their noon service, and Jews drifted back to the Western Wall, where they once more swayed in prayer and gripped the ancient stones.
75. stostosto - 7/31/2001 10:30:06 AM
Ando #65
(I haven't been able to keep up on more recent posts):
when you get right down to it people, including reporters, harbor assumptions they don't say out loud. And one such asumption sems to be that Israel's demise would be a nice capstone to the End of the Colonialist Era, and after all Jews are used to suffering, and anyway they deserve it for having become Zionists.
Do you really honestly believe that?
Your crediting Europeans with historical guilt over colonisation is way out in the wilderness, btw. That was the sixties and seventies, perhaps. Now, Europe is gripped by angst and introversion at all those strangers coming from the exact countries that were colonised (plus a number . What is to become of our culture? Language? Society? Identity?
Indeed, Europe seems to be developing a seige mentality of its own, and it's nothing to do with Jews. Arabs are a better candidate, actually. The buzzword is 'muslim'.
So guilt? When we are most assuredly in the process of becoming victims ourselves? Why, even the Americans have the audacity to behave as though they're more powerful and richer than us, making fun of us and ridiculing our hypocrisy while contaminating our youth with McDonald's and Britney Spears, Microsoft and Hollywood.
Guilty? Ce n'est pas nous.
76. stostosto - 7/31/2001 10:31:46 AM
(I so love to speak on behalf of all Europeans!).
77. marjoribanks - 7/31/2001 10:47:28 AM
Spike,
Kudos on a job well done on your new thread.
Lest you take my future absence here as a slight, let me hasten to state again that I have unilaterally withdrawn from all comment on the politics involved with the Israel/Palestine question. Should the thread meander someday to history, or even tourism (say, the snorkelling in Eilat) I will join in happily. In the meanwhile, please do not take my disengagement personally.
Ta.
78. Andonly - 7/31/2001 10:55:50 AM
Sto, my theory is that modern Europeans have adopted the language and moral stance of the US civil rights era to distance themselves from the sin of colonialism. Especially England and France, whose liberals over the last decade have responded in sympathy to the sentiments of their relatively large Arab and subcon populations, rather the way liberal whites in the US and South Africa respond to blacks' resentments over white racism. And sympathy is expressed in this psychology as a form of prostration: 'Here, you can have the Israelis, we don't love them anymore, do you forgive us now?'
Finding Israel the perennial bad guy is the way European liberals absolve themsleves: if they support Palestinians now, that makes up for their forebears having conquered the Ottoman empire, divided it up, and colonized the indigenous territory of Palestine with European Jews whom the rest of Europe (and America) did not like well enough to invite onto their own continents.
In Denmark, I imagine the anti-Israel dynamic serves as exculpation for the very anti-Muslim biasis you describe. That is, the Danish left does penance on behalf of the Danish right, which has become xenophobic in the face of heavy immigration and culture shock. 'See, we don't just hate Muslims, we hate their Zionist oppressors too; and that makes us as rational and even handed as ever.'
Israelis, naturally, are not willing to be someone else's price for absolution. And in the paradigm, they sense they're being set up by--let's face it--Christian nations, to play the part of sacrificial saviour all over again.
79. stostosto - 7/31/2001 11:48:12 AM
Ando
Having read your convoluted speculative hypothesising three times over, I almost think it is internally consistent.
80. MaxMacks - 7/31/2001 12:42:45 PM
will this work for me this morning - gtting posted here?
81. MaxMacks - 7/31/2001 12:45:40 PM
seems to work.
stostosto...this is a subject that I have much interest in but I fear to express any opinion
that seems to be sympathetic to the Pasestians
as almost invariably such comments are labelled
"anti-Semetic". meaning I guess anti-Jewish
Since ironically both the Jews and the Arabs
are Semites.
so good luck I will read your reports
Rarely have I read any thing in the USA press
that is objective regarding the mess in Palestine.
82. Jenerator - 7/31/2001 1:14:04 PM
My best male friend lives in the UAE and he says that the mass population there is EXTREMELY anti-Jewish. Second in the line of hatred is America.
Last week he told me that at university, he listened in on a conversation in which the male students discussed Arafat nuking Israel, and that it "should" happen and that hopefully Allah wuold take care of "those Jews".
83. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:38:14 PM
When reading Andonly's recent series of posts I fixed on the same statement that sto quotes in Message # 75. Her Message # 78 is just so much uninformed nonsense.
The upside of this is that now when we know that in Andonly's mind any criticism of Israel and its policies has its origins in open or suppressed anti-semitism or in an "exculpation of anti-Muslim bias" (God, what psycho-babble!) we no longer have to pay undue attention to her tiring multi-post diatribes.
84. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:40:19 PM
MaxMacks
How do you define "objective" in the Isaraeli-Palestinian context?
85. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:41:41 PM
Jenerator
Ask you friend where the UAE nationals send their children for higher education.
86. Jenerator - 7/31/2001 1:42:44 PM
I like Andonly's "multi-post diatribes".
You accused Khaval of the same thing before falling in love with her, ya know...
87. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:51:34 PM
Here is another example of European anti-semitism
Israel Warns Officials of Legal Risks Abroad
Clyde Haberman New York Times Service
Monday, July 30, 2001
Chance of Arrest in Palestinian Rights Cases
JERUSALEM The Israeli Foreign Ministry has sent a warning to government, army and security officials. Be careful in choosing
destinations when traveling abroad, it cautioned, because certain countries might be prepared to charge ranking Israelis with violating Palestinians' human rights.
The advisory that went out last week was not worded quite that
bluntly. It ecommended, as a senior ministry official put it Friday, that high-level officials "do their homework" to avoid stumbling into "a legal embarrassment."
[...]
88. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:57:27 PM
[...]
It was not lost on some Israelis that they themselves have in the past supported the "globalization of the criminal international law," as it was called by Alan Baker, a legal adviser to the Foreign Ministry.
Mr. Baker mentioned the Holocaust, seemingly referring to Israel's abduction of the notorious Nazi figure Adolf Eichmann from Argentina in 1960. Mr. Eichmann was put on trial in Israel, found guilty and hanged in 1962.
"We always had an interest in true criminals being brought to justice," Mr. Baker told Israeli radio. The problem now, he said, is "a tendency to exploit this good thing for political achievements such as delegitimizing the state of Israel and its leaders."
Full article.
89. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2001 1:59:07 PM
Not at all. khaval and I had a quasi-secret affair over in TT long before that. You need to keep up better with cyberspace gossip.
90. marjoribanks - 7/31/2001 2:05:31 PM
Jenerator,
Your UAE friend is full of shit, as so many of your friends seem to be. The UAE is super-close to the USA in any number of ways.
It is, by the way, formally anti-Israel. But you can and will see Israeli businessmen in Dubai.
91. Andonly - 7/31/2001 2:34:49 PM
"in Andonly's mind any criticism of Israel and its policies has its origins in open or suppressed anti-semitism"
In Pelle's empty brainpan any criticism of self-righteous hostility toward Israel is psychobabble or, per Sto, paranoia.
I am, myself, critical of the Israeli right. And lately, too, the Israeli left. But I'm vastly more critical of the Palestinian leadership, for it could have ended this conflict long ago and shamed Israel into giving it what the vast majority of Pals want.
But no, that leadership wants to win via diplomatic or military force.
However, Pelle Who Speaks Little and Says Less, I'm glad to see you've relinquished passive aggression for more direct confrontations. Now if only you can find a couple means of contradicting those you disagree with without resorting to empty sneering, you'll be a man.
(There's your cue to post that chainsaw picture again, dear.)
92. Andonly - 7/31/2001 3:05:10 PM
Regarding the question of extraditions and trials of suspected war criminals: this won't be a popular view here or anywhere, but I've gradually been forming an opinion since the Pinochet extradition that perhaps the whole thing isn't such a grand idea after all.
Growing up, the idea of the Nuremberg trials always struck me as flawed in some way I couldn't put my finger on. Ultimately, I decided the problem was that they were symbolic more than anything else, that no retribution against some small collection of men was possible for the scale of horror the Holocaust entailed, and that there was something a little obscene in mounting show trials in which they could remain defiant before those who once followed them. But more than that, it seemed to me the politics of such trials could easily overtake their moral significance, and that under the right circumstances this could undermine the political authority of whomever conducted them.
Now we're seeing, in the proposed extradition of Ariel Sharon to the Hague, a transparent attempt at undermining the authority of a sitting prime minister at a moment that would make it extremely advantageous to Israel's enemies. The same thing was done to Milosevich during the NATO campaign, and as much as I wanted to see Milosevich fall and Serbia capitulate, it struck me as a terrible precedent.
Until there is an apolitical international justice system--and there surely is not one now--wars should not be conducted via the international courts, for if they are, those courts will lose all semblance of righteousness.
Meanwhile, the world of justice seekers could fall back on that old standby: assassination. Failing that, a grudging admission of impotence.
93. Andonly - 7/31/2001 3:20:50 PM
Sto: "And, speaking of "making and keeping agreements" there is always the Israeli settlements..."
I am anti-settlement, so are most Israelis. But I don't believe one settler should depart under fire, or that Sharon's policy of continuing building in existing settlements while Pals persist in violence is necessarily misguided.
Rather, I consider the internal expansion of settlements a form of bloodless guerilla warfare, far preferable to shooting children.
94. stostosto - 7/31/2001 3:21:22 PM
marj
as usual you declare Jen full of shit without having the slightest idea of her source. I have no doubt she reports her friend's account accurately, and I have no doubt his story is true. Even if UAE is officially "super-close" USA.
I have heard and read enough of macho chest-thumping Arabs here to be pretty sure such brain-dead bravado is commonplace in Arab countries. And I vividly recall the enthusiasm that greeted Saddam's Kuwaiti adventure and subsequent scudding of Tel Aviv from the masses in most Arab countries, including "super-USA-close" Egypt.
Which no doubt is part of the overall problem. It's actually quite amazing that Hussein of Jordan saw fit to strike a peace deal with Israel. The Jordanians have even clamped down hard on anti-Israeli riots on the East Bank.
Or maybe that shows that courageous leaders don't really need to be constrained by such street emotions. But few Arab leaders have such courage, even as they aren't showing much enthusiasm for the Palestinian cause - the "maximalist" cause, that is.
95. stostosto - 7/31/2001 3:25:37 PM
Ando,
right, settlements are "guerilla warfare" far superior to shooting children. I guess that's internally consistent too. A real rhetorical feat.
But I thought Israel was an established full-fledged UN-recognised state. Not a guerilla movement.
96. marjoribanks - 7/31/2001 3:31:07 PM
"I have no doubt she reports her friend's account accurately, and I have no doubt his story is true. Even if UAE is officially "super-close" USA.
I have heard and read enough of macho chest-thumping Arabs here to be pretty sure such brain-dead bravado is commonplace in Arab countries."
Sto, the UAE is the UAE, not Egypt and not Palestine and not even Saudi Arabia. There are precious few Arabs in the UAE, by the way, the vast majority of the residents are foreigners there to work.
Perhaps some juvenile said something about Arafat and nukes and Israel. I dispute strenuously, however, the idea that the UAE can remotely be seen as anti-American or that anti-Americanism is anything of a perceptible phenomenon among those few UAE citizens.
As Pelle pointed out, they flock to the USA for education. They do big business with the USA and American corporations. The American Chamber of Commerce is, believe it or not, one of the more powerful and influential organizations of any type in the UAE. If anything, the UAE is at the forefront of the Arab world in absorbing America and Americanism (though second to Qatar). There are no street demonstrations and the type you are obviously thinking of wrt Egypt et al. UAE citizens are extremely rich, extremely comfortable, and extremely pragmatic.
I speak from some comprehensive knowledge of (and experience with and in) the UAE, by the way.
97. marjoribanks - 7/31/2001 3:32:34 PM
Trouble is, dear sto, that you're looking at the Arab world in broad strokes no less than Pike. Silly, conventional, mistake.
98. stostosto - 7/31/2001 3:35:21 PM
marj,
don't they also have lots of Egyptian and Palestinian foreign workers there? They do in Saudi and Kuwait.
99. Andonly - 7/31/2001 3:39:22 PM
Sto to Pike: "I completely fail to see what advantages the settlements have given Israel, though."
Seems there are two major schools of thought on the subject: 1) The Palestinians will always be a threat, therefore they must never have a state on the WB because of its strategic importance, settlers guarantee the indefinite postponement of Pal statehood; Oslo was something we got roped into, to our grave detriment; 2) There are moderate Palestinians, we have good relations now with Egypt and Jordan, we should encourage the moderates and deal with them because we don't want to rule another people indefinitely and would rather be at peace, they deserve a state, and the territories are a liability anyway; Oslo was the way toward reconciliation.
Until lately, and for the last eight years or more, I think most Israelis and American Jews believed #2 much more than #1. The way to resolve security questions was via negotiation. Now they know #2 can't come about yet, and the hardliners are more vocal and powerful than ever, but my sense is that the majority of Israelis still believe that the Pals must eventually have their state and that most of the settlers must eventually leave.
The question is, under what circumstances. And personally, I'd like to see an agreement so committed to peace on both sides that Israeli settlers would feel no more concerned about remaining in the territories than Arab Israelis feel about living in Israel. But that's in the pollyanna world we don't inhabit.
100. marjoribanks - 7/31/2001 3:45:52 PM
Sto,
Of course there is such a population. So?
101. pseudoerasmus - 7/31/2001 3:52:11 PM
Andonly's Message # 78 might have a remote chance of making some sense (purely logically speaking, not experientially) if somehow Western Europe were alone in sympathising with the Palestinians. But they are not.
One could say, without exaggeration, that almost everybody in the world who is not Jewish and who is not an American-style Christian fundamentalist sympathises with Palestinians. Ask a Chinese, or an Indian, or a Mexican, or a South African, in the street. If he had an opinion at all, it would be to sympathise with the Palestinians.
102. Andonly - 7/31/2001 4:15:12 PM
Pseudoerasmus's Message # 101 might make sense if people formed their opinions everywhere on the basis of exactly the same beliefs and and information. But they don't.
People sympathize with others for numerous and varied reaons. Why should the West sympathize with the Pals for just the same reasons as your uninformed guy on the street in Zimbabwe?
103. pseudoerasmus - 7/31/2001 4:19:48 PM
Well, the extreme uniformity of the opinion suggests a similar motivation for the opinion.
104. Andonly - 7/31/2001 4:20:45 PM
Or in Jo'burg?
***
What a drag to have to abandon my troublemaking now that PE has arrived, but my son demands that I give him the computer, and my promise to capitulate is overdue. It's either give in or bomb his room.
105. ElliottRW - 7/31/2001 4:47:06 PM
I sympathize with the Israelis, I sympathise with the Palestinians. It's a bad situation. The only quick solution is for a third party (say, Saddam Hussein) to make the disputed territories and natural resources unusable for a several centuries (for example: nuke Jerusalem). No prize, no conflict.
106. stostosto - 7/31/2001 5:37:27 PM
marj, you are right, they're not Arab, they're apparently predominantly Pakistani and muslim Indians.
People of the United Arab Emirates according to CIA World Fact Book.
Why do you find it so unlikely that Jen's pal may have overheard some Arabs or even ex-pat Pakistanis discuss Israel the way she said?
Intriguingly, only 20% of the population there are UAE citizens, btw.
107. stostosto - 7/31/2001 5:43:13 PM
Ando, if your #1 reason in your #99 is valid, then how can the Israelis ever be trusted in negotiations? If it is not, then what use are the settlements to Israel?
(And thank you for responding to my question, it's an honest one).
108. stostosto - 7/31/2001 5:57:52 PM
MaxMacks #81:
stostosto...this is a subject that I have much interest in but I fear to express any opinion
that seems to be sympathetic to the Pasestians
as almost invariably such comments are labelled
"anti-Semetic".
Please don't hold back. The above probably already labels you anti-semitic anyway, you know. So, perhaps you could start by telling us: Why are you such a rabid anti-semite?
Where are you based, by the way?
109. Andonly - 7/31/2001 6:41:47 PM
Sto, the only person I have can ever recall having branded a Jew-hater online is Azure Toonces Wannabe, and then only because she professed as much. Macks has nothing of that sort to fear from me, nor have you.
110. stostosto - 7/31/2001 7:18:33 PM
Ando, I didn't mean to imply that.
Rustler voiced his suspicions against me once, though. (As he has done against others, at least PE).
I was completely taken aback.
111. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:23:10 PM
Anyway, PE's talk about the man-on-the street view of the Pal-Israel situation is irrelevant to my theory of European guilt, which specified leftists and emphasized Frogs and Limeys. The world is not comprised solely of leftists. But leftists are disproportionately represented in the media. So, if the BBC or Reuters reports that Israel did X without reason or provocation, then it will be picked up in Jordan and Uganda and perhaps Beijing. So Britons and Africans and Chinese might have their opinions shaped by the same rhetoric, but only the Britons' view might be influenced by the dynamic I described.
People everywhere believe good stories, no matter whether they're true. But I think European leftists have a special axe to grind.
112. pseudoerasmus - 7/31/2001 8:25:34 PM
Or, since the pro-Palestinian sympathy is almost universal and uniform (across national and political lines) in the world, the most parsimonious explanation is that pretty much the same motivation underlies it.
113. Jenerator - 7/31/2001 8:40:13 PM
Marj,
My full of shit friend is a son of a wealthy oil man, born in Pakistan, with residences in Sharjah, Jeddah, Belgium, Toronto and London.
He has three degrees and is a man of honor. When he says that the climate at university is hostile to Israelis, I believe him.
114. Jenerator - 7/31/2001 8:45:16 PM
Secondly, that wealthy Muslims send their children to university in the US means jack shit with regards to US loyalism in the UAE. For the most part, I think it is safe to say that conservative Muslims believe the US and its culture to be sexually deviant and shameful in the eyes of Allah. Remember, that the World Trade Center bombers lived in the US!
115. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:56:29 PM
"Ando, if your #1 reason in your #99 is valid, then how can the Israelis ever be trusted in negotiations? If it is not, then what use are the settlements to Israel?"
I've been wondering how to answer your question.
As to the first part, well, who's doing the trusting? You'll note that Egypt and Jordan, which have peace treaties with Israel, and Qatar, Oman, Morocco and Mauritania, which have economic and diplomatic arrangements with Israel, have not been invaded or nuked recently. The only countries with which Israel doesn' play fair are those which also abrogate agreements.
So, when you ask whether Israel can be trusted, I have to ask, By whom?
On the other hand, I believe I agree with Douglas Feith that dmeocracies should never agree i advance of negotiations (as per Oslo) to come to specific agreements with terroristic entities or dictatorships. As he says, it's fine to talk, but it's bad policy to promise anything. Promises lead to dishonesty, since the nature of liberal democratic governments engaged in negotiations with radicals is to downplay to their own constituencies any violation of agreements by the opposition. This tendency backs them into a corner, so that if the opposition is not in fact negotiating toward compromise, the democratic government is still so politically invested in promoting the process that it cannot admit when bad faith does dominate the opposition position.
116. Andonly - 7/31/2001 8:56:42 PM
Netanyahu manouvered himself into what Feith called a dishonest position--he was negotiating toward a resolution of Oslo, but he had no intention of getting there. Barak, whom Israelis elected explicitly to deliver peace, cut through the smokescreen and demonstrated that Arafat was either not prepared or not able to deliver Palestinian concessions toward a "just and comprehensive peace". What happened at Taba afterward was heart wrenchingly beside the point, I believe, because Arafat failed to make any of it possible. Rather, he let street rage reign, and Israel did the same. But think about it: had the IDF been PR-clever enough not to have risen to the bait, would it have mattered? Who can negotiate with a mob?
The Pals have held the cards for some time now, despite Israel's military superiority. One wonders why they have not yet resorted to abject pacifism--i.e., massive, peaceful demonstrations, road sit-ins, etc. Why have they not laid down their stones and molotov cocktails and Kalashnikovs and mortars, and done what has worked in India, in the US, and everywhere an occupier considers himself civilized?
The answer is, their intentions--the intentions of those leading the violence--cannot accommodate compromise. As long as the maximalists drive the process, the question of whether Israel can be trusted is sort of irrelevant. Just my opinion.
117. pseudoerasmus - 7/31/2001 9:12:55 PM
I'm not sure why what Jenerator's alleged friend allegedly says is so incredible. It seems perfectly plausible to me.
118. Andonly - 7/31/2001 9:37:50 PM
As to the second part of your question--if the Pals can in fact come to an agreement with Israel and live in peace, what's the point of settlements--I really don't know whether there's any point at all to having distant settlements. I mean, there may be, but I'm not competent to say what it might be.
Still, what would you have Israel do? Twenty percent of Israel is Arab. Why should New Palestine not contain Jews? (And please, skip the assertions about illegality of settlement of territories conquered in [defensive] wars, it's as meaningful to me as a tort law in a murder trial.)
119. Andonly - 7/31/2001 9:52:02 PM
"Or, since the pro-Palestinian sympathy is almost universal and uniform (across national and political lines) in the world, the most parsimonious explanation is that pretty much the same motivation underlies it."
Well, I figure human psychology from Beijing to London to Harare is not always amenable to what you conceive as parsimonious explanation, and that it surely isn't "universal and uniform (across national and political lines)".
In any case, the issue isn't pro-Palestinian sympathy but antipathy toward Israel.
One doesn't necessitate the other, any more than pro-Pakistani sentiment necessitates anti-Indian sentiment, or vice versa, among people who have no stake in the conflict between India and Pakistan.
120. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 1:16:47 AM
One post though I said I wouldn't, wrt Pe's contention that 'the man on the world street' is unanimously against Israel:
One of the big surprises I had in my first months living in Kenya was the discovery that the people are exceedingly pro-Israel. I was called 'an Israelite' rather than a Jew or Israeli: Kenyans' knowledge and experience of the Jewish people was through the Bible - and through Israel's modern history. They knew our history from Abraham's time to Jesus' - and then again from 1967 and Entebbe. So all the heroic stuff fit together somehow: there was a straight line from King David to Yonni Netanyahu. And the embarrassing Middle Ages usury stuff - they don't know that (they're living through something worse, with the Indian supercaste in Kenya, btw). And they are Christians with a belief that is still naive and grassroots, kind of like the American West as described in various Mark Twain books.
So the overall Kenya man-on-the-street mood is that Israel is not only good - it is the Land of the Israelites, the heroes of the Bible. A lot of my wife's friends and relatives actually believed Jerusalem was located somewhere in the sky, before I assured them it wasn't.
If you conducted a poll, I wouldn't be surprised if you found that most Kenyans believe that the Messiah will come when the Jews rebuild their Temple, and they view the Israeli-Arab conflict through Christian Messianic spectacles. Most are also quite anti-Muslim for internal Kenyan reasons.
Bye again.
121. pseudoerasmus - 8/1/2001 3:21:48 AM
Well, East Africa has had historical run-ins with Arabs (slave trade), so probably that colours their perspective.
122. pseudoerasmus - 8/1/2001 3:23:34 AM
I wonder which few countries voted against the (in)famous "Zionism is racism" resolution by the UN?
123. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 4:19:06 AM
There is a pretty interesting, very long running and heated debate in East African papers on the subject of Islam and the slave trade, between Prof. Ali Mazrui (Muslim guy from the coastal Swaheli tribe) and other profs - mostly from the Luo tribe I think. Mazrui cites cases like dark-skinned Sadat's rise to power as proof that the Arabs are not racist.
Also, while Jennster is the only representative here of the messianic Christian train of thought (yes Jen - the David/Solomon Temple... there is no other!...), I think that in the real world there are a lot more Americans who share her basic attitudes and beliefs than those who share yours (dimpled chads notwithstanding). I think Pat Robertson's show does OK in the ratings, does it not?
Interesting: it's a lot like the situation in Israel. Here, the intelligentsia doesn't believe in the religious messianic stuff. It doesn't believe in anything, other than its own superiority. It therefore does not want to fight for anything. It therefore leads the nation towards what could be total disaster, because our enemies have no such pacifistic intelligentsia.
The ones who wind up saving the day over and over again are the 'simpletons', the guys who vote Likud and Shas.
When all this plays out, the ones who win this for us will be our believers and your believers. Jennster and Shas. Already, it is thanks to the Jennsters that we don't have a pinko in the White House (I'm sure Gore-Lieberman would have taken sides with a Peres-Beilin approach in the end) and thanks to the Likudsters, Shassters (and Rustlers) that we have a hawk-led national unity government.
124. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 4:22:00 AM
(I am imagining luscious Jennster next to a bearded, swarthy Yemenite Shasnik now).
125. stostosto - 8/1/2001 4:53:09 AM
This discussion (and Rustler's simpleton remarks) reminds me of a quote that goes something like this:
"In war, you are doomed to employ your opponents' methods"
Anyone familiar with that?
(I don't think it holds true, btw).
126. mgleason - 8/1/2001 6:31:25 AM
Voting record and text of UN Resolution 3379 containing the determination that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.
Yeas: 72, Nays: 35, Abstensions: 32.
Voting record of UN Resolution 46/86, revocation of the determination of UN Resolution 3379.
Yeas: 111, Nays: 25, Abstentions: 13.
Text of UN Resolution 46/86.
127. mgleason - 8/1/2001 7:21:35 AM
As a point of interest, while I found Resolution 3379 to be readily available in the UNISPAL area of the Question of Palestine site (maintained on the UN server by the Division for Palestinian Rights), Resolution 46/86 was nowhere to be found, save for a brief mention in an excerpt of the 1991 UN Yearbook:
In other related developments, the General Assembly, in a virtually unprecedented action on 16 December 1991, by resolution 46/86, repealed the 1975 resolution by which it had determined that zionism was a form of racism and racial discrimination.
128. Wombat - 8/1/2001 8:14:56 AM
In the 1960s and 1970s Israel provided technical assistance to a number of subsaharan African countries. Uganda--pre-Idi Amin--was one of them.
129. pseudoerasmus - 8/1/2001 8:39:55 AM
Apparently that didn't prevent it from voting in favour of the "Zionism is racism" resolution!
130. pseudoerasmus - 8/1/2001 8:40:55 AM
Well, in 1975 Uganda was ruled by Idi Amin.
131. Jenerator - 8/1/2001 9:45:04 AM
Thanks Rp!;-)
132. PelleNilsson - 8/1/2001 10:27:08 AM
Good sleuthing magleason!
133. marjoribanks - 8/1/2001 10:35:30 AM
Spike,
I think you are vastly overestimating the messianic impulses in the American populace at large. The segment of the US populace that would fit your description is quite small and diminishing if anything. Those TV shows you're talking about aren't on regular TV, and are mostly irrelevant anyway.
BTW, a relative of mine was Mazrui's aide for years and years when he was at Makerere University in Kampala.
134. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 10:43:48 AM
"In war, you are doomed to employ your opponents' methods"
I donno about 'doomed', but one certainly learns much from his opponent. The Pals are using our strategies (play the underdog, lay on the guilt) on us and we are learning theirs (or at least I am...).
Only problem is, when we actually use those Arab techniques on them, we are branded war criminals and taken to the Hague. I'm surprised Bashar Assad and Abdullah of Jordan haven't joined the lawsuit against Sharon, on behalf of their fathers - the heroes of Black September and El Hama.
Katzir, for instance, has been the victim of settlement by provocative Arabs, who learned that one from our settlers in Hebron. I myself intend, as some of you know, to counterattack one day by buying a house in or near Umm El-Fahm and seeing how the Arabs deal with that little bit of democracy.
Another Muslim technique I have come to admire is the conquest of territory through sound: the wails of the muazzin remind us all, five times a day, who controls the air around us.
My plan is to put up some heavy duty speakers and broadcast Israeli Independence War songs, as well as some Jimi Hendrix and Stones songs right after the muazzin finishes his piece.
I dream of rocking Arara, Ein a-Sahleh and Barta'a to 'Voodoo Child' and 'Heartbreaker'. Call me a romantic.
135. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 10:47:26 AM
I think you are vastly overestimating the messianic impulses in the American populace at large.
I'm waiting to see if the Americans on the thread agree with you. I distinctly remember (the real) George Bush consulting with Billy Graham in the White House at the peak of the Gulf War crisis.
136. Wombat - 8/1/2001 10:56:24 AM
Most Americans sympathize with Israel for a variety of reasons. The messianic Christian "sympathy" is in a small minority. I would also be leery of their sympathy, since it is tied up with Armageddon and the return of Christ. When this happens, only those who recognize the divinity of Christ will be "saved." That would not include us Jews.
It has been argued that the Israelis have used the same methods against the Palestinians as the British used against the Jewish underground in the 1940s (collective punishment, destruction of houses, etc.). Israel's existence speaks to how effective those methods were.
137. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 11:23:56 AM
It has been argued that the Israelis have used the same methods against the Palestinians as the British used against the Jewish underground in the 1940s (collective punishment, destruction of houses, etc.). Israel's existence speaks to how effective those methods were.
Rejoinder 1: Yes, Israel's existence shows that these methods have been quite effective against the Palestinians, whose (usually stated) aim has always been to destroy us.
Rejoinder 2: Yes, the Brits used those techniques on all their colonies - and they lost all of them (at least the ones overseas). So? Israel has no colonies - certainly none overseas.
Rejoinder 3: The Arabs have been using the same methods against Israel for the past 70 years: pillage, destroy, kill, bomb, maim, terrorize, preferably civilians, even more preferably children. Israel's existence speaks to how effective those methods were - and are.
138. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 11:29:45 AM
"Morale and psychological manipulation has a significant place in the minds of Jews, and formed a very important source of strength in the "Hebrew State"...
Dis-information has been one of the bases of morale and psychological manipulation among the Israelis, and propaganda played an important role in the psychological prodding of world political leaders to support Zionism...
The "Protocol's of the Elders of Zion" did not ignore the importance of using propaganda to promote the Zionist goals. In the second protocol is written: "Through the newspapers we will have the means to propel and to influence". In the twelfth protocol: "Our governments will hold the reins of most of the newspapers, and through this plan we will possess the primary power to turn to public opinion."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, official PA daily, Jan 25 2001]
(from Palestinian Media Watch)
139. Jenerator - 8/1/2001 11:34:30 AM
I have worked through Revelation and have read many books on eschatology. The "end times" is the hardest subject for me because of the language and use of metaphors and symbols in Revelation. In my heart, I believe that God has a special plan for the Jews and because I believe Christianity to be the fulfillment of Judaism, I feel as though we are brothers in a sense.
Rapture, the second coming of Christ, the anti-Christ, and Armaggedon are all topics that are hotly discussed these days. More than ever, the Christian community at large is expressing the foreboding sense that "the end is near" and is directly related to what's going on Israel today. I firmly believe that many of us are holding our breath waiting to see what happens to the Golden Dome, which seal is broken next and for any clear signs of tribulation of world leader rise from the ashes.
On Christian radio, one of the top shows is called "End Times". It even has a publication and broadcast across the world.
My Messianic friends believe we're already in the final stages before the anti-Christ, and all are ready to return to Israel (depending on what view they have of the rapture) to see the dead in Christ rise.
140. Jenerator - 8/1/2001 11:38:44 AM
P.s. The #1 book on the Christian market (and one that has done well on the NYT best sellers) is Left Behind by Jenkins and LeHaye, it deals specifically with the end times and what's going on in Israel.
141. stostosto - 8/1/2001 11:38:44 AM
Jen,
You must be joking!
142. Jenerator - 8/1/2001 11:42:42 AM
Sto,
Kidding about what?
143. RustlerPike - 8/1/2001 11:45:12 AM
It was concerned, I think, who said the Mideast was a part of the world that always made him (her?) cringe. Well - imagine what living here is like. I tell you - living in Israel gives you gas.
On the other hand, if the choice is between living somewhere where you get gas, and living somewhere where you get gassed, I guess Israel is the better choice.
144. Wombat - 8/1/2001 11:59:37 AM
The difference being that you are far less likely to be gassed in the United States than you are in Israel.
145. Andonly - 8/1/2001 1:04:16 PM
Pike to Banks: "I'm waiting to see if the Americans on the thread agree with you."
I agree with him.
However (and Sto, no Jenerator is not kidding at all, messianic Xtians do believe this stuff, and there are plenty of them living in the southwestern and southern US, whence our Shrub hails) it isn't impossible that religious convictions can seep into foreign policy on some level. But I doubt they'd do Israel any good; their political application would be comparable in efficacy to homeopathy.
146. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 1:37:46 PM
Wombat:
The difference being that you are far less likely to be gassed in the United States than you are in Israel.
Yeah, I guess. But you never know. A sufficiently pugnacious Israeli leadership could spell major trouble for American Jews, I think. A large scale expulsion of Palestinians would probably entail a large scale rise in antisemitism in the USA. Which would engender a large scale wave of emigration to Israel. Which would give us exactly what we need most: people to settle in the newly depopulated heartland formerly known as 'the West Bank'.
147. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 1:46:56 PM
As for the Christian believers being few in number: if the situation of religion in Israel is comparable, I would say this -
a. sometimes a relatively small minority is the one that consistently sways the vote, or the opinion polls. Certainly this is the case in Israel.
b. religious myths incubate in people's minds and hatch in times of crisis. During the Gulf War, for instance, I was surprised to find people who considered themselves secular speaking to me about this or another biblical prophecy, or some rabbinical pronouncement, that they thought was relevant to figuring out what was happening and how it would end.
I wouldn't underestimate the power of religion. While Western Christian nations - and the only Jewish nation - are largely nonreligious, or non-practicing, it doesn't mean that the basic religious beliefs and myths do not have deep, hidden roots in their psyches.
148. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 1:57:15 PM
Ma'ariv's site asked people if 'the presence of children in the house in Nablus should have caused the operation to be called off' (a misleading question, I think, since the children were not in the building being attacked but stood outside it, on the street). With 2,191 votes, 72% answered 'no'. There are now 5,005 votes and the nays are at 73%.
149. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 2:03:20 PM
The previous poll asked if women should serve in combat roles in confrontation zones. 53% of 5,966 votes were against.
I, myself, would send all the women in Israel to go get themselves blown up in Ramallah.
150. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 2:05:38 PM
Or better yet - have their eyes gouged out. That would be cool. I really see no reason why this crap should always be happening to the menfolk. Looks awful unequal to me.
151. Wombat - 8/2/2001 2:26:33 PM
Rustler:
This is an interesting sub-text: the status of the Zionist belief that Israel is a safe haven from antisemitism compared to Europe and now the United States.
I cannot speak for Europe, my experience there was that Jews were not particularly numerous, and were still considered somewhat "exotic."
In the United States, however, unlike in Europe, even implied antisemitism is a catastrophe for a candidate for any political office. Pat Buchanan and Jesse Jackson can tell you that. Overt antisemitism lands one on the lunatic fringe.
If Israel takes robust steps against the PLO, there may be a rise in black antisemitism (fellow oppressed...yadda yadda), but that is of little consequence in the overall scheme of things. The Jewish community will probably divide on the issue, as will the rest of the United States.
152. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 2:26:57 PM
Sorry - that may have offended some people. I received my wife's alimony suit yesterday and met the local social worker and her feminista boss yesterday, so I'm feeling a tad aggressive towards the female gender.
(a side of me I'd never known existed).
153. Wombat - 8/2/2001 2:32:22 PM
Rustler:
Do try and separate your marital life from this thread. The ugliness that you sometimes convey gives the reader sympathy for your ex, whether she deserves it or not.
154. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 2:34:06 PM
While this site was down, I posted the following in Khaval's forum.
----
This week's New Yorker has a fascinating and lengthy article on Solzhenitsyn by David Remnick. One bit of it was very interesting, and I wanted to get Spike's and Andonly's take on it. I will post it here too.
Solzhy has been accused, quite widely, of anti-Semitism. I totally disbelieve this, and Remnick makes it clear that he also does not accept this. He does say, in the light of this, however, the following -
"It is true, however, that, as a Russian patriot, Solzhenitsyn has written of the "incomparable sufferings of our people," and, as such, clearly does not believe in the uniqueness of Jewish suffering in the past two centuries or in the idea of Jews as a symbol of persecution."
This statement is made baldly, without qualification, but even so it is clear that Remnick makes it as a kind of sub-indictment.
I was struck by this because it makes explicit one thing that I believe consumes many Jews, even secular and cosmopolitan individuals. It is also the item of contemporary Jewish identity and world-view that is the hardest sell to the vast majority of the world.
Does this quote constitute a genuine indictment of Solzhenitsyn? Does one have to toe this particular intellectual line or be tinged with anti-semitism?
I'll go one further - I've been examining closely my own feelings wrt this question and while not 100% I think I lean towards Solzhy's stance as represented by Remnick. Am I, who consider myself a rock-solid friend of the Jews, thus to be seen as shaky, potentially anti-Semite?
155. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 2:35:36 PM
This is an interesting sub-text: the status of the Zionist belief that Israel is a safe haven from antisemitism compared to Europe and now the United States.
Don't forget, though, that I am extremely unrepresentative of any single stream in Israel. Secular Zionism is dead in the water - though I think it is about to rise from its ashes, thanks to Yasir A.'s terror war.
If Israel takes robust steps against the PLO, there may be a rise in black antisemitism (fellow oppressed...yadda yadda), but that is of little consequence in the overall scheme of things.
What if there is a war like the one I predicted earlier: the US and Britain against Saddam, and Israel against the Pals, and most of the WB&G Palestinians get thrown across the Jordan River? Wouldn't there possibly be some very serious backlash against the Jews when it was all over?
(I know we're deep into speculative territory, but what the fuck).
156. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 2:41:33 PM
Marj:
You are only an antisemite if deep down inside you hate the Jews. If you don't, you're not. Even if you despise some things about them and like others (the way I do, for instance), you don't really qualify for antisemitedom, I don't think.
157. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 2:46:31 PM
Spike,
I know, deep down and not so deep down, that I am not in any way what I would call an anti-semite. But the fact remains that there is, in my view, a strong case to be made that the litmus test that Solzhy is evaluated by is commonly a yardstick applied in this country at least. I'm interested in what you have to say about the litmus test and its validity.
I also posted the following quote from Remnick and my comment below it -
"In his text, Solzhenitsyn often seems irritated that there is a "taboo" against discussing the "Jewish question", that one must either endorse certain notions of Jewish history or be branded a bigot."
See, I agree with this bit quite thoroughly. I also agree that Western society is riddled with actual anti-semitism, and that often if it looks and quacks like it, it is anti-semitic. But there is a line there that is more often blurred than not, and it is crossed far too often to accuse and pillory and demonize than is good for anyone involved, or for intellectual honesty.
158. Wombat - 8/2/2001 2:49:06 PM
Rustler:
If the US and Britain go to war with Saddam (one can only hope...), Israel will--as before--be strongly urged to stay out of it. If Saddam succeeds in involving Israel by launching unprovoked attacks with WMD, he will get little sympathy outside of the region.
Most Americans are able to distinguish between Jews and Israel. The one instance that concerned me was the Jonathan Pollard case, when one man's loyalty was clearly not to the United States, but to Israel, for which he was generously rewarded by the latter. More instances of that might lead to a general suspicion of Jews.
159. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 3:01:01 PM
marj:
I'm not sure I trust myself to answer your question well. It is true the Jews use guilt as a weapon of war (against each other as well as against others). It is true also that Jews, while having suffered worse persecution - in my view - than any other nation I can think of right now, a great many Jews have known extreme success and enjoyed the good life in quite a number of places and times (the US in the present day being the best example perhaps).
I think the Jews are a special people: I think they have special talent, I think their culture and national character is essentially a good one and I think the world will benefit when they become a strong nation with a position of leadership. I think, for example, that if we had the right conditions here in Israel - like peace and prosperity for a few years - odds are we would come up with an AIDS cure.
This talent means the Jews succeed a lot, but this success often gives rise to resentment among non-Jews, and resentment breeds hate and persecution.
160. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 3:02:10 PM
I now must play a game of Red Alert 2 with my son Erez (both of us against the computer teams).
161. PelleNilsson - 8/2/2001 3:08:10 PM
Rustler
I think their culture and national character is essentially a good one and I think the world will benefit when they become a strong nation with a position of leadership.
I don't disagree with that. One of the tragic aspects of the current situation is that it diverts energy away from other things. I don't think it was a coincidence that Israel emerged as a high-tech hothouse in the period of relative calm that followed the first Intifada.
162. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 3:09:47 PM
Spike,
When you return, I think that your post is fine and justified.
I am specifically asking - is it suspect (in your view) if I think that Jews have not uniquely suffered? Is it suspect when a country or group or famous writer explicitly states this?
I find it interesting (and encouraging) that you also think of the Jews as a symbol of immense achievement. I do too. Which is why the pairing of an institutionalized insistence that they be remembered as auniversal symbol of suffering is ironic and often contradictory.
In the USA, and correct me if I am wrong others, there is an overt suppression of Jewish triumphalism (such as exhibited, very justifiably, by Spike). The emphasis is always on suffering, and it is probably a pragmatic, bet-hedging, emphasis. Do you all agree?
163. Wombat - 8/2/2001 3:41:06 PM
Marj:
I guess you weren't around in 1967. I think the most positive thing about the Jewish experience in the United States has been the ease with which most Jews have become de-ethnicized. Other than support for Israel, and even that varies considerably, I cannot think of an issue that unites Jews as a people in the United States (unless it is the annual pledge by Baptists to increase their efforts to convert Jews).
164. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 4:16:08 PM
marj:
The reason I feel uncomfortable with my answers is, when push comes to shove and I am under intense attack (as happened with Pe's insistent hammering, some months back, on the matter of Jewish ethnicity and right to Israel's land) I do revert, it seems, to the word 'antisemitism', perhaps unjustifiably. So I don't want to pretend I am more secure than I really am.
I don't think anyone is 'suspect', really. If you don't think Jewish suffering is unique that's a legitimate opinion. But what other nation had a third of its people slaughtered?
How many Tutsis were there before the genocide there?
165. RustlerPike - 8/2/2001 4:24:39 PM
Some Libak for ya:
Jerusalem, June 2001
Jerusalem, June 2001 (sign reads: 'we must defeat Arafat')
166. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 4:27:10 PM
The Tutsis is a bad example, for "your" argument, Spike. As far as I know, they were halved in the 60's and then halved again in the 90's.
The Armenians lost half of their population to the Turks.
Hell, entire peoples have been wiped out in the Americas.
167. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 4:31:37 PM
I like Libak, a lot. But what is the irony/humor/interest in the first one?
--
Spike,
I have decided that I in fact do not think that the Jews have suffered uniquely.
I consider them a symbol of suffering, though. And I, personally, am genuinely and viscerally chilled by the Holocaust to a deeper extent because it took place in an industrialized manner, in Europe, in so-called civilized climes and times, in a place that still purports to be a pinnacle of human culture and achievement.
This is my opinion, rendered from my gut. By the way, I also (from my gut) consider the Jews a symbol of phenomenal achievement.
168. pseudoerasmus - 8/2/2001 4:32:27 PM
The former Soviet Union also affords dozens of examples. Chechens, for example, lost half their population during the deportation to Kazakstan in the 1940s.
169. Wombat - 8/2/2001 4:33:41 PM
They ought to drop that fella onto a Palestinian police station. Talk about your bunker busters.
170. marjoribanks - 8/2/2001 4:36:33 PM
Oh, I get it now, those are super-soakers.
171. Andonly - 8/2/2001 5:29:09 PM
Bat: "If Israel takes robust steps against the PLO, there may be a rise in black antisemitism (fellow oppressed...yadda yadda), but that is of little consequence in the overall scheme of things."
Probably right. But in the event of Pike's major confrontation scenario there could develop serious problems in cities that have large black populations (Detroit, Philly, DC), a history of black-Jewish animosity, or notable pro-Arab contingents (San Francisco--where, during the Gulf War, some demonstrators carried signs that said "We don't want your Jew war").
Remember that blacks make up the majority of the armed services (maybe not the Air Force?), and if we were to get dragged into a protracted war the consequences of resentment could be troubling, even bad for the prosecution of the war effort.
But I agree, the US government will not be recreating Dachau any time soon.
172. Andonly - 8/2/2001 5:45:32 PM
"I find it interesting (and encouraging) that you also think of the Jews as a symbol of immense achievement. I do too. Which is why the pairing of an institutionalized insistence that they be remembered as auniversal symbol of suffering is ironic and often contradictory."
Well, history's full of ironies. But personally, I'd rather not think of myself or my fellow Jews as victims.
"In the USA, and correct me if I am wrong others, there is an overt suppression of Jewish triumphalism (such as exhibited, very justifiably, by Spike). The emphasis is always on suffering, and it is probably a pragmatic, bet-hedging, emphasis. Do you all agree?"
I think it is an unseemly political tool.
"I, personally, am genuinely and viscerally chilled by the Holocaust to a deeper extent because it took place in an industrialized manner, in Europe, in so-called civilized climes and times, in a place that still purports to be a pinnacle of human culture and achievement."
Agreed...
173. stostosto - 8/2/2001 5:45:50 PM
Reposting something I said at World Crossing:
Khaval,
I was on vacation when the Gillon case was rolling here, so I've had to do some backtracking in order to understand what went on.
I made a quick search on Gillon on the Danish parliament's web site. There were three questions asked to the foreign minister by MP Sřren Sřndergaard of the left wing party the Unity List.
This one startled me:
"Can the minister inform us when the Ministry of Foreign Affairs received requests from several Israeli human rights organisations (B'Tselem and the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel among them) not to acknowledge Carmi Gillon as ambassador to Denmark due to his record as directly responsible for torture in breach of international law?"
Foreign Minister Mogens Lykketoft's answer:
"On June the 18th and 19th the Ministry received written notes from B'Tselem and PCATI respectively concerning the appointment of Carmi Gillon as new Israeli ambassador to Denmark. In response of June 22 to the leader of the B'Tselem, Jessica Montell, the following was stated:
c "Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have legitimate security concerns, but these must be addressed in full respect of human rights and within the letter of the law. Both parties have committed themselves to respecting human rights and fundamental rights. Both parties must live up to that commitment. Therefore, Denmark and the EU will closely follow the question.
c In accordance with diplomatic practice, Denmark does not intend to question whom the Israeli government chooses to represent it in Denmark."
I have been getting quite a rap from online Jews about this matter pitting this as "Denmark against Israel" - and it turns out the whole thing was initiated by Israeli human rights organisations requesting that Denmark block Gillon as ambassador!
>>> 174. stostosto - 8/2/2001 5:46:21 PM
>>>
Andonly linked a column the other day from Haaretz which grossly misrepresented the incident to the effect that "the Danish left had succeeded in reinvigorating slumbering national antisemitism". (I quote from memory).
Mein Gott! I have to conclude the stressful Israeli situation induces rash judgment and jumping to knee-jerk prejudiced conclusions.
And for those of you who are prone to such, I'd like to inform you that antisemitism is practically non-existant here. It has about as many and as quaint adherents here as, say, sumo wrestling. It is simply not an issue.
175. Andonly - 8/3/2001 12:50:17 PM
Sto, thanks for your 173, it clears up a lot. I was wondering why Denmark of all places had chosen out of the blue and at this particular point in time to get persnickety about Israeli diplomats. Certainly looked like questionably motivatd Euro leftists trying to hijack the political spotlight.
But no, it was Israeli human rights activists--who I believe it's fair to say are leftists as well--entreating another country to undermine their own right-wing government's legitimacy in a time of war.
It doesn't seem that the media have caught on to this at all. At least, I haven't run across any commentary about it pro or con.
Pike, do you know if B'tselem and co. ever attempted within Israel to have Gillon prosecuted or banned from holding government office or anything like that? Did activists ever appeal to the supreme court about it, or did they just go straight to Denmark?
176. Andonly - 8/3/2001 1:12:53 PM
Banks:
"In his text, Solzhenitsyn often seems irritated that there is a "taboo" against discussing the "Jewish question", that one must either endorse certain notions of Jewish history or be branded a bigot."
See, I agree with this bit quite thoroughly. I also agree that Western society is riddled with actual anti-semitism, and that often if it looks and quacks like it, it is anti-semitic. But there is a line there that is more often blurred than not, and it is crossed far too often to accuse and pillory and demonize than is good for anyone involved, or for intellectual honesty.
A trip to one of Table Talk's "Let's Hate Israel" threads is all that's needed to confirm the truth of everything you say in the second paragraph. But the issue of antisemitism and Israel is tough to address in simple terms, since the subtleties of human antipathies aren't always displayed openly.
I have noticed a tendency among people to think of Israel in terms of what it means to them, and therefore to presume about what Israel should do, or not do, or what Jews should do or not do with regard to Israel, as though what Israel means to others is (naturally) what it should mean to Jews.
Too many Jews in the West have milked the Holocaust, have made ourselves into walking martyrs, and generally exploited the history of Jewish suffering.
But Israel seems to be viewed by some non-Jews fed up with all that as the greateat example of Jewish exploitation. It isn't; it's the result of a quest for self-determination, that's all. But since such quests don't usually require that those who embark on them must have suffered more than anyone else in history, one does tend to wonder about people who claim the Zionist enterprise wasn't really "necessary", and use the unexceptional nature of Jewish suffering to buttress their argument.
177. Andonly - 8/3/2001 2:09:56 PM
Here's a Ha'aretz article claiming Sharon has no game plan but to stay in power. It also calls for unilateral separation from the Palestinians.
178. Andonly - 8/3/2001 2:24:46 PM
Another, more analytical, article, same subject as the Rosenbaum linked above:
Sharon Has the Power
179. Andonly - 8/3/2001 2:40:35 PM
Also, anyone interested in the question of Israeli military superiority should follow the link at today's Ha'aretz to Ze'ev Schiff's piece, "What Cordesman Really Said".
And this piece by Amira Hass suggests maybe the Pals are trying to turn a corner. And perhaps Sharon's strategy of not negotiating under fire is not so vapid as the previous two articles I linked suggest:
Stop shooting, says Palestinian press
By Amira Hass
The Palestinian news agency Wafa yesterday ran a lead editorial dubbed "The Stone and the Shoe," calling for an end to the military aspects of the Intifada and attacks inside Israel, saying the Palestinians should use stones and shoes instead of weapons to challenge the Israeli occupation.
"We have to admit that no matter how many casualties we may cause the Israelis, we will not be able to win the war against them, and threatening the Europeans and the U.S. is a foolish step that will affect us negatively," says the editorial. As the official Palestinian news agency, Wafa generally reflects the thinking of the Palestinian Authority's top leadership. The editorial, signed by the "Wafa Political Editor," is expected to appear throughout the Palestinian press this morning.
"Only by political means we shall be able to achieve our goals, by the use of rocks to fight the Israelis, on the roadblocks and in the settlements, not inside Israel, and not using firearms," says the editorial. ...
180. RustlerPike - 8/3/2001 3:38:43 PM
sto:
You may be on to a scoop (Israel-wise) with that B'tzelem stuff. I'm trying to think of who to leak it to. I tried calling Nahum Barne'a but he wasn't home or on the cellphone.
181. RustlerPike - 8/3/2001 3:47:42 PM
Pike, do you know if B'tselem and co. ever attempted within Israel to have Gillon prosecuted or banned from holding government office or anything like that? Did activists ever appeal to the supreme court about it, or did they just go straight to Denmark?
My guess is the latter but I don't know.
182. Andonly - 8/3/2001 9:24:38 PM
Sto, on rereading your 173, I realized that there's no mention of whether Israeli human rights groups' opinions about Gillon (the "written notes") were volunteered and unsolicited by the Danish gov't.
Did the Israelis initiate the objection to Gillon, or is it possible that the Danes objected initially, with B'tselem et al. covering the Foreign Ministry's ass with their written requests?
Just curious.
183. Andonly - 8/3/2001 9:52:18 PM
Banks, having read this again in another state of mind, I find I'm not sure what you mean. Please clarify: "The emphasis is always on suffering, and it is probably a pragmatic, bet-hedging, emphasis."
In what way pragmatic & bet-hedging?
Are you saying that Jews, who are perceived in some places as arrogant and privileged, emphasize our historical suffering and minimize our achievements in order to defuse those charges?
I would point out that Jewish assimilation into the anglo-Prostestant mainstream accounts for the downplaying of collective achievements (nobody likes a braggart, America is supposed to be caste-free), and the elevation of suffering to the plane of moral achievement has likely been the diaspora's collective vaccine against antisemitism. It has probably provided us some immunity, but made us a little sick in the bargain.
184. RustlerPike - 8/4/2001 9:53:06 AM
I would point out that Jewish assimilation into the anglo-Prostestant mainstream accounts for the downplaying of collective achievements (nobody likes a braggart, America is supposed to be caste-free), and the elevation of suffering to the plane of moral achievement has likely been the diaspora's collective vaccine against antisemitism. It has probably provided us some immunity, but made us a little sick in the bargain.
imo - one of the best paragraphs you've written in the parts of the Mote where I hang out.
185. RustlerPike - 8/4/2001 9:53:08 AM
I would point out that Jewish assimilation into the anglo-Prostestant mainstream accounts for the downplaying of collective achievements (nobody likes a braggart, America is supposed to be caste-free), and the elevation of suffering to the plane of moral achievement has likely been the diaspora's collective vaccine against antisemitism. It has probably provided us some immunity, but made us a little sick in the bargain.
imo - one of the best paragraphs you've written in the parts of the Mote where I hang out.
186. RustlerPike - 8/4/2001 10:16:09 AM
Well - I'm taking my kids out of Katzir School, I'm almost positive. The reason: I feel a terror attack in the offing. I told the guys at International the rationale for this, but maybe it bears repeating.
I have been churning out monthly pamphlets here in Katzir since last December, warning of the deteriorating security situation in our area (Wadi Ara / North Shomron), and of the eyes-wide-shut security policy of our Local Council.
We are what is known as a yishuv kav tefer: a settlement just inside pre-1967 lines, bordering with PA territory on the southeast. We are also surrounded by Israeli-Arab villages on all other sides: in October 2000 Wadi Ara was the single most explosive area, in terms of Israeli Arab riots, in all of Israel. The road from Hadera to Afula - a central artery in this small country - was cut off for a week.
Katzir and Mey Ami - the other Jewish settlement in Wadi Ara - are perceived by the Israeli Arabs as encroaching on their territory. Mey Ami sits right next to Umm El Fahm and I've heard the Arabs say it has more land than it, though it has only a few hundred inhabitants and Umm El Fahm has about 40,000 (I'm not sure about the 'more land' bit: Mey Ami is an agricultural settlement and Umm El Fahm is a town - in any case, the Arabs will say none of Mey Ami's land belongs to it anyways, and all of it is theirs).
Katzir does not have a lot of land but it does have some, and it is quite well placed strategically, on a mountaintop that seems - according to the archaeologists -to have been a key strategic viewpoint since ancient times.
>>>
187. RustlerPike - 8/4/2001 10:35:25 AM
>>>
We are exceedingly vulnerable. It is the easiest thing in the world for a terrorist to mount an attack on us, for the following reasons:
- intelligence gathering is a piece of cake: there are Arabs living in Katzir and no one checks you at the entrance to see who you are and where you are going.
- there are virtually no security persons guarding the school, kindergartens and nursery.
- the perimeter fence in incomplete and there is no effective patrol along it.
and perhaps most importantly
- the terrorist/s who mounted an attack could escape to one of the nearby villages, and from there to the PA, with relative ease.
So there are both ideological 'justification' and operational ease involved here, for the potential terrorists. Unlike most other kav tefer settlements, which have put up fences, canals, and guards to protect them from what may lurk beyond, our Local Council seems to have a policy of not beefing up security one iota.
The Ministry of Defense offered us, some months back, 475,000 NIS for a perimeter fence, but the Local Council Head torpedoed the project by insisting the fence be 'decorative' and 'friendly' and also function as a promenade. My take is the guy is simply scared shitless of the Arabs and does not want them to perceive him as somehow hostile to them.
In the process of protecting his own ass he is setting us up for a horrible fate. I have been trying to wake people up to this danger but the forces I am up against (the Council, apathy, fear, stupidity, and the tendency for things to remain as they are - I forget the term, from physics) are just too great.
So I'm taking my kids to school in Hadera, I think. 188. Andonly - 8/4/2001 12:48:47 PM
BBC to describe Israeli 'hits' as 'targeted killings'
By Ha'aretz Service
The British newspaper the Independent reported Saturday that the BBC have ordered its staff and journalist to use the phrase 'targeted killings' and not assassinations when describing Israeli hits on Palestinian militants.
According to the report the "BBC journalists were astonished that the assignments editor, Malcolm Downing, should have sent out the memorandum to staff, stating that the word 'assassinations' should only be used for high-profile political assassinations'. There were, Mr. Downing said, 'lots of other words for death'."
The change is apparently a result of pressure from Israeli diplomats, who have complained to the BBC that their coverage of events in the Middle East has an anti-Israel bias.
The Independent, on the other hand refers to the policy as "the Israeli murder campaign" and attributes the killings to "Israeli death squads."
189. stostosto - 8/4/2001 1:31:35 PM
Ando #182
Did the Israelis initiate the objection to Gillon, or is it possible that the Danes objected initially, with B'tselem et al. covering the Foreign Ministry's ass with their written requests?
Ha! I would never have thought of such a possibility in a million years. But then again, I am a naif, and this is laid back bacon and fairy tale country.
My definite feeling is the government could have done without this row, it hasn't done it any good, and, anyway, it has consistently maintained that it didn't intend to question Gillon's appointment.
Apart, that is, from the justice minister's answer to a question from Mr. Sřndergaard as to whether Denmark is obliged to arrest and prosecute foreigners guilty of torture who turn up on Danish soil. Which he confirmed -- because that's what Danish law says...
If B'Tselem were prodded by Danes, it would have to have been Danish human rights org's or leftists. But, again, I find that very unlikely, perhaps out of profound naďveté.
I still am a bit in the dark as to how this matter played out, though.
190. RustlerPike - 8/5/2001 4:15:50 AM
Sto:
I've notified Barnea (Yediot Aharonot).
191. RustlerPike - 8/5/2001 8:20:42 AM
Hey - nobody's posted anything in hours.
A poll in Ynet asks - what is the correct attitude towards women serving in combat roles alongside men (the subject is in the news lately, mostly because the Zionist Orthodox have announced they won't be sending their boys into the army if women are allowed into the combat units. They complain of all sorts of 'indecent' situations that arise from this. Also, the Hebron settlers have announced they don't want women guarding them. Plus, a woman Border Guard was pretty badly wounded a few days ago - just when Elle was about to feature her in a report on 'combat girls').
The left hand bar says 'prevent it'. The middle one says 'enable it, to a certain degree'. The right hand bar says 'encourage it'. 6789 votes have been counted - that's like 0.1% of Israel's population, isn't it?
Fascinating, this male/female dilemma Israel finds itself in. The testosterone-ruled Arab neighborhood we live in is not necessarily the best place in the world to come into contact with one's feminine side.
192. ButterfieldSwire - 8/5/2001 11:19:24 AM
The vast majority of non-Jewish Americans are pro-Israel. The main reasons are:
1) Over the fifty years of the Cold War, the main question that determined American attitudes toward foreign countries was "Are they with us or agin' us." Over and over again, in USSR vs. USA, in Iran vs. USA, in Iraq vs. USA, Israel is with, Palestinians agin. Personally speaking, anyone who is the number one enemy of Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Hafez Assad and Ayatollah Khameini is A-OK in my book.
2) Israel is a constitutional democracy. We invented constitutional democracy, we think that if the whole world practiced constitutional democracy, the world would be a lot better for everyone, but especially for us. The Palestinians will practice constitutional democracy when hell freezes over.
193. ButterfieldSwire - 8/5/2001 11:39:12 AM
I guess its kind of cute to quip that Americans are pro-Israel because they believe that Ariel Sharon will break the Seventh Seal and unleash Gog vs. Magog and all that. It might also be kind of cute to say that the reason the BBC is so pro-PLO is because the network is staffed by a bunch public school poofs who dream of being in Omar Sharif's harem someday.
But you would have to be truely and deeply stupid to believe either one.
194. stostosto - 8/5/2001 11:56:48 AM
17.6.01: B'Tselem: Do not appoint Gillon as Ambassador
195. ButterfieldSwire - 8/5/2001 12:03:41 PM
The only people in the US who are really sympathetic toward the Palestinians are American Muslims and Chumpskyite leftist radicals. The first have no influence and the latter are treated as a joke. Pro-Israel American Jews on the other hand are extremely influential.
In the EU, on the other hand, people pay attention to leftist radicals and Europeans have already rid themselves of Jewish influence.
196. ButterfieldSwire - 8/5/2001 1:02:18 PM
The really intractable problem with negotiating with the the Palestinians is that the average Palestinian knows that Hamas is so corrupt and evil that any resolution of the conflict between Israel and Hamas will only leave the average Palestinian at the mercy of a bunch of crooks.
197. marjoribanks - 8/6/2001 9:21:06 AM
Banks, having read this again in another state of mind, I find I'm not sure what you mean. Please clarify: "The emphasis is always on suffering, and it is probably a pragmatic, bet-hedging, emphasis."
In what way pragmatic & bet-hedging?
Well, part of my take is adderssed by you - the "vaccine against anti-semitsism" bit. There is no public Jewish triumphalism in the USA. Unlike the Italians, say, or the Puerto Ricans (how d'ya like that example) there are no parades down 5th Avenue celebrating the success Jews have made in this country, Jews do not regularly proudly point to their own in high places, issue lists of prominent Jewish-Americans.
In private, people are triumphalist and point to the preponderance of Jews in certain circles of achievement. But in public, not only is the glee absent, it's replaced with strict solemnity and a perpetual emphasis on suffering. Public celebration is curiously completely absent in Jewish America.
198. Wombat - 8/6/2001 9:44:43 AM
Marj:
Perhaps that is how things are portrayed by organizations that purport to "speak for" Jews. I would suggest that Jews take a more nuanced attitude.
199. jexster - 8/6/2001 11:11:43 AM
The escalating Arab-Israeli violence is intensifying pressure on the Bush administration to play a more active role in the peace process because the conflict is threatening to undercut U.S. policy elsewhere in the Middle East, particularly a long-awaited initiative for confronting Iraq.
But senior officials say they remain intent on continuing their current approach, which is centered on persuading the two sides to accept a U.S.-brokered cease-fire, even though they acknowledge the Arab perception of American backing for tough Israeli tactics limits options for challenging President Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
Pressure Point
200. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 12:27:28 PM
BW:
The really intractable problem with negotiating with the the Palestinians is that the average Palestinian knows that Hamas is so corrupt and evil that any resolution of the conflict between Israel and Hamas will only leave the average Palestinian at the mercy of a bunch of crooks.
You mean the PA, not Hamas. Hamas is actually the opposite of the PA in this respect: a grassroots socially-oriented movement whose leaders are quite non-ostentatious.
201. Andonly - 8/6/2001 1:05:42 PM
Swire: The really intractable problem with negotiating with the the Palestinians is that the average Palestinian knows that Hamas is so corrupt and evil that any resolution of the conflict between Israel and Hamas will only leave the average Palestinian at the mercy of a bunch of crooks.
You mean Fatah, not Hamas, yes? Hamas is probably more like Hizbullah, which may be evil but is not as far as I know corrupt.
202. Andonly - 8/6/2001 1:07:13 PM
Oops, I see now that Pike dealt with this already, sorry to pile on.
203. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 1:20:29 PM
I've put up some more links. Some are worth digging into, I think.
204. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 1:28:12 PM
Here, as an example of what can be found at the MERIA site, is an article on feminism in Egypt.
(I support feminism. In Egypt.)
205. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 1:29:37 PM
Got so carried away with my joke I forgot to link.
206. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 1:43:28 PM
"Siden september har der vćret en drastisk forvćrring af menneskerettighedssituationen i de besatte omrĺder".
- Mary Robinson, FN.
(What's a 'besatte omrĺder'?)
207. stostosto - 8/6/2001 3:27:07 PM
Rustler:
'besatte omrĺder' = occupied territories.
Is that the only words you don't understand. You never cease to amaze me.
208. stostosto - 8/6/2001 5:35:48 PM
NGOs call for indictment of ambassador-designate
Five international anti-torture organizations have called for an investigation of former Israeli intelligence chief Carmi Gillon when he takes office as ambassador to Denmark next month. The five non-governmental organizations this weekend called on the Danish government "to ensure that its police and prosecutors investigate and, if appropriate, indict Mr. Gillon for violation of the UN Convention Against Torture, should he take up his post as Israeli ambassador in Denmark." Last week, the international human rights organization Human Rights Watch likewise sent a letter to Danish Foreign Minister Mogens Lykketoft urging him and his government to reject Gillon as ambassador, as well as a letter asking Israel to revoke his accreditation.
It's not going to stop.
209. stostosto - 8/6/2001 5:44:05 PM
Indeed it's not:
For the first time ever Amnesty International are making use of its extensive files on human rights violations in order to prosecute one single person namely the new Israeli ambassador to Denmark Carmi Gillon. The minister of Justice Frank Jensen on the contrary has stated that Gillon is protected by diplomatic immunity and it would be useless to file a case against him on his use of torture in the mid nineties. But that is not the view of Amnesty International. Most governments in the world have signed the UN torture convention. Now it is important to make sure the governments are responsible and Carmi Gillon is an Example says Anne Fitzgerald of Amnesty International in London to the newspaper Politiken.
(Quoted in full from Denmark's Radio's news in English). 210. arkymalarky - 8/6/2001 6:20:57 PM
Very nice thread, RP. Just wanted to announce my lurking status.
I tried to find my Pal pal, but it's been so long I would have to pay 40 bucks to try to locate him, since he was nowhere in the internet white pages that I could find and no one I know is in contact with him any more. He's a nice guy, but....
211. Andonly - 8/6/2001 6:39:32 PM
A critique of the Sontag article from this week's TNR.
On July 26 the nation's newspaper of record devoted 5,681 words to a retrospective by Jerusalem bureau chief Deborah Sontag titled "Quest for Mideast Peace: How and Why It Failed" and mentioned the word "intifada" just once. While virtually ignoring the Palestinian uprising that has brought the Middle East to the brink of war, the story pushes two arguments. First, that the peace process included "missteps and successes by Israelis, Palestinians and Americans alike." Second, that, in the months following Camp David, the parties were much closer to a final deal than was previously thought. But a close look at Sontag's story reveals lazy reporting, errors of omission, questionable shading, and an indifference to the basic fact that the Palestinian decision to wed diplomacy with violence, not American and Israeli miscues, damned the search for peace.
The rest, which could serve serve as a quick tutorial in the basics of how the media spins a bias, should be instructive for people who were unable to recognize Sontag's spin when they read it.
212. robertjayb - 8/6/2001 7:11:34 PM
The Israeli targeted killing of suspected terrorists is being discussed on the Lehrer newshour. Now. 6:10 central.
213. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:21:20 PM
Arky:
Just wanted to announce my lurking status.
In accordance with Middle Eastern practice, your self-proclaimed observer status will mean you wear a blue helmet and side with the Arabs, albeit quietly.
(Wonder why the UN troops - doesn't seem to matter what country they're from - always do such enraging things when charged with any real kind of mission on the ground here. Like pulling their observers out of the Sinai when Egypt told them to, in 1967. Or the whole Hizbullah tape affair. Really I wonder).
214. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:30:38 PM
(an aside: computer mice are such unergonomic gadgets, are they not? The kind of hand/finger movement they require is quite unnatural, I find.
If I were in charge of these things I would design a computer that resembled a car driver's seat, with pedals, a handbrake, steering - and a touchscreen. If you wanted to go 'back', for example, you'd steer left. Right - fwd. For 'enter' you'd have a lever, like on the jackpot machines.
You'd be using your body rather than just a couple of wrist muscles).
215. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:41:54 PM
The Gillon affair doesn't bother me much, actually. I think Gillon was in charge of the GSS when Rabin was assassinated: I don't see how someone responsible for such a horrific security failure could be appointed to anything.
I'm 99% sure it was he.
Maybe he was newly appointed at the time. Still. That fuckup was unforgiveable. I'm not sure how the Israeli press forgave the GSS for that. Everyone focused on the assassin.
Our society is childish in that sense: the more horrific your deed, the more attention you get. The Arab MKs play this masterfully: they make amazingly provocative statements - like one of them, who praised the shooting attack in Tel Aviv the other day - get humungous media attention, and have the time of their lives. Yet the media never seems to pause and say - hold it, we're being played here, let's just ignore the fucks.
216. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:47:56 PM
Sto:
You never cease to amaze me.
I'm pretty sure most people who took German in high school and knew the context could figure out what that said.
"Siden september har der vćret en drastisk forvćrring af menneskerettighedssituationen i de besatte omrĺder":
Translation:
Sidon, September: the ferryboat moved forward frantically as the besotted Man-O-War played Tomb Raider.
217. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:54:03 PM
Some bug bit me the other day and apparently triggered a furious reaction in my body. It was the most terrible thing: at first a pain where I was bitten, then the pain spread to my stomach and lower joints. It was truly terrible pain, unceasing, and it went on for 12 or 14 hours. I couldn't sleep, couldn't rest, couldn't sit, could hardly walk; I was just all bunched up, changing position every 15 seconds and asking my children when they thought this would be over.
At a certain point I started reading Psalms to my boy Erez.
218. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 8:55:31 PM
That was yesterday, actually. Painkillers didn't help either, needless to say.
219. sakonige - 8/6/2001 9:08:26 PM
Ow. Do you think it was a scorpion, or something like that? I'm lucky that bugs don't often bite me, or cause me much pain.
220. sakonige - 8/6/2001 9:11:16 PM
Actually, I remember when I first realized that. I was in the sixth grade, on recess, and a honeybee stung the back of my hand. I didn't notice until I saw it and plucked the stinger out. It didn't make more of a mark than a plucked hair.
221. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 9:15:14 PM
Good article in the TNR, Ando (Message # 211).
I guess there are really two 'Israel images' to choose from:
Image 1: a shady people with a shady record, arguably a nation even, set up a state by slithering into the Middle East colonial-style and exploiting their victimization by Nazi Germany to gain sympathy for themselves. These people set up a rogue state which does nothing much but occupy and conquer, serve Western interests in the region and stir up war. Its religious fanatics and sadistic soldiers trample the native Arab peasants and use them as its serf population. This 'nation' is now led by its most brutal general, a true war criminal, and - with the backing of the US - is seemingly set upon launching yet another campaign of horror upon the Palestinians, and any of their Arab brethern who try to help them.
>>>
222. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 9:18:28 PM
Sako:
No, that's the strange thing, there were two little spots like mosquito bites, about two inches apart. Someone said it could have been a poisonous flea of some sort. How degrading! The doctor ruled out a Black Widow because there were two bites and not one.
I told her, the way I'm feeling, I would wind up having a black widow pretty soon.
223. RustlerPike - 8/6/2001 9:20:34 PM
>>>
Image 2: Oof, I'm a tad too tired for Image 2 right now, I'm afraid. It's 4:19 am here - that pain bout threw me into jetlag.
224. sakonige - 8/6/2001 9:32:08 PM
Get good healthcare, anyway, and pay attention to what happens for a while. Whatever bit you probably bit someone else.
225. jexster - 8/6/2001 10:35:29 PM
Imagine The New York Times covering the sinking of the Titanic with only a passing reference to the iceberg. Absurd? Not really. On July 26 the nation's newspaper of record devoted 5,681 words to a retrospective by Jerusalem bureau chief Deborah Sontag titled "Quest for Mideast Peace: How and Why It Failed" and mentioned the word "intifada" just once. While virtually ignoring the Palestinian uprising that has brought the Middle East to the brink of war, the story pushes two arguments. First, that the peace process included "missteps and successes by Israelis, Palestinians and Americans alike." Second, that, in the months following Camp David, the parties were much closer to a final deal than was previously thought. But a close look at Sontag's story reveals lazy reporting, errors of omission, questionable shading, and an indifference to the basic fact that the Palestinian decision to wed diplomacy with violence, not American and Israeli miscues, damned the search for peace.
In the Interest of Fair (and Genuine)Debate - TNR
226. jexster - 8/6/2001 10:37:01 PM
Well guess who beat me to it!!!
For an article that is "meaningless" Sontag has drawn considerable fire!
227. jexster - 8/6/2001 10:45:02 PM
Sontag's discussion of Israeli and Palestinian popular opinion, which radically constricted what negotiators could offer, is also thin and misleading.
And drawn such distortion! Sontag specifically treated this point and if the author thinks the treatment "thin" fine but to misrepresent the article in such a disingenuous fashion only proves the point - too much heat, not enough light!
BTW....see my bullets in the international thread...this "thin" item in the Sontag article, I found illuminating on the very point that TNR claims was missing!
228. Andonly - 8/6/2001 11:03:25 PM
"For an article that is "meaningless" Sontag has drawn considerable fire!"
Yeah, well, I consider disinformation meaningless and so should anyone concious. In the larger scheme of things, of course, propaganda has meaning; but not the morally unambiguous sort Jexster would like.
Lies should draw fire.
By the way, I'm curious whether anyone here other than Rustler is aware that Israel attempted to make peace with Syria while Bashar's daddy was still in charge. And if so, can anyone outline what Hafiz al Assad contemptuously turned his back on.
229. Andonly - 8/6/2001 11:11:39 PM
Pike, it sounds like a spider alright. In the States we have something called a Brown Recluse, whose bite induces tissue necrosis that spreads and can take a very long time to heal. I thought it was more common in the south than the northeast, but an elderly friend of mine was bitten by one in Philadelphia and it caused her a lot of tsuris.
What you describe doesn't sound like that, but then I also didn't know a black widow made one puncture and not two. Sounds a litle odd to me. Ever met an arachnid whose body wasn't arranged bilaterally? Those monsters have fangs, not stingers.
230. jexster - 8/6/2001 11:13:43 PM
Lies should draw fire.
The Hot & Dark One hath spoken!
231. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 1:05:22 AM
Jex:
Please fire those International bullets into this thread too (I sound like Irving for some reason).
232. IrvingSnodgrass - 8/7/2001 1:22:16 AM
heaven forbid!
233. Erinys - 8/7/2001 1:43:58 AM
"In war, you are doomed to employ your opponents' methods"
stostosto, no I don't know who said this; who was it?
234. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 2:22:33 AM
Erinys, you Greek goddess!!!
235. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 2:24:19 AM
"In war, you are doomed to employ your opponents' methods": stostosto, no I don't know who said this; who was it?
Joan Rivers?
Sly Stallone?
236. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 2:26:56 AM
Andy'leh:
Ever met an arachnid whose body wasn't arranged bilaterally?
Answer 1: You mean besides CalGal?
Answer 2: The punctures were a couple inches apart. That would have to be a six foot wide black widow, by my reckoning.
237. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 2:33:46 AM
Does this link (to a JPost poll) work?
238. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 2:48:52 AM
A peace offering for my lover, Sq. Sakko Vanzetti.
239. stostosto - 8/7/2001 3:39:23 AM
Rustler, you're killing me this morning! (And I'm not even a Fatah member).
Regarding the bug bite, I think your doctor is right. My mother has tried something similar. Very nasty. Still, it's a bit mysterious that there were two bites, I have to admit.
Regarding Gillon: I don't care for Gillon so much as for the accusations of antisemitism and the fury that the incident has elicited from various Israelis.
What about the blue helmets, btw? You think that's motivated by antisemitism too?
----
Erinys:
"In war, you are doomed to employ your opponents' methods"
I asked because I'd like to know. I saw it attributed to Poul Henningsen, a Danish intellectual icon (active 20s to 60s or something). But I thought he might have gotten it from somewhere else.
240. stostosto - 8/7/2001 3:57:09 AM
Rustler,
I read a chapter of a book called "The World of our Fathers" yesterday, by one Irving Howe.
First chapter "The Origins" deals with life in the Russian shtetl before the big pogrom in 1881 that set off mass emigration to the US. It really is an agonising, painful, sad, outrageous history your people has.
Sometimes one forgets that the Nazis and the Holocaust was no more than the, admittedly incomprehensible, culmination of centuries of cruel persecution and oppression. And not just in Russia or Germany or Spain. But virtually everywhere.
I have a colleague who is the son of Polish Jews who fled from there as late as 1972 when the regime turned the heat on the Jews one last time. I say last, because there is hardly a Jew left there now, and the Poles are beginning to show some introspection and repent.
I am not sure I'll finish Howe right away. It's a big tome, and I have many things to do. 241. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 6:25:21 AM
Otsotsots:
My mother has tried something similar.
Now there's a cute Danishism.
Your Message # 240 was good to read.
242. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 7:06:48 AM
Much more fun than a mouse and IE5. Easier on the wrist, too.
243. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 7:10:38 AM
(see Message # 214).
244. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 8:25:14 AM
Israeli porn site.
245. arkymalarky - 8/7/2001 10:16:38 AM
Dadgum, RP. I'm glad you're ok. I thought black widow too when you said two puncture holes, but surely you'd have noticed a black widow that big.
246. marjoribanks - 8/7/2001 10:27:16 AM
Spike,
Maybe it was this beastie -
247. marjoribanks - 8/7/2001 10:29:34 AM
Seriously though, there are some scary little nasties in that area. When I was at Ein Gedi, my roomate burst out in awful pus boild all over his neck and arms and even his face. The local doctor told us it was a bad reaction to mango sap (we'd been picking mangoes).
When we got back to the US though, his horrified parents took him immediately to their doc who said that it was clearly the work of a poisonous crawling insect.
248. Andonly - 8/7/2001 10:30:10 AM
Pike, sorry, I neglected to recall you'd said the bite marks were two inches apart. Still, is it possible a six-foot wide black widow bit you while you were busy at the computer, and you just didn't notice?
And do you have ticks in Israel? We Murcans have something called a deer tick that spreads Lyme disease, very nasty but treatable with antibiotics if caught early. Usually pretty negligible symptoms, plus sometimes a target-like rash--not like your story.
With Best Wishes for a Speedy Recovery,
The Hot Dark One
249. Erinys - 8/7/2001 10:43:38 AM
The 'doomed' war comment sounds vaguely biblical to me.
What's that #238 guy singing?
250. Andonly - 8/7/2001 11:15:47 AM
Sto,
Your tour of Irving Howe reminds me I forgot to make a point about the subject of 'Jewish suffering' as a comparative exercise. And that point is, obviously, that few peoples have been thrown out of (or murdered in) so many places they thought they were accepted citizens of, over such a protracted period of time.
We find this disconcerting because it's not like we haven't contributed substantially to the societies we've belonged to, and attained status and power, and even legal protections from harm, over and over again.
There are Jews in the US who do not feel entirely secure here, for that reason. I'm one of them. It's not that I'm especially concerned for my own generation; and although one always worries (rationally and irrationally) about one's children, I'm not seriously concerned that the world will turn upside down in their lifetimes either.
But not being seriously concerned isn't the same thing as not being concerned at all. And it's not the same concern any non-Jew anywhere might have about being a collective victim of a war or a riot. It's the worry that, when you least expect it, everything could go to hell again, because for as long as you remain a Jew, your status (except in Israel) is Outsider.
We are taught the Holocaust partly as a cautionary tale. We're told, growing up, It can happen anywhere. And some of us, recognizing that history isn't so predictable as certain optimists would have it, come to the conclusion that this warning isn't entirely the paranoid fear-mongering of traumatized old farts.
251. ButterfieldSwire - 8/7/2001 11:35:45 AM
Thats right. Fatah, not Hamas
252. stostosto - 8/7/2001 11:35:59 AM
Andy
I see what you mean. It's really eerie.
What bothers me a bit is that I have the feeling that accusations of antisemitism where none exists may help create it.
In the Gillon case: The Israelis should by all means protest the unreasonability and hypocrisy of the Danish brouhaha (we received Arafat cordially and all that), but please don't take it as a sign of dormant antisemitism, for that is bloody offensive and risks creating hostility for no good reason.
Paranoia can create its own justification, I suspect.
253. Andonly - 8/7/2001 2:38:49 PM
"I have the feeling that accusations of antisemitism where none exists may help create it."
I agree, which is why when I posted that link to the Ze'ev Schif article I said I thought Schif was over the top. He often is. Nevertheless, sometimes what he says seems worth taking note of, in case there's a kernel of truth embedded in it.
For instance, as you allude, it isn't trivial that Denmark had no problem hosting Arafat even though its leftists responded eagerly to the human rights community's efforts in the Gillon affair. And no one--no one other than Israelis--sees fit to point out that the human rights community (and leftists generally) piling on Gillon and Sharon just at this moment has a clear political intent: to undermine the elected government of Israel, which that same community regards as "criminal", apparently no better than Slobodan Milosevich.
But let's assume Sharon and Gillon are criminals and it's just that simple. One still can't help wondering how they come to be regarded as the most important, most censurable criminals in the middle east, or even the most egregious violators of human rights among democractic countries.
Some of antisemitism, in other words, entails picking on Jews not out of any special hatred of Jews, but because it's politically expedient. Is that not happening here, now, on an international level?
254. stostosto - 8/7/2001 4:14:17 PM
Andy
either that or - like I said before - simply a different perception from the Israeli view as to whether the Pals or the Israelis are being wronged the most.
Illegal settlements in occupied territories that continue to be expanded. In spite, not only of the UN security council resolutions, but also the Oslo agreements. Entire towns and cities being sealed off and having curfews imposed on them. Combat helicopters and tanks against largely unarmed opponents. 600 dead Palestinians to 100 dead Israelis.
Things like that.
And I know, of course, the Israeli take on this -- it's just not shared by everybody, I am afraid.
255. Andonly - 8/7/2001 5:58:45 PM
Illegal settlements in occupied territories that continue to be expanded.
In keeping with Palestinians' refusal to abide by their renunciation of terror and incitement per Oslo.
In spite, not only of the UN security council resolutions, but also the Oslo agreements.
The same UN that declared Zionism equivalent to racism, the same Oslo agreements that the Palestinians violated from the git-go without a peep from the international community. Let's not even get into discussing the monies, presumably donated by the international community for Palestinian development, which were pocketed by Arafat.
Entire towns and cities being sealed off and having curfews imposed on them.
To prevent their residents from attacking Israelis. And this was only a minority of the West Bank, Gaza and much of the WB having been given to the PA to control. Moreover, you speak of curfews and blackades as though there were no terrorist threat to contend with! Let's not forget that Israel did give back territory under Oslo, and did work with the PA Police, who were also armed as a consequnce of the Oslo agreement--and subsequently became Tanzim. All of that is irrevocable (unless Sharon reoccupies the territories, which I'm sure he's loath to do, despite the rumors). In contrast, what did Arafat do that he couldn't take back again merely by shrugging? Agree to talk? Arrest a few terrorists just so he could let them go again?
256. Andonly - 8/7/2001 5:59:03 PM
Combat helicopters and tanks against largely unarmed opponents.
You mean poorly armed. Why should it arouse sympathy that an extremist contingent is not as well armed as the state it wishes to conquer? GOOD. THEY SHOULDN'T BE ARMED AT ALL.
600 dead Palestinians to 100 dead Israelis.
And if the score ever evens out, Israel will be blamed for that, too: if only you had set them free instead of oppressing them, your people wouldn't be dying. But the truth is, it would, but no one would be counting the dead Israeli victims of terror, just as no one counts those Israeli victims who have died since Oslo was signed.
Until the Pals can prove wrong the Israeli belief that every concesion will bring more revanchism on their part, there won't be peace, and there's nothing Israel can do about it except a) fight, b) negotiate only during a ceasefire observed by the Palestinians, or c) turn the other cheek.
As Rustler has pointed out time and again, option c. is suicide in the middle east. A true Pal leader is required to enact b.; Arafat ain't the guy, but my money's on Barghouti; and so a. is the only thing that can happen in the meantime. Moreover, it can't happen in a half-assed way, or the Pals will think they're winning and should fight harder. So far, their strategy has been to fight harder anyway--so they claim, so the press reports. But in fact their editorials are calling for laying down arms and returning to fighting with stones, and their leadership is on the verge of being toppled.
That is what Sharon wants. Whether he can get it soon enough, no one knows.
257. Andonly - 8/7/2001 6:00:22 PM
'But the truth is, they would, but no one would be counting the dead Israeli victims...'
258. stostosto - 8/7/2001 6:35:18 PM
Like I said, andonly, I know the Israeli take. You claim that Israel had no choice but to do what it did and everything was the Palestinians' fault.
I really don't know about that. There should be other options than shooting on rioters killing children in the process.
Sharon himself should have had other options than to make his famous walk on Temple Mount.
There should be other options than to expand settlements. In fact, I still have to see even a remotely plausible justification for that.
And the idiotic Zionism = racism was a toothless General Assembly resolution from 1975 supported by a rag-tag majority consisting of newly decolonised, anti-western countries, which was revoked in 1991, while the resolutions on the illegality of Israeli settlements were Security Council resolutions, i.e. supported by the USA, France and Britain.
You protest the difference in attitude against Israel when compared to the Pals.
But what happened to Iraq when it violated UN SC resolutions? The Arabs ask that question, as you may know.
What happened to Milosevic? (And the UN security council wasn't even behind that action which was taken on NATO's own initiative).
And why wouldn't Israeli deaths be counted? Sure they would. In fact they are, very much so.
I think Israelis should restrict themselves to arguing their case on its merits and be willing to listen to its friends in the West instead of yelling antisemitism whenever critisised for concrete deeds. I wager it has a numbing effect on Israeli self-restriction and sound judgment, this knee-jerk siege mentality. A "No one likes us anyway, so fuck them all!" kind of idea.
259. stostosto - 8/7/2001 6:41:38 PM
(I realise this is a bad time, but I have to leave the discussion for the rest of this week. The petty RL demands my attention).
260. jexster - 8/7/2001 7:04:54 PM
RP.....my case is too simple to require bullets and the case is this....
It has been obvious since the "peace" process began that the natural allies in the Mideast were and are and for the forseeable future will remain Arab and Israeli militants.
This is hardly difficult to fathom. Two parties, ostensibly opponents, benefit as violence one against the other mounts. Their cause is violence. Arab and Israeli allies!
Politically, its vastly more difficult for the mushy middle peace activists on either side to find common ground as surely as the supposed attagnonists can. Vastly more so, when the antagonists prevail with their agenda of violence.
Hamas and Sharon are born at the hip.
261. Andonly - 8/7/2001 10:07:58 PM
I realise this is a bad time, but I have to leave the discussion for the rest of this week. The petty RL demands my attention
Then I shall leave you with the last word, at least until you're ready to quarrel further.
262. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 10:19:00 PM
Sto:
I'll have you know - the rules of this thread are, if you are gone for over 48 hours you are taken to have admitted that you were wrong in everything you said here. 72 hours is an admission of antisemitism and 96 hours involves reparations.
The Host.
263. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 10:22:14 PM
Erinys:
What's that #238 guy singing?
He's called Douglas Spotted Eagle (Eagle Spotted Douglas?) and he was singing a love chant of some sort, or so I am told by my computer.
264. Andonly - 8/7/2001 10:23:52 PM
No one has answered my question about what Israel offered Syria in exchange for peace. Hint: the answer is to be found in an article from last year's NY Review of Books, entitled "The View From Damascus".
265. Erinys - 8/7/2001 10:25:45 PM
Well, it helped to get me out of my frump this morning. Thanks. I thought it was in Hebrew and you wouldn't need to have your computer tell you, though.
266. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 10:28:52 PM
Another Israeli shot dead in the West Bank. Yesterday it was a pregnant mother of five (or was that the day before?). The Israeli press reported recently that Arafat has instructed his minions to deliver a dead settler every day (did that tidbit reach The West?) - and that's what they're doing:
Jordan Valley man slain in drive-by shooting
By Margot Dudkevitch
JERUSALEM (August 8) - Zohar Shurgi, 40, of Moshav Yafit in the Jordan Valley, was shot to death by terrorists late last night in a drive-by shooting on the Trans-Samaria Highway between Ariel and the Tapuah junction.
Tsuriel Hezi, a Magen David Adom paramedic, was the first to arrive at the site. "I was returning home to Eilon Moreh. A kilometer from the Tapuah junction, I spotted a car at the side of the road with its lights on. I turned my car to face the vehicle and ran to check.
"I thought at first it was an accident, but the man had no pulse and was already dead. As I examined him, I saw that he had been hit on the left side of his body, and I noticed a bullet hole in his left cheek and additional wounds from ricochets," he told The Jerusalem Post.
Hezi said that the car was not badly damaged, supporting the theory that after being shot Shurgi lost control of the car.
Shurgi is survived by his wife Nava and three children. He worked in the center of the country and had lived in Yafit for six years, said Jordan Valley Regional Council spokeswoman Orit Azriely.
"It is a tragedy. He has three children - 13, nine, and three. How much longer can this go on?" she said.
267. Andonly - 8/7/2001 10:30:46 PM
Pike, I respectfully submit that Sto deserves leniency and should be granted an extension, during which you will recover from your bug bite and I will water my garden. My proposal includes a waiver of antisemitism for the full week, to be granted on the basis of the fact that Sto is a Dane and, let's face it, rather good looking.
Acceptance of my proposal by The Host shall not in any way imply that The Host is homosexual, a feminist, or a traitor.
Signed,
Hot & Dark, Monstrous Bitch, Etc.
268. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 10:58:20 PM
Sto:
You are ignoring my main claim wrt the Territories. Unlike Ando, I see no point in trying to convince people that our occupation and settlement is particularly humane, or legal even. Occupation is not a nice thing: it involves subjugation by force.
However, these territories were not part of a peaceful Palestinian state when we captured them. They were a part of Jordan, which was a part of a wall-to-wall Middle Eastern Arab coalition which was trying to destroy us from day one - literally - of our independence, and which has not yet walked away from this ideology of annihilation in a convincing collective fashion.
If Jordan wanted the territories back as part of a peace deal - I'm sure it would have gotten them by now. But Jordan renounced the territories. This leaves two possible long-term solutions for the Territories: Israeli sovereignty, or Palestinian sovereignty. We were willing to go for the latter - though like I said, there never was a Pal state and there was no Pal sovereignty in the Territories when we took them.
The Middle East is no place for stagnation, and this situation, like any highly charged war situation, is a dynamic one. The further away the Pal state solution gets -because of Arafat's jihad - the closer the Israeli sovereignty solution will get. That's how it works.
>>>
269. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 11:00:19 PM
>>>
Ando can sit around and wait for Barghouti (why Barghouti? Who else, except you, considers him anything but an overweight local Mafia donchik?): we in Israel know that in the Middle East, time waits for no one. We've offered the Arabs the Territories and we've offered peace. But at the same time, we are building our settlements. If they continue to refuse peace -and they will, of course - that is the price they pay.
Offering olive branches is nice. We've been doing it for decades. But just to make sure, we're pointing a gun to the other guys' head at the same time, and occasionally loading another bullet into it. Just in case the guy is stalling and waiting for the opportunity to jump us.
Which he is, of course.
270. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 11:01:04 PM
Do you understand this, sto?
271. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 11:05:13 PM
Ando:
I will grant sto temporary semi-antisemite status, to be upgraded to full status if he does not return to posting promptly.
And do not take his side, or I will find a category for you too.
(Semi-semite?)
272. RustlerPike - 8/7/2001 11:08:43 PM
Jext:
It has been obvious since the "peace" process began that the natural allies in the Mideast were and are and for the forseeable future will remain Arab and Israeli militants.
Yes, that's true. That's how it works. Militants on both sides want war. Except they each want and expect the war to end differently, of course.
273. RustlerPike - 8/8/2001 11:27:08 AM
All of which reminds me of Al Bundy's Nine Commandments for the members of 'No Ma'am':
1. It is OK to call hooters 'knockers' and sometimes snack trays
2. It is wrong to be French
3. It is OK to put all bad people in a giant meat grinder
4. Lawyers, see rule three
5. It is OK to drive a gas guzzler if it helps you get babes
6. Everyone should car pool except me
7. Bring back the word 'stewardesses'
8. Synchronized swimming is not a sport
9. Mud wrestling is a sport
Download the MP3 - it's hysterically funny if you ask me.
274. Andonly - 8/8/2001 12:02:36 PM
"Unlike Ando, I see no point in trying to convince people that our occupation and settlement is particularly humane, or legal even."
I haven't ever suggested it's humane!
As to the legality, my opinion of that is a) all things considered, I have no idea whether the occupation is "illegal", but I certainly don't accept as gospel what most journalists proclaim is "illegal"; b) any international law that does prohibit the occupation of an enemy population that refuses to make peace while it pretends to negotiate toward same is unjust and should be formally abrogated; and c) my understanding is that Oslo formalized the occupation. Under that agreement, signed by Palestinian leadership, Israel remains in military control of parts of the territories until a final agreement is reached. If the PA agreed to those conditions, then I don't know how it can be claimed that the ocupation is illegal.
As to the settlements, I don't care if they're "illegal". (Intentionally murdering civilians is also "illegal," yet no one minds when Pals do it; the press simply calls them "militants" and so absolves them of the illegality of terrorism.) I maintain that building settlements--which I've already pointed out to Sto is intended at this point to be an act of war to let the Pals know the intifada won't gain them a state faster than negotiations will--is far less morally objectionable than a number of other forms of warfare Israel might legally employ.
That says nothing about the IDF's recent history of shooting minor stone-throwers, which always struck me (sitting confortably in my home in a non-war area) as unnecessary. And it says nothing about Israeli troops in the territories allowing settlers to rampage against every Palestinian slight, which makes the government look incontinent.
Regards,
Semisemite
275. jexster - 8/8/2001 3:17:14 PM
I have just received a MESSAGE FROM ALLAH!
On a visit to the SFSU Caesar Chavez Student Union, 1 Malcom X Plaza, I noted that the Queer Alliance Office is right next door to the Union of Palestinian Students.....
From the River to the Sea...Just Say NO to the War Criminal Sharon...ALLAH u Akbar..That is All!
276. Andonly - 8/8/2001 3:24:19 PM
Oh yes,
"why Barghouti? Who else, except you, considers him anything but an overweight local Mafia donchik?"
Who? Well, he's been considered "trustworthy" in the past by your government, which worked with him extensively before the intifada. But that was some time ago, and in the interim he and his Tanzim obviously have joined the fray.
Even so, I suspect the Israelis really didn't intend to off him in that recent rocket attack (else they would have). I even wonder whether it was sort of a ploy--a kind of "gift" meant to be political cover to allow Barghouti to look like a hero and an ultra-radical, thereby giving him the power to pull together the most radical of the Pal contingents under a single leadership. Unless someone can do that--can speak for the extremists and keep his word, neither of which Arafat has ever been able to do--I'm not sure Israel has any business negotiating with the Pals at all.
Who else thinks Barghouti is the man? Well, the Palestinians seem to. He's quite popular among them, which is what enabled him to challenge Arafat's authority directly at a press conference with foreign journalists yesterday. He criticized the PA openly, said "we need to correct a lot of things," and suggested Hamas and Islamic Jihad needed to join forces with Fatah. Arafat's aids have even confirmed that the Pals are currently in the process of debating the "future composition of the Palestinian government"--this all according to the FT.
277. Andonly - 8/8/2001 3:24:41 PM
Sharon might not object to Barghouti being in power. For one thing, more abject fighting would end the sham of mere "resistance" Arafat has perpetrated. For another, it would be the end of Oslo, which doesn't really bind the PA as long as Hamas and Islamic Jihad are unfettered to do its dirty work.
If Barghouti succeeds in unifying the Pals, Israel and nascent Palestine will for the first time be on equal footing with regard to the issue of responsibility. You'll get your war, I'm sure. But if Barghouti can (perhaps with covert Israeli assistance) hold things together, he may emerge from it strong enough to negotiate a settlement. Or not, in which case Sharon will decide unilaterally where to draw territorial lines, which you'll defend in perpetuity... Either way, the sham of the peace process will be ended. And then maybe a genuine peace can eventually be forged.
278. Andonly - 8/8/2001 5:48:50 PM
In support of the point of the boldface section of Pike's Message # 268, following are some excerpts from articles appearing in the Palestine Times, a London-based internet journal.
The Palestinians need to brace themselves for the worst, which is yet to come. For Israel is no ordinary occupying power and its colonialism of Palestine is no conventional imperialist project, though it shares many of the features of European colonial enterprises. Past colonial projects ended with the occupiers withdrawing to their motherlands, be it Britain, France, Italy, Holland, Portugal or Spain. In the case of Palestine, Israelis are not comfortable withdrawing not even from an inch of the land they occupy. For in spite of Arab weakness, the Israelis can never feel secure if limited to a strip of land along the Mediterranean coast. They are haunted by the prospect of being flushed out completely. Where would they withdraw? Some of them may know by now that they have no future except as a Jewish community living in the region as some Jewish communities lived there before for more than 13 centuries. But this clearly means an end to Zionism and an end to Israel.
As the Israelis feel more threatened and vulnerable, they act less orderly, less predictably and much more desperately. But why should the Israelis be made more vulnerable if this is likely to backfire on the Palestinians? This is the enigma of the vicious cycle initiated by the Israelis. Their policies, their ambitions and their lack of confidence, which is most probably the outcome of a mixture of inherent guilt and insecurity, are expressed eventually in one way: oppressive action against the Palestinians, the victims of their occupation. This is the nature of tyranny.
-Aug. 2001, Dr. Azzam Tamini, Director of the London-based Institute of the Islamic Political Thought
279. Andonly - 8/8/2001 5:58:38 PM
The Palestinian Authority seems to have learned little from past disasters, both recent and in the past. Indeed, a sketchy glimpse at the way the PA leadership has been dealing with the present U.S.-tax funded Jewish rampage against the Palestinian people, who are eager to rid themselves of 33 years of nightmarish Israeli occupation and apartheid, shows that the PA is making the very same blunders which had brought innumerous disasters on the Palestinian people and caused irreparable damage to their just cause.
It is a hopelessly miserable approach that preoccupies itself with modalities, procedural issues, symptoms and secondary aspects of the conflict with the Zionists often at the expense of the fundamental issue, namely the Zionist occupation and usurpation of Palestine, which is the original sin and root-cause of violence and instability in the Middle East.
Thus, one cannot help being affronted by this futile posture on the part of the PA, which devotes disproportionate attention and energy to such secondary matters as the Mitchell Committee Report, the Tenet recommendations, the deployment of observers and other similarly petty issues, the accentuation of which could lead to the obfuscation of the crux of the matter—the continued Zionist military occupation...
Mahmoud al-Khatib, Palestine Times Editor in Chief
(One would think that all the "Palestinian people" want is an end to occupation and "Jewish rampage". But his own publication prints far less politically correct views.)
280. Andonly - 8/8/2001 6:17:14 PM
Azzam Tamini again:
Still over confident and blinded from seeing the implications of their [Lebanese] adventure, the Israelis created an army of collaborators whom they thought could be relied on for maintaining a buffer zone in the south of the country. The ploy was alleged to have been aimed at protecting Jewish settlements in the north of Palestine from 'terrorist' attacks. But in time neither the army of collaborators nor the so-called 'undefeatable' army of Israel with its sophisticated weaponry and mythical reputation was of any good. In May 2000 the entire world watched with amazement as Israeli troops pulled out under the cover of darkness, leaving behind their army of collaborators to disintegrate within hours.
Hizbullah has succeeded where the Arab states have failed. The two decades of Israeli occupation of south Lebanon have exposed Israel and enlightened the world about the real nature of this Jewish colonial enclave in the heart of the Muslim world. The Israeli humiliating defeat at the hands of Hizbullah has proven beyond doubt that the Hebrew state understands no language but that of force. This is an entity that is comprised of Jewish immigrants who came in search of the land of milk and honey and not of pain and agony. Paradise had been promised to them by those who recruited them for one of the most inhumane projects in the history of humanity. Occupying other people's lands and homes turned to hell compounded by the fact that Israeli cowardice and fear of death is met with unique bravery by their victims and love of death in martyrdom.
(cont.)
281. Andonly - 8/8/2001 6:17:27 PM
When...Hamas and Islamic Jihad introduced military tactics including 'martyrdom' bombings, the Israelis sensed more trouble. Now we know how much concern that escalation in resistance posed for the Israelis. We know more surely because of what has happened in South Lebanon. Simply, Israelis cannot afford to die in combat. Someone else should die but not them. If they are the ones that are excepted to pay, they'd rather relinquish their positions and retreat.
Let us try for a moment to envisage what could have happened had the Lebanese scenario been allowed to unfold in occupied Palestine. Like the Lebanese, the Palestinians were prepared to continue the struggle despite the clear imbalance of power. Like Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad had the ability to recruit fighters whose love for death in the cause of regaining their people's rights exceeded the Israelis' love for a life of security, safety and comfort. As in the case of Hizbullah, Arabs and Muslims all over the worlds sympathized with the Palestinian struggle and were prepared to support it until it reaped its fruits. However, unlike the case of Lebanon, the Palestinian struggle was stabbed in the back and betrayed from within. [A scathing critique of Arafat and Oslo ensues].
Today Lebanon is free and tomorrow Palestine will be. This is the essence of the message Hizbullah has sent to the Palestinians by awarding to them its victory.
282. Andonly - 8/8/2001 6:31:43 PM
From a regular columnist in the Palestine Times:
When will the American-Zionist holocaust
against the Iraqi people come to an end?
By Khalid Amayreh
So far, over half a million Iraqi children have perished as a direct result of the lingering sanctions imposed on Iraq by the United States (through the United Nations Security Council). ...
Huge numbers of other Iraqis have also died since the second Gulf war owing to the occurrence of abnormally high rates of cancer, which experts impute to depleted-Uranium shells used by U.S. forces against Iraq during the Desert Storm campaign. These and other lethal kinds of weapons apparently contaminated and polluted the Iraqi soil and water, and caused a variety of new syndromes which had not been known before.
In brief, it can be safely said that the American-Zionist administration, through the wanton and unbridled use of force, and the adoption of a policy based on the arrogance of power, hegemony and global insolence, is carrying out a massive and systematic extermination of the Iraqi people, in total callousness and total disregard for humanitarian considerations.
In clear language, this means that the morally corrupt Clinton, whose Zionist administration is full of hate for everything and anything Arab or Islamic, is hell-bent on killing as many Iraqis as possible, all for the purpose of satiating the cannibalistic instincts of Clinton’s Zionist executive generals and secretaries, in particular Madeleine Albright, William Cohen, Samuel Burger, Aaron Miller, Martin Indyk and Dennis Ross.
They, in reality, are no different than Adolph Hitler and his generals, who killed and incinerated innumerable people, Jews and non-Jews, during the Second World War.
[It goes on and on.]
283. Andonly - 8/8/2001 6:43:10 PM
Another Comment from the PT's Editor in Chief, this one from February, 2000:
Will the PA red lines remain red?
The Palestinian Authority of Yasser Arafat never misses an opportunity to emphasize the inviolability of the so-called Palestinian national red lines.
These include full Israeli evacuation from the Palestinian territories captured in the 1967 war (including first and foremost al-Quds al-Sharif [Jerusalem]), the dismantling of Jewish settlements, and guaranteeing the estimated four million Palestinian refugees their inalienable right to return to their ancestral homeland in accordance with United Nations resolution 194.
Indeed, this is the very minimum Palestinian political forces and masses could accept under all circumstances. No Palestinian movement or faction, including the PA, ever voiced willingness that it will accept anything less.
On the contrary, there are so many Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims who rightly won’t accept even these red lines on the ground that stopping at the 1967 armistice line would effectively lend legitimacy to the greatest theft in history, that being the usurpation of the bulk of Palestine by Zionist gangs and the establishment of the misbegotten State of Israel.
Nonetheless, many Palestinians have come to harbour certain fears of late that Arafat might be willing eventually to cross the above-mentioned red lines, either under American and Israeli pressure, or because he wants to have a “State” at any expense. ...
284. jexster - 8/8/2001 6:59:56 PM
I have asked this of Pike before ", there are so many Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims who rightly won’t accept even these red lines on the ground that stopping at the 1967 armistice line would effectively lend legitimacy to the greatest theft in history"...
And wonder whether that number is higher today than it was a year or two ago?
285. Andonly - 8/8/2001 9:48:02 PM
March, 2001
Arafat Has No Right to Negotiat Our National Rights
by Musil Shihadeh
[...]
[T]he Israeli-Arab demographic bomb is ticking toward the drastic reduction of Jewish exclusivity in Israel, turning the State into a bi-national State, which has been the early objective of the PLO since its appearance on the world scene. I believe that for the first time since the Arab-Israeli conflict, time is not necessarily on the side of Israel, and I cannot see any reasons to panic into signing such a humiliating peace agreement with Israel.
The Palestinians should stand firm in their legitimate demands and should never succumb to any pressure that would force them to legitimize the Zionist robbery of their homeland. The PA should reject all peace processes that fall short of actuating their national objectives of a free and independent Palestine with full sovereignty over their homeland [that being Israel, for the hard of hearing]. The right of return should not be an issue of negotiations, nor should it become an object of a public referendum...
...To achieve a solid front, the Palestinian leadership should unite all different Palestinian factions to face the Zionist hegemony over our homeland. It could be argued that all negotiations require some degree of flexibility, perhaps, but I cannot see that such an attitude has to prevail when we deal with our national aspirations of a fully independent Palestinian State in our homeland with full restitution of all our rights, including the right of return. No one, including Mr. Arafat, has the authority to compromise our rights to our homeland, and all efforts in this direction are doomed to failure. Meanwhile, we should not wait for a miracle to solve our problem, as all means should be used to achieve such objectives without excluding the right to use armed struggle.
286. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:04:33 PM
Here's a piece from March of 1999 by one Ramzy Baroud, entitled "A Salute to the Opposition":
Some call them radicals. Others call them the Opposition. President Clinton referred to them on various occasions as the "enemies of peace". Yet, for many Palestinians, they represent the uncompromising segment of the living conscience of Palestine. They are the Palestinian National and Islamic parties that refused to join the celebration of the newly signed peace accord at the Wye River Plantation. They are a very well-educated group of Palestinians that live inside Palestine and in Diaspora who have been carrying the torture of revolution for many years passed and many years to come. ...
Clinton's visit to Gaza was an historical one for sure. But the gathering of very different Palestinian ideologies in Damascus on 12 December was a greater accomplishment, even though it lacked the blessing and added glamour of the extensive media coverage.
The leaders of Hamas, Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad embraced and shook hands with leaders from the Palestinian Popular Front and Democratic Front. It was one great message sent to the Motherland, which shows that our differences and frequent conflicts can never stand in the way of our first and most important struggle for Palestine.
[...]
The Palestinian "opposition" now has more reasons to believe in the need for a more united front. Amending the Palestinian Charter made them feel that refusal alone is not enough. If their refusal is not combined with some serious steps to provide a solid and effective base for the new era of resistance, no real fruits of revolution could be cultivated. ...
287. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:12:43 PM
Also from March of 1999, this by someone named Sami Howrani (whom Deborah Sontag maybe should have interviewed):
While Camp David seemed a decisive step, Oslo is the mother of all processes. For Palestinians, Oslo is a process of a process of a process. It's a permanent test of their worthiness to Israelis. Oslo has left an indelible mark on the psyche of Palestinians and Arabs. It was the crowning achievement of Arafat's failures and that of his advisors. The more progress made under Oslo, the greater the risk of explosion at a later stage possibly erasing prior achievements.
This escalation has been the hallmark of this poor incrementalism devised in Washington and adopted in Tunis. Many have predicted Arafat will run out of rabbits before reaching the end point. Well, they have exaggerated. Not only is he out of tricks before the halfway point, he has taken it upon himself to kill the few rabbits still up his sleeve. Arafat's systematic liquidation of the Palestinian resistance will prove costly. Good intentions can never be an excuse for incompetence, again, and again, and again.
288. pseudoerasmus - 8/8/2001 10:15:58 PM
Until 1967 the United States was not the principal backer of Israel. France was. France was the chief weapons supplier, chief financial benefactor, and the chief foreign spokesman on Israel's behalf until 1967.
I agree with ButterfieldSwire that the vast majority of Americans are more sympathetic to Israel than to the Palestinians. But I also agree that US support of Israel is, in part, a Cold War legacy. But I certainly don't agree that Americans support Israel because it's a democracy. Since when does the USA consistently support democracy outside the USA?
(1) Millions of Jews are part of daily American life, and most Americans know Jews. Most Americans don't know any Arabs.
(2) Americans support all and any foreign policy position of the the US government. What was the last foreign policy position of the US government that the American public knew about and did not support? Not even the Vietnam War. Presumably if the US government's official position were that the Palestinians were the victims of Zionist oppression and ethnic cleansing, and had the publicity to match, the American public would fall in line, not because they are meek and stupid but because they don't care about foreign affairs unless it impinges very directly on their lives.
(3) The peculiarity of the Ameriacan electoral system allows a small group of voters who have an intense preference for a particular policy which the majority don't really care much about, to determine that policy. Cubans, by virtue of their power in Florida, whose marginal ability to deliver the presidency is extremely high, can determine US policy toward Cuba even though the majority of Americans probably couldn't care one way or another about the US embargo.
289. pseudoerasmus - 8/8/2001 10:17:54 PM
(1-3 are the reasons I posit for why most Americans are more sympathetic to Israel than to the Palestinians.)
After all, why would Americans care more about Cuba than about Vietnam, with which the USA has a trading and investment relationship, despite the fact that Vietnam remains communist and once humiliated the USA? Presumably because there is no vocal Vietnamese expatriate lobby, at least not one powerful enough in California.
Jewish Americans have a similar ability to exert an influence disproportionate to their numbers. I emphasise that this influence is not the anti-semitic conspiratorial "Jews own the banks and the press" kind of influence. Rather Jewish Americans wield their power through the mundane mechanics of the electoral eletoral system, particularly through their strength in New York and New Jersey.
290. pseudoerasmus - 8/8/2001 10:18:10 PM
More American ethnopolitics and how it influences American foreign policy:
During the Nagorno-Karabakh war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the USA tilted toward Armenia by imposing sanctions on trade, investment and assistance to the latter. This is presumably because there are lots of Armenian-Americans (like Cher, who sang for Armenia) in the USA but no community of Azeri-Americans. Probably what happened was that as soon as the war broke out, a group of prominent Armenian-American businessmen in Orange County, mostly Oriental carpet dealers, got together with Cher and went to congressman John _____ian, who had a seat on the House appropriations committee. Congressman ______ian traded votes with Congressman Joe Smith on the foreign affairs committee: recommendation of the Armenia amendment, in exchange for a vote on (say) udder subsidies to Vermont cows.
And this is relevant to an old exchange between me and Andonly. Armenia is economically and commercially worthless to the USA. Azerbaijan, by contrast, plays host to dozens of multinational corporations prospecting for, extracting, and transporting oil and natural gas in the Caspian Sea region. Yet the USA still tilted toward Armenia. (I think the USA was right to support Armenia, but my point is to illustrate the domestic determinants of this particular US policy.)
291. pseudoerasmus - 8/8/2001 10:20:32 PM
multinational American corporations
292. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:30:49 PM
And finally, here's what the editor of the Palestine Times had to say from London on the eve of Israel's 50th anniversary, back in May, 1998:
"You are but modern-day Nazis. ...
Yes, you tormented us as the Nazis tormented you, for after all you are the emulators of Hitler.
Just take a look at your ideology, ingrained in your Talmud, and you will see that it is not much different from Mien Kamph.
We will not count on your hearts, for they are as hard as a flint stone; nor on your wisdom, for it is full of devilishness, slyness and wickedness.
So, celebrate, for the time being; but remember that 50 years is a mere moment in an area where history is measured by centuries.
Will your fate be any better than that of the Crusades? I doubt it, for you are evil oppressors like them. You worship military power, and lies are your ultimate armour.
But you will eventually face your ultimate fate. Didn't you face disaster twice in the past, because of your vanity and arrogance, pushing you to slaughter your own children?
Your oppressive power won't last forever, because things don't stay as they are.
But in the meanwhile, don't you even dream of "peace" with us. How can peace be established between thieves and their victims? At least the thieves would have to return the stolen goods.
(cont.)
293. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:31:09 PM
Also remember that we Muslims are a stubborn people with an enduring vigour and implacable determination, because we have the Qur'an, the Book of God, which heralds the ultimate demise of your illegitimate and immoral State:
"And we decreed for the Children of Israel in the Scripture that you will verily work corruption and mischief in the earth twice, and you will become great tyrants. So when the time for the first of the two came, We roused against you slaves of ours of great might who ravaged your country, and it was a threat fulfilled. Then We gave you once again your turn against them, and We aided you with wealth and children and made you more in soldiery. If you do good, you do good for your own souls, and if you do evil, it is for them in like manner. So when the time for the second of the judgments came, We roused against you others of our slaves to ravage you and to enter the Temple even as they entered it the first time, and to lay waste all that they conquered with an utter wasting."
So, celebrate, for the time being.
And, for anyone interested in noting how B'tselem has changed since 1998, see in the same issue, An "Apologia of Radicalism"! by Fadia Rafeedi.
294. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:40:47 PM
"And this is relevant to an old exchange between me and Andonly. Armenia is economically and commercially worthless to the USA. Azerbaijan, by contrast, plays host to dozens of multinational[American] corporations prospecting for, extracting, and transporting oil and natural gas in the Caspian Sea region. Yet the USA still tilted toward Armenia. (I think the USA was right to support Armenia, but my point is to illustrate the domestic determinants of this particular US policy.)"
Is this referring to our conversation in International about Colombia, where we support the government AND have oil interests?
As far as I know we have never exchanged opinions about Azerbaijan or Armenia because, I'm sorry to say, I'm not equipped to have many.
295. Andonly - 8/8/2001 10:42:53 PM
Pseudoerasmus, I find nothing to contest in your Message # 288.
296. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 2:56:31 AM
Ando: excellent, enlightening quotes, and this time I'm glad you didn't link. But can you hit me with your linking stick and give me the links to these publications so I can put them up in the butterscotch bar (PS: isn't butterscotch a light shade of green, usually?).
As for Barghouti: I'm starting to think maybe this guy reminds you of someone you once had a crush on. Otherwise, I can't see why you insist on seeing this local yokel Fatah chieftain as a possible heir to Hairyfat, and creating all these 'what if' hypotheses. All the reasons you gave above for your Barghoutiism have done nothing to convince me otherwise. I mean - when you talk about the Pals you're talking about such a fractured and fractious and volatile and violent entity that predicting who would take over when Arafat croaked is beyond anyone's ability. Plus, he doesn't seem to be croaking yet, just shaking a bit.
If he were to die tomorrow - the most likely scenario in my eyes would be a 'national unity jihad' coalition of Hamas, Tanzim, and all the other bodies, with the most radical elements setting the tone.
297. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 2:58:32 AM
What both you and Pe don't see - can't see, because you are not romantic enough to understand history - is that this is a war between the Torah and Qur'an. That is why the US will always stand by Israel.
298. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 3:00:17 AM
You two are incurably unromantic.
299. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 10:19:58 AM
News: I am to meet with an investigator from the Israeli Police's Nationwide Fraud Investigations Unit on Sunday. Looks like they may start a full fledged investigation against the Local Council Head based on the stories and evidence I published in my pamphlet!
300. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 10:22:14 AM
Who da maaaan???
301. Andonly - 8/9/2001 10:28:18 AM
"I mean - when you talk about the Pals you're talking about such a fractured and fractious and volatile and violent entity that predicting who would take over when Arafat croaked is beyond anyone's ability."
OK, but if I'm right--and I certainly wouldn't take credit for any special insight if it turns out that way, since I'm only referring to news sources--you must send me a really good halvah, with no incendary devices embedded in it. If you are right, I will announce in the Mote, in whatever thread you wish, "Rustler Pike was right and I was wrong, Marwan Barghouti is a Palestinian nonentity."
The moment the question will be decided is when someone takes over the reigns from Arafat. If Barghouti dies before Arafat dies or (guffaw) before Arafat steps down, the bet is off.
If the PA dissolves out of sheer fractiousness upon Arafat's end of tenure, or if someone other than Barghouti winds up at its helm, you win.
If the PA is destroyed by Israel, we call it a draw.
302. Andonly - 8/9/2001 10:30:57 AM
Yes, Pike, I am not romantic.
Not around you anyway; you're romantic enough for all internet forums combined.
303. Andonly - 8/9/2001 10:34:58 AM
Meanwhile, in Lebanon:
140 members of opposition Christian political groups were arrested on Wed. by the Syrian-controlled Lebanese army.
304. Andonly - 8/9/2001 10:38:28 AM
Pike, the articles I posted are all from London's Palestine Times, although some of the stuff the editor prints is reprinted from other publications. A link to the site is in my Message # 293. From there you can look at past and current issues.
305. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 10:57:59 AM
Could this be the real reason Jews and Arabs keep looking for a fight?
Erogenous tissue loss due to circumcision.
(Warning: contains a lot of yucky penis shots).
306. ButterfieldSwire - 8/9/2001 11:11:30 AM
Pseudoerasmus -- Well, its arguable that the US government has no bias toward democratic countries in conducting its foreign policy. However, our government always argues that any of its policy interventions overseas are in support of some "democratic" ally. I have to figure this is because the US public does have a bias toward supporting democracies.
Now, how deep this runs is open to question (especially considering how often the public is "fooled"). However, your Cuba/Vietnam comparison isn't really on the point. It might be true that politicians are able (for reasons of electoral politics/national security geopolitics/special economic interests) to persuade the public that we should be especially hostile to a few crappy dictatorships among the many available. I think it would be much more difficult for the government to persuade people to be hostile toward a country with a political system with which Americans are largely sympathetic (like Israal).
Do you really think the government could persuade people to favor a 40 year embargo against any contact with Costa Rica? I don't.
307. ButterfieldSwire - 8/9/2001 11:31:38 AM
Conversely,
- Demographics say that in less than 20 years, combined Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza will be close to 60% Arab. Unless Israel gets rid of the latter two, they are going to start looking a lot less like a real democracy and a lot more like South Africa. That could certainly shift US opinion.
- Arab-Americans are probably already a swing voting bloc in a large swing state (Michigan). Demographics again say that they will gain in influence relative to Jewish Americans over the next twenty years.
308. ButterfieldSwire - 8/9/2001 11:47:59 AM
Speaking of demographics, it seems clear that the combination of the massive population explosion in the Near East and the dismal economic prospects for unskilled labor there is going to turn the region into a nightmare.
If they were smart, the Israelis would start turning their country into Hong Kong circa 1973, an enclave completely walled off from their hinterland.
309. Andonly - 8/9/2001 11:57:50 AM
Swire: "Demographics say that in less than 20 years, combined Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza will be close to 60% Arab. Unless Israel gets rid of the latter two, they are going to start looking a lot less like a real democracy and a lot more like South Africa. That could certainly shift US opinion."
I agree. But it probably won't happen.
There are elements in the Knesset who probably would like to see a major conflict purely for the sake of driving more Palestinians out of the territories and into refugee camps in neighboring Arab countries. Sane people see the futility in this even if, among the sane, are hardass Israelis who don't see the immorality of creating an even worse refugee problem than already exists. The fact is, Israel needs less enmity from its neighbors, not more, and it would not risk US support by engaging in wholesale ethnic cleansing at this point.
That mean that even the hardliners have a real motivation for bringing about a separate Palestinian entity: it keeps the Arabs from overwhelming Israel demographically. But the need for security with and/or against that state remains a problem. Moerover, Israel has an internal demographic problem even if it succeeds in separating itself satisfactorily from the territories. Twenty percent of Israel is Arab and poor, and poor Arabs tend to have more children than most of their (comparatively better off) Jewish fellow citizens.
It isn't just Michigan that will change over the next twenty years. In fact, I'd bet the demographic issue will become more pronounced in the heart of Israel long before it does--anywhere--in the US.
310. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 12:49:55 PM
Well - if the Pals kill 20 Jews a day, like they did today, then there'll be a lot less Jews to worry about in a year's time. Let me calculate: 20 * 365 = 7300 dead Jews a year.
Otoh - maybe that isn't so meaningful, demographically. 200 Jews a day - now that would be something.
311. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 12:52:48 PM
Where the fuck is Israel's response?
312. RustlerPike - 8/9/2001 3:17:03 PM
A poll on the hard right-wing news site 'Channel 7', aka IsraelNationalNews.com asks what the Sharon gov't's policy towards the PA should be. The possibilities begin with 'start negotiating' and end with 'topple the PA and take steps to cause the Arab populace to emigrate'.
313. Andonly - 8/9/2001 5:26:26 PM
Sure hope that wasn't a representative sample.
314. RustlerPike - 8/10/2001 12:51:24 AM
It's a representative sample of people who read the news at Arutz 7. They are much, much fewer than those who read Ynet and Ma'ariv though. Perhaps fewer than Ha'aretz (Hebrew edition) too, though I'm not sure how much fewer.
315. RustlerPike - 8/10/2001 1:22:50 AM
Michal Raziel, 16... Tzvika Golombek, 26... Frieda Mendelson, 62...
Tehila Maoz, 20... Tamar (8) and Lali (39) Shimshilshvili.
316. RustlerPike - 8/10/2001 1:27:01 AM
The Sekhviskhorder family (they had other children who survived).
317. jexster - 8/10/2001 11:30:27 AM
Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat inspected the remains of a West Bank police station hours after it had been destroyed by Israeli forces in retaliation for Thursday's deadly suicide bombing in Jerusalem
Now let's see if I have this straight.
Israel demands that the Palestinian Authority police terrorists and destroys police stations. Israel insists that the PA develop sound political institutions that it can work with and occupies PLO headquarters.
I maybe missing something but there seems to be more than a bit substance to charges that the true agenda is the destruction of the PA root and branch.
318. Andonly - 8/10/2001 11:51:34 AM
Jexster, you don't seem to be grasping the fact that the PA at the very least provides political cover for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Just as likely, it employs those terrorists by proxy. It's like letting your pit bull out on the neighbors "by accident" while complaining to the police that your neighbors are trying to poison your dog.
What do you think Israel wants to accomplish, through negotiations or war? The establishment of a Palestinian state? Freedom for those Pals Israel feels obliged to oppress? The annexation of Gaza!?
No. These are secondary or nonexistent objectives. Israel has one--only one--PRIMARY objective. And that is peace with security. If the Pals could not unify themselves under Yassir Arafat, with massive foreign aid and substantial intervention on the Pals' behalf, then, Sharon must have concluded, any hope of achieving peace with security cannot occur until the PA in its present form, which was created in part under Israeli auspices, has been undone.
And mark my words: the majority of Pals want it done. Whom do you think Arafat's corruption has hurt most?
319. Jenerator - 8/10/2001 11:54:36 AM
This thread is very interesting!
I agree with Rustler in Message # 297, the US stands behind Israel because of our historic religious association with Judaism.
I believe that the way the media portrays groups of people is very important in shaping the public's opinion of those same people. Ever notice that certain groups are presented as the enemy more so than others? The most common enemies we have in the movies are the "enemies" we have in real life. Think about it. Russians, Muslim extremists and fringe Vietnamese are almost always the bad guys.
I believe that Muslim extremists are portrayed negatively in US cinema because of their actions and attitudes towards Americans and Jews. Andonly's quote from her Message # 286 illustrates just how hateful they are , and so it's natural that we collectively see them as the bad guy.
Some call them radicals. Others call them the Opposition. President Clinton referred to them on various occasions as the "enemies of peace". Yet, for many Palestinians, they represent the uncompromising segment of the living conscience of Palestine. They are the Palestinian National and Islamic parties that refused to join the celebration of the newly signed peace accord at the Wye River Plantation. They are a very well-educated group of Palestinians that live inside Palestine and in Diaspora who have been carrying the torture of revolution for many years passed and many years to come. ...
320. Jenerator - 8/10/2001 11:54:49 AM
It's no wonder that our popular hero Arnold Schwarzeneggar is going to undermine the Jihad in the movie True Lies, they naturally represent what the US stands against. The same with Sylvester Stallone in Rocky IV, he fought the Russian just as we were fighting the ideological war with Russia at the time.
It's as though our perceptions of these bad guys is reflected in the media and perpetuated at the same time.
321. ButterfieldSwire - 8/10/2001 12:31:55 PM
Andonly: Continuing pressure for the settlement of the West Bank does not come from "hardliners who would like to see a major conflict purely for the sake of driving more Palestinians out of the territories and into refugee camps in neighboring Arab countries." Rather, it comes from a bunch of average Joes who are trying to find relatively cheap suburban land in a very crowded and urban country.
It wont be easy, politically, for Israeli's to stop colonizing the West Bank. But they have to do it if their going to consolidate their lines.
322. jexster - 8/10/2001 12:32:09 PM
Andonly...
Oh I grasp alright. I grasp that you've dutifully and rather blindly bought the Sharon justification for targeting the PA...
I also grasp that you willfully ignore my premise which is NOT that the PA is blameless but rather that Palestinians and anyone else for that matter who thinks for half a second cannot help but be struck by the dissonance here....
You destroy that which you claim to need....
That shit don't flush at least on the first try!
323. jexster - 8/10/2001 12:33:37 PM
Pale of Settlement Redux Ando my man!
324. ButterfieldSwire - 8/10/2001 12:44:44 PM
Jenerator said "I believe that Muslim extremists are portrayed negatively in US cinema because of their actions and attitudes towards Americans and Jews"
I agree. Damn those Muslim extremists!
325. Jenerator - 8/10/2001 12:58:04 PM
They're a bunch of meanies!
326. ButterfieldSwire - 8/10/2001 12:58:42 PM
Rememeber in Rocky V when Rocky Balboa was fighting the evil Arab heavyweight champion Musleem al-Islam and Rocky was cruising to an easy victory until Musleem socked Rocky in the groin and the vaguely Third World international Olympic referee called it legal and out of sheer virtue Rocky had to battle back from near certain defeat to win the match.
That still has me steaming against those extremist Muslims.
327. jexster - 8/10/2001 1:06:29 PM
All Muslims Must Die!
Tear down that Abomination on the Temple Mount!
328. Jenerator - 8/10/2001 1:07:47 PM
You remember it so well, that it obviously has affected you.
329. jexster - 8/10/2001 1:11:05 PM
I hate to bring Jesus into this but after all he was a Jew before the Gentiles turned him into a Christian.
Yesuha had some important things to say which lead me to believe I may have hit on an understanding of Sharonism!
Anyway Jen's here...
15] "So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),
[16] then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains;
[17] let him who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house;
[18] and let him who is in the field not turn back to take his mantle.
[19] And alas for those who are with child and for those who give suck in those days!
[20] Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a sabbath.
[21] For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.
[22] And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened
330. Jenerator - 8/10/2001 1:26:40 PM
Speaking of movies that influence public opinion. This week, I noticed that DeadLine featuring Christopher Walken showed as did Not Without My Daughter starring Sally Fields.
331. Andonly - 8/10/2001 2:04:37 PM
"Rather, [pressure for settlements] comes from a bunch of average Joes who are trying to find relatively cheap suburban land in a very crowded and urban country."
Then you would expect that the settlements that are having new homes built into them would be begging for that development. But they're not. Some remarkable percentage of existing housing is unoccupied. Which is why I conclude the continued expansion (within or outside settlement boundaries, depending on who's doing the telling) is not a demographic but a political necessity--i.e., the politics of war.
That doesn't mean the dynamic you spoke of doesn't exist, of course. But, cheap or not, I'm sure no one but ideologues have moved into settlements in the last six months.
"It wont be easy, politically, for Israeli's to stop colonizing the West Bank. But they have to do it if their going to consolidate their lines."
I agree. But those lines will most certainly be drawn to include all the settlements adjacent to Israel, and there's no way these are going to become off-limits to development.
332. Andonly - 8/10/2001 2:28:37 PM
"Oh I grasp alright. I grasp that you've dutifully and rather blindly bought the Sharon justification for targeting the PA..."
I don't know the meaning of the word duty. As for having "blindly" bought Sharon's justification, no: I stated in the Mote some months ago that, were I an Israeli, I'd have voted for Barak. In one of the Let's Hate Israel threads in TT, I copied copious material from the Kahane Commission and earned the undying loathing of many Jews there for having pointed out that Sharon is a pig responsible for the saughter at Sabra and Shatila.
My position about this hasn't changed. But I am persuaded that Sharon is at least a realistic pig. And the pigs he has to deal with across the green line are no less monstrous. Sometimes it's the real bastards who are the only ones capable of making peace. Not the peaceniks.
"I also grasp that you willfully ignore my premise which is NOT that the PA is blameless but rather that Palestinians and anyone else for that matter who thinks for half a second cannot help but be struck by the dissonance here...."
There's no dissonance. Israel is destroying a golem it helped make. The golem was supposed to prevent terrorism and eschew violence. It had ample opportunity to do that. It didn't.
Don't you realize that once the intifada was under way Arafat released hundreds of terrorists the PA had held in prison under the Oslo agreement? It was the ultimate in bad faith. For that alone, the PA should have been taken apart.
333. robertjayb - 8/10/2001 3:36:50 PM
This mostly first-person account by Jack Kelly in USA Today of yesterday's bombing was touted by Slate. It is grisly, graphic, gruesome, ghastly and that's why you should read it here.
334. jexster - 8/10/2001 5:19:53 PM
CNN is reporting that the State Department (FINALLY!) is waking up to Sharon's game plan which is as thinly disguised as it is thick with disenginuity.
Israeli diplomats were called to Foggy Bottom today and read the riot act. Colin Powell and Richard Armitage are reported to be super pissed and convinced (betta late than never) that Sharon is out to destroy the PA. Powell is FINALLY off to kick Sharon's sorry ass.
Of course, any thinking person with reasonable detachment (me and the EU and a few others) were clued in months ago when Sharon started this shit with a deliberately timed and patently provacative visit to the Temple Mount.
Andonly...sorry to say the shit didn't flush on the second try...mass overflow...anyone have a plumber's helper???
335. jexster - 8/10/2001 5:24:32 PM
RP....interesting concept...namely that a romantic conciousness is sine qua non to an understanding of history.....
Reminds me of E. Gellner essay trashing Hannah Arendt's entire body of work...her sin - Romanticism....
336. Property of Jesus - 8/10/2001 5:30:51 PM
Jews have every "right" to walk on their Temple.
If the Americans and their PLO allies aren't careful, the Jews may see Sharon and his modern-day Zealots as their Messiah.
The expectation of a Messiah arouses the most powerful feelings, with a steady intensification of the fervor attached to the conviction that the Kingdom of God at the World's End calls for action.
The Bible is powerful stuff.
337. MaxMacks - 8/10/2001 5:50:52 PM
The bible has caused more bloodshed and mischief than any other book that I know of.
338. stostosto - 8/10/2001 5:56:47 PM
"262. RustlerPike - 8/8/01 4:19:00 AM
Sto:
I'll have you know - the rules of this thread are, if you are gone for over 48 hours you are taken to have admitted that you were wrong in everything you said here. 72 hours is an admission of antisemitism and 96 hours involves reparations.
The Host."
This just to avoid the reparations. 339. stostosto - 8/10/2001 5:57:52 PM
? 340. stostosto - 8/10/2001 5:58:40 PM
why am I writing in large font?
341. MaxMacks - 8/10/2001 6:13:15 PM
329 squealing like a stuck pig
342. Property of Jesus - 8/10/2001 6:16:06 PM
*Catcher in the Rye* get my vote, Max.
343. Andonly - 8/10/2001 9:09:48 PM
"If the Americans and their PLO allies aren't careful, the Jews may see Sharon and his modern-day Zealots as their Messiah."
Well, Israeli fundamentalists seem well on their way no matter what the US does or doesn't do. Pike has alluded to this several times: those who will go all out, both on the Palestinian side and among Israelis, are the true believers. Pike believes they're the ones who will ultimately "save" Israel.
What they'll save it for I don't know.
Jexster: "Sharon started this shit with a deliberately timed and patently provacative visit to the Temple Mount."
You don't even know why he did that, do you? You think he was sending a message to Arafat, don't you?
Two things you could stand to learn: 1) despite the conventional accounts, the intifada did not start at the Temple Mount. It started at Netzarim junction a week earlier, where two Israeli police were shot. 2) Sharon's walk on the Israeli Temple Mount (not, incidentally, the Haram as Sharif) was not designed for Palestinian, but rather for Israeli consumption, as a stand against his political opponents. An election was forthcoming, remember?? Netanyahu, Barak, and Sharon?
His walk may have been "provocative", but the fact that a Jew walking on the site of the Jewish Temple was provocative in itself tells you something crucial. And lest you once more insist on pretending all Arafat and Co. have ever wanted was reconciliation, let me remind you that they then proceeded to announce that the Temple Mount and its Western Wall are not in fact Jewish artifacts, that the Jews have no claim on the structure beneath the Haram.
Evidently, what's stuck down the plumbing, Jexster, is your head.
344. Property of Jesus - 8/10/2001 9:21:14 PM
Andonly: You write like I wish I could.
Absolutely correct. The idea that the war started because Jews wanted to walk on the top of the hill in their sacred city shows you how shallow the peace treaty was.
I now support the Israelis. Six months ago I would have been neutral.
But we won't win. Unfortunately the Jews are cursed to lose again.
345. Andonly - 8/10/2001 10:09:06 PM
Well, Sto, now that you're back and I'm not far from being gone for a while:
"You protest the difference in attitude against Israel when compared to the Pals. But what happened to Iraq when it violated UN SC resolutions? The Arabs ask that question, as you may know."
"The Arabs" are deluded. What happened to Iraq occurred not because Iraq violated a UN security council resolution but because everyone in the region, the US, and in Europe knew that Saddam had dangerously expansionist, dictatorial intentions, and the powers that be had had enough of him. Otherwise Saudi Arabia might not have cared a fig for US intervention; an argument was even made at the time that Kuwait had actually violated Iraqui oil fields (I forget the details--slant drilling?). But the greater likelihood, quite simply, was that Saddam intended to sap Kuwait to refill his war chest after having depleted in in a protracted conflict with Iran.
No such circumstance obtains in Israel. The settlements have always been considered a security arrangement and a sop to the religious right, but there's no reason that a genuine peace agreement could not either make them irrelevant or make them (for the most part) go away.
346. Andonly - 8/10/2001 10:09:42 PM
"What happened to Milosevic? (And the UN security council wasn't even behind that action which was taken on NATO's own initiative)."
Well, half the world seems to think that intervention was "illegal"! So what's your point? And anyway, why does it escape those who are caught up in legalisms that Milosevich surely intended to drive the Kosovars out of Kosovo and claim it for Serbs: there was recent precedent, everyone feared what would come (although I certainly believe the primary motivating factor in the NATO action was that the US needed to mop up after our inexcusable ineptitude, when we did nothing as Serbia exterminated Bosnians a few years prior).
Israel, on the other hand, had just got done offering Palestinians a state, pieces of Israel, part of Jerusalem, and the dismantling of most of the horrid settlements you manage to equate with Milosevich's ethnic cleansing--whereupon Yasir huffed off and let the street rule. Barak's offer may even have been inadequate, but anyone can see that the circumstances simply aren't comparable: the KLA wanted Kosovar autonomy in Kosovo, it didn't intend to take over Serbia. The PA on the other hand doesn't just want Palestinian independence, it acts as a front for radical Palestinians whose stated intention was and is to reclaim Israel in its entirety.
Of course, as I've said before, if Sharon invades the West Bank and Gaza, I couldn't expect anything but that Syria, Egypyt, and Iraq would rain down hell on Israel, just as NATO did in the Balkans.
But that's because these things are political, not legal matters.
"And why wouldn't Israeli deaths be counted? Sure they would. In fact they are, very much so."
No, they're not. You tell me: how many dead from terror since Oslo was signed, and BEFORE the intifada started?
347. Andonly - 8/10/2001 10:33:51 PM
The following is pulled from a well known mideast media watch site whose name I can't recall and whose URL I failed to note:
The following recent quotations from leading figures in the Palestinian Authority were distributed by the Israel Government Press Office. Israel's [1993] agreements with the Palestinians obligate both sides "to foster mutual understanding and tolerance and shall accordingly abstain from incitement, including hostile propaganda, against each other."
The Oslo Accords as a temporary truce:
"Question: Do you feel sometimes that you made a mistake in agreeing to Oslo?
Arafat: No... no. Allah's messenger Mohammad accepted the al-Khudaibiya peace treaty and Salah a-Din accepted the peace agreement with Richard the Lion-Hearted."
--- Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat in a newspaper interview. Historical background: Muhammad made the Khudaibiya agreement with the Arabian tribe of Koreish. That ten-year pact was broken within two years, when the Islamic forces, having strengthened during the cease-fire, conquered the Koreish. Salah a-Din was a Muslim leader who, after a cease-fire, declared a jihad against the Crusaders and captured Jerusalem. (Al-Quds, 10 May 1998)
[cont.]
348. Andonly - 8/10/2001 10:34:45 PM
Israel's "racist Zionist colonialist" plot:
"The Palestinian people were and remain a victim of the international colonialist Zionist plot which began with the Balfour Declaration of 1917. Israel has not halted its implementation of the racist Zionist colonialist policies which are responsible for the calamities that have befallen our people."
--- From an official statement by the Palestinian Legislative Council on 12 May 1998 to mark fifty years since "the 1948 calamity" -- that is, the establishment of Israel. (Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda, 13 May 1998)
Holy war and the military option:
"Whoever has occupied part of Palestine or Jerusalem faces jihad [holy war] until Judgment Day. Our destiny is jihad."
--- Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, in the weekly Friday prayer sermon at Jerusalem's Al-Aksa Mosque, broadcast on the official PA radio station. (Voice of Palestine, 15 May 1998)
"Our choice is the military option. We must put an end to the despicable negotiations. The time has come for jihad [holy war] and martyrdom."
---Shiekh Hamed Bitawi, chairman of the Palestine Religious Scholars Association and head of the PA's Sharia Court of Appeals in Nablus. (Al-Jazira Television, 14 May 1998)
"Peace is a strategic choice, but it is not a sacred choice if the occupation and the Judaization continue."
--- Announcer on the official PA radio station (Voice of Palestine, 15 May 1998)
349. jexster - 8/10/2001 10:41:41 PM
Wanna get real pissed Andonly...I'll throw some gasoline on your fire!
More than once I have heard Palestinians in the US say "Everybody yaps about the Holocaust but no body stops to ask 'What did the Jews do to provoke such wrath'?"
Flame on!
350. jexster - 8/10/2001 10:43:17 PM
Plumber's helper no help at all.
Call RotoRooter that's the name!
351. Andonly - 8/10/2001 11:04:59 PM
No one's flaming you, Jexster. Everything looks red to you because you're off in Blissland, dreaming of sweetness and light, while your own head's on fire. Which, now that I dwell on this, explains how it wound up down the plumbing.
352. RustlerPike - 8/11/2001 2:43:03 AM
Notice how, on the ground, the US/Israeli war against Saddam and Arafat is already starting: on the same day that Sharon conquered Orient House, Bushster bombed Iraq.
Jex:
RP....interesting concept...namely that a romantic conciousness is sine qua non to an understanding of history.....
Well, it is sine qua non to understanding Semitic history, and Semitic history is quite central to world history. You have to think like a fanatic to understand him, no?
If the Middle East was occupied by Nordic races, you'd have to be incurably dull and cold to understand its history. As it is, though, you have to be capable of fervent, warm blooded belief.
353. RustlerPike - 8/11/2001 3:20:13 AM
Jen:
I believe that Muslim extremists are portrayed negatively in US cinema because of their actions and attitudes towards Americans and Jews.
That, and the fact that 90% of studio heads are Cohens, -steins and -bergs. I would not want to be an Arab filmmaker trying to get a Hollywood sponsor for a pro-Pal feature film.
354. Jenerator - 8/11/2001 10:27:17 AM
RP,
I agree. What I said above about how certain people are portrayed in the media was just a simplistic way of exposing a method in which the mass culture is influenced here.
Notice that there are not any Jewish bad guys in film, not that there should be.
What we soak up in television does influence us. Ask the typical American what's going on in Israel and he/she will not know. Ask him to describe an Israeli or a Palestinian, and you'll probably get a description based on something he saw on television.
This past week, the media seemed to be more sympathetic to Israel. I saw more negative press on the suicide bombings and footage of the Palestinian die-hards vowing to bomb more civilians. Couple that with the two films I mentioned, and it's no wonder why the typical American supports Israel over anything associated with Arafat.
355. RustlerPike - 8/11/2001 11:43:23 AM
rjb:
That truly was a horrific account. We didn't have stuff like that in our media. I think we should have.
356. jexster - 8/11/2001 10:54:38 PM
The German newspaper Die Welt quoted an unrepentant Public Security Minister Uzi Landau as warning that Israel could cripple Palestinian infrastructure and it was not clear how much longer a policy of ``restraint'' could last if violence continued.
``The more Arafat urges terrorists to conduct attacks, the nearer draws the time that we will tolerate him no longer,'' Landau said. Reuters
No additional comment necessary in light of previously posted views on subject.
357. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 12:53:16 AM
Amazing. Israel's TV Channel 2, are making a big deal out of the fact that Jerusalem Police Chief Mickey Levy was filmed punching an Arab woman in the stomach (she and a few others were all over him, on the demonstrations around Orient House).
This kind of stuff makes people like me very very angry. It's like some kind of disease or something. Can someone explain to me how this could be a major news item?
I swear, there are tens of thousands of people in Israel who, like me, feel extremely frustrated by this kind of media behavior. There is something sick, sick, sick about it.
358. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 12:55:08 AM
That should read 'Israel's Channel 2, Ynet and other media are making a big deal...'
359. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 8:12:16 AM
Well - I'm back from the Zevulun Police Station (Haifa) where I snitched on our Council Head. That was fun.
Here's some stuff I posted in The Fray some years back. Note that my obsession with Jenerator is a long one:
721. RustlerPike - Dec. 4, 1998 -1:40 AM PT
...
I was asked some time back to recommend some books. Well - there's one I read some years back, and which I now keep in the bathroom for perusal during toilet-related activity. It's quite interesting. It's called "A Peace to End All Peace: Creating the Modern Middle East 1914-1922", by David Fromkin. Mine is a Penguin paperback.
This is one quote, from Leo Amery, who was assistant Secretary of War in the British cabinet in 1917: "Bible reading and Bible thinking England was the only country where the desire of the Jews to return to their ancient homeland has always been regarded as a natural aspiration which ought not to be denied".
The book also describes the Peace Conference in Paris thus: "Lloyd George, who kept demanding that Britain should rule Palestine from (in the Biblical phrase) Dan to Beersheba, did not know where Dan was. He searched for it in a nineteenth century Biblical atlas, but it was not until nearly a year after the armistice that General Allenby was able to report to him that Dan had been located and, as it was not where the Prime minister wanted it to be, Britain asked for a boundary further north."
This illustrates, a little, my contention that views like those of Jenerator have done a lot more to shape the history of our region than what people may think - so I wouldn't knock them if I were a secular or agnostic Westerner. This is much more of a conflict between religion-civilizations (Judeo-Christian-Hellenic-Western versus Arab-Muslim) than most of us realize.
>>> 360. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 8:14:19 AM
>>>
We were talking about Haj Amin al-Husseini earlier on in this thread. Here is what Fromkin says:
722. RustlerPike - Dec. 4, 1998 - 1:55 AM PT
"When he secured the position of Grand Mufti and leader of the Palestinian Moslems for Amin al-Husseini in 1921, Richmond [Ernest T. Richmond, a liason for the British Palestine administration with the Muslim community and an anti-Zionist - RP] must have believed that he was striking a blow against Zionism. As time would show, he had struck a crueler, more destructive blow against Palestinian Arabs, whom the Grand Mufti was to lead into a bloody blind alley. An all-or-nothing adventurer, the Grand Mufti placed Arab land and lives at risk by raising the stakes of the Arab-Jewish conflict such that one or another - Jews or Arabs - would be driven out or destroyed. Eventually the Grand Mufti's road was to lead him to Nazi Germany and alliance with Adolph Hitler (...)
"Whether Palestinian Moslems would have followed other leaders had the British administration used its power and influence in other ways can never be known; but to the extent that Richmond's anti-Zionist initiative had an effect, it was not helpful to the Arab cause - or to that of Churchill and the British government in attempting to bring peace and progress to troubled Palestine".
And here we are, 80-odd years down the line, and the question of Palestine seems as far as it ever was from being solved.
361. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 8:24:50 AM
Gender equality in Israel: equal rights for all. Equal duties?
Well...
362. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 8:30:34 AM
What's the Motie take on Sharon's seizure of the Orient House?
363. Jenerator - 8/12/2001 11:54:39 AM
Thanks RustlerPike,
The feeling is mutual.
364. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 1:51:22 PM
Jen:
The mutual feeling is mutual too.
I can't believe the cops are (apparently) actually going to launch a criminal investigation against the Local Council Head. This could mean a lot of things: we could have a new Council Head soon, and I could become a local hero, the Don Quixote who toppled the Council of Meanies. There could be a statue of me in the main square, and a plaque that read: 'This is Rustler Pike - give this man a blow job'!
This is really good news.
Oh, and also - it could mean we'll finally get our perimeter fence, 24 hour guards and beefed up security at the schools, kindergarten and nursery.
366. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 2:47:09 PM
Post #365 by Rustler Pike has been deleted.
You have been warned, Pike.
367. RustlerPike - 8/12/2001 2:48:38 PM
This guy, Shai Shalom, was killed in the line of duty in the West Bank a few weeks ago. For some reason his death touched me more than any of the others. I don't know why -I didn't know him, though he was from nearby Pardes Hanna.
Something about his face.
368. robertjayb - 8/12/2001 2:53:06 PM
And again...
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A Palestinian suicide bomber killed himself and wounded 15 people at a restaurant in northern Israel Sunday, the second such attack in the Jewish state in four days.
The blast at the Wall Street restaurant in the town of Kiryat Motzkin, south of the port of Haifa, followed a suicide attack in Jerusalem Thursday in which 15 people were killed by a Palestinian bomber who also blew himself up.
369. jexster - 8/12/2001 6:25:06 PM
My Palestinian Christian grocer friend's aunt lives within one block of the PA Police Hdq. that the Israeli's missiled the other day....
She reports WRT Arafat that the Israeli actions have caused Arafat to lose control, and quite possibly the means to regain it, for The Street now rulz.
370. jexster - 8/12/2001 6:25:35 PM
She's also glad to be alive.
371. Property of Jesus - 8/12/2001 6:56:01 PM
With more than ten different security services protecting him, Arafat is still in control.
Big mistake for Egypt to break their Camp David treaty/promise and move troops to the Sinai.
372. ronski - 8/12/2001 7:39:38 PM
My Palestinian grocer in Brooklyn wanted to see Israel destroyed, no ifs, ands, or buts.
373. jexster - 8/12/2001 9:46:26 PM
Ronsk - Yea...so does mine but he's embarrassed to say that in front of me in so many words....I guess there's something to be said for PC after all.
Andonly -
NB: One common debating technique is the straw man: You attribute an extreme, indefensible position to your opponent because that position is easier to knock down than your opponent's more moderate, nuanced position is
374. stostosto - 8/13/2001 4:50:07 AM
1-Andonly:
Thanks for your educational comments, I appreciate them. But my point in mentioning the Western military actions against Saddam and Milosevic was not to suggest that their acts are somehow on a par with Israeli behaviour. It was simply that it seems the West is very selective in which resolutions it takes seriously.
The UN comes in handy if it supports the political aims of the west, otherwise, well, too bad. The west will just do what it, and it alone, deems reasonable and fair with no regard for - what did you call it? - "legalisms".
For what it's worth: I supported both military actions. (And I deplore how the west is making a mess of Kosovo afterwards by failing to commit sufficient resources).
Talking "legalisms", though, the Kosovo war was highly dubious (Kosovo was and formally still is an integral part of Yugoslavia), the Saddam war was clean cut. It's still not clear just how much ethnic cleansing went on before the NATO campaign started. Once it did, the Serbs apparently thought "to hell with it".
--
Btw, Saddam's attack on Kuwait, his threat to the Saudis, his long time frozen relations with Syria and his eight year war against Iran seems to suggest there is a tight limit to Arab and Muslim unity...
If they didn't have Israel and all that fucking oil, they'd probably be in a perpetual state of meltdown, Congo-Afghanistan-like.
375. stostosto - 8/13/2001 4:57:19 AM
Rustler, I read an interesting article on Theodor Herzl yesterday. A Norwegian professor has just written an account of his life. What an intriguing bugger.
376. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 5:28:39 AM
sto:
Herzl is my absolute fave leader. I even tried to grow my beard like his at a certain point, though I couldn't be bothered to trim it and shape it and stuff. But that picture of me on the Mote Men Calendar (from the Haaretz article) was said to be rather Herzlish anyways.
377. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 5:34:05 AM
ronski:
My Palestinian grocer in Brooklyn wanted to see Israel destroyed, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Yes, well, that's not exactly surprising, is it? Tell him his grandfather wanted Israel destroyed in 1948 and his father wanted it destroyed in 1967, and maybe his son will want it destroyed in 2021. And as long as they want it destroyed it'll just keep growing.
Oh, and tell him to listen to a Stones song: 'You Can't Always Get What You Want...'
378. stostosto - 8/13/2001 5:50:07 AM
Hĺkon Harket: Jřdestaten. Historien om en moderne idé.
(The Jewish state. The history of a modern idea).
It's in Norwegian - but don't worry, Norwegian is so close to Danish that you won't have any trouble reading it.
Rustler, it's funny, I was just going to mention that in the article there was a photo of Herzl behind his desk which reminded me so much about you!
379. stostosto - 8/13/2001 6:06:33 AM
On top of the hundreds of lives claimed by the current fighting between the Israelis and the Palestinians, there are escalating economic costs
The Economist.
"Frankly, we are strangling them", says an Israeli economist. Yet he does not believe the tactic will work.
380. stostosto - 8/13/2001 6:07:29 AM
From the leader in the same issue (last Friday):
A people under punishment
Israel justifies its economic measures on security grounds. This seems reasonable when applied to the ban on most Palestinian workers in Israel, devastating as that ban is. Under threat from terrorist bombs, it is natural that the government should try to build a wall between Israel proper and the Palestinian territories. But, of course, the protection does not work as it should: bombers still slip across the border while peaceable labourers, with no work at home, are forced to see their families clutch at emergency food relief.
>>>
381. stostosto - 8/13/2001 6:07:48 AM
>>>
Justifying the “internal closure”—that within the Palestinian territories—on security grounds is harder. The roads out of every town in the West Bank, and just about every village, are now blocked by army checkpoints, earth ramparts or deep ditches, the inhabitants shut in, barred from everyday contact with their fellows and often from basic services, including medical ones. The reason given is the protection of the deliberately scattered Israeli settlements. Since Palestinian militants have declared settlers, together with soldiers, to be legitimate targets, the Israeli government protects them with roads and buffer zones, where Palestinians are forbidden and their houses and farms sometimes demolished.
Israel's restrictions do not stop people of ill-intent
In fact, every able-bodied Palestinian will find a dirt track out of his village, though the journey will be grinding and take hours rather than minutes. The restrictions do not stop people of ill-intent. Hence the conclusion that most of the pettier regulations are punitive, punishing the Palestinians for turning down Israel's best offer (though there is beginning to be some revisionist thinking on that) and for rebelling against occupation. Do the Israelis hope that if life is made truly miserable for them, in every way, the Palestinians will eventually abandon the intifada and settle for the little they can get now?
382. stostosto - 8/13/2001 6:14:10 AM
I think one or both links to the Economist requires subscription. Sorry.
383. stostosto - 8/13/2001 6:56:50 AM
Rustler,
a good link from the Israeli government listing links to documents on the peace process, maps, and more. I was thinking you could put it up in the snot coloured bar:
http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00pq0
384. stostosto - 8/13/2001 7:03:50 AM
And here is a link from the Palestinian National Authority also presenting various links on the Peace Process.
http://www.pna.net/search/showindex.asp?DocCategory=1
385. jexster - 8/13/2001 9:56:25 AM
Message # 367 Yea RP. What a beauty! May Shari rest in peace.
386. jexster - 8/13/2001 9:57:10 AM
Shai...
387. Jenerator - 8/13/2001 12:09:45 PM
Rustler,
What type of impact will the seizure of the Orient House have? The NYT suggested that it was largely symbolic, and I somewhat agree. Or do the Palestinians *really* need this place for governmental duties? Won't this fuel the fire for the Muslim zealots? If anything, I see retaliatory bombings more likely and then what? Crushing the spirit of the extremists is understandable, it just seems possible that they might in turn bomb some Jewish/Western symbols (more than restaurants and bars) to get even.
Has security increased around the Wailing Wall?
Also, when I read such headlines as "International Community Condems Israel's Latest Attack on the Palestinians", I find it telling that the "international community" doesn't consist of more than Egypt and Lebanon, usually.
P.s. Do you still have your Herzl beard, and if so, does that make you in any way more of a target? If yes, shave it off immediately.
388. Wombat - 8/13/2001 12:27:09 PM
The Palestinians reportedly carry a card with the picture of Herzl on it and will kill anyone resembling him...
389. Jenerator - 8/13/2001 12:38:48 PM
Just how many cards do they carry?
Palestinian terrorist ID card
Herzl beard photo card
1-800-Call-ATT phone card
390. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 12:55:36 PM
Well, I finally took the time to redo my music room:
391. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 12:59:08 PM
P.s. Do you still have your Herzl beard, and if so, does that make you in any way more of a target? If yes, shave it off immediately.
Nice try, Jen. All the women I know want me to shave my ugly beard off. Truth is, if anything, it makes me less of a target, because I look like a Hamasnik more than anything else. Down at the Wadi Ara police station I'm known as 'Sheikh Ra'ed' because they think I resemble the mayor of Umm el-Fahm, Sheikh Ra'ed Salah. Arabs regularly try to hitch rides with me, thinking I'm headed towards Jenin.
392. arkymalarky - 8/13/2001 1:03:08 PM
That hideous floor color has just got to go.
393. arkymalarky - 8/13/2001 1:03:43 PM
BTW, I didn't know they had Home Interiors parties in Israel.
394. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 1:11:02 PM
arky:
That hideous floor color has just got to go.
Hah! Funny you should say that - I had a ferocious row with the decorator over that.
This is me posting to the Mote from our drawing room (must I capitalize that?). The suite is covered with Chinese silk captured from a Spanish treasure ship in 1762.
395. Jenerator - 8/13/2001 1:14:15 PM
Rustler,
Okay, so I'd trim your beard, but my question was legitimate.
With your beard, you can pass for Jewish and Arab? Good cover!
396. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 1:15:48 PM
This must be boring all of you silly, but this last one is my favorite corner of our little shambles in Katzir. It is, of course, the beautifully proportioned sunken Italian Garden, a prime feature immediately to the south of the house.
The great rockery adjacent was built using large blocks of granite carried from Bodmin Moor.
397. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 1:25:35 PM
sto:
You're right, we're meanies. But we're surrounded by meanies and we have no choice. This is the Meanie East, after all. We want a defensible strip of land, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, because we're surrounded by a hostile sea of bloodthirsty Aye-rabs. And if we have to step on the Pals to have that strip of land, or expel them even, we'll do it. We certainly won't allow the establishment of a sovereign enemy state alongside us, on this side of the Jordan.
Sharon is a fat bastard but he's not as bad as the best of the Arab dictators, any one of whom would have killed millions of people by now if he had his finger on the nuclear trigger (as Sharon does). And once they're done with us, they'll go after you guys. Have no illusions about that. Arab Muslims see all living non-Muslim westerners as an unbearable affront to their pride.
398. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 1:29:49 PM
Jex:
I sure hope you weren't being cynical about Shai Shalom. I don't know if he's particularly good-looking. But I do think there's something about him that says - this is a man.
I heard people talking about him and his family on the radio. They were full of admiration. I wanted to go to his memorial service but I didn't.
399. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:35:50 PM
Spike,
You will perhaps remember the ongoing debate/debacle in the International Thread post-Camp David. Despite the details being largely unclear, there was near unanimity expressed that the deal offered Arafat was in good faith, and sweeping, and that he was a fool not to accept the hand outstrected to him in all honesty by Barak. I remember being roundly abused (not by you) for repeatedly discounting the snap media judgements that informed this consensus. I have remained highly unconvinced by the popular take on those meetings between Arafat, Barak and Clinton.
Well, there is a very good article out in the New York Review of Books by Robert Malley, who was party to those talks. The whole article is here.
I'll post a telling excerpt or two from the introduction in succeeding messages.
400. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:36:50 PM
In accounts of what happened at the July 2000 Camp David summit and the following months of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, we often hear about Ehud Barak's unprecedented offer and Yasser Arafat's uncompromising no. Israel is said to have made a historic, generous proposal, which the Palestinians, once again seizing the opportunity to miss an opportunity, turned down. In short, the failure to reach a final agreement is attributed, without notable dissent, to Yasser Arafat.
As orthodoxies go, this is a dangerous one. For it has larger ripple effects. Broader conclusions take hold. That there is no peace partner is one. That there is no possible end to the conflict with Arafat is another.
For a process of such complexity, the diagnosis is remarkably shallow. It ignores history, the dynamics of the negotiations, and the relationships among the three parties. In so doing, it fails to capture why what so many viewed as a generous Israeli offer, the Palestinians viewed as neither generous, nor Israeli, nor, indeed, as an offer. Worse, it acts as a harmful constraint on American policy by offering up a single, convenient culprit—Arafat—rather than a more nuanced and realistic analysis.
401. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:39:04 PM
A later, crucial, passage from the article -
he final and largely unnoticed consequence of Barak's approach is that, strictly speaking, there never was an Israeli offer. Determined to preserve Israel's position in the event of failure, and resolved not to let the Palestinians take advantage of one-sided compromises, the Israelis always stopped one, if not several, steps short of a proposal. The ideas put forward at Camp David were never stated in writing, but orally conveyed. They generally were presented as US concepts, not Israeli ones; indeed, despite having demanded the opportunity to negotiate face to face with Arafat, Barak refused to hold any substantive meeting with him at Camp David out of fear that the Palestinian leader would seek to put Israeli concessions on the record. Nor were the proposals detailed. If written down, the American ideas at Camp David would have covered no more than a few pages. Barak and the Americans insisted that Arafat accept them as general "bases for negotiations" before launching into more rigorous negotiations.
402. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:40:42 PM
And another:
Ultimately, the path of negotiation imagined by the Americans—get a position that was close to Israel's genuine bottom line; present it to the Palestinians; get a counterproposal from them; bring it back to the Israelis —took more than one wrong turn. It started without a real bottom line, continued without a counterproposal, and ended without a deal.
403. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:42:17 PM
And another:
Ultimately, the path of negotiation imagined by the Americans—get a position that was close to Israel's genuine bottom line; present it to the Palestinians; get a counterproposal from them; bring it back to the Israelis —took more than one wrong turn. It started without a real bottom line, continued without a counterproposal, and ended without a deal.
404. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:42:50 PM
And the superb conclusion:
Had there been, in hindsight, a generous Israeli offer? Ask a member of the American team, and an honest answer might be that there was a moving target of ideas, fluctuating impressions of the deal the US could sell to the two sides, a work in progress that reacted (and therefore was vulnerable) to the pressures and persuasion of both. Ask Barak, and he might volunteer that there was no Israeli offer and, besides, Arafat rejected it. Ask Arafat, and the response you might hear is that there was no offer; besides, it was unacceptable; that said, it had better remain on the table.
Offer or no offer, the negotiations that took place between July 2000 and February 2001 make up an indelible chapter in the history of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. This may be hard to discern today, amid the continuing violence and accumulated mistrust. But taboos were shattered, the unspoken got spoken, and, during that period, Israelis and Palestinians reached an unprecedented level of understanding of what it will take to end their struggle. When the two sides resume their path toward a permanent agreement—and eventually, they will—they will come to it with the memory of those remarkable eight months, the experience of how far they had come and how far they had yet to go, and with the sobering wisdom of an opportunity that was missed by all, less by design than by mistake, more through miscalculation than through mischief.
405. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 1:45:38 PM
So, finally we get a more nuanced and believable picture of what happened at Camp David. I'm inclined to believe this report's conclusion, and I'm far more persuaded of its accuracy than the myriad conclusions jumped at by the mainstream press - both directly after the meetings and now.
It starts to make sense.
406. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 2:42:57 PM
marj:
This is a sample letter HonestReporting suggested its members send to the editor of the New York Review of Books. I am sending it to you, instead.
Dear marj:
Robert Malley and Hussein Agha claim to present "The Truth About Camp David" (New York Review of Books, August 9), but their report is disputed by others with much more credibility.
According to President Clinton, Arafat is "an aging leader who relishes his own sense of victimhood and seems incapable of making a final peace deal." The chief American negotiator in the Middle East, Dennis Ross, concluded, "Arafat is the only one who takes decisions, and he was the only one who was incapable and could not take the decision."
Arafat rejected Israel's historic and surprisingly generous offers at Camp David to give up almost all of the West Bank and Gaza, surrender a large part of Jerusalem, and begin the process of the Palestinian "right of return." Later, Arafat rejected President Clinton's bridging proposals -- accepted by Barak -- which would have given him even more.
Instead of accepting the end of hostilities, Arafat embarked on a new round of violence that has wrought tragic consequences for his people. Even before he left for Camp David last year, the Palestinian Authority was operating summer camps to train children in warfare, Palestinian TV and radio were inciting violence, and weapons were being smuggled into Gaza.
Malley may try to make Arafat look like a dove, but Arafat still wears his military uniform, and in the words of Dennis Ross: "Chairman Arafat could not accept Camp David... because when the conflict ends, the cause that defines Arafat also ends."
407. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 2:52:43 PM
Now some of my own words:
Malley's main point appears to be that Barak did not make his offers in writing. The reason Barak did not do that is that when you offer something to the Arabs, they reject it, but then insist on taking it as the starting point for any subsequent negotiations. This was the pattern with Assad, and it was the pattern with the Palestinians. For instance, look at what PLO bigwig Mahmoud Abbas says here: "The Palestinians insist that talks resume on the basis of U.N Resolutions 242 and 338, the land for peace formula, not on certain percentages in the West Bank (...). The Palestinians also want talks to start from the point they left off with the government of Ehud Barak last January in Taba".
If the Pals were never offered anything, what were Clinton, Barak and Arafat doing in CD all that time? Showing each other their genitals? Playing Pin the Tail on the Donkey? No offers? Nothing went on there? You really think this claim can be taken seriously?
408. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 3:00:01 PM
Spike,
Don't be silly. You obviously haven't read the article yet.
409. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 3:07:43 PM
Marj:
Oh yeah. I forgot to...
410. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 3:59:21 PM
OK, I'm reading. Meanwhile, though, the IDF seems to be readying an operation against Jenin, a couple dozens kms. from Katzir.
Ha'aretz:
Palestinian sources said Monday that the IDF had concentrated a large number of tanks near the village of Jalame north of the West Bank town of Jenin. The sources also reported IDF warplanes flying over the area. Israeli security sources refused to give any details.
411. arkymalarky - 8/13/2001 4:14:15 PM
408 & 409 are somehow both typical and hilarious.
412. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 4:21:10 PM
Marj, I've read half-plus. I find the article boring and annoying but I will read it all eventually. I still think these articles are superfluous. All you need, in order to understand the situation, is to see Arafat's ugly face proclaiming 'haq el awda (right of return), haq el awda, HAQ EL AWDA!!!!!' to his minions, and you get the picture.
413. marjoribanks - 8/13/2001 4:34:41 PM
Spike,
I fully understand your perspective. I do not expect the article to change your mind a whit, your view on the matter is not in the least bit contingent on what went on at Camp David, justifiably so.
However, public opinion in the US and a good part of the rest of the world WAS moved by what has been represented as the goings-on at Camp David. Arafat has been effectively painted as the sole, intrangisent, villain of the piece - and the Pals as fools.
The truth, as it always is, is now shown to be considerably more complex and nuanced. And the knee-jerk media summation of the process is shown to be bankrupt and wrong.
It's important for Americans to read this article, and for others with no direct stake in your part of the world. Because, it is they who were sold a bill of goods that turned out to be counterfeit.
414. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 11:29:31 PM
Marj:
Nononono. The article proves nothing like what you say it does. I will show that. But first I will read it.
415. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 11:32:54 PM
Well well well!!! Jenin's casbah was rocked tonight.
416. RustlerPike - 8/13/2001 11:48:32 PM
Sharon is shaping out as just the right leader for this war.
This will be a long war. Arik is handling it just right: standing firm and giving the Pals a jab here, and uppercut there, and waiting till enough of our babies have been killed for us to make our big move. There is no doubt in my mind he wants, ultimately, to drive the Pals out. If he doesn't - well, he will. There is no other way to handle this situation.
I must tell you guys one thing. When I met Sharon last December (December?) I said I thought this was part 2 of the War of Independence. He didn't seem to think so at the time: he said that we had been through worse things. But of late he has been quoted as saying the same thing: that this was part 2 of the War of Independence.
I wonder:
1) if he got that from me.
2) if he's thinking what I was thinking when I said that (and what I wanted him to think). Remember part 1 ended with a mass expulsion of Pals.
417. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 12:00:19 AM
I will say another thing: I have been invited by our Council Deputy Head to a meeting he is to have with Israel's Minister of Interior's chief aide on Sunday. The Deputy seems to think the Minister of Interior wants to sack the Head because of his corruption, and his mishandling of the town of Harish and of the security situation. If we succeed in toppling the Head, I will be in a position that will make it much more feasible for me to carry out my dream of buying a house in Umm El Fahm and waiting for all hell to break loose on my head.
Lately I have been thinking the sign on the house should read, simply 'Rustler Pike's House' (in English, and '(my Hebrew name)'s House' in Hebrew.
418. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 12:01:56 AM
I think having a sign with the Mote's url would be pushing it a bit.
419. Wombat - 8/14/2001 8:20:46 AM
Marj:
As one of your flamers, I read the Malley (and you neglected to mention the other fellagh, you know, the Palestinian negotiator) article, as well as Sontag's piece in the Times, and the New Republic's critique of the two articles. There is little "truth" in the pieces, but an alternative interpretation of events that is as self-serving as what came before; the point being to absolve Arafat of sole responsibility for the talks' failure. By the time you cut through the nuances and complexities, I still arrive at the same conclusion. The Israelis may not have offered more than a slight reed for Arafat to grasp as the final basis for a Palestinian state, but he failed to grasp it and move on. A leader with a vision of something other than his own survival in power would have done so.
420. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 9:01:57 AM
Wombat is right, marj. I would add that beggars can't be choosers, and poor dispossessed people looking for sympathy against another people famous for its suffering have got to really try to compromise. If I were Hairy I would have taken 80% or 90% of the WB&G, tons of American and world aid, and tried to build a home for my people where they would not be collectively raped by tanks and settlers every other day. He was certainly offered something in that vicinity, you will admit, marj.
Let's imagine that Camp David is drawing to a close and Hannan Ashrawi goes on Larry King Live and says 'look - you guys are assholes and you're on the Zionists' side but we are willing to accept the following: a demilitarized Pal state on 95% of the WB&G, sans the main settler blocs but with Hebron (pulls out maps), just like what the media reports Barak has been offering us; all of East Jerusalem with some kind of special Muslim-guardianship status for the Temple Mount, again like what Barak is reported to be offering; and we'll need tons of money - x billions over x years. In return we'll give you peace, and we'll make sure our children are raised on ideals of peace. Take it or leave it'.
Would the West have said no? You know they wouldn't have. Would Israel have said no? You know it wouldn't have.
So what do these silly revisionist 'nuanced' articles prove? Where there's a will there's a way. A dispossessed people does not haggle over nuance. It makes damned fucking sure it gets un-dispossessed and settles for less than what it wants. I mean, fer chrissake, Herzl was willing to settle for Uganda. Israel was willing to settle for the 1947 partition. And we never, never, never never never sent our men to blow up babies. Even Goldstein didn't do that. The Pals have been doing it for decades.
>>>
421. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 9:03:14 AM
>>>
Even now, Pal children in Jenin know they won't be bombed in their schools by Israel, or shot by settlers. They know they could only be hurt in school if there happens to be a terrorist command post nearby and a bomb goes astray, and that even that probably won't happen because Israel will make damn sure it won't.
Yet I have to imagine a terrorist squad spraying bullets and lobbing grenades into my children's classrooms one of these mornings when the school year opens, and the thought is driving me mad.
422. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 9:12:10 AM
You will notice I have created a special links section for participants currently in disfavor with The Host.
423. Wombat - 8/14/2001 9:25:46 AM
It frightens me that Rustler and I agree on this.
424. marjoribanks - 8/14/2001 10:43:06 AM
Funny link, Spike.
---
Wombat,
There is little "truth" in the pieces, but an alternative interpretation of events that is as self-serving as what came before; the point being to absolve Arafat of sole responsibility for the talks' failure. By the time you cut through the nuances and complexities, I still arrive at the same conclusion. The Israelis may not have offered more than a slight reed for Arafat to grasp as the final basis for a Palestinian state, but he failed to grasp it and move on. A leader with a vision of something other than his own survival in power would have done so.
I don't buy this, and I don't think it reflects the wholly believable account in the Review piece. Furthermore, I've seen interviews with Barak which lean towards coroborrating the meat of the article.
The portrayal of Arafat as solely responsible for the failure of the CD talks has been staggeringly effective, but there is demonstrably no good reason to accept it wholesale, I point you again to the conclusion of the article.
Genuinely, I believe that it is impossible to accept that "Arafat as singluar demon" theory if you read the article dispassionately. My problem may be that I can do so, while both you and Spike do not. I do not presume that your minds can or will be changed, and I do not pretend that Arafat is a great statesman. I do buy the account of the CD negotiations, though. And I think all interested Americans (and others) should read it and digest it for some perspective on this massive media (and other) snap allotment of blame.
425. Wombat - 8/14/2001 11:04:50 AM
Marj:
I don't see Arafat as a demon; I see him as someone who, due to personal and moral cowardice, preferred to risk a total breakdown of a potentially promising avenue that may have forced him to settle for less than the maximum, but which would have given the Palestinians more than they had at the time of CD, more than they are likely to get now, and more than they will get in the future.
The political forces in Israel and the Palestinian Authority necessitated the ambiguities described in the articles. They do not refute Arafat's reported plaint to President Clinton about if he signed on to what was proposed, would Clinton attend his funeral. Compare that to Rabin.
Unlike many, I do not believe that Arafat is orchestrating or in the least bit in control of what is currently happening. He missed a chance to lead, and is currently trying to keep his head above water.
426. jexster - 8/14/2001 3:37:48 PM
Of course he isn't. He's just weak.
When all nuance fails, strawmen will have to suffice.
Ask Andonly!
427. jexster - 8/14/2001 3:42:01 PM
Click Pic.
428. Wombat - 8/14/2001 4:13:08 PM
Edward Said is the Noam Chomsky of the Palestinians.
429. Property of Jesus - 8/14/2001 4:17:42 PM
I was particularly impressed that the Israelis liberated 70 Palestinians from the Jenin jail that the PLO were planning to execute for having "collaborated" with Israel.
Tanks!
430. jexster - 8/14/2001 6:46:25 PM
Yes I know he and Noam are tight. But SOME balance is needed around here if only for the sake of nuance!
431. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 8:44:35 PM
Like my dad always said - there's nothing like a set of vintage Coleman lanterns to get a thread nuanced.
432. jexster - 8/14/2001 8:48:35 PM
This is about nuance and about Macedonia but consider
There is no point in discussing "rights" with people who are interested in "land" and "power"—and are willing to use violence to get them. That sort of violence can only be answered with violence: Appeasing terrorists is no better than appeasing dictators...
433. jexster - 8/14/2001 8:53:37 PM
No heavens no I wasn't being cynical about Shai Shalom....I never joke about death. Seen too much.
In your post you said something about connecting with his eyes....I connected there too but in perhaps a deeper way being am what am.
434. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 9:36:12 PM
(A gayster? You're a gayster, Jexster?)
Well, I almost became one, I think. But I didn't in the end.
I'm glad you weren't joking about Shai Shalom. I didn't figure you were. You're right about the eyes: he's seems like... a man, I can't find another term for it. There aren't many of those nowadays, it seems.
435. RustlerPike - 8/14/2001 9:40:57 PM
Interesting link, Jexst.
436. Jenerator - 8/14/2001 9:56:05 PM
Shai looked like an attractive, young, intense and vibrant man to me.
437. stostosto - 8/15/2001 4:27:46 AM
Gillon is coming to Denmark today. Demonstrations have been announced. Two against him, one in support.
Will report more later.
438. RustlerPike - 8/15/2001 4:34:25 AM
Remember those Danish fishermen who ferried the Jews to safety in WW2? Well, turns out they did not do it just for the sake of saving Jews.
Prof. Peter Nannestad
"A liberal who espouses centrist views at home, Nannestad has shown through his research that the Danes are no better than other people."
439. stostosto - 8/15/2001 4:41:29 AM
Rustler Message # 397
You're right, we're meanies. But we're surrounded by meanies and we have no choice.
Well, there's meanies, and there's indiscriminate meanies. The first kind attacks people for what they do. The latter kind attacks people for what they are. The "we have no choice" bit doesn't follow. If anyone has choice in the present situation it's Israel. Choice that comes from superior economy, superior technology, superior political organisation, superior foreign allies.
This is the Meanie East, after all. We want a defensible strip of land, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, because we're surrounded by a hostile sea of bloodthirsty Aye-rabs.
Indiscriminate, again. Arabs aren't people, they're a hostile bloodthirsty sea. Language which justifies indiscriminate wholesale violence.
As in:
And if we have to step on the Pals to have that strip of land, or expel them even, we'll do it.
Yes, even as you are all a bunch of effeminate weaklings living in girlie country.
We certainly won't allow the establishment of a sovereign enemy state alongside us, on this side of the Jordan.
How about you worked harder to ensure that once that state is established as it eventually will be, it will be a friendly one?
Oh, and one more thing: Sharon is an idiot.
440. stostosto - 8/15/2001 4:49:12 AM
Rustler,
the money charging is no secret. But fishermen weren't the only ones involved in the rescue, you know. Nor is the fact that Denmark blocked the entry of Jews (and political refugees) fleeing Hitler in the 30s.
I would never claim Danes are better than anyone else. From what I see and hear around me that's simply not the case. I will say, however, that anti-semitism is not present here.
And I think a straightforward explanation is this: There were never very many Jews here, and they are/were largely assimilated.
441. stostosto - 8/15/2001 4:51:37 AM
Rustler,
I am beginning to think the policy of assassination of known terrorists is OK. At least it's a much better proposition than curfews and roadblocks.
442. stostosto - 8/15/2001 4:56:50 AM
I concur with Andonly and Wombat about Arafat. He controls absolutely nothing, which is why you can never make peace with him.
443. stostosto - 8/15/2001 5:02:25 AM
Rustler,
sorry if I am ruining your otherwise splendid mood. Just to cheer you up: I think you're doing a fine hosting job here.
To cheer you up some more: I am aware I can't claim any expertise in the "Meanie East", so feel free to dismiss my views as just those of some pansy Scandinavian crackpot.
444. RustlerPike - 8/15/2001 5:04:18 AM
sto:
In view of your last two posts (#441 and #442) I will remove the label of semi-antisemite which you incurred for not posting here for 48 hours straight. I will let you have a relief shipment of Lego and will let you bathe in the Arctic for 2 hours tonight. We may have to assassinate your cat though, if you continue to insult Arik The Great (whom the US apparently prevented from invading Beit Jalla last night).
445. stostosto - 8/15/2001 5:11:40 AM
Unbungling something in my #440:
the money charging is no secret. But fishermen weren't the only ones involved in the rescue, you know. Nor is the fact that Denmark blocked the entry of Jews (and political refugees) fleeing Hitler in the 30s.
Should read:
the money charging is no secret. But fishermen weren't the only ones involved in the rescue, you know.
It's also no secret that Denmark blocked the entry of Jews (and political refugees) fleeing Hitler in the 30s. I believe most countries did this.
----
Btw, I read an account of a German Jew who fled to Denmark before the war. He was charged with some crime in Germany. He was actually aided and fed by Danish border guards and found his way to Copenhagen. There he sought help from the Jewish congregation, but the people there were loath, probably shit nervous at the prospect of being accused of functioning as a magnet for refugees and what that might entail for their cosy relationship with Danish authorities (who in turn were shit scared of what it might entail for their cosy relationship with the Germans).
The man eventually made it to the USA.
446. stostosto - 8/15/2001 5:21:13 AM
Even if Denmark was rather sealed off to refugees from the Nazis in the 30s, there was a trickle coming in. The most prominent of the dissidents was Bertolt Brecht.
My grandparents had some small role helping German social democrats finding accomodation here. One of my grandmother's life long friends was a German woman who fled political persecution. She married a Dane, became a Danish citizen and stayed here.
447. RustlerPike - 8/15/2001 9:32:11 AM
Oy, it's hard being a gambler.
It's hard being.
It's hard.
It's.
448. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 2:02:37 AM
Post #447 was just me sighing wrt some rl hardship. I must say I'm fluctuating between that and a sense of elation at the way certain things seem to be shaping up.
449. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 2:03:17 AM
Well, near-elation.
Which is also fun.
450. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 3:35:47 AM
Two new links in the 'Israeli culture' section.
451. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 3:39:39 AM
btw, that leftie rally in Tel Aviv I was so afraid of a couple weeks ago: only a couple thousand people showed up.
And if the poems I am reading in Ariga are an indication, this country's Left is fast becoming its Right.
452. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 3:43:40 AM
Sto:
So what's happening with Karmi?
Like I said, I don't like the guy. Problematic, both morally and competence-wise, and quite typically Israeli in that sense.
453. Jenerator - 8/16/2001 4:18:37 AM
{Good pictures of you in Parenting, Rp.}
454. stostosto - 8/16/2001 4:49:53 AM
Rustler,
The demonstrations were rather small and completely non-violent. I think there were more journalists than demonstrators.
Politically the far left is rather isolated - together with Amnesty International and other human rights org's - in the matter.
The government regards Gillon as an ambassador like any other, and the commentariat's spin is he will be able to function normally in all his formal diplomatic duties, but that he may not be able to make much connection with Danish society. I don't know. I think he may have more leeway in practice.
There was an interesting TV interview with a thoughtful Danish politician of Syrian-Palestinian extraction.
He said it's a bit weird that while everybody demand of Israelis and Palestinians who have killed each other's families that they sit down and talk things over sensibly in an atmosphere of trust, some people on the other hand refuse to see Carmi Gillon whom they have never met and who haven't done any harm to them personally whatsoever.
He said that was 'symbol politics' as opposed to 'reality politics'.
I couldn't agree more.
----
That guy, Naser Khader, gives Arabs and Muslims a good name here due to his true democratic mindset and his willingness to look tough problems in the eye wrt immigrants and refugees.
(Which of course means he is detested by many in the Muslim milieu).
455. stostosto - 8/16/2001 5:04:44 AM
Look out for more criticism of Israeli policies, though. Our outspoken foreign minister is bent on putting pressure on Israel.
Excerpt from a newspaper interview yesterday (my translation):
"Despite the conflict, Israel is a relatively open society, a democracy. It's possible to influence the public. We must make use of that. This has been the reason we have said some things a little sharper formulated than we have done before. It must make an impression on Israel that there is criticism coming from a country like Denmark whom no one rightly can suspect of being an Israeli hostile state."
Journalist: Is Denmark selling out of its long-established Israel friendly foreign policy?
"I don't see that at all. I think we would be risking some of our credibility as a democracy and a humanely thinking country if we didn't criticise some developments in the Middle East. The most grotesque was when a spokesman for the Israeli government said that we were wrecking our legacy from 1943. I think that was totally horrible. I am very pleased to see the Danish Jewish congregation agrees".
456. stostosto - 8/16/2001 5:08:30 AM
Do I feel well represented by Mogens Lykketoft's statements above? I really don't know.
I give them to you here mostly for your information; a Danish perspective.
But, as I said before, Lykketoft is most decidedly not a natural diplomat.
Neither is Gillon, btw, which is one reason all this has been rolling.
457. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 7:29:48 AM
I found this
at www.thegoodnamesweretaken.com.
458. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 9:19:14 AM
IDF Planning Directorate predicts: 'Intifada will last until 2006'
Wonderful.
459. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 9:23:23 AM
Some more predictions from these people (who, unlike the Thread Host, failed to predict this war):
"Neither extreme case - total Israeli surrender to Palestinian dictates or an initiated escalation leading to chaos on the Palestinian side and military intervention by regional elements - is regarded as a realistic estimate. Instead, the policy established at the start of the conflict, attrition, will continue.
Another alternative, a unilateral separation, is possible, but is not on the current government's agenda.
An offensive attack by Iran or Iraq and possible changes in the regimes in Egypt and Jordan are not considered likely factors that could lead toward war by 2006.
According to the Planning Directorate, Arafat will remain the main address for the functioning of the Palestinian establishment. The Palestinian Authority will not collapse, and Arafat will not lose his control over it. Nonetheless, his ability to make decisions and implement them will weaken as a result of growing power in the hands of the radical forces.
It also predicted that the political effort will continue along the lines of the Mitchell Report and the Tenet cease-fire deal, but Arafat will try to improve his situation by skipping a cease-fire and putting the burden of the first move - a settlement freeze - on Israel, as well as by bringing in international observers as a first, symbolic step toward moving responsibility for the crisis to the international community. He has failed so far to win important political support in the Bush administration, but he is trying to bring about the collapse of the national unity government headed by Ariel Sharon."
460. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:09:11 AM
I found this at the "Not In My Name" website:
461. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:15:04 AM
Plus this quote:
"When we occupy the land we shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receives us. We must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us. . . We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries. While denying it any employment in our own country. . . The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly. . . Let the owners of immovable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us something far more than they are worth. . . But we are not going to sell them any thing back."
—Theodor Herzl, 12 June 1895
[Raphael Patai, ed.; The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl, vol. 1 Harry Zohn, trans., (New York: Herzl Press and T. Yoseloff, 1960), pp.88-89.]
462. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:17:39 AM
That map (sorry about the width - attempts to resize it made it illegible) illustrates, to me, how downright dishonest the revisionist articles marj is so fond of are.
That map is from Al Quds, goddamit - and this was the pre-Camp David proposal!!!
463. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:30:47 AM
And this too:
"Population of Palestine and Israel, 1914-1951
Sources: Schmelz (1991), pp. 26. 31-32; Metzer & Kaplan (1990). pp. 104-105; Horowitz (1954), p. 155.
| Date | No. of Arabs | No. of Jews† | Total population |
| 1914 estimation* | 715,000 | 85,000 | 800,000 |
| October 1922 census | 679,800 | 83,800 | 763,600 |
| November 1931 census | 858,700 | 174,600 | 1,033,300 |
| 1940 estimation | 1,078,600 | 460,100 | 1,538,700 |
| 1947 estimation | 1,333,800 | 609,000 | 1,942,800 |
| November 1948 census** | 69,000 | 716,700 | 785,700 |
| 1951 estimation** | 173,000 | 1,404,000 | 1,577,000 |
Notes:
† [It should be noted that a large number of Jews in 1914 might also correctly be categorized as Arab Jews. —NIMN web master]
* Estimation of the population of the areas that were later included in the territory of Western Palestine under British Mandatory rule.
** Population of the State of Israel, excluding former territories of British Mandatory Palestine that were not under Israeli control."
464. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:46:48 AM
Oooh: we're finally getting somewhere. Here is one of the excellent maps from the Foundation for Middle East Peace (I've linked it in the puke colored bar).
The Clinton Proposal (Camp David):
465. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:47:57 AM
The May 2000 Barak proposal:
466. stostosto - 8/16/2001 10:52:05 AM
Rustler:
If Arafat had agreed to the Camp David proposal such as it is commonly presented, do you think the Israeli electorate would have went along and OK'ed it in a referendum?
467. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 10:57:14 AM
To see the maps better go to http://www.fmep.org/maps/.
468. jexster - 8/16/2001 3:48:42 PM
Breakthrough!!!!!!!!!!!
"There's a lot of people in the Middle East who are desirous to get into the Mitchell process. And--but first things first. The--these terrorist acts and, you know, the responses have got to end in order for us to get the framework--the groundwork--not framework, the groundwork to discuss a framework for peace, to lay the--all right."--Referring to former Sen. George Mitchell's report on Middle East peace, Crawford, Texas, Aug. 13, 2001
469. desertlily - 8/16/2001 4:17:16 PM
Wow! Finally. A rational, realistic conversation about the Israel/PLO matter.
I just noticed inside my own brain, that if only one other person states what I perceive to be the truth (Rustler Pike, overhere), I have no desire to start talking.
This means that if I could only find someone to do this in every area of life that's important to me, I could stop talking altogether and devote my entire life to nothing but art.
Is that interesting, or what?
Well...OK...just to myself....but so what?
470. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 4:20:29 PM
Jex:
The guy is a Pericles.
471. RustlerPike - 8/16/2001 4:22:01 PM
sto:
If Arafat had agreed to the Camp David proposal such as it is commonly presented, do you think the Israeli electorate would have went along and OK'ed it in a referendum?
Yes, yes, YES!!!
We meant it, sto. And I mean that.
472. RustlerPike - 8/17/2001 1:24:14 AM
This page on the Gush Shalom website tries to convince us, with the help of maps like this, that Barak was not being generous with the Pals at all.
(Click on map).
473. RustlerPike - 8/17/2001 1:35:17 AM
According to Gush Shalom, the areas referred to in the FMEP maps as 'Green Areas - temporary Israeli security control, ultimately under Pal sovereignty' are a scam.
'The "Temporary Control" concept is unique. It refers to sovereign Palestinian land that will remain under Israeli military and civil control for an indefinite time. This area too contains settlements, some of them are the most extreme zealots (Untrue to the best of my knowledge. The Jordan Valley settlements are largely Labor-affilliated - RP). It is very unlikely that Israel will evacuate them in, say, 50 years time'.
And the conclusion, written in bold red letters:
'This is no generous offer. It is a humiliating demand for surrender!'
This is an Israeli website, mind you.
474. stostosto - 8/17/2001 4:03:02 AM
I realise the devil is in the details, but I really have a hard time judging whether this or that offer is generous or not.
In any case I think it's not a matter of lines on a map. It's a question of trust. If the Israelis felt sure that once the Pals got a fully sovereign independent state, they would be content and move on with their life, questions of where to draw the lines would be manageable.
And if the Pals felt sure that once they got their state, its sovereignty wouldn't be subject to heavy Israeli surveillance, control and suspicion, the same applies.
Of course, it seems to me the Pals are disintegrating into rivalising (at least potentially) bands of terrorists. Hamas, Jihad, Hizbollah, Fatah.
I wonder if this is not the most difficult obstacle: That such violent factions will end up perpetuating themselves indefinitely destroying any prospect of peace and security. And making Palestinian state building impossible, to say nothing of democracy.
Rustler, do you have some info handy on these Palestinian organisations?
475. stostosto - 8/17/2001 5:22:33 AM
One of today's leaders in The Economist - I copy and paste because it's subscription only (in other words, I abuse copyright law).
Israel and the Palestinians
Into the dark
Aug 16th 2001
From The Economist print edition
Blocking hope of an Israeli-Palestinian settlement could have awful consequences
HOPELESSNESS and horror are near neighbours, the one engendering the other. Unhappily, Israel's long-term strategic response to last week's bloody business, when 15 people at a Jerusalem pizza restaurant were blown up by a suicide-bomber, may have opened the way for more such horrors by extinguishing the hope of an eventual decent and peaceful arrangement.
Facing an onslaught of suicide-bombers (there was a less awful incident in a Haifa café this week, other attempts have been foiled and more are promised), the Israeli government can present good reasons for its tactical responses, including a tank incursion into Palestinian-controlled territory. But the seizure and closure of Orient House in East Jerusalem is of a different order. It carries an all-important message, embodied in the heart of the current Israeli government's policy: the Palestinians must abandon all prospect of a political settlement even roughly along the lines of the one they were negotiating last year with the previous government.
Orient House, an Ottoman building, is doubly symbolic both to the Palestinians and to the wider Arab world. Its choice as the Palestinian delegation's headquarters ten years ago, when Israel and its Arab neighbours boldly embarked on the Madrid peace conference, made it an emblem of the longed-for turn from war to peace. At the same time, its geography kept alive the dream that East Jerusalem, or some of it, would be an integral part of a future Palestinian state.
>>> 476. stostosto - 8/17/2001 5:24:07 AM
>>>
Through “understandings” with successive, and often reluctant, Israeli governments, it became a hub of Palestinian political activity. The late Faisal Husseini, whose family owns the land it stands on, was the benign king of a castle that was packed with political and welfare offices, plus visiting foreigners: it was too open for the sinister goings-on that Israelis now hint at.
Except, that is, to an Israeli prime minister who sincerely holds that any concession to Palestinian national sentiment is sinister. On the political front, Ariel Sharon's single-minded and remarkably consistent policy is to block the measures that might once have pointed the way to an agreed settlement. He has, for instance, started populating the empty slice of Israel near Gaza that had been earmarked as a possible swap in a territorial agreement. The closure of Orient House, planned well in advance, was Mr Sharon's sensational way of blocking all of Jerusalem, east and west, from Arab sovereign aspirations.
How much does that matter? After all, in the current ever-widening cycle of violence, the possibility of a lasting political settlement is fast receding in the direction of never-never land. The overriding aim in these vile Middle Eastern times is an end to the killing, a genuine ceasefire, rather than the once blessed prospect of a sustainable peace.
>>>
477. stostosto - 8/17/2001 5:24:53 AM
>>>
The two aims may be distinct, but approaching them in isolation is a path to disaster. Israel has all the means at its disposal, but brute force alone is unlikely to bring this particular war of attrition to an end. From Mr Sharon's perspective, the extinguishing of false Palestinian hopes is realism: the occupied people have to learn to accept the imposition of his new conditions. But punished by the Israelis, let down by their own leaders, the Palestinians are getting to the dangerous state of believing they have nothing to hope for and little to lose; they are close to accepting the militants' creed that if they, as a people, have to suffer, let the Israelis suffer too. Their land, unlit by hope, is darkened by despair, and the vengeance for blood.
[end] 478. stostosto - 8/17/2001 5:30:50 AM
I find this bit particularly pertinent:
On the political front, Ariel Sharon's single-minded and remarkably consistent policy is to block the measures that might once have pointed the way to an agreed settlement. He has, for instance, started populating the empty slice of Israel near Gaza that had been earmarked as a possible swap in a territorial agreement. The closure of Orient House, planned well in advance, was Mr Sharon's sensational way of blocking all of Jerusalem, east and west, from Arab sovereign aspirations.
479. RustlerPike - 8/17/2001 8:42:05 AM
Yes, sto. There will not be peace. There will be war.
480. Property of Jesus - 8/17/2001 2:38:13 PM
How soon before Christian Palestinians are arrested/tortured for being "spies" for Israel?
In Gaza, a man who died while being interrogated by Palestinian police was taken for burial by his family Friday after Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat sent a message saying he was innocent.
Suleiman Abu Amra, 38, was arrested on suspicion of collaborating with Israel and died Wednesday. Witnessess said his body was covered with deep cuts and welts, evidence of torture.
According to human rights activist Bassam Eid, 25 people have died in Palestinian detention since the Paulestinian Authority was set up in 1994.
Separating West Bank, Israel Proposed
481. RustlerPike - 8/18/2001 4:25:00 AM
"It was extremely hot in Jerusalem on Sunday," and it seemed as though the mall's air conditioning had overcome the fear of terror.
Terror, however, had overcome the law prohibiting smoking in public places. No one dared scold the smokers, as if a shared fate had now imposed a kind of tolerance."
A good piece on Jerusalem in Ha'aretz.
482. RustlerPike - 8/18/2001 5:48:45 PM
Bizarre:
A team of Swiss archeologists has found a 1,900-year-old ring that testifies to an ancient Jewish presence in Switzerland, Israel Radio reported.
483. Jenerator - 8/18/2001 7:15:21 PM
It could have only been 1 person who constituted a "Jewish presence".
484. desertlily - 8/19/2001 11:25:57 AM
I love the remarks made here by someone named "Andonly".
He/she has left some really fascinating and insightful posts regarding the psychology of Palestinians as well as that of Israelis.
I'm looking forward to more of that!
485. uzmakk - 8/19/2001 12:56:07 PM
Pike, are you there?
486. desertlily - 8/19/2001 1:41:28 PM
......no...... 487. RustlerPike - 8/19/2001 1:41:31 PM
Yes Uzmakk!!!
But I've taken a vow of Mote-celibacy until Thursday. I have to work. I owe people money.
488. RustlerPike - 8/19/2001 1:51:57 PM
I spoke to (Sharon aide and spokesperson) Ra'anan Gissin today, for about five minutes, in the PM's Office in Jerusalem (the Deputy Head of our village council took me there, on politics. We are trying to get the Head sacked and the Deputy elected instead of him). He seems to think the PA will deteriorate into chaos eventually, but he doesn't think Arafat will collapse completely. 'He's too strong', he said.
I know Gissin from when I was a reporter for IDF Radio, some 18 years ago. Half my lifetime!
I also saw Shimon Peres, through a pane of glass. And the security woman - an impressive lady, pretty good looking and very tough - almost threw me out for pacing the corridors and going places I shouldn't have.
The Interior Ministry is a dump. But that's because they're renovating.
489. RustlerPike - 8/19/2001 1:53:16 PM
I feel horribly guilty about not working, Uzmakk. E-mail me.
490. desertlily - 8/19/2001 1:56:07 PM
So, it being very quiet here, may I add my own psychological observation?
I just watched Battlebots. For those of you who don't know: it's a cool TVshow in which home-built vehicles try to demolish each other.
Today, a brilliantly-designed one, won almost immediately. The camera panned the audience and to my amazement, no one was cheering! (I was) This seemed like a reflection of a similar world-attitude that sides with the "victims" or the "underdogs" or the perceived "martyrs" no matter what their actual history might be.
This explains the venemous hatred being expressed world-wide towards both the US and Israel.
The question now remains: who/what started this?
My immediate response (which may be totally false since it's a quicky emotional one) is Noam Chomsky, Edward Said, Harvard University and the idiot savagery of "multiculturalism" as a value.
491. RustlerPike - 8/19/2001 1:59:31 PM
The general mood in Israel - or perhaps it's just me - is that we've gotten over the initial shock of the Intifada. Sharon has gotten the feel of being PM and he seems to be firmly in charge now. He appears to be more assertive vis a vis the Palestinians and seems to feel freer to act.
Another thing Gissin said to me and the Deputy is that while foreign governments pay lip service to the Arabs by condemning Israel for various actions, Sharon is accepted exceedingly warmly by these same leaders when he visits them. He seems to think the West's support of Israel is quite strong.
And he is considered to be one of the three or four people closest to Sharon.
492. RustlerPike - 8/19/2001 2:01:13 PM
desertlily:
I appoint you Temporary Custodian of the Thread while I am gone.
May the Force be with you.
493. desertlily - 8/19/2001 2:04:33 PM
Or the United Nations. Or the bicycles.
Or purple.
494. desertlily - 8/19/2001 2:05:46 PM
Your posts ade mine obsolete, but it fits anyway!! :-)
495. desertlily - 8/19/2001 2:13:45 PM
I guess I could talk to myself till Thursday. I love talking to myself.
Why?
Because I'm the best listener I ever encountered.
You're soooo weird...
But cute. Say it!
You, desertlily, are a really cute chick.
I'm going to get outta her before I make a fool of myself.
Too late...
496. jexster - 8/20/2001 11:57:21 AM
GAZA CITY, Aug. 19 -- To understand Lufti Bishawi's bitter despair, it would help to walk in his shoes. They are second-hand, bought from a pile of cracked and smelly hand-me-downs in an open-air market, and they are from Israel.
"Every time I take a step, I feel like I am walking in a swamp," said Bishawi, 69. "How did I get to this point, when I am old, to end my life in shoes thrown away by the enemy who robs me of everything?"
How Indeed!
497. jexster - 8/20/2001 12:00:36 PM
498. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 2:26:29 PM
Jex:
There's a link to that map on the 'Maps' links section. Thx anyways.
I've found another promising link: the Al Ahram website.
499. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 2:32:36 PM
Leaving Gaza, 1967.
500. jexster - 8/20/2001 2:38:23 PM
Perhaps you've answered the question too RP so if you have forgive me if I ask it again....
Really 2 questions...
- How would you answer those who ask why should Mr. Bishawi have to bear the burden of Europe's history of pogroms and persecutions?
- Is 20th Zionist ideology workable in the 21st century given the demographics and divergent outlooks and interests of Israeli constituent groups?
501. DanDillon - 8/20/2001 3:35:13 PM
Newspeak: Playing Nicey-nice with Journalistic Language in the Middle East
502. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 3:57:35 PM
Pal summer bank.
503. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 3:58:36 PM
Whoops - I meant summer camp. I was watching TV and chewing buggle dum at the same time.
504. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:05:02 PM
sto:
You asked for details on Hamas and other Pal orgs. This is an article from just before the outbreak of the present terror war. 'THE FUTURE OF PALESTINIAN POLITICS: FACTIONS, FRICTIONS, AND FUNCTIONS'.
505. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:15:10 PM
Jex:
I may not answer your (good) questions before Thursday.
Another thing Gissin said to me and the Deputy: he said Arafat has achieved none of the goals he had set out for himself in the present terror war. And he was quite happy about that.
He did say Israel had a serious problem explaining itself, because the media will always look for 'the story', and 'the story' here is that the Pals are the underdogs.
And this is Israel's leading spokesman saying this, more or less.
I'm going to set up a meeting with him, I think. I want to add some Flash to the gov't and IDF websites. If you guys have any comments about the present state of Israel's web propaganda, I'd like to hear them. I'll add a link to the IDF site in the cream colored bar. The Foreign Office and the PM's Office are already there, I think.
506. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:20:30 PM
Oh, this is grand. Follow the link to read Ariel Sharon's CV in the Prime Minister's Office website.
507. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:31:02 PM
And in the Hebrew section of the website, they didn't even bother to put up the 'bio' link.
508. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:35:30 PM
My mistake: there is a link, and it's the same. 'Under Construction'.
Wonder what the problem is.
509. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 4:42:39 PM
One thing I must say: Israel's top pols are remarkably accessible. I doubt ac could reach the top French pols, or sto could reach the top Danish pols, so easily, even if he was the most charismatic figure in a 3,000 person town in his country, and as handsome as I am. Out here you just waltz in on them, basically. Before Rabin was murdered it was even easier.
Or am I wrong about this, ac and sto?
510. uzmakk - 8/20/2001 4:50:04 PM
I simply ride my horse into their living rooms.
511. uzmakk - 8/20/2001 4:54:26 PM
...through the picture window.
I don't communicate with them much unless they displease me.
I am the Steppelord.
512. desertlily - 8/20/2001 5:17:01 PM
I find it interesting to see how Edward Said is less slick, less clever, less devious than Noam Chomsky.
Where Chomsky manipulates the truth just enough to serve his purpose, Said simply lies.
513. jexster - 8/20/2001 5:47:40 PM
RP..WRT your interview or chat, at first I thought sounds like Condo Rice trying to claim the Bush admin isn't unilateralist or disliked in Europe
But then I discovered a database of foreign language news service translations...the following PAL newspaper echoes ....
514. jexster - 8/20/2001 5:56:06 PM
Ramallah Al-Ayyam
: Hani Habib article: "Orient House and the White House"
Washington has regarded Israel's seizure of
Orient House in Jerusalem as "political escalation that undermines confidence in reaching a settlement through negotiations." This is what a US State Department statement said. However, the chain of events might lead to another explanation for the occupation of Orient House by the Israeli authorities. This was an Israeli political escalation toward the United States. (lengthy discussion of State Dept meets Bush bafflement - pushes Bush to action)
Before the Bush administration moves from the stage of "inaction" to the stage of "doing something," Sharon has succeeded in testing the pulse of the Arab regimes and their peoples. The Arab official and popular reaction to the occupation of Orient House, which some considered as a first step and a test balloon for a more serious subsequent step to seize control of the Al-Aqsa compound, has been mute. No one, apart from the Palestinians and some of their Jewish and foreign friends, has done anything regarding what is happening. Explaining this silence, some Arabs said it is because there was nothing new or important in this measure, since Israel, in fact, occupies all Palestine, including the West Bank,
the Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem. They said that the recent Israeli measures were part of the occupation process Israel has been carrying out since 1967. The Oslo Agreement was only a process to regulate and maintain the occupation. These explanations might be correct in one way or another, but what is important is that these explanations cover up the real factors behind the total Arab silence and are a shameful justification for it.
515. jexster - 8/20/2001 6:27:21 PM
Message # 504
Excellent article gives lie to the Arafat Terror propaganda so stridently and unconvincingly pressed by some around here.
A blow for nuance!
Because Sharonistas surely know what Barry Rubin knows about the peculiarities of PA political structure, I think it fair to conclude that his entire strategy from the Al-aksa visit, through the election campaign, to the present was calculated from the outset to cripple the PA before it could become viable.
Sharon isn't trying to stop PA violence which he has aimed to inflame from the get go inorder to provide cover and opportunity for his throughly cynical aim - the destruction of a viable Pal entity.
516. jexster - 8/20/2001 6:46:16 PM
Kudos also to Sto for the Economist reprint.
I wonder whether Sharon's political position is as solid as his government would have us think. I suspect that his support is a really mile wide and an inch deep for I doubt that the Israeli public is as gullible as his strategy assumes.
517. RustlerPike - 8/20/2001 11:55:53 PM
This is great:
'Thieves: We'll trade stolen Chagall for Mideast peace'.
518. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 12:00:05 AM
Jexter will like this nuance:
'Barak revealed that former US president Bill Clinton called him after he read recent articles that sought to blame Israel for the breakdown at Camp David. He said that, contrary to the reports, Israel was merely seeking agreement from Arafat to use the Camp David understandings as the basis for future talks, but that Arafat rejected the premise entirely'.
519. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 12:01:18 AM
Kudos also to Sto
I propose studos to Ko too - in the interest of balance.
520. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 12:33:21 AM
DD:
That article by Fisk was interesting. Now please read this piece, called 'Robert Fisk's Orwellian Newspeak'.
521. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:13:39 AM
RP -
The blame game is one way of looking at things, an entirely predictable response of politicians but entirely meaningless for that reason.
But I think getting caught in that all too predictable silliness is to miss the larger picture, a picture that I am becoming more and more convinced, Sharon sees quite clearly.
And the picture is this - Sharon saw a weak Barak, buffaloed by the Netanyahu threat, saw a President Clinton in the last few months of his Presidency trying to craft an agreement, saw an election year in the US and in Israel
He sabotaged the peace process, such as it was, fragile as it was, contentious as it was, and for those reasons all the more an opportunity ripe for seizing.
Bush's election doomed any continuation of Clinton's efforts (and not surprisingly given Bush's lack of mandate and conservative domestic agenda - foreign affairs weren't worth expending political capital he didn't have).
And the blame game also suits Sharon for it muddies the waters and together with the violence he deliberately fomented, helps deflect attention from his real objective which has been clear all along -destroy any possibility of a viable Palestinian political culture.
Its all about buying time, about fomenting violence and using it as a cover to unite Israelis if only for the year or two he will need to accomplish objectives he cherished and nutured before there ever was a Camp David or an Intifada.
522. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:22:01 AM
RP has even provided some interesting pieces to the puzzle:
The general mood in Israel - or perhaps it's just me - is that we've gotten over the initial shock of the Intifada...
He seems to think the PA will deteriorate into chaos eventually,
He did say Israel had a serious problem explaining itself, because the media will always look for 'the story', and 'the story' here is that the Pals are the underdogs. (hard to square with...)
Gissin said to me and the Deputy is that while foreign governments pay lip service to the Arabs , Sharon is accepted exceedingly warmly He seems to think the West's support of Israel is quite strong. (which is either gross self-deception or deliberate deceit)
Sharon is playing youse guys for suckers - I bet you've a better Yiddish phrase for it
523. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:23:25 AM
"an entirely predictable response of politicians but NOT entirely meaningless for that reason"
524. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 4:01:40 AM
Jexter:
I like your theory - at least the part that ascribes these great powers to Sharon. I agree that he is a great strategist, but think about it: how could he have manipulated so many leaders and events so artfully with that little stroll he took, when all he was at the time was an elderly leader of a fragmented opposition party? Surely you must realize it is much more a matter of the time being right for Sharon than any manipulation on his part. All the guy did was take a walk on the Israeli-held Temple Mount, for the umpteenth time in his life. It was the Arabs who turned this into a casus belli (sp.?) and set Israel on fire in reaction.
Is this your theory, btw, or is your Palestinian grocer ventriloquizing through you? I remember you once said it was he who thought Sharon had a Big Plan.
525. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 4:04:14 AM
So what do you think Sharon's ultimate aim is? Chaos in the WB&G, reoccupation - or population transfer a la 1948?
526. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 4:08:16 AM
Erratum: The picture in #499 is not of Arabs fleeing Gaza in 1967. It is of Jews being ferried to safety by Danish fishermen in 1943. The guy on the boat counting the change is Sto's granddad, fisherman Olaf Stossen, who made quite a bundle that week.
My bad.
527. stostosto - 8/21/2001 4:20:03 AM
Rustler Message # 509
I doubt ac could reach the top French pols, or sto could reach the top Danish pols, so easily, even if he was the most charismatic figure in a 3,000 person town in his country, and as handsome as I am.
I have never spoken to the PM, but I have actually met and interviewed our present foreign minister, the notorious Mr Mogens Lykketoft, when he was the minister of finance. I have also met and spoken to other government ministers and politicians.
It's not something I do on a regular basis, mind you, but sometimes it has been useful in my present job to make such contacts, and it's not difficult at all.
Part of the reason for my easy access may be my affiliation and the small - usually very small - impact that my company's musings might have on the political agenda.
But generally, Denmark is a very laid-back informal country and it's not unusual to see government ministers going around Copenhagen by bicycle.
----
In any case, I do think it's commendable for Israel to uphold the normal functioning of its democracy under conditions, past and present, of severe pressure.
528. stostosto - 8/21/2001 4:23:48 AM
Rustler,
#526
Yeah, yeah.
If you had been listening, you would remember that I mentioned the ferry-money the very first time I posted about the Danish rescue operation, and that I was actually very guarded in my extolling Danish virtue. I could find it for you you're interested.
529. stostosto - 8/21/2001 4:45:30 AM
Ah, what the hell. Here it is, whether you're interested or not:
Some unbearably triumphalist national chest-thumping comments by stostosto, a frothingly patriotic Danish chauvinist
(From the International thread #1004).
530. stostosto - 8/21/2001 4:51:16 AM
Did you see Plotz' musings on the logic behind the respective tactics of suicide bombings and targeted assassinations?
The Logic of Assassination. Why Israeli murders and Palestinian suicide bombings make sense.
Not a terribly complicated or surprising analysis. But Plotz is a good writer, I think.
531. stostosto - 8/21/2001 5:12:25 AM
Rustler,
thanks for the link in #504. Will read later.
532. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 8:51:53 AM
Here's another, sto. 'What are Hamas and Hezbollah', by Emily Yoffe.
533. stostosto - 8/21/2001 8:52:21 AM
Hey Rustler.
HI.
534. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 8:58:03 AM
Plotz was good.
535. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:05:43 AM
Pro-Palestinian Flash movie: 'Israeli Heaven'.
(The woman they say is dead was not dead, but rather fainted. I rememeber that picture from when it happened).
536. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:08:08 AM
Do you see why I have gas?
537. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:08:40 AM
HI STOK'LEH!
538. stostosto - 8/21/2001 9:14:17 AM
Good of the Washington Post to keep us informed on your whereabouts, Rustler.
You're quite the celebrity, huh?
539. stostosto - 8/21/2001 9:16:24 AM
Looking on that map, I've just discovered that I like the elegant curve of the Israeli coast-line. It's very pleasing in purely aesthetic terms.
540. Wombat - 8/21/2001 9:56:22 AM
Rustler:
Jenin, your residence, suicide bombings: causal relationship?
541. transient1a - 8/21/2001 10:13:33 AM
sto^3,
Re: Message # 530
Thanks for the URL to David Plotz's article.
A brilliant analysis -- if all involved had IQ's of 200. But they don't.
And, most of the smart Palestinians left a long time ago.
And, some smart Israeli's have left.
1
Hmmm. I wonder. Did the US really abandon assassination in 1976?
2
Unfortunately, assassination worked well for Jew against Jew:
Yitzak Rabin, Nov. 1995
3
Targeting the entire population is not new. Both the Allies and Germany used it in WW 2. It was sanctified as official British policy with the saturation bombing of Germany. (The philosophy espoused was that war included the entire population.) What failed in Germany worked with Japan with use of the atomic bomb.
[The Japanese also used suicide bombers -- Kamikazee --very successfully.]
Driven to the wall, the Palestinians could resort to germ, chemical, or primitive nuclear weapons with disastrous loss of life for Israel -- and in retaliatory attacks also for the Palestinians and their sponsor states.
ANYWAY
Maybe there is a way defusing the situation. A simple minded approach would be to give the Palestinians a strong economic incentive to reach some sort of 'fair' agreement. Whether this is a viable approach or in any way possible, God alone knows. And we are not on speaking terms.
542. stostosto - 8/21/2001 10:21:19 AM
transient
you really do have the most curious of posting styles.
543. alistairconnor - 8/21/2001 12:22:18 PM
Message # 509
Russ : Israel and Denmark are little countries, like New Zealand (of which I am on speaking terms with the Prime Minister and about four other ministers). You're right though, you can't just bowl up and demand to talk to a French minister.
544. jexster - 8/21/2001 12:57:07 PM
RP....
Mine is not a hindsight look at the little stroll...
When I saw it on CNN my first reaction "What the fuck is that asshole doing?"
Second reaction - "Barak what an idiot"
545. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 12:57:54 PM
ac, sto:
I always thought it was a matter of national character. Looks like it's just size. Major rethink required, it would seem. Difficult task at the daunting age of 37 (in October). I thought I already knew everything.
I'm talking like Uzmakk, God bless him.
546. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:00:13 PM
and WRT "opportunity", of course, politics is the art of the possible, all a matter of timing, of carpe-ing the diem, which Sharon did masterfully!
547. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:01:36 PM
If I were jewish, I'd be gushing shalom 4 sure
548. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 1:04:44 PM
Wombat:
Jenin, your residence, suicide bombings: causal relationship?
Hmmm.
Naaaaah...
I have yet to make my mark on the region.
So far, my main contribution to history is the watchdog group on police brutality I formed in 1987, which was crucial in creating the public pressure that led to the formation of the Department for Investigation of Police Officers. This, in turn, probably makes our police force a lot less violent than it would have been if we still had the old system in place (where police officers' offenses were investigated by other police officers).
Sorry for being earnest, and for repeating stuff I have already posted in the past, though perhaps not in this thread.
549. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 1:16:09 PM
Ynet is reporting that Joschke Fischer has managed to broker an agreement between Arik and Yasir on a gradual ceasefire, without the seven days of total quiet Sharon had been demanding. Apparently the ceasefire is to begin in certain areas and then spread.
550. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:20:27 PM
Deutschland Uber Alles!
Thank God for the EU...with the Bushies paralyzed by GOP isolationism and by the internecine conflict emerging between Condo R and Colin P and Sharon exploiting same 9see my Ramallah Al something post)
551. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:21:39 PM
How can I become a citizen of Greater Europa?
552. jexster - 8/21/2001 1:24:31 PM
Sharon is so full of shit...7 days of total quiet
He's playin on your fear and playin you for schmucks
553. jexster - 8/21/2001 3:33:57 PM
Sharon's aim...
A docile Pal people, homeless, stateless, landless, dispossed, impoverished, without viable political system or voice
Hope he saved the Bergen Belsen design drawings.
554. stostosto - 8/21/2001 3:37:35 PM
"Hope he saved the Bergen Belsen design drawings."
Tasteful.
555. jexster - 8/21/2001 3:39:48 PM
If the shoe fits, wear it
556. stostosto - 8/21/2001 3:43:33 PM
jex
I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
557. Jenerator - 8/21/2001 4:37:06 PM
Jex,
Seven days isn't enough to make Palestinians "docile".
558. desertlily - 8/21/2001 6:16:06 PM
warning: slightly off-topic (or maybe not so off?)
I went to the IDF site and this is my reaction: looks like a religious place with that ugly-wood-carved star and the dumb olive banch twisted through it and the silly swirl holding those really neat circle-emblems that could have been utilized a whole lot better.
It's like they're afraid to show the perfect simplicity of white/blue pure-Israel coloring. As if someone said, "Can you make it look like we're heavily into peace?"
I was waiting for a white dove to travers the site....
559. desertlily - 8/21/2001 6:23:52 PM
Maybe I ought to explain that when he put it up (that IDF site), Rustler Pike asked for feedback on its design.
So I'm just feeding back, OK?
560. desertlily - 8/21/2001 6:34:17 PM
More feedback. This time on the psychology of identification.
People who feel powerless in their own private lives, tend to strongly identify with any group that uses perceived powerlessness against an imagined oppressor who is supposed to possess unlimited power.
The purpose of such identification is to end personal powerlessness vicariously, thereby avoiding the need for any kind of real-life action that might result in real-life change, since all such change would induce existential terror.
I'm reacting to certain posts, that's all.
561. stostosto - 8/21/2001 6:44:50 PM
desertlily
And what would you say if I said what you just said is nothing but a load of amateurish psycho-babble?
562. desertlily - 8/21/2001 6:52:33 PM
Stostoso - I would say that most people do not evaluate a political situation in accordance with their known facts about that situation. Instead, they choose sides based on a purely emotional identification. Which explains the often irrational venom needed to protect their point of view.
I was not referring to you, by the way.
563. desertlily - 8/21/2001 6:54:00 PM
By the way - I might also say that you're very rude.
564. stostosto - 8/21/2001 6:55:09 PM
desertlily
I am tired, and I think my post came out too sourly. Sorry, and thanks for not responding in kind.
I didn't think you were referring to me.
But on what basis do you evaulate the political situation and choose sides yourself? Are you very rational?
565. desertlily - 8/21/2001 7:02:35 PM
I'm probably as irrational as most others. Especially about this thread's topic, since I detest terrorists and believe that most Palestinians would blast Israel into Kindom Come, if they had the capability.
I will never forget their joyful dancing when Saddam was bombing Tel Aviv....nor their widespread and joyful celebrations after Israeli baby body parts were slung against the walls of that Pizza parlor.
566. stostosto - 8/21/2001 7:09:33 PM
And you make the quintessentially irrational extrapolation from a few exalted fanatics into an entire people.
Have you seen the pictures Palestinian babies killed by Israeli shrapnel?
What is your irrational or rational reaction to such?
567. desertlily - 8/21/2001 7:25:29 PM
Yes, Stostoso - I do what you say I do. If an group within "a people" engages in terrorist acts and the rest of the people remain silent, they are by their very silence acquiescing in the terrorist acts. Therefore, one can hold an entire people responsible for the actions of a few.
568. desertlily - 8/21/2001 7:30:03 PM
And now, for some more of that wonderful "psychobabble":
Individuals who don't respect relative strangers they have just met and about whom they know nothing at all, do so because they have no respect for themselves.
We project who we are. Isn't that interesting? I think so.
569. stostosto - 8/21/2001 7:33:31 PM
"People who feel powerless in their own private lives, tend to strongly identify with any group that uses perceived powerlessness against an imagined oppressor who is supposed to possess unlimited power"
So, the Pals aren't powerless, they just FEEL powerless; and they don't identify with groups who use powerlessness, because they're not powerless, only PERCEIVED powerless; and they don't use this against an oppressor, but against an IMAGINED oppressor; and this oppressor does not possess unlimited power but is SUPPOSED to possess unlimited power.
Interesting.
The Palestinians have never been wronged, they just THINK that they have been wronged.
Why haven't anyone thought of explaining this patiently to the Palestinians? I am sure they would feel endlessly relieved from their great burden of delusion.
570. stostosto - 8/21/2001 7:36:35 PM
desertlily
Where have I said anything that shows disrespect for you?
571. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:12:53 PM
And you make the quintessentially irrational extrapolation from a few exalted fanatics into an entire people.
It didn't look like a few fanatics to me, sto. It looked like hundreds of people, perhaps thousands, thronging the streets in celebration.
572. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:17:29 PM
I find it interesting to see how Edward Said is less slick, less clever, less devious than Noam Chomsky.
Yes, but Chomsky is so slick he roots for the enemy of his people, whereas Said is just unslick enough to remember his roots. Big difference there. No nation has produced as many self-haters as the Judean nation, I think.
573. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:41:41 PM
Jex, in Message # 500 you asked:
- How would you answer those who ask why should Mr. Bishawi have to bear the burden of Europe's history of pogroms and persecutions?
Mr. Bishawi may be bearing the burden of Europe's pogroms, but it is much more relevant to his plight that, as a Palestinian and as an Arab, he has leaders who have consistently sold his interests out for the sake of furthering the Jihad against Israel and achieving this:
"Jews into the sea!"
If Bishawi's leaders had accepted the UN compromise of 1947, he would still have been tending his fields near Jaffa, and we would have been happy with borders that did not even include most of the Galilee. If the leaders of the Arab states did not try to annihilate us again in 1967 we never would have taken Gaza. And if Yasir Hairyfat had accepted the offer of 95% of the WB&G in return for peace, Bishawi would not be living under closure.
Instead of accepting peace, Hairyfat released the Hamas terrorists from jail. So Bishawi has smelly shoes. And this is still the good part, for Bishawi. Because after another year of intensifying terror attacks makes us go totally haywire, he will need those shoes for a trek we will make him take, across the border into Jordan.
If his Arab leaders cared about Bishawi, they could have diverted some of their oil money, over the past 40 years, to building decent housing for Pal refugees (and buying them shoes). Instead, they want them to be as impoverished and pathetic as possible, because that makes for great items in the Washington Post, which sway gentle hearts like yours to hate Israel.
574. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 9:54:06 PM
Your second question is a bit more muddled:
- Is 20th Zionist ideology workable in the 21st century given the demographics and divergent outlooks and interests of Israeli constituent groups?
Well, I would ask it like this:
Is Israeli society going to fragment and crumble, now that Zionist ideology is no longer as powerful as it was, and there are no Ben Gurions to hold the different factions and groups together?
Good question.
Actually, Israeli society has never been stronger, imho. The Ashkenazi-Sepharadi rift is fast becoming a myth: I believe more than half of the children being born nowadays to Israeli Jews are a mixture of Ashks and Sephs. The melting pot works here - unlike some other places I know - because the different kinds of Jews have kids together: Polish Jews fuck Moroccan Jews, Tunisians lay Russians, and the kids are simply Israeli Jews.
As for Zionism: it was almost dead, but the Terror War of 2000 is bringing it back to life. Always count on the Arabs to unite Israelis and remind them of their common fate.
575. RustlerPike - 8/21/2001 10:04:11 PM
'Effective use of the Star of David'
As you see, the Arabs in general and the Palestinians specifically - whose leader, Hajj Amin Al Husseini, was a fervent fan and collaborator of Hitler's during WW2 - bought into the ideology that produced those pogroms quite easily. So if they bought into Nazism so readily -even before 1948 - maybe they even deserve to suffer from its consequences.
576. Andonly - 8/21/2001 10:38:20 PM
"People who feel powerless in their own private lives, tend to strongly identify with any group that uses perceived powerlessness against an imagined oppressor who is supposed to possess unlimited power."
Right. The Pals are, however, true underdogs. It's just that this doesn't mean they're helpless--in fact they call the shots when it comes to achieving peace. Israel only has the power to ensure their lives are made miserable for choosing war. As such, Israel is not an imaginary oppressor. But the Palestinians are victims in the same way the Black Panthers and their sympathizers were victims, the same way the Baader-Meinhof gang were victims, the same way the IRA and the ETA are victims. They're victims of retribution by power. Calculated victims. Were the Pals to renounce violence, they'd have peace and an end to occupation; what they want is not peace, but power and territory they're not going to get, ever. So their people suffer because "Israel has the means at its disposal"--to do what again? Meekly retreat to the borders of Tel Aviv? I don't understand why this should seem more plausible than that the Pals should cease incitement or suicide bombings or stoning Israelis.
577. Andonly - 8/21/2001 10:38:42 PM
In fact I can't understand what the world wants Israel to do, exactly. Get used to accepting terrorism without retaliating, I guess. As though Israel were England or Spain, free of neighboring enemies, and the Pals weren't the proxies of three or more virulently hostile nations and several Islamic organizations committed to its erasure. As though terrorism in a country the size of New Jersey or Delaware could be compared with terrorism in a territory the size of England.
By the way, a bomb exploded outside the ministry of justice in Lebanon yesterday (nobody hurt).
Two journalists critical of the Syrian occupation (not including Washington-based Raghida Dergham, who was recently tried in absentia by the Lebanese army) are currently being held on trumped up charges of having "conspired with Israel". Most of 250 other detainees arrested for opposing the occupation having been released, but more arrests are expected. Maronite bishops, students, and Walid Jumblatt (Druze leader) have been making waves by asking certain questions out loud. The war could be about to spill over.
578. Andonly - 8/21/2001 10:48:51 PM
I hate to express hope for anything out loud for fear of being disappointed (again), but I do hope Peres and Arafat can come to some meaningful ceasefire arrangement. Thereafter, I pray, Israel's distant settlers will be called home, and it's near settlements and Jerusalem formally and permanently annexed to Israel by means of the construction of a wall visible from space.
579. Andonly - 8/21/2001 11:27:38 PM
"So if they bought into Nazism so readily -even before 1948 - maybe they even deserve to suffer from its consequences."
Do you think they did, though? I believe, based on what I've read, that Palestinians as a whole weren't all that anti-Zionist in the years before the estblishment of the state. They became increasingly so after Jews (as in 1929 in Hebron), and later the new state, were attacked by groups of militant Arabs, and responded, and the inevitable horrors and dislocations of guerilla and other warfare ensued.
Incidentally: the body count of Pals vs. Israelis is often cited in the media as evidence of Israeli military brutality. I asked a question earlier, which no one answered: how many Israelis killed by terrorism AFTER Oslo was signed?
Answer: I don't know, I've only see the data up until 1996. But in the 30 months after September, 1993 (birth of Oslo), 213 Israelis, including children, were killed by terrorists--more than in the entire preceding decade (209 from January 1983 to September 1993).
580. desertlily - 8/22/2001 12:13:23 AM
Frightening drawings. Especially the one of those hands pulling at the Star of David. Who can imagine a human being even CONCEIVING of that?
Gives me the shivers.
581. desertlily - 8/22/2001 12:15:58 AM
"calculated victims"
Interesting concept. I never thought of it quite like that.
582. Andonly - 8/22/2001 12:35:08 AM
Here's the answer to my other question which no one bothered to find out: What did Israel offer Syria in exchange for peace?
Hafiz Asad, in a quiet overture, had dictated the formula "full peace for full withdrawal" to Israel. In response Rabin offered full military withdrawal from the Golan Heights, but Asad wouldn't talk until Israel had agreed a priori to remove all settled Jews from the Golan as well.
Later, Peres, in exchange for entering negotiations over Israeli withdrawal from the Golan, required the following:
1. A summit meeting with Hafiz Asad, to take place in Jerusalem, Damascus, or Washington, the quality of which was to be regarded by Israel as "the litmus test" for any peace agreement with Syria.
(2)That the Golan Heights be turned into an economic development zone as part of a "new Middle East" envisioned by Peres.
(3)The initiation and development of economic enterprises and shared interests in the areas around the border to be designated between the two countries, all as a measure of the "quality and depth" of the coming peace.
(4)The creation of a regional security organization under American supervision and tutelage to be launched under the title "the Clinton Plan."
The author, Sadik al-Azm, who describes this (in the NYRB), goes on to explain: "In Damascene eyes, Peres's over-ambitious approach could go nowhere because it neglected the simple fact that Syria is also at all levels a highly security-conscious state. Syria naturally finds it much easier to digest a security-based peace agreement that it can understand and cope with than one overburdened by grandiose economic schemes and ventures that it is ill-equipped to handle."
What this apologia actually means, I suspect, is that Syria is a dictatorship and could not control jack shit if it allowed any real economic development to occur.
583. Andonly - 8/22/2001 12:53:09 AM
"The View From Damascus by Sadik Al-Azm"
Letters in response, from Amos Elon, Itmar Rabinovitch, Moshe Ma'oz
Sadik Al-Azm replies
584. jexster - 8/22/2001 1:00:41 AM
RP...Thanks very much for the insight...I still wonder whether the Euro liberal jews will continue to pay for adventurism but that wasn't my muddled question.
It rather was this and is best understood from your keyboard to wit
The melting pot works here - unlike some other places I know -because the different kinds of Jews have kids together: Polish Jews fuck Moroccan Jews, Tunisians lay Russians, and the kids are simply Israeli Jews.
Some melting pot. What about PALS???? Fucked any of them lately? What about PALS who are Israeli citizens now? What about Pals whose birth rate is what Andonly 3-4 times higher? What about PALS 45% of whom are under 15? Fucked any of them lately?
That was my reference to demographics,that was my "distasteful" ref to B-B design drawings. That is the problem.
585. Andonly - 8/22/2001 1:51:57 AM
'Egyptians wedding Israelis'
Reuters
(Cairo)
RISING UNEMPLOYMENT is driving Egyptian men into the arms of Israeli women, an Egyptian member of parliament said.
"Unemployment is one of the reasons for the increase in the marriage of Egyptians to Israeli women and Israel is encouraging this," opposition parliamentarian Abul-Ezz al-Hariri complained in a parliamentary committee meeting late on Monday.
Egypt's economic recession over the past year has made joblessness a growing concern in the country.
Officially, the unemployment rate for the 1999/2000 financial year was estimated at 7.4 percent, down from 7.9 percent the previous year. But analysts estimate that it is much higher, and still rising.
Over 14,000 Egyptian men are estimated to have Israeli wives, but many of them are Palestinian nationals of the Jewish state. Children of unions between Egyptian men and Israeli women are entitled to both Egyptian and Israeli nationality.
586. Andonly - 8/22/2001 2:02:44 AM
Hope I have not left boldface lying about.
587. Andonly - 8/22/2001 2:09:39 AM
"What about PALS 45% of whom are under 15? Fucked any of them lately?
Shhh. If Rustler admits to having fucked Pal Israelis under the age of 15 (purely for the sake of peace in the middle east, of course) CalGal will come in here, fail to appreciate the good that could come of such fuckings, and start a new kind of holy war. We don't want that, really we don't.
588. stostosto - 8/22/2001 4:09:01 AM
Rustler, Ando, desertlily
You operate from a perspective of extreme defensiveness.
It's not really the terror acts that are the problem. It's the uncompromising collective wish to throw Israel into the sea.
And it's not really the Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, PLO, the PA, or even all Palestinians who are the problem. It's all Arabs. No, hell, it's the rest of the world, because we know from hard, historic experience that the rest of the world is antisemitic, is it not? They may not think they are, but they are.
If anyone protests any of the above, that only goes to show how very very right we are. The devious buggers.
And, of course, the conclusion is, in the words of Randy Newman (my favourite song writer, btw):
They all hate us anyhow
so let's drop the big one now.
589. stostosto - 8/22/2001 5:14:40 AM
Rustler,
It didn't look like a few fanatics to me, sto. It looked like hundreds of people, perhaps thousands, thronging the streets in celebration.
You're right. There's no doubt the Pals generally love it when Israelis hurt.
The English also cheered in the movie theatres when they saw footing of the destruction of Dresden and Hamburg with almost nothing but civilian casualties.
Why do people do that?
And why is it if the Pals are so happy at the death of Israeli babies that they feature pictures of dead Palestinian babies at their web sites (this one is Hamas's)?
(Warning: it is ugly).
590. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 6:22:34 AM
They all hate us anyhow
so let's drop the big one now.
Precisely.
What about PALS???? Fucked any of them lately? What about PALS who are Israeli citizens now? What about Pals whose birth rate is what Andonly 3-4 times higher? What about PALS 45% of whom are under 15? Fucked any of them lately?
You're saying there's a demographic problem wrt the Aye-rabs? Well, for one thing, younger Israeli Arabs have a lot less kids than their parents' generation, I believe. For another, the vast majority of Pals in the Disputed Territories will be living in Jordan by sometime next year, I think, or by early 2003. And antisemitism in the US after we kick the Pals out (think of what your reaction to such events will be, jex) will bring us another 2-3 million Jews to populate the Territories with. So I fail to see the problem.
Also, eventually, perhaps the Israeli Arabs can be assimilated into the Jewish people, the way the Edomites once were.
591. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 6:31:22 AM
And why is it if the Pals are so happy at the death of Israeli babies that they feature pictures of dead Palestinian babies at their web sites (this one is Hamas's)?
You know the answer to that, sto. And you also know that there has not been a single case in all the 70+ years of this conflict in which Jews deliberately planned and executed the murder of Palestinian children, while there have been dozens and dozens and dozens of cases where the Pals deliberately planned and executed the murder of Israeli children.
So don't give me that sanctimonious crap and think a bit before you post Pal propaganda (even if I have linked to it). Btw, the dead children shown there were killed when an Israeli missile hit the building they were standing under (also shown in the pics), killing the top Pal bombmakers. You expect us to spare them? What kind of wusses do you take us for?
592. stostosto - 8/22/2001 6:35:43 AM
What the fuck was sanctimonious about the crap I posted?
593. stostosto - 8/22/2001 6:40:14 AM
"Btw, the dead children shown there were killed when an Israeli missile hit the building they were standing under (also shown in the pics), killing the top Pal bombmakers. "
I know how you rationalise the death of those children.
I also know how Pals rationalise the death of Israeli children.
Apparently it's not a problem at all for anyone.
Apparently no one is wusses.
594. Andonly - 8/22/2001 8:42:12 AM
"It's not really the terror acts that are the problem. It's the uncompromising collective wish to throw Israel into the sea."
Both are problematic. The latter issue only matters if the collective wish is acted on; the former issue contstitutes such acts. What would you have Israel do?
"And it's not really the Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, PLO, the PA, or even all Palestinians who are the problem. It's all Arabs. No, hell, it's the rest of the world, because we know from hard, historic experience that the rest of the world is antisemitic, is it not? They may not think they are, but they are."
How did you get from Israel's opponents to "all Arabs" to "the rest of the world"? And why do you think that widespread hatred of Israel among nationalistic pan-Arabists is not meaningful or important? Excepting Jordan and Egypt, Israel is dealing with states that simply aren't interested in governing their populations' radicalism. Iran, Iraq, Syria/Lebanon. Why should you consider this a negligible obstacle to peace? The terror organizations you listed are not powers unto themselves. They're proxy warriors, and they and their benefactors have made the Palestinian people their proxy infantry. Do you not understand this?
"If anyone protests any of the above, that only goes to show how very very right we are. The devious buggers."
Who's defensive?
595. Andonly - 8/22/2001 8:46:23 AM
And by the way, Sto, I think you have a very convenient and dishonest way of glossing over the distinctions between Pike's views and mine. (As for desertlily, I don't really know what her views are in any detail.)
596. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 9:48:38 AM
And by the way, Sto, I think you have a very convenient and dishonest way of glossing over the distinctions between Pike's views and mine.
And to think I was just going to compliment you, Andy, for starting to sound increasingly like a red-blooded Zionist.
597. Andonly - 8/22/2001 10:10:21 AM
Selective reading.
Unlike you, I'd love to see a genuine peace settlement emerge, tomorrow, in the next ten minutes, whenever--the more so since it should mean having to forego the vast military ejaculation you're sure is imminent.
I just don't think it's ever going to happen under Arafat. Hope I'm wrong.
598. stostosto - 8/22/2001 10:47:22 AM
I have discovered that this discussion bothers me on a personal level.
Apparently I really am a delicate flower after all. (OK, I always was, and I knew that).
I find myself uneasily nudged into a position where I seem to be defending the most bestial and disgusting terrorist acts, and I don't like that all that much.
So, maybe I am wrong (this is also an unpleasant possibility to consider). Maybe there really isn't any common ground. In that case I personally think it'll be because extremists carry the day. And, yes, let's just say, Palestinian/Arab extremists carry the day, but no matter.
Maybe it has to be played out as an all-out war. What do I know? Hell, why do I even care?
But I am certain of this: If there really is an all-out war, it won't solve anything. It won't give the Palestinians a state, and it won't give Israel security.
It will only ensure at least another fifty years of entrenched hatred and bitterness.
And a lot of blood spilt all over.
And probably some 100,000-200,000 UN troops stationed indefinitely (which I will, of course, willingly pay my share of).
599. stostosto - 8/22/2001 11:41:44 AM
And now, I have to go.
See you on Sunday.
600. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 10:54:07 PM
Unlike you, I'd love to see a genuine peace settlement emerge
I'd love that more than you, Ando. I just don't waste my strength dreaming impossible dreams. Peace will come when the Arabs have been trounced -or never.
If they were all like Abdullah of Jordan, that would be different. I think Abdullah and his dad and granddad really meant peace.
But they're not. And likelier than not, it'll be the Pals who eventually control Jordan. I'm not sure Abdullah will live to be 40 - or maybe he will, and he'll just become another exiled King on the ski slopes of Europe.
How old is the fucker, btw?
601. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 10:56:45 PM
I have to say, in fairness, that I do not know what the dates on those Arab cartoons are. Some of them may date back to 1967. The website they're on doesn't cite the newspapers they appeared on or dates.
602. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 11:25:18 PM
This one is obviously from 1967: I can see Nasser there, and the young Hussein.
You know, looking at that, I can see the Arab pov. Here they were, minding their own business, finally ridding themselves (with some help from the British) of the yoke of Ottoman rule and coming into their own as proud Arab nation-states... then the British left - but when did, they left behind these poor weird people in suits who had come in from abroad under their protection. What an affront to the proud Arab nation!
What an insult to Muhammad!
Obviously these Jews would be nothing without American arms. Obviously they are wimps, compared to the manly Arabs.
I really do understand what these people are thinking. Which convinces me all the more that there can be no compromise with them. They have got to be hit on the head, hard, before they start talking sense. They have got to realize that they are no longer the conquering, dominant Umma they were hundreds of years ago. Allah is with the West now.
603. RustlerPike - 8/22/2001 11:31:14 PM
This is obviously a war between the Anglo West and the Jews (on one side) and the Arabs on the other. That is why Hairy is banking so heavily on the non-Anglo West (aka Europe). He figures they can tip the scale of power to his side.
But what I think he fails to understand is the Europeans don't really give a shit.
604. RustlerPike - 8/23/2001 2:50:02 AM
Another Israeli hi-tech breakthrough:
Erez using CommDevice RA2, especially designed for inter-room communications with friend/ally while playing Red Alert on a LAN without disturbing Dear Old Dad who is sitting at his computer pretending to work. (photo: AP)
605. desertlily - 8/23/2001 5:17:55 PM
Tell your son he's not alone: I too, run around the room talking to myself.
606. RustlerPike - 8/23/2001 11:46:30 PM
desert:
No, those cups are attached to 5 meter long hoses with the same setup on the other end, in the other room, where his friend sits at another computer and plays against him in a network strategy game. It's like an intercom.
607. RustlerPike - 8/24/2001 12:06:05 AM
Hairyfat goes to India, looking for allies against the Anglo-Saxon/Judean crusaders.
608. RustlerPike - 8/24/2001 12:10:50 AM
Sharon is getting bolder in his responses to Hairyfat's terrorism. But I think the Pals will get meaner, too. We have a mean year ahead of us. Worse, even, I daresay, than the annum horribilis (is that the term?) the Queen had when that fire broke out in Windsor Castle.
609. desertlily - 8/24/2001 1:49:24 AM
So sorry, Rustler....I thought your kid was listening to himself talk.
Didn't mean to make him appear like the weirdo "selftalker" I am.
I once was "wisewoman" but now I'm "selftalker"....look at that! I found my new name.
610. desertlily - 8/24/2001 1:50:57 AM
If Arafat came that close to "my" face, I would positively absolutely become severely ill.
611. RustlerPike - 8/24/2001 3:03:59 AM
You'll notice the Indian guy has earplugs.
612. RustlerPike - 8/24/2001 5:37:45 AM
Hebron by night (for brochure contact Arik Tours, Ltd.).
613. RustlerPike - 8/24/2001 5:42:07 AM
From Haaretz.
614. Andonly - 8/24/2001 9:38:35 PM
Here's something Rustler may (or may not) appreciate:
War in Zion
To return to your mother long after your mother is dead
and drive out your cousins who loved her but wandered
like sheep in the garden,
you must be like ordinary men who will kill for their children.
Like ordinary men you must kill for a place to defend.
To live life again in the garden the arm of the angel
who sent you away in God's name to walk sideways and elsewhere in golah,
you severed.
No martyr at last, you've turned hard from heaven to cry
you will not give up hope.
And you won't give it up, you who once owned Canaan.
Your reasons to mortals and children and pacifist Norsemen
no God will explain--
no different, they too love like blind mother bitches of curs
their own beauties made out of historical wrongs.
Now the hills skip like rams.
If the heavens turn dark, if the end of the world comes
it comes to us, then.
The prophets and judges and diplomats keen,
the nations who wouldn't have had you now howl.
God's angels are hypocrites, swords still aflame:
the world is the world of the children of men.
As you've become Ishmael, he'll become you.
Whose land was once dry will have rain.
-Shulamith Kesher
615. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 2:59:24 AM
Whoa!
Very un-Jewish, that poem! I like it and find it interesting. I don't know about its purely artistic value but the message I relate to, though I would have added 'chainsaw-bearing' before 'pacifist norsemen'.
Where's it from?
616. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 3:02:34 AM
'all we have are stones'
Gunmen from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades show off a heavy machine gun at the rally in Nablus on Friday. (Photo: Reuters)
617. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 4:09:29 AM
CNN on women in the IDF.
618. Jenerator - 8/25/2001 10:08:34 AM
That he is on your "School of Enlightenment" link was my first clue, Rama.
619. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 10:15:31 AM
???
620. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 10:18:45 AM
One can tell there's been a disaster of some sort by listening to Galgalatz radio (linked on the butter bar). The music gets quiet and sad.
Though sometimes they can play songs like Fire and Rain even if nothing sad happened.
621. PelleNilsson - 8/25/2001 1:40:09 PM
Rustler
I must congratulate you to the way this thread has developed under your guidance. It is the only Israel-Palestine threaf I have seen that has not degenerater into invective and abuse.
There is one thing I'm curious about. Given the Israeli policy of picking off selected Palestinians, why is über-terrorist Arafat still alive? This seems to add credibility to the theory that he is, in fact, an Israeli stooge.
622. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 2:39:04 PM
Pelle:
I was just asking myself why you don't post here.
Are you serious about that question?
I thought not.
But I'll go along with it anyways. Israel is not picking off Hairyfat, or any of the Pal political leadership, yet. There are certain accepted 'rules of the game', I guess. What is happening now is the reverse of what happened in 1993. Then, the PLO and Hairy were legitimized, de-demonized, and accepted gradually by Israel's media and society as people who deserved to be heard, rather than demonic, beastly enemies (Begin had called Hairy a 'two legged animal').
Gradually, this is being reversed. The Pals are being enemized. I hope we give Hairy a personal enema before this is all over, but that will only happen in the very last stages, I think.
623. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 3:26:21 PM
An interesting article about Hamas in Al Ahram:
(...) This incremental "Islamisation" of mainstream Palestinian nationalism is evident everywhere.
One measure is the increasing agnosticism Fatah leaders have toward military operations inside Israel, including suicide bombs. As recently as June Fatah leaders like Marwan Barghouti opposed suicide attacks inside the Green Line because of their "negative impact on Israeli public opinion."
But after Israel's killings of Hamas political leaders Jamal Mansour and Jamal Salim in Nablus on 30 July --and the attempted hit on himself four days later -- Barghouti's changed tack. Attacks like the 9 August blast in West Jerusalem are now "the only way to end the occupation of Palestinian territories," he said in its aftermath. |
624. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 3:56:30 PM
Another interesting piece by some professor from Cairo ('head of the Political Science Department at Cairo University's Faculty of Economics and Political Science') that shows how the Arabs have not even accepted Israel's right to exist yet, and why this conflict cannot be solved peacefully:
"Mafia states," of which Israel is the prime example, are phenomena of a different order. A mafia state pursues its activities in broad daylight and with flagrant contempt for the law. Such is its hold over international decision-making centres that all other governments tremble at the mere thought of accusing it of breaking the law. Indeed, they are forever ready to ignore or cover up the most horrendous atrocities, from the forced deportation of civilians under occupation to murdering prisoners of war, massacres of civilian populations and other war crimes and crimes against humanity. |
Very interesting take on the history of Zionism since the Balfour declaration. A must read, I'd say, if one wants the Arab intellectual perspective on stuff we've discussed here. 625. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 4:07:02 PM
This guy tries to criticize the suicide bombing blitz. However, as he himself explains in the prologue to this article, doing this is very dangerous in the Arab world today. So the article is one big apology, with a hint of why suicide bombing is a stinky tactic in the last paragraph.
Fascinating. I'm learning stuff from being a host.
626. PelleNilsson - 8/25/2001 4:27:28 PM
Rustler
I haven't posted because I haven't been around. As you know I'm deeply interested in the issue at hand but I find it increasingly difficult to develop a coherent stand on it.
627. RustlerPike - 8/25/2001 5:09:36 PM
Wonder what you have to say about this, Pelle:
This article from Ha'aretz says that
"Emigration has become the hottest topic of discussion in many Israeli households during the past few months - especially among young people, newly discharged soldiers and university graduates. The race for a foreign passport, a work permit and real estate abroad is at its height.
Even more amazing to me though are the results of a poll in Ynet which asks, bluntly, 'are you considering emigrating from Israel?':
628. desertlily - 8/25/2001 8:40:42 PM
I think we should give them an almost empty State overhere in the US, say Wyoming, and let them get the hell outta there and create a New-Israel-USA.
629. desertlily - 8/25/2001 8:43:04 PM
A comic from Chicago used to say that the sun goes down cockeyed in Wyoming cause no one's watching :-)
630. desertlily - 8/25/2001 8:46:26 PM
It would save us billions, every year, and it would be a real boost for our dotcom economy to have all those Israeli genius kids overhere.
631. Andonly - 8/26/2001 1:11:54 AM
A brief history of the Palestinian faction whose members infiltrated and attacked an IDF outpost this morning.
These guys are probably Hizballah-trained.
Here's the US State Dept. summary:
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)
From: Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1998. United States Department of State, April 1999.
Description
Marxist-Leninist organization founded in 1969 when it split from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Believes Palestinian national goals can be achieved only through revolution of the masses. In early 1980s, occupied political stance midway between Arafat and the rejectionists. Split into two factions in 1991; Nayif Hawatmah leads the majority and more hardline faction, which continues to dominate the group. Joined with other rejectionist groups to form the Alliance of Palestinian Forces (APF) to oppose the Declaration of Principals signed in 1993. Broke from the APF - along with the PFLP - over ideological differences. Has made limited moves toward merging with the PFLP since the mid-1990s.
Activities
In the 1970s, conducted numerous small bombings and minor assaults and some more spectacular operations in Israel and the occupied territories, concentrating on Israeli targets. Involved only in border raids since 1988, but continues to oppose the Israel-PLO peace agreement.
Strength
Estimated at 500 (total for both factions).
Location/Area of Operation
Syria, Lebanon, and the Israeli-occupied territories; terrorist attacks have taken place entirely in Israel and the occupied territories. Conducts occasional guerilla operations in Southern Lebanon.
External Aid
Receives limited financial and military aid from Syria.
632. Andonly - 8/26/2001 1:17:22 AM
One does have to wonder how come Arafat can't reign in this force of only 500 men, especially since he is ostensibly en route to a meeting with Peres & Joschka Fischer.
I begin to dwell on just how much Syrian involvement could be at play here.
633. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 1:25:13 AM
dl:
The guy in the article mentioned Oregon. How much for Oregon?
634. stostosto - 8/26/2001 8:54:00 AM
Shalom aleikhem
I much appreciate that some of my many many words of wisdom appear under the thread headline on the thread list.
Glad to see the host sees the Arab view point. (Not that it should really be all that difficult).
I don't expect to post much if anything this coming week. But I may do a bit of lurking.
I think the Arab articles Rustler linked look interesting and worth checking out.
---
50% say they want to emigrate from Israel?
Now that's really incredible.
Of course, it's only Ynet's users whom I suspect are disproportionately young and savvy - but then again, that's hardly any less less worrysome from an Israeli perspective.
635. stostosto - 8/26/2001 8:56:07 AM
There should, of course, have been one 'less' less in my last.
636. stostosto - 8/26/2001 8:58:44 AM
On the other hand, the post shouldn't be completely lessless.
I don't like lesslessness.
637. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 12:26:54 PM
Lesslessness is bad news.
The Ynet situation has improved: it's at 54 to 46 now, with some 14,000 votes. You're right about the 'young and savvy' bit.
They didn't say they wanted to emigrate but that they are 'considering it'.
And there was a similar mood before the Six Day War.
My conclusion is: the people need a leader. Sharon is old, as is Peres. Barak and Netanyahu's generation produced no one of truly great, or even large, stature. There is no strong leader in Israel. I'm convinced this need will become more and more acute as the months pass, and you'll be reading articles about it in Ha'aretz.
Which, by the way, is the magazine that published that article with a humungous Herzlish picture of...
Me.
638. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 12:33:19 PM
Israeli truck driver killed in shooting north of Tul Karm:
This is getting closer to home with each passing day. This is the first time I've seen Katzir on one of these post-terror attack maps (I didn't add it to the map this time). We're closer to the Green Line than that map shows, though.
639. PelleNilsson - 8/26/2001 12:34:39 PM
So, Israel sucht ein Führer.
640. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 2:44:12 PM
Ja. Ich will wohnen im regierungsgebaude (Ich weiss nicht wie macht mann ein umlaut hier).
641. PelleNilsson - 8/26/2001 3:21:42 PM
Umleute sind nicht einfach zu machen. Man braucht für diese Zwecke sehr spezielle Frauen.
That map is seriously wrong. I remember from when I looked for Katzir on one of those large-scale CIA maps that it is quite close to the Green Line. It is a pity we didn't "know" each other in 1995-96. I could easily have come over for a quarrel face-to-face.
642. stostosto - 8/26/2001 4:28:41 PM
Pelle:
It is a pity we didn't "know" each other in 1995-96. I could easily have come over for a quarrel face-to-face.
I wonder what the quotation marks around the word "know" signifies...
Surely you don't "know" Rustler in the biblical sense?
Ha ha ha! Of course not! How silly! Ha!
Ha ha ha!
Heh...
Do you?
643. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 5:32:29 PM
And what if we have had a bit of harmless cyberfun, sto?
644. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 5:35:30 PM
My guesses:
einfach = easy
Zwecken = dots? signs? bastards?
I've forgotten much of what little Deutsch I gelernt in Hochschule.
645. stostosto - 8/26/2001 5:53:08 PM
Zwecke: Purposes.
But I cant' say I understand what Pelle means.
Man braucht für diese Zwecke sehr spezielle Frauen.
"You need very special women for these purposes".
???
646. desertlily - 8/26/2001 5:59:16 PM
Oregon is too rainy and too crowded and loaded with skinheads.
Let's go for Wyoming.
Make an offer....
647. desertlily - 8/26/2001 6:07:22 PM
Then again...what about becoming an American State while remaining in Israel?
Has that ever been considered by either side, I wonder?
We'd build Kentucky Fried Chicken joints in the shape of the Star of David. Paint them blue and white. Serve chummus...might be really nice, you know.
648. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 10:55:49 PM
Then again...what about becoming an American State while remaining in Israel?
Has that ever been considered by either side, I wonder?
That used to be many an Israeli's wet dream, I daresay. But they are savvier now than they used to be and most have come to realize that it's a bit -ahem - unlikely to happen.
Still, the general sucking-up-to/love-of (depends on one's charitableness) the US is a major theme of Israeliness. On our Independence Say a lot of cars sport the Stars & Stripes alongside the Union Dave (we don't have a nickname for our flag yet so I'll call it that if you don't mind).
As for the Kentuches Fried Chicken idea: we already have a (not extremely successful, I think) fast food chain called McDavid, so maybe it's worth considering.
649. RustlerPike - 8/26/2001 11:16:24 PM
A window for an eye.
Within the coalition government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, some right-wing cabinet ministers have begun to express frustration with the policy of tit-for-tat retaliation, which thus far has in the main involved firing on empty buildings.
(...)
But the Sharon government replies that it is striking a middle course — making targets of mostly abandoned buildings — that, it says, shows the Palestinian Authority and its chairman, Yasir Arafat, that they stand to lose more and more unless the violence stops.
650. Andonly - 8/26/2001 11:34:40 PM
"So, Israel sucht ein Führer."
Ought to be. The present and last prime ministers have been less leaders than interim managers of decaying circumstances.
It would be nice, of course, if the subtext of your comment turned out not to be what Israelis wind up with.
"Surely you don't "know" Rustler in the biblical sense?"
Pelle and Pike: like chainsaw and yarmulke, they just go together.
651. Andonly - 8/26/2001 11:37:24 PM
BTW, Host, your Galgalatz radio link doesn't work for me. I get an invalid syntax error msg.
652. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 12:16:48 AM
BTW, Host, your Galgalatz radio link doesn't work for me. I get an invalid syntax error msg.
a) do you have Bill Gates Product 5.0 or so?
b) go here and press this:
653. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 12:21:05 AM
Our Council Head is planning to sack our Deputy this evening. As the loyal threadbearers will recall, I've been scheming with the Deputy wrt toppling the Head. I hope he does get sacked: it'll finally make him take this fight out into the open, and turn it into a bona fide campaign, with volunteers, sit-ins, stickers, and of course - one salaried, bearded campaign manager.
654. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 12:23:54 AM
That Ynet poll shows what this is all about, does it not? Breaking the Israeli spirit. It's what Nasrullah was referring to when he said: with all its modern arms and American backing, Israel is as weak as a cobweb.
You see, Hairyfat isn't as dumb as you may think.
655. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 12:26:03 AM
With 16,000 votes cast - the Ynet poll is back at 50% - 50%.
656. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 12:27:17 AM
Not very impressive, when 50% of Pals would probably say they were willing to become suicide bombers.
657. PelleNilsson - 8/27/2001 3:21:58 AM
I see that my feeble attempt at a German pun failed miserably.
Rustler said he couldn't make an Umlaut.
I said that it is not easy to make Umleute. "Leute" = "people".
Hahaha.
I miss Hashké.
658. stostosto - 8/27/2001 3:52:27 AM
Ando Message # 614
"War in Zion"
Shulamith is my gal.
I like the "pacifist Norsemen" bit. As if somehow the villagers on the upskirts of Yurp matter in the least. We like to think so and are willing to receive flattery even if backhanded, simple peasant stock that we are.
659. stostosto - 8/27/2001 3:56:05 AM
Rustler,
have you ever considered emigrating yourself? Having lived in the States, being fluent in English, relating to myriad Murcans over the Internet, it wouldn't seem such a distant possibility.
Actually, I would be surprised if you haven't.
660. stostosto - 8/27/2001 4:51:50 AM
Pelle:
Achtung!
Der Umlaut - die Umlaute
Bitte bemerken Sie Ihnen ganz sorgfältig und genau die korrekte Schreibweise bevor Sie solche Wortspiele machen versuchen.
661. PelleNilsson - 8/27/2001 7:14:14 AM
Jawohl, Herr Sturmbanngruppenführer!
(Klicking heels)
662. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 8:42:20 AM
Guess where I am?
663. stostosto - 8/27/2001 9:09:01 AM
You're on the forefront of a biblical struggle.
664. stostosto - 8/27/2001 9:48:34 AM
Thomas Friedman has a proposal which preempts my prediction that a war will lead to a permanent presence of a sizeable outside military force. I said UN, Friedman says NATO.
Palestine~Kosovo/Bosnia.
A Way Out of the Middle East Impasse
665. Andonly - 8/27/2001 11:31:02 AM
Sto, that's a fascinating column by Friedman. He proposes exactly what I've wondered anyone had dreamed of. But I can't imagine how NATO could be "legally" brought to bear on the mideast's problems.
I assume he specifies NATO or a "NATO-like" force because the UN has absolutely no credibility with Israel and would bail out when the going got rough anyway.
But you have to wonder whether the established Arab states would go for NATO forces being in the region. Iran, Iraq, and probably Syria and Saudi Arabia would carp that unless such a force delivered to the Palestinians a state on Arab terms, the whole thing would be an exercise in Western imperialism. If the force were "NATO-like", that would still mean an army of nations perceived to have stakes in the outcome of the conflict. And it would take a while to negotiate the constitution of such an organization. Who'd be in it? Murcans, Yurpeons, Indians, Egyptians, Russians, and Turks?
Very curious to read Friedman's next installment.
666. stostosto - 8/27/2001 12:22:32 PM
"UN has absolutely no credibility with Israel and would bail out when the going got rough anyway. "
Well, if the UN were to take it on, the US would necessarily be required to back it up. If it did that, Israel would (have to) go along.
It's really a question of what the USA decides; is it better to use NATO (= "western imperialism") or the UN (= "anti-Israeli") as the vehicle for American military force.
And I would imagine Israel would have a say in such a decision.
667. stostosto - 8/27/2001 12:23:24 PM
The Desert Storm was UN sponsored, by the way, remember? Did Israel have a problem with that?
668. PelleNilsson - 8/27/2001 12:29:52 PM
On emigration there is an article today in our major daily paper filed by its Israel correspondent. Excerpts translated by me:
There is a segment of the Israeli population which is intellectual, liberal, democratic, secular and supporters of peace, the bearers of the political tradition that shaped the state of Israel for the first decades of its existence. Now they are largely powerless, their tasks being to pay taxes, serve in the IDF, keep the economy going and losing elections.
One representative of this segment, an architect, 46, is quoted as saying:
Give me a job in another country and I'll get out now. I can stand the bombs, the economic downturn and the political confusion. But I cannot stand that my children should grow up in a society where the agenda is set by people who hate the secular, democratic Israel I have worked for. Let those who favour the occupation project fight their battles without me.
Let me add that the correspondent, Nathan Shachar, is at least half Jewish and has lived in Israel for many years. He probably moves in the segment of society he describes.
669. Andonly - 8/27/2001 1:37:30 PM
"Well, if the UN were to take it on, the US would necessarily be required to back it up. If it did that, Israel would (have to) go along. ... And I would imagine Israel would have a say in such a decision."
The UN wouldn't take it on without US initiative, therefore the US wouldn't be required to "back up" an armed force; the US would have to lead it. So far the US has vetoed even proposals to send in UN observers without Israeli consent, because Israel has refused to countenance them (for good reason). So Israel would have more than a say in the matter, it would likely have a veto. Would Israel consent to armed UN forces? I wonder. You think George Shrub has the persuasive capability to win over Ariel Sharon to such a proposition? (Maybe he could appoint his Daddy Special War Ambassador to Israel to get that job done.) And whatever would Shrub offer Sharon in return for turning Israel's protection over to an outside force--other than that the "UN forces" would be composed of and commanded by Murcans and personnel from approved countries only?
And what would the Pals agree to, I wonder?
"is it better to use NATO (= "western imperialism") or the UN (= "anti-Israeli") as the vehicle for American military force."
From Israel's standpoint, no organization made up of its enemies has any business ensuring "security" in the West Bank, Gaza, or Israel. I expect NATO stands a better chance; but the Arabs would have to give, because I bet they'd prefer forces under UN auspices.
667. stostosto - 8/27/01 5:23:24 PM
The Desert Storm was UN sponsored, by the way, remember? Did Israel have a problem with that?
670. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 2:59:14 PM
Since when did Thomas L. Friedman matter so much? You're all talking as if the US is under obligation to follow his advice.
Now maybe I'll read the article.
671. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 3:03:04 PM
Pelle:
Rustler said he couldn't make an Umlaut.
I said that it is not easy to make Umleute.
Actually I've been known to make excellent Spanish Umlauts.
672. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 3:08:14 PM
I met with Gissin again today. I sat there when he got a call from the Washington Post correspondent, who gave him hell over why did Israel blow up that Popular Front chief when there were Americans in the building and a few American kids actually got hurt from flying glass. Gissin was apoplectic. I told him he could get a heart attack like that. He seems to be suffering, I swear.
The missile seems to have hit the guy in the face, no less.
673. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 3:20:24 PM
Lee Hockstader, that's the WP guy's name. He ruined Gissin's day.
674. Andonly - 8/27/2001 3:34:12 PM
Host, I followed your instructions. Galgalatz still inaccessible.
Probably no great loss.
The Wash Post seems distinctly anti-Israel, but it's not surprising given how pc the paper is.
Sto, I meant to respond to your 667--why should Israel have objected to Desert Storm, a US-led offensive designed to punish one of Israel's most vocal enemies? It's a little diferent to invite the UN to set up and police a hostile Pal state next door. But maybe NATO could do it, who knows.
675. Andonly - 8/27/2001 3:42:07 PM
Iraq shoots down US plane
676. Andonly - 8/27/2001 3:56:10 PM
Oh, yes, the poem:
Glad you liked it Sto. Pike, I have no idea any more where it came from (one of those things picked up in the surf). I would have thought the author Jewish, if not Israeli, based on the name. But "Shulamith" is a little ironic, isn't it. Does the surname "Kesher" mean anything in Hebrew?
677. Andonly - 8/27/2001 3:57:45 PM
As for the artistic merit--hard to say, Mote format screwed up the stanzas a bit so the lines don't break as in the original.
678. stostosto - 8/27/2001 4:14:44 PM
Since when did Thomas L. Friedman matter so much? You're all talking as if the US is under obligation to follow his advice.
I am a bit surprised at the weight Ando attaches to him.
Ando
The UN wouldn't take it on without US initiative, therefore the US wouldn't be required to "back up" an armed force; the US would have to lead it. So far the US has vetoed even proposals to send in UN observers without Israeli consent, because Israel has refused to countenance them (for good reason). So Israel would have more than a say in the matter, it would likely have a veto.
So many words to say what I thought I said. It was precisely what I meant.
From Israel's standpoint, no organization made up of its enemies has any business ensuring "security" in the West Bank, Gaza, or Israel.
The UN is made up of Israel's enemies? And you wonder why I think you take your defensiveness to the extreme?
Btw, I think such a force will be spun as protection for the Palestinians. Just like NATO protects the Kosovars against the Serbs. It's the logical thing.
679. stostosto - 8/27/2001 4:17:26 PM
Logical, because the Palestinians, like the Kosovars, are stateless, and the Israelis, like the Serbs, are an established state with military superiority.
And why you think Iraq's and Iran's (!) backing are so all-important, I will never know.
It's your "proxy" warrior fixation that runs away with you, I suppose.
680. jexster - 8/27/2001 7:59:51 PM
Two Palestinian gunmen staged a pre-dawn commando raid on an Israeli army outpost in the Gaza Strip Saturday morning, killing three soldiers and wounding seven. Since some of the Israelis appeared to have been shot in the back, the papers speculated that they may have been hit by friendly fire. One of the Palestinian raiders died on the scene, while the other escaped the outpost but was located and killed several hours later. The Jerusalem Post said the raiders' ability to penetrate the army base revealed the Israeli Defense Force's Achilles' heel:
The spotters failed to detect them. The fence didn't stop them. The gate guard was easily overcome. But worse than all was the failure to quickly locate and kill the infiltrators. … But what does the army expect when it doesn't train for this sort of close-quarters combat? The IDF doesn't issue knives and doesn't train most infantry soldiers … in hand-to-hand combat.
Clueless in Gaza - Slate
681. jexster - 8/27/2001 8:03:47 PM
One day the Feckless Ones that pretend to be the USG blast Arafat, the next...
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reacting sharply to the murder of a Palestinian leader, the State Department said Monday that Israel's targeted killings of Palestinians only inflame an already volatile situation and make it much harder to restore calm.
Spokesman Richard Boucher commented after Israeli rockets killed Mustafa Zibri,63, leader of the hard-line Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. He was the most prominent Palestinian to be killed in recent years.
``The escalation and violence in recent days in the Middle East threatens to overwhelm any chance of restoring calm and of implementing the Mitchell committee recommendations,'' Boucher said.
God knows I'm all for nuance but this shit only results in total confusion as to what the US is about.
682. Andonly - 8/27/2001 8:23:51 PM
Sto,
Let's try this again, this time in tiny sentences you can be bothered to parse:
"Well, if the UN were to take it on, the US would necessarily be required to back it up. If it did that, Israel would (have to) go along."
NO, THAT'S BACKWARDS. If Israel would go along, the UN could take on a massive state building project in the Territories. This could happen only if the US decided to initiate or endorse such an action.
****
Now some details (you can skip these if it troubles you to read so very many words):
But a) Israel under Sharon won't accept UN state-building measures, and b) the US under Bush will not go along with such a proposal by the UN, will not pay for the effort, and will not send in troops, unless Israel requests that it do so.
There has never been a mainstream call for armed US intervention in Is-Pal affairs voiced in the US, that I can remember (which is why the Friedman piece is striking). Everyone fears we're too dependent on OPEC oil to piss off the Arab oil producers, who are all officially anti-Israel. (REMEMBER: the establishment of a Pal state is contemplated largely to placate the Pals, whom anti-Israel Arabs do not want placated.) Plus, popular opinion here is that no one wants to get drawn into "another Vietnam" which a UN nation-building exercise in the territories could surely become.
So, once more, No, the US would not "have" to back up anything. I'm sure we would want to find a way out of helping to create a Palestinian state, at least as long as Republicans control the White House and the DoD. Watch the papers for a response to Friedman penned by someone from Douglas Feith's office.
683. Andonly - 8/27/2001 8:27:51 PM
Slerpike: "Since when did Thomas L. Friedman matter so much? You're all talking as if the US is under obligation to follow his advice."
Toast: "I am a bit surprised at the weight Ando attaches to him."
If one examines a man's proposals they become weighty? This only happens when one handles a mans testicles, as far as I'm aware.
684. Andonly - 8/27/2001 8:47:22 PM
"The UN is made up of Israel's enemies? And you wonder why I think you take your defensiveness to the extreme?"
Yes, the UN--the same UN which declared Zionism a form of racism and failed to retract this for--what, a decade?--is made up of enemies of Israel, among others. But you know this, and I can't believe you can't comprehend the logic behind my assertion that NATO forces might be preferable from Israel's standpoint (assuming Israel would go along at all).
"And why you think Iraq's and Iran's (!) backing are so all-important, I will never know."
There can of course be no such backing. Any international intervention of the sort Friedman describes will divide the Arab world, but not on behalf of Arabs other than the Pals, whom nobody really loves and everyone loves to use. Why you do not see the danger inherent in this--in an intervention which must, in order to acquire Israeli and US support, benefit Israel--I can't understand.
You seem to think the Pals want a state more than they want Israeli concessions to their demands. Let's say you're right, and the majority do. What about the outliers funded by Iran and Syria? What happens when the UN must deal with them, and Iraq? I'm telling you, the UN forces will crumble, just as they do in the face of Hizballah.
But maybe NATO (or a "NATO-like" force) would be different, I don't know.
685. Andonly - 8/27/2001 8:59:20 PM
"God knows I'm all for nuance but this shit only results in total confusion as to what the US is about."
If it keeps going on like this for long enough (Bush tacitly supporting Israeli incursions in response to terror and openly supporting Sharon's refusal to negotiate under fire, State Dept chiding IDF for escalation), everyone will soon hear the message clearly enough: The US doesn't want to get involved and wishes the belligerants would just calm themselves.
OK for a temporary position, but it won't be helpful over the long haul.
686. Andonly - 8/27/2001 9:16:12 PM
August 26 2001 An Apology and a Prayer: An Open Letter
To: The Palestinian People
AN APOLOGY AND A PRAYER
An open letter to the Palestinian people from Jews in Israel and the
Diaspora
In the period between the religious festivals of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, Jews are enjoined to take steps to repair the wrong we have done to others. This is an attempt to reach out to you, our Palestinian cousins, to change the nature of the bloody and merciless exchange, which currently dominates relations between us.
We who sign below, ordinary Jews, want to tell you that we are sorry.
We are sorry for the calamity you experienced in 1948, for the loss of your homes and land, for your dispersal and exile, and for the families that have grown up for three generations in refugee camps without a sense of home or belonging.
We are sorry particularly for the Jewish part in your exodus – the expulsions, the shelling of villages, and those killings which created the climate of fear which prompted many to leave. We our sorry that our terrible century of tragedy became your tragedy. You did not ask for it and you did not deserve it. And we were blind to it.
Our people were blinded by our own suffering and loss, rage and grief, desperate to
survive, desperate for a home, a refuge, a place we could call our own. We were unable to see the magnitude of the sacrifice we were asking of you.
In 1948, and again in 1967, we were also blinded by the joy and relief of the military victories which secured our homeland. [cont.]
687. Andonly - 8/27/2001 9:17:34 PM
We apologise unreservedly for the increasing harshness of our occupation since the victory of 1967, and for the further losses we have inflicted on the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza. Losses of land, of water, trees and homes, of dignity and humanity and freedom. This occupation has been perverted by greed and hubris, and it has corrupted our people as it has humiliated and angered your people. It has created hatred and a thousand new wounds between us. It needs to end.
We want you to have your own state, that you can take pride in, a refuge and symbol of hope for your own people, with Arab Jerusalem as its capital. We want to return to you that land and those settlements which stand in the way of the wholeness and territorial integrity of your state.
We will not now give up our own state. We have yearned for it for too long, fought for it too hard, and need its sanctuary too much to let it go. But we want our two states to work together as partners for the good of all our peoples.
We want your refugees with our help and the help of the community of nations to receive reparation and help to build new lives and re-settlement if they wish. We will welcome a certain number to Israel. They will not find the country that their forefathers left, but we hope they will find through this process a new climate of acceptance and tolerance. [cont.]
688. Andonly - 8/27/2001 9:17:57 PM
We respect the determination of the people of the West Bank and Gaza to resist the occupation. But we ask you urgently to stop the suicide bombings and the shooting of innocent people. These acts generate a climate of fear, hatred and mistrust, and the belief that there is no rational partner in peaceful dialogue. For our part we will resist the aggressive and intimidatory acts of our own leaders. The shelling of villages and assassination and destruction of homes and crops must stop.
At this time of darkness and war, it is incumbent upon us to search out every glimmer of light and hope. We wish for our people and your people, for our children and our children's children, joy and prosperity, peace and God's blessing.
Sincerely,
Go here to sign
689. Andonly - 8/27/2001 9:19:02 PM
(Not that it will matter at all.)
690. RustlerPike - 8/27/2001 11:48:52 PM
Ando, this is precisely the kind of uninformed, from-the-hip statement I cannot tolerate:
If one examines a man's proposals they become weighty? This only happens when one handles a mans testicles, as far as I'm aware.
Did you check your facts before posting? My testicles do exactly the opposite when womanhandled. They shrivel up, Ando. Am I not a man? Are my testicles not testicles? Is this some kind of teste balloon you are floating? How dare you make such inflammatory, incendiary and insensitive remarks?
691. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:13:24 AM
Actually I'm not sure they shrivel up. DOn't testicles shrivel somewhat when one strikes a boner? Yet - somehow I can't recall that happening during sex.
Ah well - it's been so long...
692. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:20:12 AM
Ando, that is the funniest petition I've ever read.
Hey - I was swimming and then it hit me (no - not the wall of the swimming pool). Those 50% who are thinking of emigrating? They are the Ashkenazi or Ashkenazi-compatible guys who voted Labor, supported 'painful concessions' and thought they were oh-so-much more clever and beautiful than all of us uncouth, swarthy hotheads. Then suddenly, reality struck! Turns out PC attitudes are nice in peacey times, but when the Arabs get their hard-on you'd better be ready with yours, and the only PC that's any good is the one in APC.
Hah! So now they're sulking! Hahaha!
Babies. Effeminate babies.
693. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:41:52 AM
I figure the Pal's next step is to head for 1970s-style tactics. This means that:
- Force 17, the Fatah and other PLO factions will become more involved in terror operations inside Israel (and not mostly in the territories, like now).
- the attacks will be carried out by well-trained gunmen rather than fanatic but otherwise geekish suicide bombers.
- the targets will now include schools, hospitals, and other public buildings and places where grenade-and-Kalachnikov attacks are most effective. A grenade lobbed into a crowd at a rock concert has always been a nightmare here.
We're in for a fun year.
694. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:43:41 AM
Israel's Arabs are key to achieving this, btw: they are the ones best suited for smuggling the terrorists in from the WB&G. They're already quite active in this terror war, as it is.
695. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:44:47 AM
Katzir's Deputy Council Head has been sacked!!!
696. stostosto - 8/28/2001 3:41:55 AM
Ando #682:
I am impressed at the effort you are willing to make, and not a little flattered, though - as usual - in a backhanded way. I do pick up the condescension, you know.
Again, yes, you're right. And that's what I meant to say. To me it's perhaps just too obvious to bother with being so particular: The USA has got to take the initiative in close partnership with Israel, sure.
And, like you, I don't foresee this happening under the present leadership (if at all). Sharon is an idiot incapable of anything but brain dead violence. George Bush is, as everybody knows, an idiot, period. And Arafat is completely worthless, no, less than worthless, because it'd be better if he wasn't there.
----
That you see the UN as composed of enemies of Israel really is ridiculous. What the General Assembly does in the way of 'Zionism=racism' is and has always been completely inconsequential, unimportant, and irrelevant. The only people I have heard make much of what the GA does are Israelis -- and Arabs, of course.
>>>
697. stostosto - 8/28/2001 3:42:10 AM
>>>
What matters is the UN Security Council because it actually has the power to act - when no one vetoes, i.e. China and Russia agree with America (or acquisce).
What also matters is that the UN recognises Israel. It doesn't recognise the Palestinians.
Heck, that's the formal reason why resolutions demand restraint and good behaviour from Israel. It's a state, full-fledged, well-established, UN-recognised. It should behave like one.
I can't believe you can't comprehend the logic behind my assertion that NATO forces might be preferable from Israel's standpoint (assuming Israel would go along at all).
Where is it exactly that I do not "comprehend" the "logic"? NATO equals US power, no strings attached. UN attaches strings, as in "we have to keep the Russians and Chinese aboard".
Which is the reason I think the UN would have a better chance of being a lasting arrangement, eventually, because Arab warmongers wouldn't have Russians and Chinese to appeal to in order to garner support.
698. stostosto - 8/28/2001 5:50:08 AM
Rustler,
what do you think of ##686-688?
Would you be willing to sign?
Or is it simply a contemptible expression of effiminate defaitism?
Personally, I think it'd be wonderful to hear Sharon make that speech. And the right thing to do.
699. ronski - 8/28/2001 8:49:39 AM
The best thing for the U.S. to do is to let Israel be Israel, which I think is pretty much what Bush is doing. U.S. policy under Clinton only emboldened the Arabs to do the kind of terrorism they are currently engaged in. The last president who actually helped the Israelis (and ultimately the Arabs) by getting closely involved was Carter. Btw, the Egyptians are very busy oppressing gay people now. I wonder if anyone, Bushies or Europeans, is going to protest. I rather think not.
700. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 9:05:49 AM
Rustler,
sto:
What do you think of ##686-688?
I think it's ridiculous. But it's very Ando, and there are a lot of Andos out there.
Oh, yeah - and it's also amazingly condescending towards the Palestinians. Basically, it says this:
"You are noble savages. We are beautiful, intellectual Ubermenschen. We will now very politely explain to you what is happening so you will cool down. We apologize, savages. We love you. You good savages. We more developed White Men and Women. White men love savages. Savages must love White Men. Now go and eat your pitas. Please do not explode any more. Thank you".
You have to imagine that being said in a mesmerizing, hypnotic tone of voice.
701. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 9:07:32 AM
That's really a classic, that petition.
702. rubberducky - 8/28/2001 9:21:08 AM
meanwhile, a quote of mine has yet to go in the thread header, and i am just a wee bit pissed.
703. stostosto - 8/28/2001 9:38:25 AM
there are a lot of Andos out there
...who will make your testicles weighty by their touch?
(I am still wondering about that. I think she may have a point -- but only if she doesn't carry through to the logical conclusion, if you sort of get the drift).
704. Andonly - 8/28/2001 10:30:09 AM
"I do pick up the condescension, you know."
Just reciprocating.
705. jexster - 8/28/2001 11:26:23 AM
706. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:28:23 AM
"That you see the UN as composed of enemies of Israel really is ridiculous."
It isn't in the least ridiculous to say that the UN is populated substantially by enemies of Israel.
"What the General Assembly does in the way of 'Zionism=racism' is and has always been completely inconsequential, unimportant, and irrelevant."
Not at all. Where do you think the "illegality" of various Israeli actions is derived?
"The only people I have heard make much of what the GA does are Israelis -- and Arabs, of course."
Plus every journalist on earth. And yes they do inluence public opinion, even in countries whose govt's are not enemies of Israel.
707. Wombat - 8/28/2001 11:33:08 AM
As a certified American Jewish bleeding heart, even I find Andonly's petition lame-oh. I couldn't bring myself to sign it.
708. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:35:14 AM
"What also matters is that the UN recognises Israel. It doesn't recognise the Palestinians."
Right-o. They just have a permanent Security Council observer, and Airyfart gets to present his case there before critical votes, right alongside Yehuda Lancry. Neat, huh? Some of the best benefits of belonging to the UN, none of the responsiblities of being a state.
Following are reports of some General Council and Security Council activities--just a recent few, because who can be bothered to paste them all in.
709. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:49:00 AM
Incidentally, gentlemen, it's not MY petition--I didn't write it, I don't agree with it's every detail, but I did sign it and circulate it. It came from one of Rustler's bleeding heart Israeli links. But lest anyone assume I am not a true jackbooted fascist nazi Zionist pig, let me just confess also to writing letters to certain news media Honest Reporting emails me about, and sending missives to HR in turn to alert them to any instances of anti-Israel bias I come across in print.
710. stostosto - 8/28/2001 11:50:33 AM
Oh, phooey, Ando.
It's the UN Sec. Council that matters, including such anti-Israeli resolutions as the 242. No one attaches any importance to what the GA says. It's when the USA supports them they carry weight. Not only in the USA, but in Europe too. Who cares what the Africans say?
711. stostosto - 8/28/2001 11:52:41 AM
I think the ear-deafening Israeli fuss about the UN is designed to perpetuate the eternal self-victimisation which is such a comfortable position.
712. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:53:17 AM
CNN:
Oct 7, 2000
UNITED NATIONS -- After days of marathon talks, the Security Council passed a resolution Saturday condemning the use of force "especially" against Palestinians in the Middle East.
The resolution said the council "condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life."
The United States abstained from the vote. U.S. objections included the language of the proposal, which calls the visit by Israeli Likud official Ariel Sharon to Holy sites in East Jerusalem a "provocation."
A majority of U.N. members blame Israel for the upsurge in violence and were determined to charge Israel in a resolution.
The vote was 14 for the resolution, none against and one abstention.
"The United States does not think this is a very good resolution, to put it mildly," U.S. ambassador Richard Holbrooke said after the vote. "It was one-sided, it did not reflect the fact that Israelis have been killed and wounded. We want resolutions that contribute to the resolution of problems, not inflame situations."
Palestinian U.N. observer Nasser al-Kidwa praised the council's action, saying it could help revive Middle East peace. ...
Earlier, U.S. President Bill Clinton asked for a delay in the vote after a final draft resolution was offered that the United States said it had little choice but to veto.
As one of five permanent member countries on the Security Council, the United States has the right to veto any resolution and kill it.
Members of the developing countries -- which back the Palestinians -- agreed to changes and a new text was then sent to Clinton and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, diplomats said.
The United States still doesn't approve of the resolution but decided not to veto it, U.S. sources said.
713. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:55:14 AM
UN: 18 December, 2000 – A draft resolution proposing to deploy a United Nations observer force in the occupied Palestinian territories has failed in the Security Council because the measure did not receive the requisite number of affirmative votes.
The draft, which was acted on during a late evening meeting of the Council on Monday, received eight votes in favour - one short of the required majority. Bangladesh, China, Jamaica, Malaysia, Mali, Namibia, Tunisia and Ukraine cast their votes for the measure. Seven countries of the 15-member Council -- Argentina, Canada, France, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States -- abstained in the vote.
714. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:57:25 AM
Strong support for Palestinian people voiced, as UN marks Day of Solidarity
29 November, 2000 -- The United Nations today marked the International Day of Solidarity with Palestinian People amid calls for renewed efforts to achieve a just and comprehensive settlement to the question of Palestine - the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict. ...
In his statement at the meeting, the President of the General Assembly, Harri Holkeri of Finland, reaffirmed that "the UN should retain a permanent responsibility towards the question of Palestine, until it is effectively resolved in all its aspects, in accordance with international law and justice." Mr. Holkeri stressed that development was essential for peace to take root, and urged the international community to step up its efforts to assist the Palestinian people....
The Chairman of the Palestinian rights committee, Ibra Deguene Ka of Senegal, drew attention to the "brutal interruption" of the peace negotiations in September and stressed that the parties must accept and respect all relevant UN resolutions.
The meeting also heard a message from Yasser Arafat, the President of the Palestinian Authority, which was read out on his behalf by the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the UN, Nasser Al-Kidwa. In the message, Mr. Arafat stressed that the Palestinian people were being subjected to a "bloody military campaign" waged by the occupying Power in an apparent attempt to impose unacceptable solutions. A UN observer force should be deployed in all localities occupied by Israel since 1967, he said.
The programme of events marking the Day included an art exhibit presented by the Palestinian rights committee, in cooperation with the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN. ...
715. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:59:23 AM
1 December, 2000 -- The United Nations General Assembly today concluded its consideration of the situation in the Middle East and the question of Palestine after voting to adopt a total of six resolutions on those agenda items.
By the terms of a resolution on Jerusalem, adopted with 145 Member States voting in favour, 1 against (Israel) and 5 abstentions (Angola, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, United States), the Assembly determined that the decision of Israel to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem was illegal and, therefore, null and void. The Assembly also deplored the transfer by some States of their diplomatic missions to Jerusalem in violation of Security Council resolution 478 (1980).
With 96 voting in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), and 55 abstaining, the Assembly adopted a resolution on the Syrian Golan. By the terms of this text, the Assembly declared that Israel had failed so far to comply with Security Council resolution 497 (1981) and that the Israeli 1981 decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan was null and void, and had no validity whatsoever. The Assembly called upon Israel to resume the talks on the Syrian and Lebanese tracks and to respect the commitments and undertakings reached during previous talks. It also demanded that Israel withdraw from all the occupied Syrian Golan to the line of 4 June 1967.
On the question of Palestine, the Assembly adopted a resolution on the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, in a recorded vote of 106 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), and 48 abstentions. [cont.]
716. Andonly - 8/28/2001 11:59:44 AM
The Assembly authorized the Committee to continue to exert all efforts to promote the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and to give special emphasis to the need to mobilize support and assistance for them.
By a text on the Division for Palestinian Rights of the UN Secretariat, the Assembly requested Secretary-General Kofi Annan to continue to provide the Division with the necessary resources. The vote was 107 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), with 48 abstentions. In its action on the Special Information Programme on Palestine of the UN Department of Public Information, the Assembly requested the Department to continue its special information programme for the biennium 2000-2001 and to promote the Bethlehem 2000 Project. The resolution was adopted by a recorded vote of 151 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US) and 2 abstentions (Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands).
Adopting its resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine by a recorded vote of 149 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), and 3 abstentions (Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru), the Assembly expressed its full support for the ongoing peace process and expressed the hope that the process would lead to the establishment of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. It stressed the need for commitment to the principle of land for peace and the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and the need for the immediate and scrupulous implementation of the agreements reached between the parties, including the redeployment of Israeli forces from the West Bank. [end]
717. Andonly - 8/28/2001 12:00:19 PM
From the ADL website:
The history of the United Nations and the State of Israel is intertwined. Shortly after Israel was established in 1948, in accord with the United Nations partition plan calling for a Jewish national state in Palestine, Israel became an official member of the international body. Since that time, however, the United Nations has more often than not demonstrated hostility and belligerency toward Israel, criticizing Israeli policies, singling out Israel for offenses committed by other states, and prohibiting Israel from the full participation enjoyed by other members.
Although this hostility began to wane at the outset of the Israeli-Arab peace process in the early 1990s, today the UN still has not completely normalized its relations with the Jewish state. For example, an Israeli official has never been appointed to a top Secretariat position, and Israelis the only member nation consistently denied admission into a regional group. The Arab states continue to prevent Israeli membership in the Asian Regional Group, Israel's natural geopolitical grouping. As a result, Israel has sought entry into the Western and Others Group, but has not been granted admission there either. Without such membership, Israel cannot be nominated for most important UN positions, such as membership in the Security Council. According to former Israeli representative to the UN Gad Ya'acobi, this "prevents Israel from becoming a legitimate and normal member of the United Nations, to have the right to be elected to positions, and to fully participate in the organization."
718. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:22:10 PM
Adopting its resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine by a recorded vote of 149 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), and 3 abstentions (Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru), the Assembly expressed its full support for the ongoing peace process and expressed the hope that the process would lead to the establishment of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. It stressed the need for commitment to the principle of land for peace and the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and the need for the immediate and scrupulous implementation of the agreements reached between the parties, including the redeployment of Israeli forces from the West Bank. [end]
Oh, yes, there's 149 enemies of Israel right there, and only one friend.
Tell me, what do you expect? That Israel gets totally free reins to do whatever it decides in its incomparable wisdom is proper and right to protect its security, and the rest of the world just says amen and rubberstamps it no matter what? Otherwise the rest of the world is just full of "enemies of Israel"? What kind of ever-convenient responsibility denial is that?
719. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 12:24:08 PM
I fail to see why any of those excerpts are either an idictment or an example of egregious behavior on the part of the UN GA.
The Honest Reporting slant is often dishonest, this came to mind quite strongly when Pike posted that letter (which addressed nothing relevant) that was meant to rebut the NYReview of Books piece a couple of weeks ago. But also here.
Look at this statement:
"The Arab states continue to prevent Israeli membership in the Asian Regional Group, Israel's natural geopolitical grouping. As a result, Israel has sought entry into the Western and Others Group, but has not been granted admission there either. "
Nasty Arabs and related towel-heads, right? No. Israel never seeks to be lumped in with the Asian nations in any other world body, and in fact it does not belong there. It does belong with the Western and Others Group in the UN. But it is denied membership. By whom? By the European nations, by the US, by Canada. The towel-head nasties have nothing to do with the fact that Israel is somewhat isolated within the GA. The statement is crafted to mislead.
On the other hand, it effectively has a veto power in the Security Council thanks to the US. Which Arab nation can count on such a powerful ally among the permanent members.
The UN is great for Israel when it banks some of its international legitimacy on the resolutions that created it. But it's a nasty body when its members vote in a way that (impotently) censures it. Nothing new. Every country treats the UN the same way.
720. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 12:27:03 PM
Shit.
Now, I'm not tag-teaming with Sto, but what is the least bit controversial or offensive about this:
Adopting its resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine by a recorded vote of 149 in favour, 2 against (Israel, US), and 3 abstentions (Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru), the Assembly expressed its full support for the ongoing peace process and expressed the hope that the process would lead to the establishment of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. It stressed the need for commitment to the principle of land for peace and the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and the need for the immediate and scrupulous implementation of the agreements reached between the parties, including the redeployment of Israeli forces from the West Bank.
Nothing. It's what you want from a world body. It falls short only if you want full-throated and one-sided activism. Which is not what you'll get if nations vote on the Israel-Palestine question.
721. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:28:21 PM
Hey, marj, you can tag-team with me safely. Nothing wrong with that.
722. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 12:35:49 PM
Sto,
Well, I don't want to seem that I'm ganging up on anyone or any argument, since dialogue is what I'm after.
In any case, we'd make a pretty wimpy gang. One earnest Scandi activist (disarmingly handsome) and one bleeding heart Indian American with a walletful of baby pictures.
723. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 12:36:54 PM
I'm now used to editing.
In any case, I meant Scandi academic.
724. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:39:57 PM
I hereby announce the creation of WESABHIA.
As in Wimpy Earnest Scandi Activists and Bleeding Heart Indian Americans.
WESABHIA for peace!
725. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:45:38 PM
By the way, marj:
Where does WESABHIA stand on the "weighty testicle" issue?
726. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 12:48:43 PM
Quick, sto, buy wesabhia.org, wesabhia.net and wesabhia.com!
And how about the motto: 'Tell Wesabhia - we'll save ya!'
Still, I must ask - is it just coincidence that your organization's name rhymes with 'labia'?
727. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 12:50:15 PM
Sto, I didn't get what you meant about the logical conclusion wrt the weighty testicles.
728. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 12:50:30 PM
Weshabia sits squarely on (in?) the hand of Andonly, on this weighty testicle matter.
729. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 12:53:11 PM
This business with Micronesia voting in favor of us is a running joke here in Israel, btw. It's always, like, 415,387 countries vote against us, but Micronesia thinks we're OK, so why worry?
Some Jew must have bought that country.
730. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:54:25 PM
You know, when testicles are handled by gentle woman hand, there is usually more to follow. And when more follows on more... and more... and more... there comes a moment.... after which nothing more follows, at least for a little while.
Was this good for you?
731. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 12:56:38 PM
I think the main reason Israel will eventually be allowed to do what it wants to do is that we have 300 or 400 nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them different places. Isn't that the reason Yugoslavia got natoed, while Russia got away with Chechnya virtually uncensured?
I wonder what you guys think about that reasoning. Am I very much off the mark?
732. stostosto - 8/28/2001 12:56:38 PM
(My last was to Rustler's #727, in case anybody wonders).
733. PelleNilsson - 8/28/2001 1:08:17 PM
Does Israle really have 300-400 nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them? That's on par with China I believe. In any case I don't think that counts in the present conflict. Where would you drop one? Ramallah? Jericho?
734. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 1:10:21 PM
Pike,
Israel has nukes. Israel has a military more than capable of taking on and defeating all the combined Arab armies from the nations surrounding. Israel's economy is stronger and more vibrant than all the others in the region, perhaps even combined. Israel has a powerful and vocal ally in the US, which trumps any other geopolitical alignment available to the Arabs. Israel has the Palestinians effectively sealed off and by the scruff of their necks, easily dispatched even overnight.
It has all these things, and can get away with whatever it wants. However, it does not have that (fickle) global popular opinion, which it also selectively doesn't give a shit about (quite rightly). Yet, some seem to squirm and whine about this. That Honest Reporting bunch among them, ceaselessly machinating to get that elusive and ultimately worthless public opinion on top of all of that above. But it won't get it, ever, in the end you can't have everything.
Big deal. It doesn't matter. You've got everything you need.
735. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:23:48 PM
Pelle:
In any case I don't think that counts in the present conflict. Where would you drop one? Ramallah? Jericho?
What I meant was not that we have the capabilty of nuking the Arabs, but that we have nukes and therefore are sort of like a guy packing a pistol that you don't want to mess with too much. The way nobody wanted to mess with Russia over Chechnya.
I mean, why push someone to his limits when he has these horrible weapons? He could go berserk and God knows where he'd lob them.
I'm pretty sure Sharon was the man behind something that was called 'the Samson Option', many years back. There was even a book like that, I think. It was this apocalyptic thing about how, if pushed against the wall, Israel would just -well - nuke everybody.
Sorry.
736. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:26:05 PM
Marj, sto, pelle:
I don't know about world public opinion not counting at all. It's always nice to be popular. But I guess you're right that as long as the US likes us, and the US doesn't give a shit about world public opinion (which it obviously doesn't), then we're OK.
737. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:26:23 PM
Marj and Sto, I find it odd that you both latch onto one out of six security council resolutions and yell, See! That one's not anti-Israel!
But perhaps you miss the 'coded' references, which I have no doubt are why the US did not vote for or even abstain from the resolution.
In the first place, the phrase "a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement" is now the Pals' personal propaganda, smartly adopted from the language of UN resolutions--resolutions they interpret differently from Israel. For instance, the Pals' understanding of "just" is that all their 5 million refugees must have the right to return to Israel (they angrily turned down an offer from Canada to resettle scads of them there; meanwhile, 1000 Lebanese Xtians have just taken up that offer in the wake of Syrian arrests of protesters over the last weeks). "Comprehensive" means every Pal (and other Arab) demand must be met. "Lasting" means nothing state-sponsored terrorists do to Israel will again result in Israeli retaliatory confiscation of territory.
The description of the resolution you guys cite says: "It stressed the need for commitment to the principle of land for peace and the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and the need for the immediate and scrupulous implementation of the agreements reached between the parties, including the redeployment of Israeli forces from the West Bank."
738. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:26:57 PM
In case you didn't notice, it makes no mention of terrorism and the need for its cessation; everything is on Israel, and only Israel. Blame is implicity apportioned to on side in the conflict. Moreover, 242 itself is enormously problematic and has been since the resolution was agreed. The language of it was carefuly decided, then reinterpreted by Arabs as they saw fit, and ever since then they have pressed and won over popular world opinion to their interpretation. But look at this:
a) " ... paragraph 1 (i) of the Resolution calls for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces 'from territories occupied in the recent conflict', and not 'from the territories occupied in the recent conflict'. Repeated attempts to amend this sentence by inserting the word 'the' failed in the Security Council. It is, therefore, not legally possible to assert that the provision requires Israeli withdrawal from all the territories now occupied under the cease-fire resolutions to the Armistice Demarcation lines." (American Journal of International Law, Volume 64, September 1970, p. 69)
b) "The agreement required by paragraph 3. of the Resolution, the Security Council said, should establish 'secure and recognized boundaries' between Israel and its neighbours 'free from threats or acts of force', to replace the Armistice Demarcation lines established in 1949, and the cease-fire lines of June 1967. The Israeli armed forces should withdraw to such lines as part of a comprehensive agreement, settling all the issues mentioned in the Resolution, and in a condition of peace." (American Journal of International Law, Volume 64, September 1970, p. 68)
739. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:27:15 PM
As of December last year, when this proposal was voted, according to a legal reading Israel wasn't in violation of UNSC Res. 242. It had withdrawn troops from territories. There was as yet no comprehensive agreement, certainly no peace, as the intifada had been going on for three months by then. Why specify that Israel should redeploy from the West Bank when it already had, albeit incompletely, and where was UN criticism of the PA?
Yes, this is indeed anti-Israel. Distressing that you can't see it.
740. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:27:37 PM
sto:
You're quoted on the home page again. It's bad this time, man.
741. stostosto - 8/28/2001 1:34:37 PM
Ando, you are a true master in picking up 'coded references'.
The reason I didn't pick up on the other resolutions you posted was that they have sizeable abstention votes - you noticed? As in a large number of countries didn't feel they could go along with the wording of this or that particular resolution. If I am not mistaken the European countries are among them in those cases.
Anyway, it's not really important how many UN countries vote which way. It's important which ones vote which way.
But you're apparently bent on having all the world being bloody-minded "enemies of Israel".
742. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:34:59 PM
"I think the main reason Israel will eventually be allowed to do what it wants to do is that we have 300 or 400 nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them different places."
I don't think that's why.
But I love Sto's quote on the home page.
743. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:36:33 PM
The aide to the Director of the Office of the PM and the aide to the Minister of the Interior (or something like that) are holding a meeting on Monday. According to our Deputy, they are meeting in order to decide to sack our Council Head (who sacked the Deputy yesterday, despite being warned not to by the Director of the PM's office).
One of the reasons cited by the Head for sacking the Deputy is that he was collaborating with me (Pike) and we were seen together at the PM's Office. I am the Great Satan as far as the Head is concerned.
By the way - remember when I asked 'guess where I am?'. I was at the PM's office, waiting for Gissin. Then I got booted out for using the computer to surf the web (though I had been given permission to do so by someone else prior to that).
So you see - I got kicked out of the PM's office for being loyal to the Mote. I think this should not go unappreciated.
744. stostosto - 8/28/2001 1:37:06 PM
Rustler,
I noticed that quote. It saved my day.
Seriously.
745. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:37:47 PM
"...ceaselessly machinating to get that elusive and ultimately worthless public opinion..."
Yeah, that's what Murcan politicos thought about public opinon during the Vietnam war. I don't attach as much significance to it as Jexster does, but it matters.
746. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:39:17 PM
I was scared I'd get in trouble if they checked the History, entered the thread, and found that I had been conversing with a bunch of Germans (my post was immediately preceded, I believe, by posts in German by sto and Pelle).
Well, pidgin German.
747. stostosto - 8/28/2001 1:39:50 PM
Gee, Rustler, you are really making waves! I am impressed. Very reluctantly, but all the more so for it.
748. Andonly - 8/28/2001 1:41:54 PM
"But you're apparently bent on having all the world being bloody-minded "enemies of Israel"."
And you're bent on caricaturing my opinion whenever I point out something you want to pretend isn't there. At which point you simply claim it isn't important.
Oh, well. Heavy balls to you, dear sto.
749. marjoribanks - 8/28/2001 1:43:51 PM
Andonly,
For your information, the UN cannot legislate about bodies or organizations that (a) are not members and (b) are not national entities.Hence, a resolution "against" Hamas is not just ridiculous, but impossible. So, you're not going to see language about free-lance terrorism.
In addition, you are reading more into the coded language than is merited. It's ridiculous, actually, that you would decry the use of the word "comprehensive" for instance, which actually has zero legal meaning, for being part of a Pal template. It means nothing, you can interpret it as much as you like one way or the other - it remains meaningless feel-good language that a plurality of countries could vote for in a largely meaningless vote.
---
I repeat that this looking for mandate and approval from the world community is one of the stupidest tacks Israel could take. If you actually put it to a vote you'd be back to the pre-67 borders already, forcibly de-nuked, jerusalem would be under international control, and you'd be forced to live in a one country, two peoples fashion with Jews eventually required to live as a minority in a Palestinian-dominated state. That's what a vote would get you, at best.
So, I suggest that Israel (actually blinkered ideologues like Honest Reporting) cut the crap about world opinion and the mean ond UN and what the meaning of the word "is" is, and do what it feel it has to - secure in its overwhelmingly unassailable position.
750. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 1:52:12 PM
Marj - I must say, #749 does sound convincing. You're saying that what we think of as 'the entire world' is basically just a bunch of buffoons who can't do shit about anything.
Heh heh, I like that.
Still, HonestReporting is not so much about influencing The World as it is influencing American media - which does matter to the Dubbya People. I don't think HR is The Savior (everybody knows I'm that!) but it is a good balance to Pal (physical) intimidation of the press in the WB&G and it's doing a very impressive job.
751. PelleNilsson - 8/28/2001 1:52:29 PM
Rustler
I made a minor correction to the sto quote.
(Only to remind you of my awesome powers and that I'm not to be messed around with.)
So don't you dare calling my German "pidgin" again (although sto's is better I must reluctantly admit).
Keep us up-dated on the Katzir soap-opera. It adds a dose of normality to the situation.
752. Andonly - 8/28/2001 3:34:48 PM
Banks: "For your information, the UN cannot legislate about bodies or organizations that (a) are not members and (b) are not national entities.Hence, a resolution "against" Hamas is not just ridiculous, but impossible. So, you're not going to see language about free-lance terrorism."
Who's been handling your testicles? Nowhere have I called for the UN to "legislate" against Hamas.
And why do you think you can be sure there's anything "freelance" about any Pal terrorism just now?
UN resolutions certainly can and do affect non-national entities and their political powers even when they aren't specified. UN monies also affect non-national entities, and UN observers (as in Lebanon) surely impact on the course of events, not always for anyone's mutual good, either.
Moreover, there is no "legislation" entailed in some statement deploring the deliberate targeting of civilians during conflicts, or in, say, a resolution acknowledging that Israeli military action is in response to outside aggression.
753. Andonly - 8/28/2001 3:35:04 PM
"So, I suggest that Israel (actually blinkered ideologues like Honest Reporting) cut the crap about world opinion and the mean ond UN and what the meaning of the word "is" is, and do what it feel it has to - secure in its overwhelmingly unassailable position."
Israel can only do more damage than good if it acts wholly unilaterally. With evenhanded UN support (not currently available), Israel and the Pals could maybe, possibly reach accommodation. For one thing, Israel might actually be persuaded to allow observers or UN peacekeepers into the territories if it thought those personnel would help enforce a truce.
But they would be stupid to do so. If you read back a bit, you'll see my exchange with Sto on this subject began with my assertion that Israel would, for good reason, not trust the UN to occupy and establish a Pal state (per the Friedman article Sto linked), whereas it might conceivably trust NATO or a "NATO-like" force to do the same. Sto has been maintaining that the UN is not composed of Israel's enemies, and anyway they don't count. I say it contains plenty, and I hope we'll all live long enough to find out what counts and what doesn't.
As for Honest Reporting, yes, they are ideologues, but so are the reporters writing about half the news and editorials they criticize. It evens out.
754. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 10:47:49 PM
A new Israeli tactic is suggested in an article in today's Ha'aretz.
Israel's best defense is the power of prayer, and it is time we unleash this weapon with all the fury and determination that we can muster.
Critics will no doubt mock the idea, asserting perhaps that it is a sign of weakness or even desperation. But when a people finds itself with its back against the wall (or, in this case, the Mediterranean Sea), no answer should be so hastily dismissed.
(...)
The fact is that for the past decade, we have given politics a chance, and it has failed us. Now is the time to give God a chance, for unlike politicians, He can always be relied upon to keep His word.
This, by a man who served as deputy director of Communications and Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office from 1996 to 1999. 755. RustlerPike - 8/28/2001 10:48:58 PM
Oy, Israel, Israel.
756. stostosto - 8/29/2001 10:52:16 AM
Rustler,
I think the main reason Israel will eventually be allowed to do what it wants to do is that we have 300 or 400 nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them different places. Isn't that the reason Yugoslavia got natoed, while Russia got away with Chechnya virtually uncensured?
Equating Israeli behaviour in the occupied territories with Yugoslav behaviour in Kosovo and Russian behaviour in Chechnya is simply so much blatant and cheap Pal and Arab propaganda that I don't know what to say...
757. jexster - 8/29/2001 10:54:25 AM
RP -
You asked what I thought Sharon's true objectives were. Some thought my answer a bit trenchant if not in "bad taste".
Well Sharon has provided many answers to the question each and all infinitely more trenchant and distasteful..
His latest Beit Jala
758. jexster - 8/29/2001 10:57:26 AM
14] Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scoffers,
who rule this people in Jerusalem!
[15] Because you have said, "We have made a covenant with death,
and with Sheol we have an agreement;
when the overwhelming scourge passes through
it will not come to us;
for we have made lies our refuge,
and in falsehood we have taken shelter";
[16] therefore thus says the Lord GOD,
"Behold, I am laying in Zion for a foundation
a stone, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation:
`He who believes will not be in haste.'
[17] And I will make justice the line,
and righteousness the plummet;
and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and waters will overwhelm the shelter."
[18] Then your covenant with death will be annulled,
and your agreement with Sheol will not stand;
when the overwhelming scourge passes through
you will be beaten down by it.
[19] As often as it passes through it will take you;
for morning by morning it will pass through,
by day and by night;
and it will be sheer terror to understand the message.
[20] For the bed is too short to stretch oneself on it,
and the covering too narrow to wrap oneself in it.
[21] For the LORD will rise up as on Mount Pera'zim,
he will be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon;
to do his deed -- strange is his deed!
and to work his work -- alien is his work!
[22] Now therefore do not scoff,
lest your bonds be made strong;
for I have heard a decree of destruction
from the Lord GOD of hosts upon the whole land
759. Andonly - 8/29/2001 1:36:00 PM
Very nice. Is that King James version? Doesn't sound like it.
760. jexster - 8/29/2001 2:19:56 PM
Isaiah 28
761. jexster - 8/29/2001 2:20:51 PM
Isaiah 28 - RSV...
762. Andonly - 8/29/2001 2:53:36 PM
Lovely translation. But you took it out of its proper context. Here is the preceding chapter (same version):
6
In days to come Jacob shall take root, Israel shall blossom and put forth shoots, and fill the whole world with fruit.
7
Has he smitten them as he smote those who smote them? Or have they been slain as their slayers were slain?
8
Measure by measure, by exile thou didst contend with them; he removed them with his fierce blast in the day of the east wind.
9
Therefore by this the guilt of Jacob will be expiated, and this will be the full fruit of the removal of his sin: when he makes all the stones of the altars like chalkstones crushed to pieces, no Ashe'rim or incense altars will remain standing.
10
For the fortified city is solitary, a habitation deserted and forsaken, like the wilderness; there the calf grazes, there he lies down, and strips its branches.
11
When its boughs are dry, they are broken; women come and make a fire of them. For this is a people without discernment; therefore he who made them will not have compassion on them, he that formed them will show them no favor.
12
In that day from the river Euphrates to the Brook of Egypt the LORD will thresh out the grain, and you will be gathered one by one, O people of Israel.
13
And in that day a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were lost in the land of Assyria and those who were driven out to the land of Egypt will come and worship the Lord on the holy mountain at Jerusalem.
[The prophet must have been talking about 1948, don't you think?]
763. Andonly - 8/29/2001 2:54:45 PM
Here's Isaiah 29:
4
Then deep from the earth you shall speak, from low in the dust your words shall come; your voice shall come from the ground like the voice of a ghost, and your speech shall whisper out of the dust.
5
But the multitude of your foes shall be like small dust, and the multitude of the ruthless like passing chaff. And in an instant, suddenly,
6
you will be visited by the LORD of hosts with thunder and with earthquake and great noise, with whirlwind and tempest, and the flame of a devouring fire.
7
And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, all that fight against her and her stronghold and distress her, shall be like a dream, a vision of the night.
[This seems to support the Rustler Pike "Israel Has Nukes" thesis.]
8
As when a hungry man dreams he is eating and awakes with his hunger not satisfied, or as when a thirsty man dreams he is drinking and awakes faint, with his thirst not quenched, so shall the multitude of all the nations be that fight against Mount Zion.
9
Stupefy yourselves and be in a stupor, blind yourselves and be blind! Be drunk, but not with wine; stagger, but not with strong drink!
10
For the LORD has poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and has closed your eyes, the prophets, and covered your heads, the seers.
11
And the vision of all this has become to you like the words of a book that is sealed. When men give it to one who can read, saying, "Read this," he says, "I cannot, for it is sealed."
12
And when they give the book to one who cannot read, saying, "Read this," he says, "I cannot read."
...
764. Andonly - 8/29/2001 2:55:02 PM
13
And the Lord said: "Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by rote;
14
therefore, behold, I will again do marvelous things with this people, wonderful and marvelous; and the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their discerning men shall be hid."
765. Andonly - 8/29/2001 4:28:53 PM
Beit Jala ocupation designed to expose Arafat's weakness
The main goal of the operation was not to stop the shooting on the neighborhood of Gilo, which cannot be achieved by such an action, but rather to expose the weakness of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. Arafat's distress may push him to make a diplomatic move toward a cease-fire with Israel. Alternatively, it may motivate him to encourage a deadly terror attack that will draw an Israeli response, which will reinforce his status in the region and internationally.
766. transient1a - 8/29/2001 4:36:28 PM
It may be hard to believe, but Barrington Wynn says he deserved to have his testicles torn from his scrotum. ``He (my son) lied to me. I asked him about something and he told me a lie, and I start slapping him,'' Wynn said. ``She (Crichton) thought I was slapping him too hard. So she grabbed me. She just grabbed on to my nuts, telling me to leave the kid alone.''
Yes, Andonly, they must feel heavier with no support.
AND
RustlerPike, just consider yourself lucky.
767. jexster - 8/29/2001 7:23:21 PM
OK enuf proof-texting! heh heh
On to something else.
Last week I posted an article from the Ramallah AL-something er other in which the author opined that Sharon was trying to neutralize emerging opposition in the US state department to his policies and continue thereby the long evident paralysis of the Bush Administration WRT MidEast Policy.
Now maybe its just because I saw Thirteen Days this past weekend and it caused a flash back to my childhood college days (Graham Allisons bureaucratic politics model of the Cuban Missile Crisis so well developed in the movie) but I cannot help but notice that it is in fact State(Colin Powell) that is taking the lead on criticizing Israel whereas it is the WH (Miss 'Leeza) who tackles Arafat. On top of this, I have read an article or two to the effect that a split has developed between Powell and Rice, a regular power battle royal in fact for the heart (and mind as it were) of the person who lives at 1600 Penn Ave. (for now)
Interesting that some PAL journalist from some dirt poor dusty village came up with such key insight, insight apparently lost to her well-healed journalistic brethren at the Post and the NyT.
768. Andonly - 8/29/2001 8:37:25 PM
Fascinating, Jexster. Any links available?
Thing is, Powell and Miss Leeza could have been guaranteed to have a fight from the git go. I don't know that I approve of Condi's politics--she's smart, but maybe too mean--but Powell is simply inconsistent. He's the guy who preached overwhelming force when it was the US vs. Iraq, even in the face of large numbers of Iraqi casualties, but any time Sharon sneezes Israel is guilty of "excess."
The more I read the Friedman piece, the more I like it. Mind you, I don't object to Sharon's tactics thus far. But they can only be used to so much good effect. Israel is undoubtedly in a position of strength right this moment: now (or sometime like now) is the time for someone to dictate peace to the Pals so that Israel can make the necessary concessions.
"Sharon was trying to neutralize emerging opposition in the US state department to his policies and continue thereby the long evident paralysis of the Bush Administration WRT MidEast Policy."
We both know the Bush admin's paralysis needs no help.
769. Andonly - 8/29/2001 8:38:32 PM
"Yes, Andonly, they must feel heavier with no support."
Who, me? I keep my nails short.
770. jexster - 8/29/2001 10:13:46 PM
Ando...I'll try to find the Condo/Colin at war article...I read so damn many in my crusade against Greater Moronia..
The article from the Ramalla AL Yalla whatever I picked off of an SFSU database..no link...about a week ago I posted excerpt.
771. RustlerPike - 8/30/2001 1:11:32 AM
sto: you have no comment on the fact that Pelle added an 's' to 'hand' in your quote on the Home page? This takes away the American Indian Truth sound which I think you were trying to give to that sentence.
PS: experience has shown that whenever Peres brokers any kind of ceasefire with Hairy, it is a matter of days (at most) before an atrocious terror attack is carried out. So I'm not exactly ecstatic about his agreement with Hairy re: Beit Jala.
772. stostosto - 8/30/2001 3:34:12 AM
sto: you have no comment on the fact that Pelle added an 's' to 'hand' in your quote on the Home page? This takes away the American Indian Truth sound which I think you were trying to give to that sentence.
I did think it took something away, but I didn't quite know what it was until now.
Please, Rustler, strip that 's' of the gentle woman hand.
-----
Today, I will not be around. It's not only a promise, it's a dictate by logistics and geography.
Shalom.
773. PelleNilsson - 8/30/2001 5:24:35 AM
The Battle of the Hand heats up.
774. Andonly - 8/30/2001 9:52:10 AM
See, Rustler? The Orthodox are too doing their part for the war effort:
Arik Sharon, when he was Israeli Minister of Defence, came to visit
the Rebbe. After his private audience, he related to his friends, "The
Rebbe was very cordial. He asked when I was leaving, and when I told
him I was taking a flight back tomorrow he insisted that I stay a
little longer."
General Sharon's Lubavitcher friends explained to him that the Rebbe
doesn't say such things just out of politeness and insisted that he
postpone his flight. The plane that Sharon was to have taken was
hijacked to Libya. At a later date, another Israeli cabinet member,
in private audience with the Rebbe, poised the obvious question. "If
you knew," he asked the Rebbe, "why did you not report the matter to
the authorities and attempt to circumvent the whole hijacking?"
"Do you think I knew?" the Rebbe responded in a very serious tone.
"It is not a matter of prophecy or knowing. It is simply that when I
see someone standing before me, I am so completely obsessed with doing
that person a favor -- that is why I say what I say."
-"Bringing Heaven Down to Earth"
by Tzvi Freeman
[As reported to me by email missive. Mr. Freeman is also now gracing grocery store calendars here with his special brand of gnostic Jewish aphorism.]
775. jexster - 8/30/2001 12:00:31 PM
EUREKA Ando!
and thank you Lexis Nexis
This was the article I had in mind yesterday. Not sure whether you have to pay to get same now.
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company
The New York Times
August 19, 2001, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
SECTION: Section 1; Page 1; Column 1; Foreign Desk
LENGTH: 111 words
HEADLINE: Rice on Front Lines As Adviser to Bush
BODY:
Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, came to Washington signaling that she would be a behind-the-scenes broker among the competing views that shape foreign policy.
776. jexster - 8/30/2001 12:01:02 PM
Similar...
Copyright 2001 The Washington Post
The Washington Post
August 26, 2001, Sunday, Final Edition
SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A01
LENGTH: 2281 words
HEADLINE: Powell Takes the Middle Ground
BYLINE: Alan Sipress and Steven Mufson, Washington Post Staff Writers
BODY:
A chastened Colin L. Powell stepped into the hallway outside the Oval Office to face reporters alone. It had fallen to the secretary of state to explain why, just inside the doors, President Bush was telling South Korean leader Kim Dae Jung the opposite of what Powell had told the world a day earlier.
No, the United States was not about to resume missile talks with North Korea. "There was some suggestion that imminent negotiations are about to begin," Powell said, referring to his earlier remarks. "This is not the case."
777. jexster - 8/30/2001 12:03:26 PM
Now as far as I know, no one has specifically looked into how or whether this bitch fight is having an impact on US policy towards Israel/PLO - specifically my hypothesis that the split may account for vascillating policy and which office warns which party etc
Any enterprising journalists out there?
Have at it!
778. jexster - 8/30/2001 12:06:29 PM
This from the Post ties in with the premise of the NYT article that Rice is scoring points by brown nosing the conservatives in the Bush Regime
(oooo "regime" I like that!)
he has shown a quiet persistence that has meant locking horns at times with other, more ideologically conservative figures, particularly Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, without displays of pique or public petulance.
Yet it remains unclear whether Powell will provide the Bush administration with a foreign policy vision to match America's unrivaled military muscle and global responsibilities, or whether he possesses the creativity to handle such problems as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His detractors -- among Republicans who favor less engagement and Democrats who want more -- consider Powell an incrementalist
779. Andonly - 8/30/2001 1:40:22 PM
"Now as far as I know, no one has specifically looked into how or whether this bitch fight is having an impact on US policy towards Israel/PLO -specifically my hypothesis that the split may account for vascillating policy and which office warns which party etc"
Well, very early on there were speculations that Powell and Rumsfeld would be severely at odds. So far it looks like Bush is not much influenced by Powell regarding the Is-Pal situation. Don't forget who he appointed as Undersecretary of Policy: Douglas Feith.
But all these Repubs in office at the moment, hawks or no, are not apt to want to get us into the mideast right now. Militarily, I mean--as in, on the ground. They're isolationsists. That means they'll chide, excuse, support, condemn, send Mitchell over, whatever, but not much else unless there's a series of unbelievably severe provocations against US interests.
780. rubberducky - 8/30/2001 1:53:40 PM
you make that sound like a bad thing
781. Andonly - 8/30/2001 1:58:23 PM
Marjoribanks redux: "For your information, the UN cannot legislate about bodies or organizations that (a) are not members and (b) are not national entities.Hence, a resolution "against" Hamas is not just ridiculous, but impossible. So, you're not going to see language about free-lance terrorism."
I was just reading the paper this morning and happened across an article that mentioned UN sanctions currently in place against Savimbi's murderous rebels in Angola.
Now, surely UNITA is at least as righteously motivated as Hamas and Islamic Jihad and the P/DFLP et al.--the government they revolt against is elitist and corrupt and empowered by the West's interest in oil; it demolishes housing tracts to make way for fancy boondoggles; it isn't a nice regime. But the US no longer needs Savimbi to combat Communism. And the UN employs sanctions against him.
782. Andonly - 8/30/2001 1:58:40 PM
For your information, Banks:
In a briefing paper released on Monday ahead of a UN Security Council debate on the Panel of Experts report, Human Rights Watch said the Panel's findings "includes an imaginative set of recommendations and some weighty new information on embargo violations".
However, "the Experts Panel suffered from the lack of a centralised office to coordinate its work; the failure to involve Interpol in its efforts; and the failure of member states to share intelligence with the panel".
The rights group added that the Panel did not attempt to take serial numbers from weapons observed in Angola in February, and did not arrange for the full transcription of interviews with UNITA defectors. The team did not visit the neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo where UNITA is active and "did not closely examine Israel", which plays an important role in the international diamond trade. Neither did the Panel's report publish detailed findings on UNITA finances and the brokers who flew supplies to the rebels, Human Rights Watch said.
"The sanctions regime on Angola provides an opportunity to develop smarter, targeted embargoes regimes, and governments can and should be more forthcoming in their support," the rights group said. It recommends that "within six months, the Security Council should take specific action against countries, companies and individuals named in the Panel's report. A new five-member-plus Panel should also be appointed to carry forward the work of investigating embargo violations."
783. Andonly - 8/30/2001 2:04:19 PM
One of the UN's many recommendations to UNITA:
* Stop the recruitment of minors for military service and the use of child soldiers; no one under the age of eighteen should be inducted into the military or permitted to participate in hostilities.
784. Andonly - 8/30/2001 2:20:26 PM
From the UN's "Fowler Report":
3. It should be recalled that the first sanctions against UNITA - those relating to arms, military equipment and fuel - were introduced in 1993, after UNITA refused to accept the results of the September 1992 election in which President dos Santos won 49.6 percent of the vote to Savimbi's 40.7 percent, and the Movimento Popular de Libertaçao de Angola (MPLA) won 54 per cent of the vote in this legislature to 34 per cent for UNITA. Following its defeat in the elections, UNITA restarted the war. In order to compel UNITA to agree to a cease-fire and accept the election results, sanctions against UNITA were first threatened and then imposed. Following the signing of the Lusaka Protocol on 20 November 1994, an imperfect and uneasy peace ensued during which exhaustive efforts were made to implement the provisions agreed at Lusaka.
4. UNITA's persistent failure to comply with its obligations under the Lusaka Protocol prompted the Security Council to threaten and then impose additional sanctions. These additional sanctions, imposed in 1997, included the freezing of UNITA bank accounts, prohibiting foreign travel by senior UNITA officials, and closing UNITA offices abroad. After a brief improvement in the situation that included agreement on a new timetable for implementation of the Lusaka Protocol, sanctions were again threatened by the Council when UNITA repeatedly failed to implement these new undertakings.
785. Andonly - 8/30/2001 2:31:52 PM
As for the Palestinians not being official members of the UN and therefore magically immumne to sanction, well...
The Charter of the United Nations is silent on the issue of observer status. The issue rests purely on practice and has been set on a firm legal basis through discussions and decisions in the General Assembly. There is more than one type of observer, which includes non-member states; intergovernmental organizations; national liberation movements; and beginning 1991 other entities as well. Specialized agencies and related organizations are also considered observers….
Rights and privileges of observers vary and precedents refer to a broad spectrum of "activities" or "power". Variations stem from the different process of acquisition of observer status, the language of the relevant General Assembly resolution granting the observer status and any additional resolution(s) granting more rights and privileges to a particular observer, as well as the established practice in this regard, including the interpretation by the U.N. Secretariat of those resolutions.
[...]
786. Andonly - 8/30/2001 2:32:15 PM
With regard to participation of the PLO in the Security Council, on 4 December 1975, at its 1859th meeting, the Security Council decided by a vote that an invitation should be extended to the PLO to participate in the debate on the situation in the Middle East and that that invitation would confer upon it the same rights of participation as those conferred upon a member state when it is invited to participate in the discussion under rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Council. That invitation was repeated on numerous occasions and, as of February 1994, Palestine has been invited to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the provisional rules of procedure and the established practice.
On 23 September 1982, in a letter to a private counselor-at-law, the Office of Legal Affairs stated "as indicated above, a review of the procedural practice of the United Nations shows that the Palestine Liberation Organization now has a unique status in the United Nations with extensive and continuing rights of participation. Even outside the United Nations framework, the overwhelming majority of states formally recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and have established direct links with it on a bilateral basis, sometimes even granting it full diplomatic status".
In resolution 43/160 of 9 December 1988, adopted under the agenda item entitled "Observer status of national liberation movements recognized by the Organization of African Unity and/or the League of Arab States", the Assembly decided that the PLO was entitled to have its communications issued and circulated as official documents of the U.N. The same right was also granted to SWAPO (Namibia) in the same resolution. To date, no other observer enjoys that right.
(From http://www.palestine-un.org/news/feb98_obs.html)
787. RustlerPike - 8/30/2001 4:39:23 PM
They seem to have caught a terrorist cell in Jerusalem, en route to an attack and armed with automatic weapons. This is what I was talking about when I said the Pals would eventually return to 70's style attacks. They haven't done that until now: gunmen were only (a) shooting at settlers in cars and (b) carrying out long range sniping from Pal neighborhoods and villages to Jewish settlements and neighborhoods, while serious attacks on Israeli civilians inside the Green Line were exclusively carried out by using bombs, some of them human (the Arab version of a smart bomb, I guess).
This would appear to be something new (though the details are still sketchy and they don't seem to have caught all the terrorists yet): the intention seems to have been to kill a lot of people using gunfire (and, I'm guessing, grenades).
788. RustlerPike - 8/30/2001 4:44:38 PM
They are saying the guy caught was carrying two automatic weapons: a carbine (can that be automatic?) and an H&K MP5A3:
789. RustlerPike - 8/30/2001 4:57:15 PM
I could be wrong: Ha'aretz says they were apparently going to shoot at cars, so maybe it isn't back to the 1970's just yet.
790. marjoribanks - 8/30/2001 5:31:16 PM
I was just reading the paper this morning and happened across an article that mentioned UN sanctions currently in place against Savimbi's murderous rebels in Angola.
Now, surely UNITA is at least as righteously motivated as Hamas and Islamic Jihad and the P/DFLP et al.--the government they revolt against is elitist and corrupt and empowered by the West's interest in oil; it demolishes housing tracts to make way for fancy boondoggles; it isn't a nice regime. But the US no longer needs Savimbi to combat Communism. And the UN employs sanctions against him.
Point taken. However, UNITA is quite a bit different from free-lance Palestinian suicide bombers. In effect, UNITA is a large part of Angola, and controls a significant fiefdom.
I'm fairly sure that the UN can pass condemnations, and even sanctions, aimed at the PA now. But it can't target Hamas, or any of the other little terrorist cells, for obvious reasons. It's hard to find a direct link between Arafat and the PA and particular recent terrorist acts, or the Un probably would have issued a boilerplate condemnation already.
Interesting material, though. Thanks. I'm going to check up a bit further tomorrow, when I'm back at the keyboard.
791. RustlerPike - 8/30/2001 6:02:54 PM
Jex:
Is there a good Wiz of Whimsey rendition of Condoleeza and/or Colin you can direct me to?
792. Andonly - 8/30/2001 7:34:50 PM
Banks:
During the first nineteen months following the White House signing [Sept. 1993], the PLO did not even pretend to be taking action against the terrorists. Indeed, Arafat openly said “that he will not disarm Hamas,” Reuters reported.[6] Initially, the PLO claimed it could not take any real anti-terrorist measures until it actually controlled some territory. Yet, the PLO’s takeover of Gaza and Jericho in May 1994 did not stop terrorist attacks. From the beginning of Gaza-Jericho self-rule until the April 1995 “crackdown,” 172 terrorist attacks took place, in which 78 Israelis were killed and 230 wounded, and 21 Arabs were killed and 16 wounded.[7] The great majority, but not all, of these attacks were undertaken by fundamentalist Islamic groups; twenty of them were carried out by factions of the PLO.
From a Morton Klein article originally published in Middle East Quarterly:
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=89
793. Andonly - 8/30/2001 8:39:31 PM
The foregoing was of course meant to illustrate a rebuttal to Banks' assertion that "It's hard to find a direct link between Arafat and the PA and particular recent terrorist acts, or the Un probably would have issued a boilerplate condemnation already."
It isn't hard:
"When Israel allowed the return of most members of the PNC in the Palestinian Territories in 1996, the DFLP [Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine] moved part of its leadership to the area. A reconciliation of the DFLP - together the PFLP -with Arafat took place in Cairo in August 1999." (from http://www.medea.be/en/index036.htm)
So where's that UN boilerplate?
794. Andonly - 8/30/2001 8:50:55 PM
Jerusalem Post:
Panel rejects appeal to oust anti-Jewish Arab group
By Janine Zacharia
WASHINGTON (August 31) - The International Steering Committee of the non-governmental forum at the UN racism conference that opens today in Durban rejected yesterday an appeal from a Jewish American group to revoke the credentials of an Arab organization that distributed booklets filled with anti-Semitic caricatures to participants.
Andrew Srulevitch, executive director of UN Watch, a branch of American Jewish Committee, said a representative of the steering committee told him she considered the caricatures "political speech and therefore no action would be taken."
On Wednesday, UN High Commissioner Mary Robinson, appalled by the booklets, symbolically proclaimed herself a Jew in solidarity with the Jewish people.
Oh, gee, thanks.
795. concerned - 8/30/2001 11:52:48 PM
On top of this, I have read an article or two to the effect that a split has developed between Powell and Rice, a regular power battle royal in fact for the heart (and mind as it were) of the person who lives at 1600 Penn Ave. (for now)
That's: Mr. President, sir! to you, jex.
796. concerned - 8/30/2001 11:56:28 PM
But all these Repubs in office at the moment, hawks or no, are not apt to want to get us into the mideast right now. Militarily, I mean--as in, on the ground. They're isolationsists. That means they'll chide, excuse, support, condemn, send Mitchell over, whatever, but not much else unless there's a series of unbelievably severe provocations against US interests.
Glad I voted for GWB. Little bit tougher to cozen Republicans into becoming embroiled in a no-win mess.
797. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 12:10:09 AM
Arafat's War: How to End It
By C. Krauthammer
The Bush administration, to its credit, has fallen into the "doing something" trap only once, when President Bush sent CIA director George Tenet in June to broker a cease-fire that never took. He then sent secretary of state Colin Powell to bolster the fictional cease-fire even as it collapsed around him. After that acutely embarrassing exercise in futility, Powell left. Wisely, he has not returned.
The other notion about "doing something," emanating mostly from the Europeans, is to send some kind of international force, including Americans, to observe and peacekeep.
We have been here before, but no one seems to remember. Everyone remembers that 241 American servicemen were massacred in Beirut during the last American peacekeeping operation (as were 58 French paratroopers, killed in a similar suicide bombing). No one remembers how we got there.
798. concerned - 8/31/2001 12:31:13 AM
FWIWIMO, in its self interest, the only reasonable course for Israel to take is with the goal of its long-term survival as a viable entity. Nukes, troops, walls, moats, whatever. Meanwhile, I'll likely be averting my eyes and wincing.
799. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 12:42:38 AM
The lowdown on the local political situation in Katzir:
Like I told you guys, the Council Head, Dubbi Sandrov (may he be buttfucked repeatedly by an overgrown porcupine) sacked the Deputy Council Head, Ya'acov Amor, on Monday.
I have been scheming with Amor, going to top officials in the Ministry of Interior and trying to get them to sack Sandrov. Sandrov caught a whiff of this and fired Amor, citing the fact that he was seen collaborating with me as a major reason for the move. However, Ya'acov Amor is very well liked and well connected in the Likud - unlike Sandov, who is universally hated by everyone who knows him and has no party ties of any kind.
On the day that Amor was to be sacked, he had a previously scheduled meeting with the Director of the PM's Office, Avigdor Yitzhaki, one of this country's premier movers and shakers, and the Director of the Interior Ministry, Mordechai Mordechai of Shas, regarding the town of Harish, which is also under our Council's supervision yet has been grossly and disgustingly neglected by it. Sandrov was not invited to this meeting. However, he caught a whiff of it and crashed the party.
According to Amor, this is what then happened:
Yitzhaki - who had been told by Amor, of course, that Sandrov was sacking him - called Sandrov into the room (but told the rest of his entourage of Council officials to stay out). He then said to him: "if you dare hurt Ya'acov, I will personally make sure that your Council is dissolved by the Interior Ministry (looks at Interior Ministry Director. Mordechai nods in confirmation) and that Ya'acov is named to head the Appointed Council we will set up to replace you. Cancel that meeting tonight".
>>>
800. concerned - 8/31/2001 12:44:59 AM
The illusion that assuaging the Palestinians and granting them their own state would bring peace is shattered.
Too bad the illusion ever affected Israeli policy in the first place - I ascribe it to the natural self-preservation instincts of the Left kicking in. I was much younger when I stopped believing that. And I'm 5000 miles away from the epicenter and have no religious or ethnic interest either way in any of this.
801. concerned - 8/31/2001 1:00:00 AM
So, how much blame does James Carville (heh, heh, heh) deserve for all of this?
802. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 1:04:10 AM
>>>
Amor says that Mordechai weighed in at this point and told Sandrov that they had a bagful of complaints and suspicions against Sandrov, and firing him would not be difficult to justify. Amor also said something about Yitzhaki talking about freezing all funding for Katzir, but I don't remember if that was another threat he hurled at Sandrov or something he told Amor after the sacking or what.
In any case, Sandrov said he would weigh the matter, or something to that effect, and was sent out of the room. He waited for Yitzhaki to come out and approached him when he did, but Yitzhaki ignored him and kept walking. Sandrov went home, but one of his Council honchos, Gavri Sigeti, stayed behind in Jerusalem. It was at this point that I waltzed in to the PM's Office to meet Gissin, who was being interviewed at the JCS Studios in Jerusalem following the hit on the PFLP head and would not be back until later. I then got kicked out of Gissin's offices (by a young Nazi aide called Mitchell, God give him a hernia) for Moting, as has been explained.
So now I was sitting near the so-called 'orange', a circular position where the security-cum-information crew sit and monitor and direct whoever comes in. This was boring. At a certain point - around 16:00 (Gissin was an hour late by this time, and I had come 30 minutes early), Sigeti waltzed out of the other corridor and saw me. I said hello, and I may have seemed slightly amused.
I can't prove this but my feeling is that if Sandrov was still thinking not to sack Amor at this point, this encounter with me drove him into the realm of irrational emotionalism and he went ahead with the sack, thus infuriating one of the country's top political dons and practically challenging him to hit him with all he has.
803. concerned - 8/31/2001 1:05:04 AM
For eight years, the Clinton administration urged Israel to take "risks for peace" with solemn assurance that the United States would stand behind it. "Today I come to Israel to fulfill a pledge I made," declared President Clinton in Jerusalem in December 1998, " ... to reaffirm America's determination to stand with you as you take risks for peace." Israel took those risks, giving Arafat his armed mini-state and adding steadily to its territory under relentless pressure from secretary of state Madeleine Albright.
And the contingency clause in this grand plan was....?
804. concerned - 8/31/2001 1:12:06 AM
In hindsight, it's even more amazing to me these days than it was at the time (and people at the Mote know what I thought of the WH Rapist then) how many otherwise intelligent people bought Clowntoon's bullshit.
805. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 1:34:10 AM
Katzir, cont.:
Now, according to Amor, Yitzhaki and Mordechai have scheduled a meeting for Monday devoted to the topic of Sandrov, Amor, and the Local Council of Katzir-Harish. Amor came to my house yesterday: he wants me to write a letter for him, which he will sign and send to Mordechai (I'm a deadly letter-writer and Amor is only semi-literate. Or let's just say I'm exceedingly good at this and he sucks at it).
He is confident that Yitzhaki and Mordechai will dissolve Sandrov's Council and name an Appointed Council with Amor as its head. This, he says, is completely doable, and something similar was done just recently with the Local Council of Teffen, where they sacked a Labor Council Head (or appointed one, I forget which). He says these are political deals: if Mordechai agrees to appoint Amor - a Likudnik -Yitzhaki will give him a Shas appointment somewhere else in the country.
Still, Amor is shaking and preparing for the worst - talking about how much severance pay he is to get, and worrying about money. And I am all he has right now. It seems I was the first person he called when he was slapped with that letter inviting him to the meeting where he was to be sacked (delivered by messenger to his home, at 23:30 on Saturday). So it seems I have him where I want him between now and Monday. Once I finish drafting that letter, and once he is appointed Head (if he is) - he will be partying and I will be left behind holding my dick (as the Israeli saying goes). Conventional wisdom would dictate that I make my demands now.
What do I want, you ask?
>>>
806. concerned - 8/31/2001 1:38:15 AM
Freedom to post on the Mote from Sharon's office?
807. concerned - 8/31/2001 1:39:54 AM
Sorry, I couldn't resist. I'll be quiet now. Fascinating read, btw.
808. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 1:40:15 AM
>>>
Well - I would like to get some money as compensation for all the money I have spent and the work I have lost in my struggle against Sandrov over the past 10 months - a struggle of which Amor will be the number one beneficiary if this pans out like I am hoping it will (and mind you, he was fighting against me for most of that time, and only joined forces with me a few weeks ago, when it became apparent Sandrov was losing his balance). I am in a dreadful situation with my bank and I'm not talking about more than 10,000 NIS.
I would also like to get an appointment in the new Council as Spokesman / Media Advisor, and Manager of External Contacts (which would entail going to the US occasionally to schnor donations from wealthy Jews). And I would like a salary like Sandrov's advisors, which I think means getting at least 8,000 NIS (net) per month (1 USD = 4.25 NIS). At the same time, I intend to continue running my website-building business, though I wouldn't mind having an office in the Council building too. Matter of fact - I think I should insist on having one.
I'm wondering if I should make him sign a piece of paper to this effect. I don't think it would be binding in the case of the appointment anyways - I don't think any such contract, with a pol who does not hold office but aspires to one, is legally binding.
What do you think, Moters? Any advice for your Thread Host?
809. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 1:44:05 AM
(by 'an office in the Council building' I mean, like, a room. Preferably fart-proofed. I'm a very big farter. A fartistic type, you might say).
810. jexster - 8/31/2001 11:11:30 AM
NyT's Friedman - Set Up A NATO Palestinian State
Fuck Sharon!
811. jexster - 8/31/2001 11:14:13 AM
Speaking of Sharonista fartistas..
When Israeli forces carried out their latest assassination of a Palestinian radical on Monday, the State Department repeated its longstanding view that it opposes targeted killings and believes they undercut efforts to restore calm in the Middle East.
But Zalman Shoval, a foreign policy adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, shrugged off the comments from State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher.
"Judging by the statement Boucher made," Shoval told the Jerusalem Post, "I would derive that the basic American attitude [to the attack], though not supportive or condoning, is one of understanding. I don't think there will be a basic change of this policy."
Remarkably similar to what Gessin told RP. Bad spin, smelly fart.
812. jexster - 8/31/2001 11:17:26 AM
My adivce RP?
Just Say NO -Just Gush Shalom!
813. Andonly - 8/31/2001 11:26:52 AM
"I would also like to get an appointment in the new Council as Spokesman /Media Advisor, and Manager of External Contacts (which would entail going to the US occasionally to schnor donations from wealthy Jews)."
Better just sell yourself as Press Secretary cum Fundraiser, and arrange upfront for the job to be split up and parcelled out in the event it becomes impossible later to do everything yourself. Even if that happens, you'll meanwhile have had the opportunity to connect with various movers and shakers: you can work your way into something bigger, if need be. Just bear in mind that every organization needs money and knows it; most, however, are not so sure they need spokesmen and media advisors, even when they desperately do.
In fact, it seems like a paucity of convincing spokesmen and media advisors has been Israel's bane for years now. Is the failure to communicate a national characteristic of some kind?
814. Andonly - 8/31/2001 11:28:49 AM
"I'm a very big farter."
Stick a hose up your ass and run the other end of it into a bowl of rosewater.
815. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 11:41:14 AM
Stick a hose up your ass and run the other end of it into a bowl of rosewater.
Ando! Is this a gentler side of you I had never known before?
816. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 11:52:54 AM
In fact, it seems like a paucity of convincing spokesmen and media advisors has been Israel's bane for years now. Is the failure to communicate a national characteristic of some kind?
It could be. Everybody seems to think they can do it fine without any help, and they can't of course. But is Israel worse at spokesmanship than other countries?
You see, I went to Gissin and he sent me to the Foreign Office. The Foreign Office guys said they had somebody doing stuff for them on a voluntary basis. I asked Gissin to refer me to the IDF Spokesman but he did it in a way that seemed calculated to fail, perhaps because he sees the IDF site as competition to his. The IDF people already had a contract with a big web building company: they didn't seem to understand what I said, about me preparing some Flash films not being incompatible with the big company doing the overall website. Gissin said he didn't control any funds for the PMO's website: he said the Foreign Office had the funds. But the FO said they had nothing to do with funding the PMO website. Gissin, meantime, was boasting that Abba Eban had given him a compliment through his wife earlier that day (Eban himself is apparently too old to even give people compliments directly. He could be more of a farter than I by now, for all I know).
So everybody is full of himself and people go for perceived style and snazz rather than true quality. But is that different in the US or Europe? I really don't know.
817. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 12:03:41 PM
Ando:
I think this guy does realize he needs me though. Like, the way he's turning to me to write all these letters for him. He seems to be a bit out of his depth with these high risk, top level political moves, and a bit scared of the police angle (though I don't thing he's done anything wrong - he's just a bit scared, that's all). This need for me could continue even after he is appointed (if he is). The Ashkenazi snobs out here will eat him alive if he is appointed Council Head and I could help him a lot in that respect.
Or he could be a total idiot and mess everything up. That's why I'm thinking I want him to sign something now, before he's appointed and everything goes to his head.
But you see - that's why I generally prefer the Sepharadim to the Ashkenazim. The Ashkenazim are unbearably arrogant.
818. concerned - 8/31/2001 12:13:55 PM
Re. 812 -
I always suspected that Jexster had a talent for picking corn out of shit. This proves it:)
819. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 1:18:30 PM
You guys aren't helping me and I really need advice. Do I corner the guy and say: sign this piece of paper or I will be very angry?
820. mgleason - 8/31/2001 1:56:53 PM
PLO's Arafat Blasts Israel as 'Racist' State
What a surprise; back to 'Zionism is racism,' along with a chorus of 'You go, Grrrl!' from anti-Amen corner.
821. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 2:13:33 PM
Pike:
I'm gonna' blow your fucking mind.
822. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 2:18:14 PM
No wonder "they" don't like you posting on The Mote.
823. Wombat - 8/31/2001 2:56:49 PM
Rustler:
It's the Sabra tradition of being blunt and rude. You need more emollient types to sell Israel's policy.
824. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 3:11:14 PM
Emollient. Why does that word make me think of skin cream?
Speaking of which: in the US in the 70's, it was called Oil of Olay. Yet I've encountered it since then mostly as Oil of Ulay. Can someone set me straight on this?
825. Wombat - 8/31/2001 3:20:16 PM
It's Ulay in Britain. Mebbe it's a copyright thing. Or a cultural thing.
In Britain, I saw a billboard advertising Electrolux vacuum cleaners. The message: "Nothing Sucks Like an Electrolux!" How well do you think that would have done in the 'States?
826. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 3:20:33 PM
Msg #820 is the second time I've seen someone use 'you go grrrl!' (the first was Diva talking about breastfeeding I think). What does that refer to exactly? Onlookers encouraging someone or something else?
Thank you (must keep up to date on Americanisms).
Uzmakk: go ahead, blow my mind. Let's see if you're up to it.
827. RustlerPike - 8/31/2001 3:23:03 PM
'Nothing Sucks Like an Electrolux'???? That must have been tongue-in-cheek, no?
I guess not.
828. concerned - 8/31/2001 3:27:07 PM
Not from a country where they eat bangers along with their spotted dicks.
829. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 3:47:19 PM
Pike:
Dehaaaaaa ha ha. I love a challenge.
830. mgleason - 8/31/2001 4:22:48 PM
'You go, girl!' is encouragement of a particularly mindless sort, much derided by comedians in this country, while 'grrrls' are anti-chicks, post-modernist punk feminists who take themselves way too seriously. I thought it funny to combine the two concepts in describing the pro-Arafat phenomenon.
831. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 4:40:22 PM
Pike:
I promised to write you, sir. Some projects take longer than others. I have misssed the Renaissance Faire for this year for lack of an adequate product and for lack of an adequate presentation. But not next year, Pike. (I, ofcourse, will take advantage of the Faire this year and bring to the man who has the lazer cutter-burner, my copy of The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.) I have made a box for my book in white pig skin(Jexster should like this). I don't know if you are familiar with the original cover of the book, but it is simple black- on- white. I shall have him burn a likeness of the original design in white pigskin. That is this year.
Next year.
You see, Pike, my product must be authentic.
832. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 4:51:31 PM
Pike? Are you an authentic Jew?
833. mgleason - 8/31/2001 4:54:57 PM
As opposed to what, a mail-order one? (I'm thinking of those ads for ministries through the Church of Sts. Krazy Kat and Ignatz, for example.)
834. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 5:04:39 PM
Oh bloody hell, mgleason, a real Jew or a real Christian, or a real Muslim. What a fucking reasonable question. How fucking real are you/
835. mgleason - 8/31/2001 5:08:08 PM
Apparently not as real as someone with a fetish for white pigskin and authentic Jews, but such is life.
836. concerned - 8/31/2001 5:54:13 PM
I fully agree.
837. stostosto - 8/31/2001 6:54:06 PM
Rustler,
it's hard to give advice because it depends on whether one thinks the guy can be trusted. The neat thing would be to have him agree to your demands simply by word of mouth. But if you feel he's too hard to read and that he may hold your dick leaving (no, not a Danish saying), you need to get it in writing. It does strike me as rather straightforward blackmailing though, and he might not take too kindly to it, I imagine. But if he needs you enough...
Regardless of whether the paper would be legally binding, I think it would be highly binding politically. With paper in hand, you can potentially expose him for
1) a guy who has to rely on a guy like you for simple tasks like writing letters, and more complicated tasks like running 10 month campaigns against his rival
2) a guy who shits on people who help him advance in the world.
Plus, he knows from experience that you're nothing if not a relentless campaigner, pamphleteer, activist and fartist. And that you have a host of important connections, many based in a mysterious international backing group called (mysteriously) The Mote.
If you have him on paper, he'll have no choice but to come through for you after he makes it big, the way I see the matter as presented by you here (and assuming about 200 things about the workings of your relationship and your local politics).
---
A different thing altogether is whether your demands are reasonable, and whether this is really any way of running a town council...
You may, if you so wish, disregard this last remark as just the earnest Scandi in me burping. If I don't allow him that, it'll eventually come out as a fart, see. (I do fart a lot, actually).
838. stostosto - 8/31/2001 7:08:09 PM
Ando,
good stuff you posted on the Pals' standing with the UN. I didn't know that.
I do think it's difficult to make the PLO responsible for what Hamas and Hizbollah do, though.
But I also think Arafat should have gotten a lot more heat, especially over his releasing of those terrorists. That was a really shitty move which not only led to more terror but effectively helped destroy Arafat's credibility as a man of his word, or a man in control, or both.
Personally, I think his lack of control erodes his resolve to make good on his words. The Pals need a new leader - who can actually lead, including selling compromise to his people when some day down the road there will again be one to sell. I don't know if they have such a guy.
839. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 7:39:54 PM
Agreed. concerned and mgleason are not real and can be discounted.. re: the white pigskin
It is hardly a fetish. I could have chosen either pig or goat. Simple. I agree? Heuh heuh heuh.
840. uzmakk - 8/31/2001 7:45:21 PM
Pike:
Forget all these boring fucks and pay attention to me. I have just come back from Chinese dinner with my family and am now obligated to watch at least one movie with them. Then I must go on a bike ride with my wife as soon as I wake up in the morning. Then I must break some concrete with my sledge hammer and lay a brick side walk. It is no wonder that I have so little time for the Mote. Anyhow, I will see you tomorrow sometime.
841. Andonly - 8/31/2001 9:44:53 PM
"Do I corner the guy and say: sign this piece of paper or I will be very angry?"
If you do, you may get what you want, or part of it, or you could blow your big chance if he demurs; if you don't, and you pursue no other tactic to get what you're after, you may spend x number of penurious years wondering whether you should have.
But for an alternate tactic: instead of cornering the guy, persuade him. Just tell him what you're prepared to do for him and what you need in return, making it clear that if he doesn't put you on the payroll you've got other fish to fry.
842. Andonly - 8/31
Israel's formal stand wrt the WB&G