L.A. Times. The Newspaper with Balls!
al953
in the USA!
Occupation Propels Conflict; Removing Yasser Arafat will do nothing to
quell the uprising.
by Hussein Ibish
Los Angeles Times
December 4, 2001
This weekend’s scenes of horror and devastation in Jerusalem and Haifa
caused by three Palestinian suicide bombers screamed out to a world
distracted by
other events that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is
continuing to intensify.
These attacks came in response to a less-well-reported but extraordinary
wave of killings of Palestinians by Israel, including the blowing up of
five children in their Gaza refugee camp and the assassination of a
leading Hamas figure.
Suicide bombing is a reprehensible tactic. These murderous acts involve
not only political shortsightedness but an unwillingness to set limits
on what is permissible in the pursuit of freedom. Yet just as the
occupation does not justify suicide bombing, neither does resistance
justify the occupation, which imposes a structure of routine violence on
the daily lives of the 3 million Palestinians who live under abusive
Israeli army rule.
The occupation is the elephant in the living room of Israeli and
American discourse on this conflict, the overwhelming fact that cannot
be acknowledged.
Instead, what we get is obsession over the personality of Yasser Arafat
and his future as a political leader.
It seems almost absurd to have to point out that forcing millions of
people to live for decades under hostile military rule with no end in
sight inevitably produces violent resistance. Only a mind-set that
steadfastly refuses to recognize this can become captivated by a lone
figure whose real and imagined failings become a smoke screen that
obscures the machinery that actually drives the conflict.
As Israelis and Palestinians use ever more lethal means against each
other’s civilians, the question being asked in Israel and the U.S. is
not how to end the occupation, but whether or not to end the career, or
even the life, of Arafat.
Let us suppose that Arafat were somehow permanently removed from the
equation this evening. What would really change? The bulldozers,
checkpoints, Israeli settlements, Jewish-only roads, the entire hideous
apparatus of the occupation would still be in place.
Would Palestinians suddenly lose their will to resist? Would they become
incapable of organizing protests, demonstrations, armed resistance or
suicide bombings?
Can anyone really believe that the solution is a more oppressive
occupation rather than an end to the occupation?
Like the discourse on “incitement” in the Palestinian media, the whole
conversation about Arafat misses the point. It is the occupation that
creates a
distorted reality for both Palestinians and
Israelis, allowing each side to interpret “good” as being anything that
is bad for the other.
In their rage and frustration, Israelis are tempted to obliterate Arafat
and the Palestinian Authority. This would certainly intensify the
struggle.
As such, it is a step that would be welcomed not only by many Israelis
but also by some Palestinians who believe that the Palestinian Authority
simply mediates the occupation. If the goal is to bring greater
security to Israelis, eliminating Arafat or the Palestinian Authority
would certainly backfire spectacularly.
It would only deepen the Palestinian determination to resist Israeli
rule. If it involves Israeli soldiers once again policing the towns of
the West Bank, it would create new targets for armed resistance.
No one should be under any illusion that it would succeed when the
killing of almost 1,000 Palestinians in the past year has failed to
break the will of the Palestinians to accept anything less than genuine
independence.
Moreover, it would play directly into the hands of the religious
fanatics responsible for the suicide bombings, whose parties have never
been able to command much more than 20% support among Palestinians until
now. The failure of the peace process to ease the plight of the
Palestinians and Israel’s brutal response to the uprising already has
strengthened the extremists’ hand.
The destruction of the secular leadership of the Palestinians and a
harsher occupation would all but ensure a spectacular rise in support
for them.
Even dramatic developments such as these, however, would not alter the
substance of the conflict. The question is not whether Israel gets rid
of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. The only real question is how
many more innocents must die before Israel decides to return to the
negotiating table and work out a serious plan to end the occupation—and
the conflict the occupation propels.
Hussein Ibish is communications director for the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee.
Šee
--
Reminder: Dogs and books are man's best friends...
"
al953" <al...@xyz.com> wrote in message news:3C0D8315...@xyz.com...
Logical
You really need to memorize the following link, it contains information that
will open your eyes:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0i9o0
Stu707
> in the USA!
>
The Left Angeles Times regularly prints pro-Pallie op-ed pieces and
pro-Pallie editorials disguised as news stories.
But see this editorial cartoon. (Link requires registration. If link wraps
cut and paste.)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-include-ramirez.ssipage
Former Israeli Prime Minister Barak presented a serious plan at Camp David.
Pallie response was mob violence and terrorism.
> negotiating table and work out a serious plan to end the occupation-and
IR
Hussein IBISH, the outspoken ARAB leader wrote this?
What a pile of crap.
The L.A. times has been know to take a steep
dive here and there at times.
heheheheehe
ir
"al953" <al...@xyz.com> wrote in message news:3C0D8315...@xyz.com...
> I can't believe the L.A. Times printed this. Free press is alive & well
> in the USA!
>
>
>
>
>
> Occupation Propels Conflict; Removing Yasser Arafat will do nothing to
> quell the uprising.
> by Hussein Ibish
>
> Los Angeles Times
> December 4, 2001
>
> This weekend's scenes of horror and
<
al953
traveler
> in the USA!
Aaa Aaa Wrong! The LA Times has always been a propaganda rag. When
California was a more conservative place, it featured more
conservative propaganda. Now that California has fallen prey to
Democratic Machine politics, it is an organ for leftist propaganda.
Anyone who doesn't know what they are all about has never lived in LA
for any length of time.
What has become more and more apparent in recent months is that
the Israelis and the Palestinians simply cannot live together. A new
site for the Palestinian Homeland should be carved out of Jordan, with
its western boundary at the Jordan River. That country has plenty of
space and a large number of ethnic Palestinians in its population.
Israel is just too small a place. Throwing these two groups together
in such a small "cage" is, was, and always will be asking for major
trouble.
> Occupation Propels Conflict; Removing Yasser Arafat will do nothing to
> quell the uprising.
> by Hussein Ibish
>
> Los Angeles Times
> December 4, 2001
>
> This weekend’s scenes of horror and devastation in Jerusalem and Haifa
> caused by three Palestinian suicide bombers screamed out to a world
> distracted by
> other events that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is
> continuing to intensify...