A Slow, Steady Genocide
tokugawa
Tanya Reinhart interviewed by Jon Elmer
by Tanya Reinhart and Jon Elmer; FromOccupiedPalestine; September 11,
2003
Jon Elmer, FromOccupiedPalestine.org: I would like to begin the
discussion with the topic of September 11th, given the coming of the
second anniversary. In The Crisis of Islam, Bernard Lewis writes of
September 11th: "There are few acts of comparable deliberate and
indiscriminate wickedness in human history." Can you comment on this
assertion with a view from the Middle East?
Tanya Reinhart: Well, just with a general view, obviously this was an
indiscriminate and wicked act, but I don't think it is unprecedented.
If you look at the type of things the US has been doing for years -
the atrocities in Vietnam, or of the previous Iraq war where the Iraqi
army, after being defeated, was bombarded by the US as its soldiers
were withdrawing.
You could also look at the number of civilians that died in Iraq both
from the bombardments and the starvation imposed on them for 10 years,
which is clearly much more in scope [than the September 11 attacks].
So in terms of scope, there are really many acts comparable in
history, many of which the US itself is responsible for.
What I think is new here is that it wasn't done by an army. We are
used to the fact that those killing civilians are military airplanes
with sophisticated weapons - then it is a conceivable act. But when it
is done not by an army, but by a group with no military means, by a
group driven by despair and determination to fight, this is shocking.
It also exposed the vulnerability of the strongest power in the world
- it turned out that having the most sophisticated military machine
was not going to generate security. I think this is the biggest shock
of the event for the US, and for other states.
Elmer: Israeli officials were quick to co-opt and align themselves
with American grief and rage after 9/11 in order to justify escalating
the war on the Palestinians. In fact, Netanyahu - the same man who
thought that Tiananmen Square provided the perfect cover for the
expulsion of Palestinians from Greater Israel back in 1989 - was
infamously quoted in the New York Times on September 12, 2001 saying:
"It's very good… well, not very good, but it will generate immediate
sympathy." How significant was September 11 for the Israel/Palestine
conflict, and specifically for the Palestinians?
Reinhart: Yes, it is true, Israel immediately seized the opportunity
opened, from its perspective, by September 11th. The Israeli cabinet,
Sharon and the ministers immediately labeled the Palestinian struggle
as an instance of global terror, and Israel's oppression of the
Palestinians as part of the war against terror.
The September 11 attack came a year after Israel launched its own
attack on the Palestinians. At that time, military circles, Barak, and
later Sharon - figures who were against the Oslo agreements from the
start - were working on a grand scale to undo all the arrangements of
Oslo, destroy the Palestinian society, and shrink it into smaller and
smaller enclaves. They were ready, right from the start, to use the
full scale of the military machine against the Palestinians. They got
some support from the Clinton administration, but apparently not as
much as they had hoped - there were some conflicting views in the US
administration.
After September 11, Israel succeeded in depicting its project of
destroying Palestinian society as part of the war against terror, and
the Palestinians terrorists. The consequence, at least in the Israeli
propaganda, has been that the same means the US uses in fighting its
own terror, Israel can also use in fighting the Palestinians. For the
Palestinians, this has had very grave consequences - Operation
Defensive Shield [in April 2002, Israel's largest escalation since the
1982 war on Lebanon], in which Israel invaded all of the West Bank,
and the Jenin horrors that came afterwards.
Ever since, Israel has used all of the US methods, including economic
strangulation. Under the pretext of fighting terror, they are freezing
all sorts of funds to the Palestinian society. Many of the Hamas funds
go to support families that are affected by the siege, the blockades,
the lack of work. The only funds that are still supporting the social
infrastructure of the Territories are often these charity funds, and
they are being frozen - all in the name of the war against terror.
Elmer: Gideon Levy wrote in Ha'aretz recently: "Every day of quiet in
Israel is another day of crass disregard for what is going on in our
backyard. If there is no terrorism there are no Palestinians." (Gideon
Levy, Ha'aretz, 7 September 2003) What is your feeling on that
statement?
Reinhart: It is true that the Israelis view the Palestinians only
through their effect on Israeli society. It is really amazing how life
in Tel Aviv goes on normally when there is no terror. People go about
their life, their work, their studies, their coffee shops, while just
a few kilometres away, a whole society is dying.
What is happening in the Territories is a process of slow and steady
genocide. People die from being shot and killed, many die from their
wounds - the number of wounded is enormous, it is in the tens of
thousands. Often, people can not get medical treatment, so someone
with a heart attack will die at a road block because they can not get
to the hospital. There is a serious shortage of food, so there is
malnutrition of children. The Palestinian society is dying - daily -
and there is hardly any awareness of this in Israeli society.
The established Israeli peace camp actually collapsed in the Oslo
years. From their perspective, they were fully willing to accept that
in the Oslo Accords Israel had in fact given the Palestinians back
their land. There were a few technicalities to still go over in the
coming years, but essentially the occupation was over.
No facts on the ground - like the fact that the number of settlers
doubled since Oslo, that the confiscated Palestinian land increased in
size, and that the one million Palestinians in Gaza were locked in a
prison surrounded by massive electronic fences, with the Israeli army
guarding the prison from outside - none of this was actually perceived
by the Israeli peace camp.
So the reaction at the beginning of the [October 2000] Palestinian
uprising and its repression was that we Israelis gave the Palestinians
everything. We peaceniks were against the occupation, we had agreed to
end it, and the Palestinians were extremists who were not willing to
accept our offers. Although this has changed somewhat by now, there
are still many who view whatever we do in the Territories as
self-defense: we have no choice, and, in war there are victims.
But it is important to mention that there are also many Israelis who
do see what is happening, and there is a growing group of draft
resisters who keep reporting on what they have seen during their
reserve service in the Territories, and declare that they will never
do this again. There are groups of young Israelis who are going to the
Territories and are trying to fight the [separation] wall.
The Masha Camp, which is very much grassroots, is a joint project
with, Palestinians, Israeli and Internationals from the International
Solidarity Movement. Together with the villagers who are losing their
land to the wall, they built a camp and they stayed for about three
months. The camp was dismantled by the army recently, but they are in
the process of rebuilding it. And so Palestinians are not transparent
to all Israelis. There is some awareness, but it is not in the
mainstream.
Elmer: I want to talk to you about the political uses of
anti-Semitism. Tel Aviv University has published a report entitled
Anti-Semitism Worldwide wherein it claims: "The barriers between
anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism have been lifted and the two merged."
What are your thoughts on conflating anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism?
Reinhart: I haven't seen the specific report, but the claim is of
course very widespread. Usually the source of this claim that
anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism is Israeli propaganda, and its very
well-oiled branches of the pro-Israel lobby across the world.
The supposition in this claim is that if you look at Israel's
behavior, it is essentially alright: it is a country defending itself,
and it is doing what is necessary to defend itself - there isn't
anything peculiar about it. Therefore there must be some hidden reason
why people criticize Israel and object to Israel's acts in the
Territories, and what could that reason be if not anti-Semitism? The
reason that it is picked on is because it can work - given that there
was, and is, anti-Semitism, given the horrible history of the Jewish
people, people do have fears of anti-Semitism.
But I don't like the term anti-Zionism to define opposition to Israeli
policies, because Zionism - the way it is perceived by most Israelis -
is that Jews are entitled to a State of their own. It is the
liberation and self-determination of the Jewish people motivated by
the Holocaust and their fate in exile.
The trouble is not exactly with Zionism, but with the Israeli
leadership and the way Zionism has been executed, based on ethnic
cleansing from the very start. I believe it was possible to reach the
same goal [of Jewish self-determination] with much less loss and
sacrifice for the Palestinian people.
It is not part of having your own state that it must be based on
striving to grab more and more of your neighbor's land, or depriving
minorities of their rights - this is the Israeli military system's
implementation of the idea of Zionism. So I believe what we should say
is that we are against Israel - meaning Israel's acts and the policy
of its leadership, and against the Occupation, and leave the question
of Zionism aside.
Elmer: In an article in the Guardian this past week ("Recruiting by
al-Qaida 'means bombs in the UK'") a British police commissioner said
that suicide bombings were "inevitable" in the UK. He sited the two
Britons who carried out the May bombing in Tel Aviv as a "leap" that
was "all about people prepared to give their lives in relation to
their causes". He asks: "Why are they created? What motivates them?
The old way of doing things … just doesn't work any more. They are
totally dedicated to their cause. It is quite chilling."
On the other hand, a front-page story in the Jerusalem Post on Sunday
featured an Israeli Naval commando killed in Nablus. The story spoke
of how "he was ready to die for the state of Israel." His primary goal
in life was to be a naval commando, he worked overtime to pay for the
laser eye surgery he needed to qualify and "he didn't sleep or eat
well until he was accepted". At his funeral his commander said of him
"you defended us with your body… [his was] A full life of a warrior of
23 years who finished his task in this world and did it with honor"
(Jerusalem Post, 7 September 2003).
Is the commitment and willingness of a Palestinian martyr to die for
his or her cause really a unique phenomenon from that of an Israeli
soldier such as this naval commando?
Reinhart: The willingness to die for your community, for what you
believe in, for your struggle, is really not new and it is really not
different from people dying on the battlefield. So I don't think it is
necessarily the willingness to die that is under consideration.
I think that the difference between dying in battle and dying in a
terror attack is that the latter is still a real act of despair - this
is something you do when you are convinced that there is no other
channel open to you. Battles have been organized throughout history to
have rules, conventions, a determined end, means to decide the rights
of prisoners... the battle of the despaired is not subject to any
rules or conditions or protections.
The best explanation for this growing wave of terrorism is that the
present power system closes all other means of struggle that were open
to people throughout history. There is no country in the Middle East
that could defeat Israel - it has atomic and chemical weapons, it has
the best air force in the area - so there is no room anymore for any
conventional war with Israel. That is why for Israel, the biggest
danger is terror. So the major thing in thinking about terror is
thinking whether there are options left for struggle.
If we look at the Palestinian perspective, that is exactly the
situation: there is not a thing the Palestinians could do that would
satisfy Israel - Israel wants their land, and wants them essentially
out of this land. The Palestinians lived quietly under the Israeli
occupation during the Oslo years - there was hardly any terror. They
accepted essentially the Israeli occupation with some form of
self-rule. But that wasn't good enough for the military wing of
Israel, whose goal was getting more Palestinian land, and getting them
out of even the little they still had.
This is not just an abstract struggle for their land - the
Palestinians have impossible life conditions. In history, colonists
and occupiers have at times learned to create conditions that enable
people to still survive, and to have some reason to live. Israel
hasn't been doing that - there are really very few motivations for a
young, unemployed person who cannot support his family to want to
live.
That said, I still believe that not just terror (which is, obviously,
profoundly morally wrong), but even armed struggle against the
occupying army is the wrong choice, and should not be taken by
Palestinian society. The only hope under these conditions, with all
other options closed, is still the slow, painful and patient road of
civil disobedience - the struggle of the whole of society.
Elmer: With the death of the Road Map, another peace proposal has
fallen by the wayside. Is there really a legitimate "peace process"?
Reinhart: Well, legitimate is what the US decides. But legitimate or
not, there is no peace process. There actually never has been. The
ceremony of "renewing the peace process" happens periodically - the
last time was in March of 2002 when the US envoy [Anthony Zinni] was
sent to the area to talk about ceasefire. The ceremony ended with the
Israeli Operation Defensive Shield and the horrors of Jenin. So I am
afraid this latest round, the Road Map, is only the preparation for
the next bloodshed.
If you look at the details of the Road Map, there were a few concrete
steps that had to be taken by the Israeli side in the first round. For
example, it said that Israel should withdraw immediately to the lines
it held in September 2000 when the Palestinian uprising started.
Israel made it completely clear that it was not accepting this - which
did not stop anybody from presenting Israel as the side who accepted
the cease-fire. Same with the dismantling of settlement outposts that
was supposed to take place. So it was completely clear that Israel was
not fulfilling any of its obligations. It said instead that it would
ease conditions in the Occupied Territories, like lift roadblocks.
Even that it didn't do.
Throughout the whole period of the cease-fire, it was one-sided;
Palestinians declared it and kept it, but Israel kept violating it.
[In mid-August] there was a big escalation in Israel's aggression and
they resumed their assassination policy. It was completely obvious
that with these intensive assassinations, there would be Palestinian
revenge. Israel was doing everything it could to provoke terror.
Israel tried to assassinate [Sheik Ahmed] Yassin, the major spiritual
leader of Hamas, who is viewed as such by many Muslims regardless of
their organization. Such a direct provocation can only be interpreted
as trying to explode the whole situation. But the Israeli
understanding is that the perception of the world will again be that
Israel tried to obtain peace, and the Palestinians refused to take it.
Elmer: To close, Professor Reinhart, how do we end the war of 1948?
Reinhart: The most obvious way is the one that somehow no one happens
to think about: the only way to end an occupation is to get out of the
Occupied Territories. In fact, this can be done immediately, within a
month or two. The majority of Israeli settlers are concentrated in
relatively small settlement blocks. The forty Israeli settlements that
are scattered within the Palestinian Territories have very few
residents. Despite controlling the land, Israel hasn't actually
managed to settle large areas of the West Bank. The majority of these
settlers are willing - even begging - to get out and back into Israel,
with compensation for what they invested.
If you ask Israelis, if you pose the idea of immediate unilateral
withdraw in polls - and this is not often done - the answer you get is
up to 60% support, so it is very easy to convince the Israelis to do
this. The only problem is that the Israeli elite, the government and
the army, are still motivated by greed of land. They want the
Palestinian land, and so they have to invent ways of postponing the
idea of withdrawal by either the Oslo model - endless negotiations -
or by keeping Israeli fears alive, and provoking terror.
A simple solution like unilateral withdrawal is still possible, and
after Israel gets out of most of the territories and the Palestinians
get back most of their land, they will start to rebuild their society,
democratize, settle and return refugees. Then there can be a long
process of the two people discussing how they want to build the
future, together, or side by side, in this one land with two people.
[Tanya Reinhart is a professor of linguistics and media studies at Tel
Aviv University and Utrecht in the Netherlands. She is the author of
Israel-Palestine: How to end the war of 1948 (Seven Stories Press,
2002)]
[Jon Elmer is currently reporting from Israel-Palestine and is the
editor of FromOccupiedPalestine.org]
Shylock
http://aztlan.net/protocols.htm#preface
"tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fb0ae2f1.03091...@posting.google.com...
> "It's very good. well, not very good, but it will generate immediate
> The old way of doing things . just doesn't work any more. They are
> totally dedicated to their cause. It is quite chilling."
>
> On the other hand, a front-page story in the Jerusalem Post on Sunday
> featured an Israeli Naval commando killed in Nablus. The story spoke
> of how "he was ready to die for the state of Israel." His primary goal
> in life was to be a naval commando, he worked overtime to pay for the
> laser eye surgery he needed to qualify and "he didn't sleep or eat
> well until he was accepted". At his funeral his commander said of him
> "you defended us with your body. [his was] A full life of a warrior of
nshi...@columbus.rr.com
descriptions of past events are not useful, and contribute nothing to a
settlement of the deadly problem.
The one that really sticks out is the absolute lie that the USA "caused" the
starvation of Iragi's during the years of the embargo. You know very well
that
Saddam was allowed an "oil for food" program, the proceeds of which he used
to build his palaces, and let his own people starve.
Your position is just an outright lie, and you know it.
But the important issue is who might be "guilty" of something. Isreal has
defeated your cowardly arab nations in every war fought over the past fifty
years. Alla did your absolutely no good.
Iseal has the bomb. Isreal is not going anywhere.
Every square inch of our world has been forcefully taken away form one
nation by another several times over since the beginning of time. We are all
guilty, and it does absolutely no good to continuously
point your finger at anyone else.
If you want to sove the problem, you must have the common sense to forget
that, and deal with the real situation as it exists.Islam is NOT the answer.
You MUST mentally become part of the 21th century. You are Mentally living
in the 11th century.
You will never defeat Isreal, and your people are suffering death and
destructing almost daily as you refuse to recognize how hopless your
situation really is.
Common sense, reason, must dictate that you come to an agreement with
Isreal.
If you were sak for a neutral military force, better NATO than UN, step
between you and Isreal, to keep the peace and prevent further settlements,
in my opinion, that would be a great begining, and probably the only really
practical solution.
Knowing your religous convictions, probably the only possible solution, for
several generations, until you escape the 11th century.
"tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fb0ae2f1.03091...@posting.google.com...
> "It's very good. well, not very good, but it will generate immediate
> The old way of doing things . just doesn't work any more. They are
> totally dedicated to their cause. It is quite chilling."
>
> On the other hand, a front-page story in the Jerusalem Post on Sunday
> featured an Israeli Naval commando killed in Nablus. The story spoke
> of how "he was ready to die for the state of Israel." His primary goal
> in life was to be a naval commando, he worked overtime to pay for the
> laser eye surgery he needed to qualify and "he didn't sleep or eat
> well until he was accepted". At his funeral his commander said of him
> "you defended us with your body. [his was] A full life of a warrior of
TheAnswer
wrote:
>A Slow, Steady Genocide
One wonders of course how the population of Arabs has exploded while
genocide is ongoing. Well, one who isn't a rampant racist does,
anyway.
cindys
> genocide. People die from being shot and killed, many die from their
> wounds - the number of wounded is enormous, it is in the tens of
> thousands. Often, people can not get medical treatment, so someone
> with a heart attack will die at a road block because they can not get
> to the hospital. There is a serious shortage of food, so there is
> malnutrition of children. The Palestinian society is dying - daily -
> and there is hardly any awareness of this in Israeli society.
With all this *genocide* going on, it's amazing that the Arab population in
the West Bank is growing in leaps and bounds. How do they manage that?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Susan Cohen
"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:_c1ab.104594$7G2....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
The same way they manage a "cease fire" with two attacks.
Susan
rgol...@bellsouth.net
Boy I love it when they screw themselves with their own lies.;-)
--
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman
http://www.usidfvets.com
"TheAnswer" <TheA...@upyours.com> wrote in message
news:5s3hmv4ftqiqq90um...@4ax.com...
Joseph Hertzlinger
How's that again?
tokugawa
> Well, quite obviously, your highly incorrect and politically colored
> descriptions of past events are not useful, and contribute nothing to a
> settlement of the deadly problem.
The same can be said about your remarks.
> The one that really sticks out is the absolute lie that the USA "caused" the
> starvation of Iragi's during the years of the embargo. You know very well
> that
> Saddam was allowed an "oil for food" program, the proceeds of which he used
> to build his palaces, and let his own people starve.
The "oil for food" program started years after the embargo began.
On the television program "60 minutes," Secretary of State Albright
was asked if the embargo was worth the deaths of 500,000 Iraqis.
She answered affirmatively.
> Your position is just an outright lie, and you know it.
I know that the Coalition forces intentionally targeted the Iraqi
water and sewer systems, and put chlorine on the embargo list
so that Iraq could not purify its water. At least half of the
embargo deaths were children under five who were infected by
diseases from drinking unpure water.
> But the important issue is who might be "guilty" of something. Isreal has
> defeated your cowardly arab nations in every war fought over the past fifty
> years. Alla did your absolutely no good.
Allah is not my deity.
> Iseal has the bomb. Isreal is not going anywhere.
I have not asked Israel to move.
> Every square inch of our world has been forcefully taken away form one
> nation by another several times over since the beginning of time. We are all
> guilty, and it does absolutely no good to continuously
> point your finger at anyone else.
To prevent wars, the United Nations was formed. Countries which
joined agreed to stop attacking their neighbors, and to let the
Security Council solve disputes. Israel joined the U.N. and is
therefore legally bound by its provisions. Israel has ignored
many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982. Israel also
ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees to return to their
homes.
> If you want to sove the problem, you must have the common sense to forget
> that, and deal with the real situation as it exists.Islam is NOT the answer.
> You MUST mentally become part of the 21th century. You are Mentally living
> in the 11th century.
The answer is peace with justice for all parties.
> You will never defeat Isreal, and your people are suffering death and
> destructing almost daily as you refuse to recognize how hopless your
> situation really is.
My people are the Jews. To stop the killing of innocent civilians on
both sides, an equitable peace is required. Sharon, in my opinion,
will never agree to an equitable peace, he will only accept the
unconditional surrender of the Palestinians. That path guarantees
the deaths of more innocent civilians.
> Common sense, reason, must dictate that you come to an agreement with
> Isreal.
>
> If you were sak for a neutral military force, better NATO than UN, step
> between you and Isreal, to keep the peace and prevent further settlements,
> in my opinion, that would be a great begining, and probably the only really
> practical solution.
>
> Knowing your religous convictions, probably the only possible solution, for
> several generations, until you escape the 11th century.
As previously stated, I am Jewish. The only possible solution is
peace with justice for all parties.
tokugawa
> "tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[stuff deleted]
> Cite your source that Peres was the first to refer to any
> "massacre" at Jenin.
Tuesday, April 09, 2002 Nisan 27, 5762 Israel Time: 11:17 (GMT+3)
Peres calls IDF operation in Jenin a 'massacre'
By Aluf Benn and Amos Harel, Ha'aretz Correspondents
Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is very worried about the expected
international reaction as soon as the world learns the details of the tough
battle in the Jenin refugee camps, where more than 100 Palestinians have
already been killed in fighting with IDF forces. In private, Peres is referring
to the battle as a "massacre."
IDF officers also expressed grave reservations Monday over the operation in
Jenin. "Because of the dangers," they said, "the soldiers are almost not
advancing on foot. The bulldozers are simply 'shaving' the homes and causing
terrible destruction. When the world sees the pictures of what we have done
there, it will do us immense damage."
"However many wanted men we kill in the refugee camp, and however much of the
terror infrastructure we expose and destroy there, there is still no
justification for causing such great destruction."
[stuff deleted]
DHatheway
tokugawa wrote in message ...
>A Slow, Steady Genocide
>Tanya Reinhart interviewed by Jon Elmer
>by Tanya Reinhart and Jon Elmer; FromOccupiedPalestine; September 11,
>2003
>
>You could also look at the number of civilians that died in Iraq both
>from the bombardments and the starvation imposed on them for 10 years,
>which is clearly much more in scope [than the September 11 attacks].
>So in terms of scope, there are really many acts comparable in
>history, many of which the US itself is responsible for.
>
The US is somehow responsible for starvation? In the same country that
build 17 new Presidential palaces AFTER the '91 Gulf War?
Get a grip on reality.
[remainder snipped]
rgol...@bellsouth.net
--
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman
"tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fb0ae2f1.03091...@posting.google.com...
tokugawa
> tokugawa wrote:
While serving as U. S. ambassador to the United Nations, Ms. Albright has
consistently voted to maintain the sanctions against the Iraqi people.
Those sanctions meant to guarantee the dismantling of weapons of mass
destruction have caused the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children under the
age of five. In a recent interview, "60 Minutes" asked Ms. Albright if
this were a price worth paying. "Yes," she replied. "It is a difficult
decision to make, but we think the price is worth it."
BTov
tokufaga's a sad moron who'd say santions against iraqi _people_
because sadam who kept medical supplies out of reach of his people is
closer to his heart ;L
there isn't a scumbag pagafuka wouldn't kiss
tokugawa
> >>Cite your source that Peres was the first to refer to any
> >>"massacre" at Jenin.
> "tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Tuesday, April 09, 2002 Nisan 27, 5762 Israel Time: 11:17 (GMT+3)
> >Peres calls IDF operation in Jenin a 'massacre'
> >By Aluf Benn and Amos Harel, Ha'aretz Correspondents
> >Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is very worried about the expected
> >international reaction as soon as the world learns the details of the tough
> >battle in the Jenin refugee camps, where more than 100 Palestinians have
> >already been killed in fighting with IDF forces. In private, Peres is referring
> >to the battle as a "massacre."
>
> An article in Haaretz, posted to the Free Palestine Palliebull
> site, is not evidence that Peres was the first to refer to
> any "massacre" at Jenin - particularly since the Haaretz article
> on the Palliebull site doesn't reference Peres's exact words.
The article comes directly from Ha'aretz. Are you suggesting that
Ha'aretz is controlled by Palestinians?
Or maybe you are again suggesting that anything appearing on a
web site sympathetic to Palestinians is, ipso facto, untrue?
Peres' exact word was massacre, and the journalists who wrote
the story appear very sure he used that word. What part of
massacre don't you understand? Or is you definition of massacre
"something that Zionists never do?"
And if you believe that there was a reference to a massacre
before Peres', please provide a link or a source. You cannot
because Peres was the first person to use the word 'massacre'
with respect to the IDF operation in Jenin.
Also not disputed is an announcement by an IDF spokesman, which
was reported in newspapers around the world reported, that dead
Palestinians from the Jenin battle were removed and buried in
unmarked graves in the Jordan valley. So until we get an
accounting as to how many of Jenin's dead were removed, we will
not know how many were killed in Jenin.
The bottom line is that you demanded a source to the assertion
that Peres was the first person to use the word 'massacre'
about the battle in the Jenin refugee camp, and I provided a
reference. You rejected the reference from an Israeli newspaper
because that story also appeared on one or more web sites
sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. If that is your standard,
I will never be able to satisfy you, since you will
always come up with additional demands, and you will ignore
information that does not fit into your world view.
Susan Cohen
"DHatheway" <dhat...@outspamding.isd.net> wrote in message
news:vml1j0o...@corp.supernews.com...
Just like Israel is responsible for there being no peace, when it's the PLO
that breaks every agreement, & spends the money given to them on their
leaders or bombs.
>
> Get a grip on reality.
Don't hold your breath.
Susan
>
> [remainder snipped]
>
>
Theodore Herzl
Get your facist army of Zion off their land, remove your squatter
settlements and then wall your asses in along the 1967 borders if you
want. Any land occupied by Zionists since the 1967 war and funded by
Israel, are illegal squatter settlements, regardless of size, and must
be vacated and turned over to the Palestinians. Then you can build a
100ft wall right around Israel to protect you from harm and there you
can fester, secure inside your borders.
> > Get a grip on reality.
>
> Don't hold your breath.
>
> Susan "the Bigot"
BTov
> > > "Deborah Sharavi" <desh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>Cite your source that Peres was the first to refer to any
> > >>"massacre" at Jenin.
>
> > "tokugawa" <truth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >Tuesday, April 09, 2002 Nisan 27, 5762 Israel Time: 11:17 (GMT+3)
> > >Peres calls IDF operation in Jenin a 'massacre'
> > >By Aluf Benn and Amos Harel, Ha'aretz Correspondents
> > >Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is very worried about the expected
> > >international reaction as soon as the world learns the details of the tough
> > >battle in the Jenin refugee camps, where more than 100 Palestinians have
> > >already been killed in fighting with IDF forces. In private, Peres is referring
> > >to the battle as a "massacre."
>
> > An article in Haaretz, posted to the Free Palestine Palliebull
> > site, is not evidence that Peres was the first to refer to
> > any "massacre" at Jenin - particularly since the Haaretz article
> > on the Palliebull site doesn't reference Peres's exact words.
>
> The article comes directly from Ha'aretz. Are you suggesting that
> Ha'aretz is controlled by Palestinians?
hairetz is a leftie bullrag
> Or maybe you are again suggesting that anything appearing on a
> web site sympathetic to Palestinians is, ipso facto, untrue?
they're crap
> Peres' exact word was massacre, and the journalists who wrote
> the story appear very sure he used that word. What part of
> massacre don't you understand? Or is you definition of massacre
> "something that Zionists never do?"
& what part of massacre don't you understand?
LOL
> Also not disputed is an announcement by an IDF spokesman, which
> was reported in newspapers around the world reported, that dead
> Palestinians from the Jenin battle were removed and buried in
> unmarked graves in the Jordan valley. So until we get an
> accounting as to how many of Jenin's dead were removed, we will
> not know how many were killed in Jenin.
``NewsMax Wires
Monday, April 15, 2002
JENIN, West Bank -- Israel's high court ruled Sunday that the military
can begin clearing the bodies of Palestinians killed in the Jenin
refugee camp. Rejecting petitions from human rights activists, but
under a deal with the petitioners, the army will hand over the dead to
the Palestinian Authority, not bury them, the Ha'aretz newspaper
reported.
The court also ruled that the army must take Red Cross and Red
Crescent relief workers with them when they collect the bodies,
according to the British Broadcasting Corp.....''
so..where're the bodies? ;L
tokufaga when you take a break from massacring facts you may
investigate it too
LOL
BTov
> > that breaks every agreement, & spends the money given to them on their
> > leaders or bombs.
>
> Get your facist army of Zion off their land, remove your squatter
> settlements
palistanians to date have failed to produce any non bogus land
ownership papers to claim the land's theirs ;L
> and then wall your asses in along the 1967 borders if you
> want.
there were no 1967 borders ;L
> Any land occupied by Zionists since the 1967 war and funded by
> Israel, are illegal squatter settlements, regardless of size, and must
> be vacated and turned over to the Palestinians.
by palestinians you mean palistanian squatters with jordanian
passports who want to grab a free jewish built housing? cool ;L
> Then you can build a
> 100ft wall right around Israel to protect you from harm and there you
> can fester, secure inside your borders.
;L
tokugawa
> "Deborah Sharavi" <desh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<23469428a971f8f9d55...@mygate.mailgate.org>...
> > "massacre" at Jenin.
>
> Tuesday, April 09, 2002 Nisan 27, 5762 Israel Time: 11:17 (GMT+3)
>
> Peres calls IDF operation in Jenin a 'massacre'
>
> By Aluf Benn and Amos Harel, Ha'aretz Correspondents
>
> Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is very worried about the expected
> international reaction as soon as the world learns the details of the tough
> battle in the Jenin refugee camps, where more than 100 Palestinians have
> already been killed in fighting with IDF forces. In private, Peres is referring
> to the battle as a "massacre."
>
> IDF officers also expressed grave reservations Monday over the operation in
> Jenin. "Because of the dangers," they said, "the soldiers are almost not
> advancing on foot. The bulldozers are simply 'shaving' the homes and causing
> terrible destruction. When the world sees the pictures of what we have done
> there, it will do us immense damage."
>
> "However many wanted men we kill in the refugee camp, and however much of the
> terror infrastructure we expose and destroy there, there is still no
> justification for causing such great destruction."
>
> [stuff deleted]
"Deborah Sharavi" <desh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>An article in Haaretz, posted to the Free Palestine Palliebull
>site, is not evidence that Peres was the first to refer to
>any "massacre" at Jenin - particularly since the Haaretz article
>on the Palliebull site doesn't reference Peres's exact words.
>Since the IDF occupied Jenin on 3rd April, it is more than
>like Peres was worrying about Pallies squawking about another
>fake "massacre" like Tantura.
Deborah, I am quoting directly from Ha'aretz. I don't know
why you are so confused about the original source. Are you
saying that if an article from Ha'aretz appears on a site not
to your liking, than the article automatically loses all of its
truth? Are you saying that if an article from Ha'aretz appears on
a site not to your liking, that the article is automatically
a fabrication? Or are you saying there was a previous
reference to a massacre before Peres' statement? If so,
then please provide a reference.
The authors of the Ha'aretz article were sure of one of Peres'
words, and that word was 'massacre.' Apparent the editors of
Ha'aretz were also sure SINCE THEY USE THE WORD 'MASSACRE' IN
THE HEADLINE.
The Ha'aretz article quotes IDF sources as saying "When the
world sees the pictures of what we have done there, it will
do us immense damage." Are you saying that the authors of
the story FABRICATED A QUOTE AND ATTRIBUTED IT TO
THE IDF? Wouldn't the Israeli government have shut down
Ha'aretz for treason if that had happened?
After the Ha'aretz story ran, the backtracking began with
the mysterious declining death toll. In any normal
battle, the number of casualties goes up as time passes.
According to the IDF, the death toll of Palestinians in
Jenin WENT DOWN as time passed. First there were
hundreds of dead. Then there were one hundred dead.
Finally, the death toll dropped to 54, according to the
IDF and Israeli sources. Did the Palestinians discover a
way to resurrect their dead? I don't think so. The
most likely explanation is that the IDF removed the bodies
from Jenin and buried them in unmarked graves in the Jordan
valley, LIKE THE IDF ITSELF ANNOUNCED IT WOULD DO. Just
because the Israeli Supreme Court said it was illegal, does
not mean it wasn't done. After all, Sharon has broken just
about every provision of the Geneva conventions during his
career, why should he now suddenly start obeying laws? And
apparently Sharon has passed his law breaking down to his
sons, who are not cooperating with a criminal investigation
regarding illegal campaign contributions to Sharon's last
campaign.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Don't look at the man behind the curtain" - the Wizard of Oz
BTov
of course! ;L
you won't quote any other source proving there wasn't any massacre..;L
> The Ha'aretz article quotes IDF sources as saying "When the
> world sees the pictures of what we have done there, it will
> do us immense damage." Are you saying that the authors of
> the story FABRICATED A QUOTE AND ATTRIBUTED IT TO
> THE IDF? Wouldn't the Israeli government have shut down
> Ha'aretz for treason if that had happened?
it's easy..:l
idf sources knew that whatever the results the sad world of tokufakas
would see massacre lol
& tokufaga proves idf was right ;L
& now back to the point:
``Monday, April 15, 2002
JENIN, West Bank -- Israel's high court ruled Sunday that the military
can begin clearing the bodies of Palestinians killed in the Jenin
refugee camp. Rejecting petitions from human rights activists, but
under a deal with the petitioners, the army will hand over the dead to
the Palestinian Authority, not bury them, the Ha'aretz newspaper
reported.
The court also ruled that the army must take Red Cross and Red
Crescent relief workers with them when they collect the bodies,
according to the British Broadcasting Corp.....''
so the red cross was there..but where're the bodies? ;
did you find any while taking time away from posting bullshit here? ;L
Theodore Herzl
> AntiZ...@hotmail.com (Theodore Herzl) wrote in message news:<3a44d57.03092...@posting.google.com>...
> > > "Susan Cohen" <fla...@his.com> wrote in message news:<3f73...@news101.his.
> > > Just like Israel is responsible for there being no peace, when it's the PLO
> > > that breaks every agreement, & spends the money given to them on their
> > > leaders or bombs.
> >
> > Get your facist army of Zion off their land, remove your squatter
> > settlements
>
> palistanians to date have failed to produce any non bogus land
> ownership papers to claim the land's theirs ;L
They do not have to provide anything to prove to the invading
Zionist's that they lived there. It is the invading Zionist's that
must prove they have LEGAL rights to the land, otherwise the fact that
the Palestinian's have lived their for centuries is enough. They do
not have to prove anything to the Zionist gypsies, tramps and thieves
that are trying to steal their ancestral homeland from them.
> > and then wall your asses in along the 1967 borders if you
> > want.
>
> there were no 1967 borders ;L
Exactly, you are lucky the United States and the International
community have decided only to push your freeloading asses back to
those borders, otherwise you would be even a less significant country
than you already are.
> > Any land occupied by Zionists since the 1967 war and funded by
> > Israel, are illegal squatter settlements, regardless of size, and must
> > be vacated and turned over to the Palestinians.
>
> by palestinians you mean palistanian squatters with jordanian
> passports who want to grab a free jewish built housing? cool ;L
No the Semitic people who have lived in Palestine for centuries and
thrived by turning the desert into an oasis. Until the greedy
European Gypsies decided that they could use the evil doctrine of
Zionism, and the sypathy for Jew's after WWII to plunder Palestine,
that region was much more peaceful than it is today. These Zionist
Gypsies, dependent upon welfare from America, have no rights what so
ever in the region, and never have.
BTov
> > ownership papers to claim the land's theirs ;L
>
> They do not have to provide anything to prove to the invading
> Zionist's that they lived there.
``So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the
country and multiplied till their population has increased more than
even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population.
--Martin Gilbert, Churchill, vol. 5, p. 1072''
> It is the invading Zionist's that
> must prove they have LEGAL rights to the land,
the san remo conference did it already together with jewish purchases
of land
;L
> otherwise the fact that
> the Palestinian's have lived their for centuries is enough.
if it's enough then it's jews who lived there when no one even heard
about arabs & it's the joooovish land LOL
> They do
> not have to prove anything to the Zionist gypsies, tramps and thieves
> that are trying to steal their ancestral homeland from them.
palistanian fairy bollocks
have you seen the palistanian fairy hanan ashrawi?
lol
> > > and then wall your asses in along the 1967 borders if you
> > > want.
>
> > there were no 1967 borders ;L
>
> Exactly, you are lucky the United States and the International
> community
the soviet union the international community? ;L
some community..that's why arabs luveit ;L
> have decided only to push your freeloading asses back to
> those borders, otherwise you would be even a less significant country
> than you already are.
if israel so insignificant then why every arab / pro arab asshole [*]
in the un makes farts about it?
;L
> > > Any land occupied by Zionists since the 1967 war and funded by
> > > Israel, are illegal squatter settlements, regardless of size, and must
> > > be vacated and turned over to the Palestinians.
>
> > by palestinians you mean palistanian squatters with jordanian
> > passports who want to grab a free jewish built housing? cool ;L
>
> No the Semitic people who have lived in Palestine for centuries and
> thrived by turning the desert into an oasis.
then these were / are jews OK then & now
``One witnesses in Palestine not merely the impact of European culture
upon the East, but also the impact of Western science and Western
technology upon a semi-feudal civilization.
--anglo_american committee 1946''
;L
> Until the greedy
> European Gypsies decided that they could use the evil doctrine of
> Zionism, and the sypathy for Jew's after WWII to plunder Palestine,
> that region was much more peaceful than it is today. These Zionist
> Gypsies, dependent upon welfare from America, have no rights what so
> ever in the region, and never have.
Winston Churchill in 1939:
``So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the
country and multiplied till their population has increased more than
even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population.
--Martin Gilbert, Churchill,''
palistanians are a mongrel product of the egyptian & syrian &
jordanian & lebanese & what_not arabs ;L
;L
JGB
>
> To prevent wars, the United Nations was formed. Countries which
> joined agreed to stop attacking their neighbors, and to let the
> Security Council solve disputes. Israel joined the U.N. and is
> therefore legally bound by its provisions. <
So what did the UN do to prevent or punish the 7 Arab nations that
attacked it in May 1948, the day of its independence, and even bombed
Tel Aviv from the air? The UN authorized the JEwish state, but what
did
it do to stop or punish the Arab states that immediately invaded it?
>Israel has ignored
> many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
> out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982. Israel also
> ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees to return to their
> homes. <
Why should Israel listen to ANYTHING the UN says when it did nothing
to prevent or punish the Arab aggressors of 1948? Nor did it stop
constant crossborder attacks on ISrael over the armistice lines of
1949 (the so=called "67 borders." The Arab states never recognized the
"zionist entity"
nor any borders. So why do they know harp on the "67 borders?" What
borders?
tokugawa
> truth_s...@yahoo.com (tokugawa) wrote in message news:<fb0ae2f1.03091...@posting.google.com>...
> > <nshi...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:<F40ab.3899$KJ5....@fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
>
> >
> > To prevent wars, the United Nations was formed. Countries which
> > joined agreed to stop attacking their neighbors, and to let the
> > Security Council solve disputes. Israel joined the U.N. and is
> > therefore legally bound by its provisions. <
>
> So what did the UN do to prevent or punish the 7 Arab nations that
> attacked it in May 1948, the day of its independence, and even bombed
> Tel Aviv from the air? The UN authorized the JEwish state, but what
> did
> it do to stop or punish the Arab states that immediately invaded it?
The U.N. sent a mediator, Fouke Bernadotte, who had worked
successfully to save tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis.
He worked with both sides of the conflict and he successfully
negotiated at least one truce. He was assassinated by Zionist
terrorists in Jerusalem.
The reason the U.N. did not stop the Arab states was that they
were responding to repeated acts of Jewish terrorism which
targeted civilians and was therefore ethnic cleansing, the most
notable terrorist atrocity being Deir Yassin. Also, the conflict
consisted mostly of the Jews invading and capturing territory
allocated to the Palestinian state.
Could you give me your source concerning the Arabs bombing Tel
Aviv from the air? I was aware of the Israeli Air Force which
bombed Palestinian cities in 1948.
> >Israel has ignored
> > many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
> > out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982. Israel also
> > ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees to return to their
> > homes. <
>
> Why should Israel listen to ANYTHING the UN says when it did nothing
> to prevent or punish the Arab aggressors of 1948?
see above
> Nor did it stop
> constant crossborder attacks on ISrael over the armistice lines of
> 1949 (the so=called "67 borders." The Arab states never recognized the
> "zionist entity"
> nor any borders.
It's hard to recognize borders when Israel had never specified
what her borders are.
> So why do they know harp on the "67 borders?" What
> borders?
What borders, indeed!
tokugawa
> >successfully to save tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis.
> >He worked with both sides of the conflict and he successfully
> >negotiated at least one truce.
>
I believe that he did not negotiate a cease fire. Maybe two.
> Bernadotte's proposal of July 1948 modifying
> the UN partition resolution - to create a small Jewish
> entity and an enlarged Transjordan - negated everything
> everyone had accomplished over the past 18 months.
In other words, he did not approve of total Jewish
control over all of Jerusalem.
> The
> Arab states rejected his proposal, as did Israel. Only
> Jordan favored it, but even they were forced to denounce
> it. As head of the Swedish Red Cross, he saved thousands
> from the Nazis - mostly non-Jews - and his delayed and
> overcautious palaverings with Himmler killed more Jews
> than he saved.
Are you criticizing Bernadotte because he didn't say
"Free those Jews now, you Nazi bastard," to Himmler?
It seems as if diplomacy was a wise precaution when
dealing with the Nazis, or else an 'unfortunate
accident' might have occurred, killing Bernadotte.
You are accusing Bernadotte of "killing" Jews. He did
not kill ANY Jews. He saved tens of thousands of Jews.
He put his own life in danger to do this, just as
Wallenberg did.
> Raoul Wallenberg saved far more lives,
So what? Many people saved no Jews at all. Bernadotte
saved tens of thousands.
> which is why .
>
> >He was assassinated by Zionist terrorists in Jerusalem.
Are you saying that Bernadotte was assassinated by Zionist
terrorists because he did not save ENOUGH Jews from the
Nazis? Wouldn't it have been sufficient for him to have
saved one Jew? And he didn't just save one, he saved
tens of thousands of Jews.
> He was killed by the Lechi for his proposal to cede all
> Jerusalem to Jordan and to limit immigration of Jewish
> survivors of Hitler.
If it was a proposal, it could not have been adopted
except by the approval of both sides. The U.N. partition
resolution specified that Jerusalem was to become an
international city, which is what Bernadotte was working
on when he was assassinated. Bernadotte was not working
to cede all Jerusalem to Jordan.
> Had Arabs gotten him first - they
> attacked his convoy in Ramallah - no one would think
> twice about the matter.
I don't care about you hypothetical speculations.
> >The reason the U.N. did not stop the Arab states was that they
> >were responding to repeated acts of Jewish terrorism which
> >targeted civilians and was therefore ethnic cleansing, the most
> >notable terrorist atrocity being Deir Yassin. Also, the conflict
> >consisted mostly of the Jews invading and capturing territory
> >allocated to the Palestinian state.
>
> More bullshit.
More ad hominem attacks. Its like saying, "my next arguments are
REALLY weak. Therefore, I'll start out with name calling. If you
thought your arguments could stand on their own, there would be
no reason for you to use name calling.
> It was not the Jews "invading and capturing
> territory" allocated to the proposed ARAB state in Palestine;
> it was the armies of the invading Arab states which seized
> that territory.
Israel, according to its Plan Dalet, intentionally expanded
the territory allocated to it by the U.N. partition, and made
sure all the fighting would take place in Arab communities.
> Their purpose was not only to enlarge their
> own territory (or, in Iraq's case, to gain a corridor to
> the Haifa terminus), but to prevent the creation of an ARAB
> state in British Palestine dominated by the Husseini clan.
> As King Abdullah stated, "Were an Arab state to be created
> in Palestine, we should find ourselves surrounded by enemies."
More hypothetical speculations. The purpose of Arab
intervention was to stop atrocities like Deir Yassin. In
this, the Arabs failed miserably, since there were
many more massacres. One of the motivations for the
partition lines was that they put Jewish communities
in the Jewish state and Arab communities into the
Palestinian state. By conquering territories allocated
to the Palestinian state, Israel used military force and
evicted Arab civilians from their homes and communities
at gunpoint, and after ethnic cleansing these
communities had no Arabs, and were then settled by
Jews. Arab owned land was confiscated by
Israel, and there still has been no compensation
for the losses suffered by the refugees who lost
their homes, their farms, and their businesses.
> The UN called on the Arab states to cease all military
> activities, but it had no more power to enforce that than
> it had to force the Brits to accomodate the partition
> commission in January 1948.
Was the U.N. completely silent with respect to Israeli
terrorism? Was the U.N. completely silent when Israeli
terrorists assassinated Bernadotte? Did the U.N.
authorize the ethnic cleansing that Israel carried out
at Deir Yassin and Lydda? Did the U.N. approve of
Israel's military adjustments of the partition lines?
> In any case, the Arab League
> had already issued its formal declaration of war against
> the Jewish state. The UN didn't give a shit about "ethnic
> cleansing" - a term which had not been invented yet; -
> had the UN been concerned, it would have been too busy
> with the "ethnic cleansing" going on over the partition
> of India, and the resultant 16,000,000 refugees, along
> with the 10,000,000 postwar refugees still in Europe.
Changing the subject again? It's OK for the Jews to
evict the Arabs, because it was happening in India!
Major difference, though. In the case of India, both
sides had a sovereign state. In the case of Palestine,
the Palestinians still do not have a state of their own.
> Go
> look at any newspaper from the time. "Palestine" was not
> top priority on the UN agenda.
Ethnic cleansing was OK because newspapers said Palestine
was not a top priority on the UN agenda?
> >Could you give me your source concerning the Arabs
> >bombing Tel Aviv from the air?
>
> Open a history book.
Interesting, you provide no reference. You could have
made up everything you say, since you do not provide a
source. Why should anybody believe you, an obviously
biased and uncivil usenet poster?
> The Egyptian air force bombed Tel
> Aviv at appx 5:00 a.m. on 15th May 1948, and continued
> to bomb Tel Aviv intermittently.
>
> >I was aware of the Israeli Air Force which bombed
> >Palestinian cities in 1948.
>
> The only "Palestinian cities" in 1948 were Jewish cities.
Not according to the U.N. partition agreement.
> As of the Arab invasion of 1948, the only "Israeli Air
> Force" was the Sherut Avir of the Palmach; total strength:
> eight single engine planes, one twin engine plane. There
> was an international embargo on all weapons shipments to
> the ME (which did not stop Britain from supplying Jordan
> and Egypt pursuant to treaties). Israel smuggled in four
> disassembled Messerschmitts from Czechoslovakia then re-
> assembled them.
It looks like the embargo was not successful in stopping
supplies from getting to Israel. In fact, Israel had
weapons superiority due to the excellent work of
smugglers and the success of Israeli spies in preventing
supplies from getting to the Arabs. And also the very
generous contributions made by American Jews.
> The "Palestinian cities" the four
> Messerschmitts attacked consisted of one bridge outside
> Ashdod held by the Egyptians. The Messerschmitts' guns
> and cannons jammed, and one plane crashed, killing the
> pilot. Which meant that as of 29th May, Israel had lost
> 25% of its air force. Galilean kibbutniks shot down a
> Syrian fighter plane. On 3rd June, one of the remaining
> three Messerschmitts of the Israeli Air Force shot down
> an Egyptian Spitfire and a Dakota over Tel Aviv. During
> operations in the Negev later that year, the Israeli Air
> Force strafed Egyptian positions. They also managed to
> strafe and bomb Israeli lines. In January, positions
> outside Al Arish were bombed, but AFAIK, Al Arish has
> never been a "Palestinian city".
Just because Arabs lived there?
> >>>Israel has ignored
> >>>many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
> >>>out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982.
>
> Israel crossed the border in 1978, following Pallie terrorist
> massacres of March 1978. As soon as UN forces were in
> place, Israeli forces withdrew. The UN forces failed to
> keep the peace they were supposed to keep, hence the
> 1982 invasion.
Israel had no U.N. authorization in 1982 to invade anybody.
> Point to Security Council RESOLUTIONS of 1982 demanding
> that Israel pull out immediately.
I spoke of Security Council demands, not RESOLUTIONS. Do
you really expect people to believe that the U.N. was silent
when a member state was invaded by its neighbor, Israel? By
invading Lebanon, Israel was ignoring the U.N. CHARTER,
which specifies that nations would not invade other nations,
and that disputes were to be handled by the Security
Council. By becoming a member of the United Nations,
Israel bound itself to its CHARTER. Israel did not have
Security Council authority to invade Lebanon, just like
it did not have the authority to invade Egypt (twice),
Jordan or Syria.
> >>>Israel also ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees
> >>>to return to their homes.
>
> Point to Security Council RESOLUTION demanding that Israel
> "allow the refugees to return to their homes."
The Geneva Conventions also specifies that refugees be
permitted to return to their homes once the fighting
has stopped. But Israel, despite its ratification
of the Conventions, violates them every day with
collective punishments, and denial of health care by
forcing pregnant women to give birth at check points,
rather then letting them get to a hospital, resulting
in the deaths of many children and their mothers.
This is a technique that the Nazis would use. This
makes me ashamed to be a Jew when I hear of
such things going on in Israel.
> >>Why should Israel listen to ANYTHING the UN says when it did nothing
> >>to prevent or punish the Arab aggressors of 1948?
>
> >see above
>
> IOW ? see the evasive bullshit Untruth_seeker spewed above,
> which naturally did not answer the question with anything
> resembling facts.
More ad hominem attacks. You must think your arguments are
tremendously weak. If you had strong arguments, there would be
no need for you to use name calling.
> >>Nor did it stop
> >>constant crossborder attacks on ISrael over the armistice lines of
> >>1949 (the so=called "67 borders." The Arab states never recognized the
> >>"zionist entity" nor any borders.
>
> >It's hard to recognize borders when Israel had never specified
> >what her borders are.
>
> The Arab states did not recognize the state of Israel, stupid.
> Get a clue. Today, Israel?s borders with Egypt, Jordan and
> Lebanon are specifc, pursuant to treaties setting them.
You do not refute that Israel has some undetermined borders. No
borders were specified in the Israeli declaration of
Independence. In fact, before the peace treaties with Egypt and
Jordan, there were no specified borders at all. The most important
unspecified border today is between Israel and a not-yet-created
Palestinian state. Israel apparently is working to make sure that
Palestinian state is as small and geographically unconnected as
possible. By making a viable Palestinian state impossible, the
only possibility may become the single state solution, which, in
a democracy, means that the majority of the state of Israel
becomes ...
Do you want that?
> >>So why do they know harp on the "67 borders?" What
> >>borders?
>
> >What borders, indeed!
>
> The only ?borders? in 1967 were the armistice lines of 1948.
> Armistice lines are not borders, except to ignorant, lying
> Palliebull-throwers.
More ad hominem attacks. You once again demonstrate how weak
your arguments are. If your arguments had merit there would
be no need for you to use name calling.
JGB
> jga...@netzero.com (JGB) wrote in message news:<2ce735b1.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > truth_s...@yahoo.com (tokugawa) wrote in message news:<fb0ae2f1.03091...@posting.google.com>...
> > > <nshi...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:<F40ab.3899$KJ5....@fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
>
> > >
> > > To prevent wars, the United Nations was formed. Countries which
> > > joined agreed to stop attacking their neighbors, and to let the
> > > Security Council solve disputes. Israel joined the U.N. and is
> > > therefore legally bound by its provisions. <
> >
> > So what did the UN do to prevent or punish the 7 Arab nations that
> > attacked it in May 1948, the day of its independence, and even bombed
> > Tel Aviv from the air? The UN authorized the JEwish state, but what
> > did
> > it do to stop or punish the Arab states that immediately invaded it?
>
> The U.N. sent a mediator, Fouke Bernadotte, who had worked
> successfully to save tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis. <
What they sent was a supposed "Jew-lover" to try to con the Jews out
of what had already been agreed upon in the UN Partition resolution.
> He worked with both sides of the conflict and he successfully
> negotiated at least one truce. He was assassinated by Zionist
> terrorists in Jerusalem. <
He was being targeted by both sides.
> The reason the U.N. did not stop the Arab states was that they
> were responding to repeated acts of Jewish terrorism which
> targeted civilians and was therefore ethnic cleansing, the most
> notable terrorist atrocity being Deir Yassin. Also, the conflict
> consisted mostly of the Jews invading and capturing territory
> allocated to the Palestinian state.<
That is nonsense. It is the Palestinian side led by Haj Amin El
Husseini
that had been carrying on terrorist campaigns against JEws since 1920.
It is CLEAR the Arabs who have always initiated terror, back then and
today, because terror is the only way Arabs know how to fight. Only
the British trained and led Jordanian army were the effective
exception to that rule.
> Could you give me your source concerning the Arabs bombing Tel
> Aviv from the air? I was aware of the Israeli Air Force which
> bombed Palestinian cities in 1948.<
Any AUTHORITATIVE text on the 1948 war and not one-sided propaganda
polemics.
> > >Israel has ignored
> > > many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
> > > out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982. Israel also
> > > ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees to return to their
> > > homes. <
> > Why should Israel listen to ANYTHING the UN says when it did nothing
> > to prevent or punish the Arab aggressors of 1948?
>
> see above<
The Arab states urged the Palestinians to leave to make their invasion
easier,
promising them that they would be back in a matter of weeks to help
divide
the Jewish booty.
> > Nor did it stop
> > constant crossborder attacks on ISrael over the armistice lines of
> > 1949 (the so=called "67 borders." The Arab states never recognized the
> > "zionist entity"
> > nor any borders.
>
> It's hard to recognize borders when Israel had never specified
> what her borders are.<
THe Arabs rejected the UNR181 partition, then after losing the "first
round"
did not recognize ISrael then either, and lost the '67 war and didn't
recognize
Israel then either, and most still don't recognize Israel today. Now
if the
ARab states are PROPOSING the '49 armistice lines as ISrael's borders,
Israel
can take it under advisement. But ISrael doesn't have to negotiate
anything
with anyone who doesn't recognize its RIGHT to exist. The Beirut
proposal
is that IF Israel withdraws unilaterally and completely back to the
1949
armistice lines THEN they will recognize the State of Israel. That's
ass backwards. FIRST they have to recognize the State of ISrael, which
was authorized by the UN in 1948, and THEN they can negotiate over
borders.
That's the way it is normally done.
>
> > So why do they know harp on the "67 borders?" What
> > borders?
>
> What borders, indeed!<
EGypt recognized ISrael and then they negotiated a border. Jordan
recognized
ISrael and then they negotiated a border. That's the way it's done.
BTov
> jga...@netzero.com (JGB) wrote in message news:<2ce735b1.0310021458.> > > <nshi...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:<F40ab.3899$KJ5.2079@fe2.
> > > To prevent wars, the United Nations was formed. Countries which
> > > joined agreed to stop attacking their neighbors, and to let the
> > > Security Council solve disputes. Israel joined the U.N. and is
> > > therefore legally bound by its provisions. <
>
> > So what did the UN do to prevent or punish the 7 Arab nations that
> > attacked it in May 1948, the day of its independence, and even bombed
> > Tel Aviv from the air? The UN authorized the JEwish state, but what
> > did
> > it do to stop or punish the Arab states that immediately invaded it?
>
> The U.N. sent a mediator, Fouke Bernadotte, who had worked
> successfully to save tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis.
to punish arabs!? LOL
> He worked with both sides of the conflict and he successfully
> negotiated at least one truce. He was assassinated by Zionist
> terrorists in Jerusalem.
israeli government subsequently cracked down on lehi & arrested many
of its members & confiscated their arms
lehi disbanded largely due to public condemnation
have yet to see similar reaction going on the arab side ;L
> The reason the U.N. did not stop the Arab states was that they
> were responding to repeated acts of Jewish terrorism which
> targeted civilians and was therefore ethnic cleansing, the most
> notable terrorist atrocity being Deir Yassin. Also, the conflict
> consisted mostly of the Jews invading and capturing territory
> allocated to the Palestinian state.
``British authorities in Haifa have formed the impression that total
evacuation is being urged on the Haifa Arabs from higher Arab quarters
and that the townsfolk themselves are against it.''
--sir alan cunningham the british high commissioner for palestine
``Syria's UN delegate, Faris el-Khouri, interrupted the UN debate on
April 22, 1948 on Palestine to describe the seizure of Haifa as a
"massacre" and said this action was "further evidence that the
'Zionist program' is to annihilate Arabs within the Jewish state if
partition is effected." The following day (April 23, 1948), however,
the British representative at the UN, Sir Alexander Cadogan, told the
delegates that the fighting in Haifa had been provoked by the
continuous attacks by Arabs against Jews a few days before and that
reports of massacres and deportations were erroneous.''
deir yasin preventing food convoys reaching jerusalem where jordanians
were starving jews was good
attacking deir yasin opening the way to convoys was bad
it's the arab mindset ;L
so israeli atrocities disappear & tokubullshit emerges in its full
bullshit colors ;L
> Could you give me your source concerning the Arabs bombing Tel
> Aviv from the air? I was aware of the Israeli Air Force which
> bombed Palestinian cities in 1948.
the 1st mission was stopping an egyptian column near ashdod on may 29
1948
later egyptian dakotas which used to bomb tel aviv were shot down..
what palistanian cities were bombed bth? ;L
> > >Israel has ignored
> > > many Security Council demands, such as an immediate pull
> > > out of Lebanon after Israel's invasion in 1982. Israel also
> > > ignores U.N. demands to allow the refugees to return to their
> > > homes. <
>
> > Why should Israel listen to ANYTHING the UN says when it did nothing
> > to prevent or punish the Arab aggressors of 1948?
>
> see above
yea see above ;L
> > Nor did it stop
> > constant crossborder attacks on ISrael over the armistice lines of
> > 1949 (the so=called "67 borders." The Arab states never recognized the
> > "zionist entity" nor any borders.
>
> It's hard to recognize borders when Israel had never specified
> what her borders are.
jews agreed on the un partition plan which specified borders
arabs didn't ;L
neither were arabs about to sit down & talk about borders..they wanted
it all ;L
> > So why do they know harp on the "67 borders?" What
> > borders?
>
> What borders, indeed!
tokufaga why don't you take your sack of bullshit&lies together with
your sad existence here to a more luvin' arab board where you'll be
able to talk all kinds of lies & bullshit freely? ;L
BTov
> > >The U.N. sent a mediator, Fouke Bernadotte, who had worked
> > >successfully to save tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis.
> > >He worked with both sides of the conflict and he successfully
> > >negotiated at least one truce.
>
> > Bologna.
>
> I believe that he did not negotiate a cease fire. Maybe two.
bologna ;L
> > Bernadotte's proposal of July 1948 modifying
> > the UN partition resolution - to create a small Jewish
> > entity and an enlarged Transjordan - negated everything
> > everyone had accomplished over the past 18 months.
>
> In other words, he did not approve of total Jewish
> control over all of Jerusalem.
neither he asked for any concession from the arab side proving no one
expected anything constructive to ever come out of there
ain't it embarassing to arabs huh? being always implicitly regarded as
dumbasses? ;L
tokufaga get a life! ;l
tokugawa
> Care to try for a list of the terrorist acts Ben-Gurion and
> Rabin committed?
Before the partition, Jews comprised only one-third of
the population of Palestine, which held some 608,000 Jews
and 1,237,000 Arabs. Even within the area designated for
Israel under the U.N. partition plan, the population
consisted of some 500,000 Jews and 330,000 Arabs. How
could a country with such a large Arab minority become
a Jewish homeland?
The answer is that it could not. A massive population
transfer would be required. And this was understood by
Jewish military leaders during the war of 1947-1948.
David Ben-Gurion, father of Israel and leader of its
military, confidently predicted on February 7, 1948,
that "there surely will be a great change in the
population of the country" over the next several months.
He was right.
There is ample evidence of forcible expulsions. The
most notorious was the Lydda/Ramle death march. On
July 12 and 13, 1948, on the direct order of
Ben-Gurion, Israeli forces expelled the 50,000
residents of the towns of Lydda and neighboring Ramle.
Yitzak Rabin, later to become Israeli Prime Minister,
wrote in his memoirs that "there was no way of
avoiding the use of force and warning shots in order
to make the inhabitants march the ten or fifteen
miles" required to reach Arab positions. Before they
left, the townspeople were "systematically stripped
of all their belongings," according to the Economist
newspaper in London. Many of the expelled died in
the 100-degree heat during the trek.
Eventually the refugees from Lydda and Ramle made
their way to refugee camps near Ramallah. Count Folke
Bernadotte, Swedish nobleman and United Nations
mediator, attempted to offer aid. He later wrote that
"I have made the acquaintance of a great many refugee
camps, but never have I seen a more ghastly sight
than that which met my eyes here at Ramallah." Later
that year, Bernadotte was murdered by the Stern Gang,
one of whose leaders, Yitzhak Shamir, became Israeli
Prime Minister in 1983.
Forcible expulsions were commonly practiced by the
Jewish/Israeli military during 1948: Qisariya on
February 15; Arab Zahrat al-Dumayri, al-Rama and
Khirbat al-Sarkas in April; al-Ghabisiya, Danna,
Najd and Zarnuqa the next month; Jaba, Ein Ghazal
and Ijzim on July 24; and al-Bi'na and Deir al-Assad
on October 31, among many others. Israeli historian
Benny Morris has identified 34 Arab communities whose
inhabitants were ousted. We may never know the full
extent of the ejections, though, because, as Morris
notes, the Israeli Defense Forces Archive "has a
standing policy guideline not to open material
explicitly describing expulsions and atrocities."
More often, though, the instruments of expulsion were
the terrorizing and demoralization of the Arab
population. Jewish military forces used several
tactics in pursuit of these goals.
One was psychological warfare. Radio broadcasts in
Arabic warned of traitors in the Arabs' midst, spread
fears of disease, reported confusion and terror among
the Arabs, described the Palestinians as having been
deserted by their leaders, and accused Arab militias
of committing crimes against Arab civilians.
Another effective psywar tactic involved the use of
loudspeaker trucks. At various times they urged the
Palestinians to flee before they were all killed,
warned that the Jews were using poison gas and atomic
weapons, or played recorded "horror sounds"--shrieks,
moans, the wail of sirens and the clang of fire-alarm
bells.
A second tactic, economic warfare, was a favorite of
Ben-Gurion, who described "the strategic objective"
of the Jewish forces to be "to destroy the [Arab]
urban communities." "Deprived of transportation,
food, and raw materials," he later noted with
satisfaction, "the urban communities underwent a
process of disintegration, chaos, and hunger."
A third technique to induce Arab flight was military
attack on a town's Arab population. These assaults
often used Davidka mortars--horribly inaccurate, but
useful for creating terror--and barrel bombs. The
latter consisted of barrels, casks, and metal drums
filled with a mixture of explosives and fuel oil.
Rolled into the Arab section of a town, they created
"an inferno of raging flames and endless explosions."
Another destructive maneuver described by writer
Arthur Koestler was the "ruthless dynamiting of
block after block" of the Arab community.
Not uncommonly, the Jewish forces resorted to
terrorism. Sometimes this took the form of bombs
planted in vehicles or buildings: 30 killed in
Jaffa on Jan. 4, 1948, with a truck bomb; 20 killed
the next day when the Semiramis Hotel in Jerusalem
was bombed; 17 killed by a bomb at the Jaffa Gate
in Jerusalem two days later.
More often, a Jewish military force entered an Arab
village and massacred civilians, either during a
night raid or after the seizure of the village. The
massacres started early: Major General R. Dare
Wilson, who served with the British troops trying
to keep peace in Palestine before the end of the
British Mandate, reported that on Dec. 18, 1947,
the Haganah murdered 10, mostly women and children,
in the Arab village of al-Khisas with grenades and
machine gun fire. Wilson also described how on Dec.
31 the Haganah slaughtered another 14, again mostly
women and children, again using machine guns and
throwing grenades into occupied homes, this time in
Balad Esh-Sheikh.
Throughout 1948, the massacres continued: 60 at
Sa'sa' on Feb. 15; 100 murdered in Acre after its
May 18 seizure by the Haganah; several hundred at
Lydda on July 12, including 80 machine-gunned
inside the Dahmash Mosque; 100 at Dawayma on Oct.
29, with an Israeli eye-witness reporting that
"the children were killed by smashing their skulls
with clubs"; 13 young men mowed down by machine
guns in open fields outside Eilabun on Oct. 30;
another 70 young men blindfolded and shot to death,
one after another, at Safsaf the same day; 12
killed at Majd al-Kurum, also on Oct. 30, with a
Belgian U.N. observer writing that "there is no
doubt about these murders"; an unknown number
killed the next day at al-Bi'na and Deir al-Assad,
described by a U.N. official as "wanton slaying
without provocation"; 14 "liquidated," according
to the Israeli military's report, at Khirbet
al-Wa'ra as-Sauda on Nov. 2.
A particularly repugnant method of killing
employed by the Jewish militias was the blowing
up of houses with their occupants still inside,
often at night. The militia would place explosive
charges around the stone houses, drench the
wooden window and door frames with gasoline, and
then open fire, simultaneously dynamiting and
burning the sleeping inhabitants to death.
***
David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister):
"If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an
agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken
their country. It is true God promised it to us,
but how could that interest them? Our God is not
theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis,
Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They
see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen
their country. Why would they accept that?" Quoted
by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish
Paradox), pp121.
***
"We must do everything to ensure they [the
Palestinian refugees] never do return" David
Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in
Michael Bar Zohar's Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet,
Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
***
"We should prepare to go over to the offensive.
Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and
Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem
regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine.
We shall establish a Christian state there, and
then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate
Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb
and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and
Sinai." David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General
Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael
Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
***
"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab
villages. You do not even know the names of these
Arab villages, and I do not blame you because
geography books no longer exist. Not only do the
books not exist, the Arab villages are not there
either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul;
Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid
in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in
the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single
place built in this country that did not have a
former Arab population." Moshe Dayan, address to
the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz,
April 4, 1969.
***
"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us.
Allon repeated his question, What is to be done
with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion
waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive
them out!'" Yitzhak Rabin, quoted in the New
York Times, 23 October 1979.
***
Rabin's description of the conquest of Lydda,
after the completion of Plan Dalet: "We shall
reduce the Arab population to a community of
woodcutters and waiters" Uri Lubrani, PM
Ben-Gurion's special adviser on Arab Affairs,
1960. From "The Arabs in Israel" by Sabri
Jiryas.
***
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain
to public opinion, clearly and courageously,
a certain number of facts that are forgotten
with time. The first of these is that there
is no Zionism, colonization or Jewish
State without the eviction of the Arabs and
the expropriation of their lands." Yoram Bar
Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.
***
"Spirit the penniless population across the
frontier by denying it employment... Both
the process of expropriation and the removal
of the poor must be carried out discreetly
and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl, founder
of the World Zionist Organization, speaking
of the Arabs of Palestine, Complete Diaries,
June 12, 1895 entry.
BTov
> "Deborah Sharavi" <desh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<5df5d97534267efc5ce...@mygate.mailgate.org>...
>
> > Care to try for a list of the terrorist acts Ben-Gurion and
> > Rabin committed?
>
> Before the partition, Jews comprised only one-third of
> the population of Palestine, which held some 608,000 Jews
> and 1,237,000 Arabs. Even within the area designated for
> Israel under the U.N. partition plan, the population
> consisted of some 500,000 Jews and 330,000 Arabs. How
> could a country with such a large Arab minority become
> a Jewish homeland?
> The answer is that it could not. A massive population
> transfer would be required. And this was understood by
> Jewish military leaders during the war of 1947-1948.
> David Ben-Gurion, father of Israel and leader of its
> military, confidently predicted on February 7, 1948,
> that "there surely will be a great change in the
> population of the country" over the next several months.
> He was right.
> There is ample evidence of forcible expulsions. The
> most notorious was the Lydda/Ramle death march. On
same garbage which was dumped last month..
tokufagga's very environmental--he doesn't discard garbage he recycles it LOL