posted on May 11, 2002 05:53:22 PM new
I would also ask why HRW doesn't seem to be concerned with the fact that Palestinian militants use the Red Crescent (aligned with the International Red Cross Society) to transport armed militants and suicide bombers into (and out of) civilian areas. In fact, Red Crescent has been formally reproved by the Internation Red Cross for these practices. Interestingly, HRW doesn't seem to mention this anywhere on their website (that I could find).
Anyone who finds "excuses" and "rationale" for Palestinian suicide bombings against Israel, must find the same "excuses" and "rationales" for the 9/11 attack on our country. If the Palestinians truly want an autonomous state, they will never get it with the methods they are so fond of using.
posted on May 11, 2002 06:22:54 PM new
Katy...you have failed to back up anything you said with fact. Yes, it is your opinion. Yes you are entitled to it. But it is not backed by information or facts and it does weaken your thesis.
The UN represents more than just the US. I am not sure if it is in our best interest to be members or not, but we currently are. I suppose we can always take our ball and go home if they don't show us the respect we oughta be gittin'
"Frankly, if I was convinced that HRW was a totally unpolitical organization, their comments might carry more weight with me. But they aren't and they don't. Interestingly, the HRW site you linked to does not comment IN DEPTH on the abuses by the Palestinians."
Did not disappoint me. You were the one that brought up the human rights agencies. You presented a false statement of what their investigation found. You built a trash thesis built upon this false statement. Point it out and you denounce what you attempted to use.
The HRW site I linked to is quite broad...admittedly one has to take time to read it and have some degree of reading comprehension...but I think that a person could find info if they actually wanted to develop an informed opinion. Not sure if "97%" of the population agrees with me or not...but I still believe a little research could serve well.
They do speak out against the atrocities committed by the Palistinians Katy. They are against the atrocities committed by both sides, as am I. Some Israel people committing atrocities against the Palestinians is no more commendable than some Palestinian people committing atrocities against the Israeli people. Both are wrong...one no more wrong or no more right than the other. It is equitable...the vileness of it cannot be measured by those that commit it. It is measured by the actions.
Here is an op-ed piece that reflects closely, though not exactally, my feelings on the issue.
BTW "I support Israel's right to military defend their country against terrorists."
I agree with that statement too. But I still believe Israel should hold accountable those of theirs that commit war atrocities. And I believe that war atrocities committed by Israel are no more justifiable than those committed by the Palistinians or the Germans or anyone else. In every case they are wrong.
So your use of that premise does not support that "most" American's think Israel can do any thing they want to the Palistinian people. There are limits of what is acceptable in civilized people.
posted on May 11, 2002 06:50:28 PM new
>>I would also ask why HRW doesn't seem to be concerned with the fact that Palestinian militants use the Red Crescent (aligned with the International Red Cross Society) to transport armed militants and suicide bombers into (and out of) civilian areas. In fact, Red Crescent has been formally reproved by the Internation Red Cross for these practices.<<
I would reckon the IRC like the ARC are no Saints. Realize, at least here, they are, and I use the word loosely, *paramilitary* organizations who report directly to the gov't. (Why else would they have the monopoly on front line response with military backing.) You should really do your homework on the ARC. I think the CNN message board had a hot thread going when Healy (?) was outed.
posted on May 11, 2002 06:53:39 PM newYou were the one that brought up the human rights agencies. You presented a false statement of what their investigation found. You built a trash thesis built upon this false statement. Point it out and you denounce what you attempted to use.
Frankly, Bittybug your reading comprehension is no better than your rationalizing capabilities. None of what you say is true. I did not bring up human rights agencies. I made a comment about Kofi Annan's proposed "human rights investigation team". Read again, and you will see that I never put forth ANY thesis on what their investigation found because they never investigated. What I did put forth was the truth about Jenin and the Palestinian propaganda that was heartily debunked by all that there was a "massacre" at Jenin. No false statement by me. You on the other hand, have built a "trash thesis" based solely upon what I DIDN't say.
The HRW site I linked to is quite broad...admittedly one has to take time to read it and have some degree of reading comprehension...but I think that a person could find info if they actually wanted to develop an informed opinion.
Yes, anyone with a minimal amount of "reading comprehension" can see that the HRW organization is certainly not "apolitical" nor without an agenda. Go to the home page and peruse the links. Certainly your "reading comprehension" will improve the second time around.
Interestingly, you have no comment nor do you see fit to post "links" to outlining the atrocities committed by Palestinians as I mentioned. Being in the medical profession, it surprises me that the use of ambulances for terrorist activities does not seem to bother you. It is clear where your sentiments lay, and your rationale that somehow such terrorist actions are PROVOKED, therefore granting them some kind of perverted legitmacy, although you deny it with each post in the interest of cloaking yourself in political correctness.
And I believe that war atrocities committed by Israel are no more justifiable than those committed by the Palistinians or the Germans or anyone else.
Well if that is the case you have some work to do in presenting a more balanced argument. As it is your posts speak volumes as to who YOU think is truly committing atrocities. Violence begets violence. Expecting the Israelis to turn the other cheek (which by the way is what they appear to be doing now, let's see how far it gets them) while their civilians are murdered in cold blood, is a bit too much to ask. The Israeli response has been amazingly restrained. The US would have bombed the living #*!@ out of them long ago.
posted on May 11, 2002 06:57:21 PM newSo your use of that premise does not support that "most" American's think Israel can do any thing they want to the Palistinian people. There are limits of what is acceptable in civilized people.
Oh forgot to address this gem...where did I posit that "most" American's think Israel can do any thing they want to the Palistinian people. Can you READ? And since when do "civilized people" strap explosives to their kids and send them out to blow themselves up along with as many other people they possibly can? This is "civilized" in your book? Sheesh!
posted on May 11, 2002 09:07:23 PM new
KatyD- If Israel were destroyed, many of the misinformed(I use the term generously) including those who are anti-semitic and don't have the balls to admit it, would see very clearly the error of their thinking. The repercussions would have such insidious global consequence that they would quickly wish it had gone the other way. Sometimes there are those who just can't see clearly! Save your energy. Justice will prevail. BTW- those who use Jenin as any criteria for "taking sides" had the same position prior to it.
BittyBug- those who can't spell "comprehension" have little right to correct others regarding same.
posted on May 12, 2002 01:59:46 AM newBut I still believe Israel should hold accountable those of theirs that commit war atrocities.
Now who's making unsubstantiated accusations?
After 20-some Israelis were killed in a booby-trapped building, would it have been wise to allow U.N. investigators access willy-nilly?
Thankfully most Americans (especially post 9/11) understand that terror is terror no matter how you giftwrap it. The idea that Palestinian children are being raised by their parents and leaders to become human bombs is repugnant to the entire civilized world.
If you believe there is ANY merit behind the words of Arafat, you definitely need to do a reality check.
posted on May 12, 2002 06:46:12 AM new
I responded earlier to an idiotic comment by stusi, that "anyone who defends the Palestinians in any way is either a terrorist, an idiot or an anti-semite who doesn't have the balls to say so." The Israeli spin-doctors are so skillful and the Israeli lobby is so powerful that they have managed to convince most Americans that Israel is the victim of aggression. The truth is that the Israeli army is committing war crimes and justifying those crimes by protraying Palestinine as beast-like, suicidal animals.
To label anyone who criticises Israel as either an idiot, an anti semitic or a terrorist si just horse manure.
For the past 33 years, Palestinians have lived under oppressive Israeli military occupation while Israel has no legal claim to any of their territory. Palestinians just want what our founding fathers wanted in America, Freedom.
Both Israel and Palestine are guilty of killing children.
HOW ISRAEL CONSIDERS THE SHOOTING OF CHILDREN
Excerpts from an interview by Israeli journalist Amira Haas of an Israeli sharpshooter, Ha'aretz 11/20/2000:
Sharpshooter: "They [IDF leaders] forbid us to shoot at children."
Journalist: How do they say this?
Sharpshooter: "You don't shoot a child who is 12 or younger."
Journalist: That is, a child of 12 or older is allowed?
Sharpshooter: "Twelve and up is allowed. He's not a child any more, he's already after his bar mitzvah. Something like that."
Beside this interview is a photo of a 12 year old palestinian child shot in the head.
posted on May 12, 2002 08:12:12 AM new
Israel is not above criticism and not all Palestinians are terrorists. Having said that, anyone who does not see the difference in mindset of those who "control" the military of the respective factions is delusional. The PLO and its derivatives are motivated only by the religion-inspired fanaticism to destroy Israel as its perceived destiny. The Israelis have offered compromises on numerous occasions only to be rebuffed. It is simply impossible to destroy widely scattered attackers without significant collateral damage(civilian casualties). Regarding the "hit lists" of Israeli soldiers- weren't we told numerous stories about teenagers in Viet Nam shooting at U.S. soldiers? Don't you think there are young Palestinians shooting at Israelis? If you don't get that the Israelis are in a permanent state of 9/11 then I feel sorry for you.
posted on May 12, 2002 09:17:29 AM new
Stusi, if you believe that the Israeli war faction is not controlled by a fanatic religious element then you, stusi are not seeing the problem clearly.
posted on May 12, 2002 11:49:33 AM new
It is obvious to me that the Palestinians understand that all they have to do to win is confront the Israelis with a situation that can not be "won" without behaving in a way that is objectionable to most of the world.
The Israelis can win this anytime they want by rolling over them and wiping them out. The Palestinians are betting on the restraint of the Israeli's to win - and I think it is a poor and dangerous bet. They don't want to be remembered as monsters like the Germans who killed so many Jews. But given the clear choice between that and being destroyed they may go for the utter destruction of the Palestinians. Once they come to that desision it will be TOO LATE to accept all the offers they have turned down. There will be no time or avenue open except to say Opps.- we bet wrong. Even if the Arab states come to their aid it takes so long for conventional forces to mobilize they won't be able to save them. In fact if the Arabs started forming their forces at the borders it would probably be the death of the Palestinians because the Jews would say " We are going to be invaded again in 3 or 4 days- we don't need these Palestinians at our back while we face the Arabs- time to wipe them out first.
[ edited by gravid on May 12, 2002 11:53 AM ]
posted on May 12, 2002 02:12:28 PM new
Helen- I find it interesting that you believe that the PLO is interested in "Freedom".
There isn't one Arab militant group interested in "Freedom" in the context that our forefathers envisioned it.
The PLO is not only a terrorist organization, there is nothing on their agenda regarding individual freedoms.
There is no individual freedom issues on ANY muslim groups agenda.
These muslims countries and groups have a culture and society that abhors personal freedoms and civl rights.
There is only one western style democracy in the region that embraces western freedoms and that is Israel. Do you want these despotic muslim regimes to gain more power in the middle east ? More Talibans, Saudi Arabias, Iraqs, Irans ? Just what the free world needs, more freedom hating despotic countries. End woman's rights, end of free press, free speech, etc.. The amazing thing is that there are females defending the PLO and these same females wouldn't even be allowed to speak much less use a computer if these cultures are further empowered, not to mention drive a car, or choose a husband, or go to school, or be permitted to work in the professions. The Saudis want in the "peace" process for a reason, and that reason is to further spread their vile religious practices into the west bank and gaza.
You would do well to take a sound look at these groups you are defending.
Atrocities are a part of every war - but it depends on how you define war atrocities. Usually the side that wins defines what an atrocity is.
posted on May 12, 2002 03:47:21 PM new
hjw- I suppose there are degrees/definition(s) of fanaticism. I suppose that in a sense there are Israelis who are NOW fanatical regarding the PLO/Hamas et al. I truly believe it not to be religious-based per se as is that of the Muslims. I believe it is defense-based and as such I find it perfectly acceptable and I will not get hung up on semantics as you are all too glad to do. All I can say is watch closely the events of the next few months/years and see if you still support the PLO, as it is certain that you do not support the Israelis. How does it feel to be called a PLO sympathizer as that is what someone who calls the Palestinians "freedom fighters" is? Have you contributed any money to any of the charities that the U.S. government has seized?
posted on May 12, 2002 05:37:05 PM new
I just saw a piece on 60 Minutes about the Kurds that were gassed by Sadam.
It amazes me that people are upset that the UN decided not to investigate IDF actions but remain silent about what these muslim regimes have done to people. The Kurds are still suffering from gas attacks that happened 14 years ago; deformed babies and cancer abound, no medical treatment or doctors and equipment allowed in.
No one wants to investigate the dozens of Palestinians that were taken into the street and shot in the head by the PLO for being "traitors", with no trial, no verdict, just taken out and shot.
I worry about this country and the world when I see people defending the likes of these types of thugs and ghastly murderers.
Doesn't anyone realize what is actually at stake in these conflicts ?
We seem so willing to villify Israel and the US without taking into consideration what will happen and what has happened when we empower entities like the PLO, Iraq, the Taliban, Hamas, and all the others.
We have seen the tip of the iceberg on 9-11 from these cultures. Their very existence in its present form means millions of people will be denied freedom and basic human rights, not at the hands of Israel or the US, but from their own cultures and societies.
Israel is not at war with some freedom loving democracy. It is at war with cultures and societies that will end freedom for everyone under their control.
I wouldn't care if the IDF or the 82nd Airborne had collateral damage in the thousands, it is still better than these despotic muslim regimes having power over anyone.
posted on May 12, 2002 07:54:32 PM new
BittyBug might want to write Mr. Annan and request an "investigation" into what happened to THESE Palestinians. Then again...maybe not. Wonder how these Palestinians felt about their "human rights" being violated. What? No trial? No judge? No jury? Looks like a "massacre" to me...but by whom?
posted on May 12, 2002 08:28:24 PM new
Its strange too that "evil" Israel gives a trial to Nazi criminals when they catch them. They are given a chance to defend themselves and have evidence presented against them.
The Palestinians should have a state like we should give the mafia its own state or give the illegal drug cartels a state.
posted on May 12, 2002 08:41:13 PM new
The Israeli government voted today not to support a Palestinian state. As the Palestinians have turned down many opportunities in the past, and answered most if not all such offers with terrorism, it now seems their time has run out. They will now be systematically dealt with.
posted on May 12, 2002 08:49:02 PM new
Arafat should be captured, given a trial, and if found guilty of aiding the suicide bombers, he should be hung, not out of revenge, but as a solemn duty for the good of all humanity.
posted on May 13, 2002 05:40:40 AM new
I believe that most people like you and I are interested in living in peace, stusi. Nobody will be happy living in an oppressive envirnonment. You are wrong to presume that I am PRO PLO or ANTI ISRAEL. I am PRO PEACE. But, as I have said before, I don't believe that with leaders like Sharon and Arafat and George Bush that we will live in peace. Please, stusi, state your opinion but don't put words in my mouth and presume to know what I believe.
The suicide bombings of innocent people in Israel are criminal, just as the barbaric war crimes of the Israeli armed forces led by Sharon. In my opinion, the only answer is an international force in the area to keep peace between these wild ass factions.
Thousands of Israeli left-wing demonstrators participate in a rally in Tel Aviv against Israeli army operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip May 11, 2002. Israel shelved an assault on the Gaza Strip "for the time being" on Saturday amid international pressure and to give fresh peace diplomacy a chance. REUTERS/Gil Cohen Magen
Israel Pulls Out of West Bank Town
Sat May 11, 7:24 PM ET
By DAFNA LINZER, Associated Press Writer
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel put off its offensive against Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip (news - web sites) and pulled out of a West Bank town Saturday, leaving Palestinian-run territories free of Israeli troops for the first time in six weeks.
Palestinian officials expressed little relief, however, as Israeli tanks and most reservists called up in recent days continued to sit on the border with Gaza.
"Postponed doesn't mean canceled," said Saeb Erekat, a senior official in the Palestinian Authority (news - web sites).
Erekat, a chief negotiator for the Palestinians for years, was looking forward to the arrival of CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet, who has been deeply involved in trying to bring the sides to a cease-fire. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) had said Tenet would probably be here this week although U.S. Embassy officials said an exact date had not yet been set.
Residents in Gaza, home to 1 million Palestinians, have been bracing for an Israeli incursion after a suicide bombing in a suburban Tel Aviv pool hall killed 15 Israelis earlier in the week.
But an Israeli official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Saturday that the operation had been postponed. And military sources said some reservists had been sent home.
Israeli newspapers reported that the decision came in response to American pressure. But the Israeli official said Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer was concerned that too many details of the operation had been leaked and that Palestinian militants had been given too much time to prepare.
In downtown Tel Aviv, about 50,000 Israelis rallied Saturday night in favor of an Israeli pullout from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. "Leave the territories for Israel's sake," read banners at the biggest peace rally since Palestinian-Israeli violence erupted 19 months ago.
In the West Bank, Israeli troops pulled out of the Palestinian town of Tulkarem, after a brief raid there.
The military confirmed that there were no soldiers in Palestinian-run areas for the first time since March 29, when Israel launched its operation to root out Palestinian militants responsible for suicide bombings that have killed scores of Israelis.
"We left all of the cities out of our own free will, and we don't have any intention to go back there and reoccupy them," Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said Saturday on CNN's "Novak Hunt & Shields."
Asked if American pressure was involved in the decision regarding Gaza, Peres said Israel does not consult Washington on military operations but that the administration had "made a note of cautiousness."
In Bethlehem, clergy held hands at the Church of the Nativity, saying the Lord's Prayer as they reclaimed the shrine after a 39-day standoff between Israeli troops and Palestinian gunmen ended there Friday.
The siege was lifted after 13 militiamen were deported to Cyprus and 26 others were taken to Gaza and set free. Israeli troops then withdrew, freeing residents who had been confined to their homes under curfews since April 2.
Inside the church Saturday, black-robed monks and local volunteers scrubbed the floors, wiped down the walls and cleared out trash left behind by the Palestinians who had spent nearly six week inside the church, built over the place where tradition holds that Jesus was born.
A special service was planned for Sunday, to be led by Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, a Vatican (news - web sites) envoy who had been involved in negotiations to end the standoff.
But as one crisis ended, there were fears of additional violence elsewhere.
After the suicide bombing Tuesday south of Tel Aviv, several Israeli Cabinet ministers had suggested a limited military operation in Gaza was imminent. Tanks and troops began moving to Gaza's borders while Gaza residents began stocking up on provisions. Hamas, whose leadership is based in Gaza, had claimed responsibility for the suicide attack.
In the Jebaliya refugee camp, about 100 militants, armed with with hand grenades, anti-tank rockets and machine guns marched through the streets.
The Israeli decision to hold off in Gaza was welcomed in Egypt, where President Hosni Mubarak (news - web sites) met with Saudi and Syrian leaders to discuss ways out of the Mideast conflict. More than 1,600 Palestinians have died in 19 months of fighting that has claimed nearly 500 lives on the Israeli side.
"It is obvious that there is an Israeli reconsideration to the decision ... to attack Gaza," Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher said. "We don't say that the danger is over, but we say that there is more realization to the gravity of such an adventure."
Peres said Saturday that he wants a U.S.-proposed peace conference to be held by June, but it was not clear whether Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (news - web sites) would be welcome to attend.
Also Saturday, a 14-year-old Palestinian boy was killed and two others, ages 11 and 14, were wounded by Israeli soldiers near the Karni crossing between Gaza and Israel, Palestinian hospital officials said.
The Israeli army said its soldiers opened fire on individuals who were crawling toward the border fence.
Gaza, a narrow strip of land on the Mediterranean, was captured by Israel from Egypt in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel handed most of Gaza, and parts of the West Bank, to Arafat's Palestinian Authority in 1994. But it still controls key roads and several enclaves where an estimated 7,000 Jewish settlers live among some 1.2 million Palestinians.
Also Saturday, Israeli Education Minister Limor Livnat, who accompanied Sharon to Washington last week, proposed that the United States appoint an interim Palestinian government in order to sideline Arafat whom Israel has branded a terrorist.
The appointment of a new leadership should be followed — after an extended period — by Palestinian elections, Livnat told Israel Radio. "The Americans need to be the ones exerting great pressure, as they did in Afghanistan (news - web sites)," she said.
It was not immediately clear whether Livnat was expressing the views of the government. Sharon also wants Arafat sidelined and moved to a symbolic leadership position devoid of real authority, but has not said how he envisioned to bring about such a switch.
The Palestinians have said Israel has no right to meddle in their affairs and Bush, while sharply criticizing Arafat for failing to rein in militants, also told Sharon he needs to work with the Palestinian leader.
Sharon's Likud party was to hold a convention in Tel Aviv Sunday to discuss formulating an official party position opposing the creation of a Palestinian state.
posted on May 13, 2002 06:32:47 AM new
Helen- you said the Palestinians were fighting for freedom, ie.-"freedom fighters"! Anyone who thinks they are an opressed people(by the Israelis) is delusional. To call them freedom fighters is being sympathetic to a terrorist cause. That makes you a terrorist. Please sign in on the TERRORISTS SIGN IN HERE thread.
posted on May 13, 2002 11:14:16 AM new
Helen- I love peace too. But the fact is that cultures and societies come to points where their can be no negotiation or peace, the PLO shows that daily.
The US had peace protesters in the Revolutionary war, the War of 1812, the Civil War, etc.. Just wanting "peace" at any cost is not a just cause. There is nothing noble about pacifism when you're not even willing to protect the very institutions that would allow that idea. There are fates worse than death on the battle field. I hope we never have to re-learn that, but it seems many have forgot.
The world is coming to that point, again. I think it has been well established that there will never be a world free from war. Conflicts have to be managed just like everything else in our world.
What the Arab/muslim nations represent is at a severe tangent to western values. The values are totally incompatible.
If they should win this war it will effect the world worse than the barbarians collasping the Roman Empire.
We would enter a new dark age repleat with suffering and despotism the world hasn't seen in centuries.
Our collapse or capitulation will not happen in year or even in a decade, but unless we put an end to the problem now, it is inevitable.
Once these groups have WMDs, the choices we have to manage the conflict change radically. We can not have the 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf, and we can not amass troops or amour in the region.
What's left isn't pretty, because it leads to a nuclear exchange as the only option.
Part of the problem in the region is the difference in values. This arose basically due to a lack of assimilation that occured during WWII in the region.
Both our allies and the defeated in WWII have a common experience of values and change. Even China has an affinity towards the US because we fought there with them against Japan, as does Korea.
We have in the muslim world very little common experiences, and hence our values are nearly totally without common ground.
There is no way that muslims can have a place in the civilized world under their present value system. Not because the West has reached this conclusion, but because of the actions taken by these countries and groups will ultimately force us to reach this conclusion.
Even if you were to examine the most "liberal" muslim country, you will find it untenable to any notion of freedom and civil rights. Turkey is one such country. It is considered one of the most liberal and secular muslim nations, yet it is still atrocious towards freedom and civil rights. Ironically, Turkey's reason for this condition is due to radical muslims.
There is no appeal, no help, no political redress in these countries. I will put ever effort towards the muslim world losing this war. I have this position not due to hatred or prejudice, but because I love freedom and enjoying my civil rights, and because if we lose there will be no "do overs", our way of life will be over.
I appreciate your well reasoned thoughts and also the fact that you refrained from attacking me and my beliefs personally. I realize that I may be wrong in maintaining a hope for peace in the middle east. Heaven knows, this problem has gone without a solution for forty years.
The idea of nuclear weapons in this region is especially frightening ....no doubt about that. And now, there are missing biological weapons right here.
