Saturday, 20 November 2010
The BBC and when the use of phosphorous shells is a crime and when it is not worthy of attention
In 2009 the BBC were obsessed by the 'war crime' of Israel using white phosphorus shells, the Israelis claim that it was used to provide smoke cover not as a weapon were barely acknowledged under the weight of disapproval. However 18 months on and the BBC choose not to report the use of phosphor in shells fired from Gaza. If the use of phosphorous was a war crime when carried out by Israel in 2009 then why is it not even worth a mention when carried out by Hamas in 2010?
Thanks to Biodegradeable at Biased-BBC for the spot.
17 comments:
- Picture the scene. You're hemmed into the concentration camp formerly known as Gaza. It's 2007. The Israeli security force starts throwing burning phosphorus at you. It burns your skin, right down to the bone and out the other side. You cry to the international community about your pain. Nobody cares. Some right-wing zionists say you're making it all up, the israelis never threw any phosphorus. Then they say they did, but only for the smoke it produces. Enraged at the violence and lies, you score your own phosphorus and throw it back. Predictably, the right-wing bloggers are up in arms, denouncing you as a figure of hate, but they can't see the hypocrisy staring them in the face. The world is mad.
- a) Gaza is not a concentration camp - do your research b) Who are these people so burned by phosphorous, the United Nations would have made them all 'poster boys' if they existed c) Why right-wing Zionists? Are they worse than left-wing Zionists? d) So Hamas only use Phosphorous shells because Israel do. Even if this were true, which it isn't, would that not still be a war crime? Or are Jews only capable of war crimes not Islamic terrorists? If the world is mad, your world view is seriously warped.
- A) are you saying the Palestinians in Gaza are free to come and go as they please? B) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5470047.ece http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4325805/Gaza-phosphorus-casualties-relive-Israels-three-week-war.html http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article1497 C) yes D) of course its still a war crime. But you are criticizing Palestinians for using phosphorus when Israel used it first! desperate people such as the occupants of Gaza, bombed with white phosphorus, respond with similar. wow, what a shock. if I was to strike you, you could strike me back. both strikes would be wrong, but the second strike is somewhat justified. you've got your head in the clouds if you think Israel hasn't used phosphorus. just go to YouTube, type in "gaza phosphorus". you're lying to yourself and it is sickening, to be honest. are you that brainwashed?
- a) So your definition of a 'concentration camp' is somewhere where people are not free to come and go as they please. Is that what you think happened in World War II? Were Jews just not allowed to come and go as they wishes? b) I think your third source can be discounted as maybe a touch biased. As for the other two, I see no porof just the claims of Palestinians. Indeed The Times report includes this line 'Human Rights Watch had no evidence that Israel was using incendiaries as weapons.' and HRW are no friends of Israel. The Telegraph piece includes the plauible explanation that 'The Israeli government has accused people like the Halima family of being coached by Hamas to spout fiction.' c) What is the difference between a right-wing Zionist and a left-wing Zionist? d) So you admit that Hamas comitted a war-crime, will you be protesting tho the United nations about this? Oh no, I see that you think that Hamas are excused from their guilt because 'Israel used it first'. I think you are missing the point that whilst Hamas used Phosphorous shells as a weapon (which is a war crime), Israel used a shell that 'is not defined as an incendiary weapon by the Third Protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons because its principal use is to produce smoke to protect troops.' Do you see the difference or are Israel always wrong in your world-view? You call me 'brainwashed'; look at the evidence below: Look at the Wikipedia page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacksmesures. It is Hamas's avowed aim to kill all Israelis and indeed all Jews. 'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it' 'Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.' 'The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.' 'There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.' '...the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim). The implication is clear: Allah promised that the Jews will be murdered, and the Hamas "aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take.' Ask yourself one question, if Hamas laid down its arms would Israel use the opportuinty to kill all the residents of Gaza? Now ask yourself what would happen if Israel disarmed...?
- A) you are confusing death camps with concentration camps. In Nazi Germany, Jews were kept in both kinds of these camps, and the allies built their own concentration camps for POWs, or in the case of the US, for their Japanese-American citizens. Now obviously Gaza is not a purpose built concentration camp, but building a wall around it based on ethnic grounds amounts to pretty much the same thing, no? B) oh please. Is it just Palestinians claiming the use of phosphorus or is it the UN and the entire international community as well? Even right wing papers like times and telegraph accuse Israel. As for the other source, I posted it because you wanted photographs - did they draw the wounds on do you think?? Do you think Israel never lies to the international community?? Do you want a list?? My point is that you immediately accept claims that Hamas used phosphorus but immediately reject claims that Israel used (much larger quantities of) phosphorus. That, my little right-winged friend, is doublethink! But anyway, I sense we are digressing somewhat. C) the difference is, obviously, that nationalism is a preserve of the right wing, which has got you all into this mess. The leftwing emphasises equality, something that doesn't come to mind when we look at the region. D) then you provide lots of quotations from enraged nationalist Hamas militants presumably to try and convey what EVIL PEOPLE we are dealing with here. But Israel has been utterly racist to the Palestinians for just as long, and can we not forget that this whole problem was created when Israel took Palestinian land? The Israeli leaders knew they would have to kill all Palestinians to achieve this in the longterm. You get so riled about Hamas, who were formed in the 80s, but can't understand the reason they exist. It's a reaction to the fundamental illegality of the creation of the state of Israel. Now personally I believe anyone should be able to live anywhere they like and that for me includes Jews in the holy land, but other people want live there as well. Israel should let them and not be so nationalist and racist. I haven't the time to check the veracity of the quotes from Hamas, partly because you didn't include sources. You'll probably dispute the following website's neutrality, but I guess you can check out some of the quotes if you want. Leading Jews - or people who profess to be Jews at least - have had a plan of Arab elimination from the region, by death or expulsion, since well before 1948 and it continues to this day. In that context, I'm not surprised Hamas feel the way they do, but of course I do not condone their actions. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/palestinians.php
- "Ask yourself one question, if Hamas laid down its arms would Israel use the opportuinty to kill all the residents of Gaza? Now ask yourself what would happen if Israel disarmed...?" "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983. "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983. "Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Israeli prime Minister Menachem Begin in a speech to the Knesset [Israeli Parliament] quoted by Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts," New Statesman, June 25, 1982
- a) I was using the term 'concentration camps' in the sense that they are usually used and the way that the vast majority of people would understand it. It is good to see that you do know that the term existed outside of Nazi Germany, indeed the term was first used to describe some of the actions used by the British during the Boer War. No I do not think that Gaza is a 'concentration camp', have you seen what life is like in Gaza for the majority of people - shopping malls, food aplenty and life could be even better if Hamas stopped its attacks on Israel. b) If there was proof of deliberate use by Israel of phosphorous shells against civilians then rest assured that the United Nations would have passed many a resolution to that effects. You ask if I want a list of Israel's lies to the international community; whilst I hate to resort to your line in your previous comment - would you like a list of Hamas's lies? c) 'nationalism is the preserve of the right-wing'. Is all nationalism bad? How about the nationalism of the Palestinians, nationalism for a nation that has never existed as a sepaarate country but had a homeland formed for it - Jordan? d) Israel took Palestinians land? It was a United nations resolution that took the whole of the land that had been promised to Israel in the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and split it between other countries. The part of Palestine that was taken from what was meant to be Israel in 1929, was used to craete Jordan. Jews have lived in the area now called Israel for millenia, as I am sure you know. You can read more about this here - http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2010/10/viva-palestina-some-uncomftable-truths.html ... cont
- ... cont A comparison for the creation of Israel in 1948 can be found in the partition of Pakistan and India a year earlier. In that case many millions of people moved from one side of the border to the other as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan was seen not to be a greeat place by the vast majority of Hindus, Sikhs & Buddhists to live and likewise many (but not all) Muslims left their homes in India for a new life in Pakistan. A similar swap of populations happened in 1948 and soon after as as many Jews fled or were forced out of Iraq, Syria, Morocco, Egypt, Jordan etc. for Israel, as Palestinians left israel. In the former case there are no 'refugee camps' just two countries living alongside each other, whilst not in totally happy accord, at least in relativce peace (Kashmir excepted). In the latter case, the Jews expulsion form Muslim countries is largely forgotten, whilst the palestinians is not. You might want to read this site for more of what really happened in 1948 - http://www.jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/ You say that 'personally I believe anyone should be able to live anywhere they like and that for me includes Jews in the holy land,'. Which is quite correct however you also say complain of the 'fundamental illegality of the creation of the state of Israel'. You might want to investigate how many Jews Jordan let visit the Jewish holy sites Jerusalem during the period they held control of Jerusalem and compare that with the freedom of religion that Muslims have in Israel today. You might also want to ask yourself how many Muslim MPs there are in Israel and compare that with the number of Jewish MPs in any Muslim country. Do remember that back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan." Why is it not acceptable for Israel to be a Jewish state, albeit one where Muslims have the vote and rights as Jews, but it is acceptable for the Palestinian Authority to want to want a Jew free land? Read here - http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138856 - the PA Chairman's words "I will never allow a single Israeli to live among us on Palestinian land". ... cont
- ... cont You wanted sources for the quotations I provided, they are all from Hamas's Charter and associated documnets and can be found on my site and elsewhere - http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm is one such source. Here are some others for you to think about: "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth." Ziyad Abu al-Haj, Hamas cleric in Friday sermon 3 April 2009 "Regarding the Jews, our business with them is only through bombs and guns... the prophet [Muhammad] promised that we will fight you, with Allah's help, until the tree and stone say: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Nizar Rayan, Hamas religious and military leader, 1 Jan 2009 "We find occasional condemnation and denunciation of the resistance operations and bombings [suicide attacks], carried out by Hamas and the Palestinian resistance branches... [Eventually] everyone will know that we did this [suicide attacks] only because our Lord commanded so - 'I did it not of my own accord' [Quran] - and so that people will know that the extermination of Jews is good for the inhabitants of the world." Source: Al-Rissala (Hamas weekly), 23 Apr 2007 "The Jews are the Jews. There never was among them a supporter of peace. They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere." Dr. Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah, a member of the Palestinian Sharia (Islamic religious law) Rulings Council, and Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University: 13 October 2000 "Fatah is not responding [to the Goldstone Report], is not apologizing, is not sorry, and does not recognize Israel. It is the PLO that negotiates on behalf of the Palestinian people." Ahmad Assaf, Fatah spokesman: 8 Feb 2010 Do also remember that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel." Once again I ask you to read what Hamas and Fatah leaders, not isolated oddballs but secular and religious leaders say they want to do to all Jews (not just Israelis) and ask yourself one question, if Hamas laid down its arms would Israel use the opportuinty to kill all the residents of Gaza? Now ask yourself what would happen if Israel disarmed...?
- In reply to your 10:20 comment that I did not see until after I replied to your earlier post... "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983. I refer you to http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=775 'Of the “memorable quotes” featured on MIFTAH’s Web site (some of which have already been debunked in Part I), the following is attributed to one Chairman Heilbrun: We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves. Source given: Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983 Investigation: The quote is found on numerous anti-Israel sites, in addition to MIFTAH’s, but the facts do not check out. While Shlomo Lahat was indeed re-elected as mayor of Tel Aviv in 1983, no record was found of any “Chairman Heilbrun.” The quote was traced to a 1988 book, The Hidden History of Zionism, by radical Marxist Ralph Schoenman (dismissed by mainstream historians as a crazed conspiracy theorist), and is one of many bogus quotes in the book attributed to Israeli leaders. According to Schoenman’s footnote, the quote by Heilbrun was hearsay relayed to him in private conversations: Cited by Fouzi El-Asmar and Salih Baransi during discussions with the author, October 1983 Needless to say, Schoenman’s scholarship, upon which many anti-Israel Web sites depend, leaves much wanting. CAMERA contacted former Mayor Lahat who attested that he has never employed, known or heard of any such person as “Chairman Heilbrun,” and that the reported incident never took place. Lahat also emphasized that he would never allow any of his employees to make such statements, as it completely contradicts his own sentiments about Palestinians. Summary: Fabricated quote, fabricated source' "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983. I refer you to http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=766 'Investigation: The quote does not appear in either article. While both sources discuss comments made by then-outgoing Chief of Staff Eitan, there is nothing remotely resembling this quote. A wider search of the New York Times archives, also turns up nothing.' cont...
- ...cont "Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Israeli prime Minister Menachem Begin in a speech to the Knesse [Israeli Parliament] quoted by Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin antd the Beasts," New Statesman, June 25, 1982 I refer you to http://begincenterdiary.blogspot.com/2009/05/correcting-misquotation-reputedly-by.html and http://www.camera.org/ '...Internet hate sites, as well as Fisk, attribute the derogation of Palestinians as “two-legged beasts” to former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. The source generally given is: Menachem Begin, as quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts, "New Statesman, June 25, 1982 Indeed, the radical French-Israeli journalist, Amnon Kapeliouk, did attribute such a quote to Begin in his New Statesman article criticizing Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. The author posited: For this reason the government has gone to extraordinary lengths to dehumanize the Palestinians. Begin described them in a speech in the Knesset as "beasts walking on two legs However, further investigation by CAMERA reveals that the actual speech upon which Kapeliouk based his quote, as well as news reports at the time demonstrate that the journalist distorted the quote, giving it a completely different tone and meaning. Begin was referring not to "the Palestinians" in a general sense but very specifically, he was referring to terrorists who target children within Israel...Kapeliouk neither recanted nor apologized for his deception...' Maybe you could let me know whether the quotations that I provided are factual or similarly flawed?
- ok, you leave me with much to deal with! first off, it just goes to show that you can't believe everything you read on the internet! it seems those quotations i provided are falsified or outright fabrications. fair enough, i withdraw them and thankyou for dealing with them. i also do not doubt the veracity of your quotes now that you have provided sources - just like i do not doubt that the people who lead Hamas are fundamentalists opposed to the existence of Jews in general, and of course i denounce this position. The difference I am trying to highlight between our viewpoints is that, although the beliefs of Hamas are evil, I can see and understand how these beliefs have become established. Just like, if I and a few thousand mates came and camped in your back garden for a few years, I can understand how that might really get to you after a while. ok... A) is Gaza a concentration camp? no. can it be likened to a concentration camp, in that people are not free to leave? that conditions within Gaza are lower than average and deteriorating further? that education, health are lower and poverty is higher? Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion is on Oxfam's website and was commissioned with Amnesty, Save the Children, etc. I'm sure you're already aware of it. so i think 'concentration camp' is a fair analogy. you would say that cynical, hateful people only use it against Israel because they know how offensive the use of that phrase, in a historical context, is to Jewish people. I would say that people use it against Israel to highlight the hypocrisy Israel is showing to the world. it seems like Israel is acting out "do to others what has been done to us". people find it genuinely saddening that Jewish people could not equate what they are doing in Gaza to what has happened to them (for the record, we are not talking about death camps here). B) look, you're going to have to accept israel used white phosphorus in built up areas, which is illegal, and dint just use them as a smokescreen. UN sanctions? No, just the Goldstone report. And the Human Rights Watch report: http://www.hrw.org/node/81760 And the Amnesty investigation into birth defects. From what you have said above, you're implying that the UN did nothing about the claims of phosphorus use because they were so lacking in foundation. Come on, we both know thats not the case.
- C) yes, to me, all nationalism is bad, and its only legitimate and non-destructive application is in sport. what has nationalism brought us, but war? (yes, the nationalism of the palestinians is also bad). D)technically, it was the League of Nations, not the United Nations, and it was right that they took the indigenous populations into account (we are talking 1919/ealy 20s). and yes, Jews had lived in the area for millenia, of course, but in 1900 there were 70,000 Jews in Palestine, and now there are 5.5million in Israel. This is clearly the source of the conflict. You then compare the population displacement with India/Pakistan and conclude that the Indian subcontinent is in a much better situation, despite Kashmir. I've got to disagree with you there! India and Pakistan have both became nuclear powers to deal with the threat of each other and the process of 'nation-building' by western powers that thought themselves so enlightened have nearly always resulted in failure, measurable by the conflicts we see in the world today. You make some good points about the way the word 'palestinian' has been used as a tactical/political method rather than a true term. also, i do not doubt that some palestinians would not want a single jew living in a palestinian state, but again, i see the motivation for this - they are deeply paranoid that if they ever get to a palestinian state that it will be taken from them. Now to your final question (which seems to get recycled a lot as if its some universal truth, but its just clever framing of the question): "if Hamas laid down its arms would Israel use the opportuinty to kill all the residents of Gaza? Now ask yourself what would happen if Israel disarmed...?" If Hamas laid down its weapons, Israel would build more houses and drive them out that way - by colonization. It seems to me that, now, there is so much entrenched hate on either side that neither can see the other's point of view. For what its worth, I think this has been a valuable discussion, and it has challenged some of my preconceptions, and you seem to be an intelligent and motivated person. I just wish you would not take whatever Israel says as gospel ("we didnt fire phosphorus in an illegal way") and be a bit more balanced in the way you write your blog. For my part, I'll try to stay off the anti-semitic websites and check my own sources more in future. I'm interested in conspiracy theory, and whilst some of it is good stuff, some is shot through with anti-semitism. i'm sure you well aware.
- Anon 13:27: Thank you for accepting that your quotes were not kosher. That is one of the problems with the internet, these 'quotations' spread so fast and cannot usually be corrected. I am glad that I did answer your original post as I feel that this dialogue is assisting us both to think and maybe trim our positions; let's see! I am afraid that I must part with you when you say that you say that 'although the beliefs of Hamas are evil, I can see and understand how these beliefs have become established.' The trouble is that these beliefs are not new or even just been around since 1948. Nizar Rayan's line "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him" is somewhat older. It is from 'The Book Pertaining to the Turmoil and Portents of the Last Hour (Kitab Al-Fitan wa Ashrat As-Sa`ah)' and is often translated thus 'Ibn 'Umar reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them until even a stone would say: Come here, Muslim, there is a Jew (hiding himself behind me) ; kill him.' On November 23, 1937, Saudi Arabia's King Ibn Saud told British Colonel H.R.P. Dickson: "Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty" According to the Koran, the Jews are enemies of Allah, the Prophet and the angels (2:97-98). If you want a history of how Muslims have treated Jews since the times of Mohammed I recommend http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf15.html Here are a few more quotations from the Koran to show you that the hatred of Jews amongst many Muslims is not a result of the creation of the State of Israel but pre-dates it by well over a thousand years. "Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-) Moving on, you write 'Just like, if I and a few thousand mates came and camped in your back garden for a few years, I can understand how that might really get to you after a while.' This is not a fair analogy. What would be fairer is if my family lived continuously on some land for several thousand years before it was split into half, one half for me and one half for the people who hated me. 19 years later my land was halved again and my relatives were thrown out of nearby homes for being like me. Meanwhile my six large neighbours all set upon me and my family at the same time, vowing to kill us all. Do you see why I might feel a little threatened,especially when my large neighbours try the same trick a further 19 years later and then again on my holiest religious day a further six years later? Yes I understand that the Palestinians feel aggrieved at 'losing their land' but as I have tried to point out lots of people lost their land but whilst the JEws thrown out of Syria have made lives for themselves in Israel and 'made the desert bloom', the Palestinians who left Israel have done nothing similar. Do you think that Israel got only the good bits of 'Palestine'? Or that the Israelis just worked harder to make a go of it? ... cont
- ... cont a) Yes I agree that the people of Gaza are not free to come and go as they please. However, and it is a huge HOWEVER, Gaza has a land border with Egypt as well as Israel. If Egypt wanted to end the 'siege' of Gaza it could do in a moment. It chooses not to... Poverty levels in the West Bank and Gaza are not good but at $2,900 GDP per capita the people of Gaza (and the West Bank) are better off than those in Bangladesh (almost twice the per capita GDP), only slightly more wealthy than Cameroon and only slightly less wealthy than India. Yes many people in Gaza are poor but this is not the fault of Israel or the donor countries of the West who pay $ billions of aid. The fault lies with the Palestinian elite who siphon off the money and use poverty as a weapon to attack Israel with. Yasser Arafat's wife is rumoured to receive around £11 a year from the Palestinian Authority. Before we leave the poverty of the Palestinians and Israel's culpability, how do you explain the Shatila refugee camp south of Beirut? Palestinians in Lebanon cannot own a house or land, or become lawyers, engineers or doctors. This is not an isolated occurrence, there are another 11 Palestinian 'refugee camps' in Lebanon, but oddly they receive very little publicity when compared to those whose existence can be blamed on Israel. This Guardian article might be of interest in this regard - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/24/palestinian-refugees-lebanon-rights b) I accept that Israel used phosphorous shells, I cannot be sure if they were used just as a smokescreen or not. If they were not then I would criticise Israel for that action, it is not acceptable to me. Please do not confuse the Goldstone report with an unbiased analysis. Look at the parameters it was issued to report under and look at the report itself. The report asserts that the Gaza police force was a "civilian" agency, even though it merged with Hamas's own paramilitary "Executive Force" after Hamas took over Gaza in 2007. The report also says it could not "establish the use of mosques for military purposes or to shield military activity," despite widely available real-time video evidence to the contrary. The Goldstone report seems to argue that it is fine for Hamas to surround its combatants with civilians (although it is not),but for Israel to strike back is a war crime. The Goldstone report treats Israel as the sole aggressor in the conflict, even though the Israeli government sat still for more than three years as Hamas transformed Gaza into a terrorist enclave while firing rockets at Israeli towns and cities. At exactly what point, if any, does Mr. Goldstone believe Israel is entitled to self defense? At what point do you think Israel is entitled to act in self defense? cont...
- ...cont c) You say that all nationalism is bad. I disagree but I can see your line of reasoning. d) You are quite right, mea culpa, it was the League of Nations - my history teacher would not be impressed. To the 70,000 in Palestine you must add the approx 750,000 who were expelled from their homes in surrounding countries and fled to Israel. This was a population transfer, similar (not the same) to that between India and Pakistan and indeed to the huge flows across Eastern Europe in the aftermath of the Second World War. JCPA - http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=5&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=625&PID=861&IID=1020&TTL=The_Forgotten_Narrative:_Jewish_Refugees_from_Arab_Countries.html - have a fascinating article about this aspect of the story of Israel and Palestine. The Palestinians talk about the 'right of return' and their right to live in their ancestral homes again. Does the same right exist for the JEws forced to flee Iraq, Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries? The value of the assets these Jews left behind has been valued at today's prices at around $300 billion. A US based organization has decades-old property deeds of Jews from Arab countries on a total area of 100,000 sq.km. - which is five times the size of the State of Israel. My comparison with India/Pakistan is based on the very similar antiquity, similar religious differences (although Hindus are pantheists not monotheists, Sikhism is a different kettle of fish altogether and as for Buddhism; I am not a theologian). Western nation building alone did not result in the creation of Pakistan and India as separate entities, you need to also consider the calls by Mohammad Ali Jinnah for a separate Muslim 'nation' and such as Veer Savarkar who accepted that 'India cannot be assumed today to be Unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main — the Hindus and the Muslims.' Yes there were one nation Hindus, Gandhi and many Muslims were of this view. Gandhi lost the support of many Hindus by his efforts (some would say at too much cost) to keep India one country. Gandhi was assassinated not by a Muslim but by a Hindu nationalist. I don't want to stray onto the history of the foundation of India and Pakistan, fascinating subject though it is, but India was not exactly ruled by Great Britain, the roles of the Maharajahs and various Prines is worthy of attention. As you may tell, I love history I am sorry but I cannot agree with your view that 'i do not doubt that some palestinians would not want a single jew living in a palestinian state, but again, i see the motivation for this - they are deeply paranoid that if they ever get to a palestinian state that it will be taken from them.' Israel has offered the Palestinians a state of their own before only to have the offer thrown back at them. After the Camp David talks collapsed due to Yasser Arafat's intransigence. Indeed President Clinton, and others who participated, put the blame for the failure of the talks squarely on the shoulders of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian negotiators. In 2001, Clinton told guests at a party at the Manhattan apartment of former UN ambassador Richard Holbrooke that Arafat called to bid him farewell three days before he left office. "You are a great man," Arafat said. "The hell I am," Clinton said he responded. "I'm a colossal failure, and you made me one." Other comments by Yasser Arafat are in my previous comments. cont...
- cont... Do you seriously believe that without Hamas, Israel would just build and build and build and drive the Palestinians out 'that way'? I can assure you that whilst that might become the aim of some Israelis, the Israeli government would not allow it. Remember it was the Israeli government government that dragged settlers from their homes in Gaza prior to handing Gaza over to the Palestinians. It was the Palestinians that destroyed the greenhouses and other plant and machinery left by Israel to give the new Palestinians a start on this land. No all Israelis are not perfect, far from it, but they have genuinely tried to live in peace with their neighbours. 'Land for peace' is often the cry, do you remember when Israel gave up the Sinai (with all of its oil) to Egypt in return for peace? The Sinai, captured in 1967, was bigger than Israel; yes Israel gave away land bigger than it is for peace with Egypt, it can'y keep giving away land - do you know how small Israel is? This site - http://www.iris.org.il/sizemaps.htm - will enlighten you. Israel is a tiny country surrounded by larger Muslim countries. Can not the Jews who were living in Israel/Palestine over 2,000 years before the birth of Mohammed not be allowed their homeland? I agree that this has been a worthwhile discussion and I am glad that I responded to your first comment. I hope that I am intelligent, I try to be and I am motivated, above all by a sense of fairness. I don't take all that Israel says as the gospel truth; although associating the gospels with Israel is historically accurate, if religiously difficult. The problem I have with 'fairness' is that the majority of the news about the Middle East, that is presented as fact, in the west is very heavily slanted against Israel. I try and redress this balance by pointing out the bias and the unfairness. Unlike some pro-Israel sites that are out there; I do not see every Muslim as the enemy, my Muslim colleagues would attest to that, nor do I do think that the Palestinians do not deserve their own state. You are right there is a lot of anti-Semitism out there on the internet and you need to take care who or what you believe. Good luck out there and if you need to check a fact do come back here.
An interesting discussion, I think that you will agree, and one that I would not have had if I had dismissed the original comment without replying. I would seem to have moved 'Anonymous' slightly away from his original position, shown him that all that he reads on some websites may not be true and that I am not the hatemonger that I think he first thought I was.
So what should I do re this comment?
Thursday, 7 October 2010
Viva Palestina - some uncomfortable truths
Harry's Place has two excellent pieces regarding the hateful Viva Palestina and their quest to break the 'siege of Gaza'. The first article explores the recent visit to Syria by Viva Palestina trustee Kevin Ovenden who
'addressed the welcoming party while standing underneath flags of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party.
Once you take a closer look at the SSNP it becomes very clear that no self-respecting socialist or humanitarian would go anywhere near them, let alone let themselves be photographed standing under their emblems.
Even if we ignore their suspiciously familiar imagery of lightning bolts and eagles (compare and contrast) or their flags, there is no mistaking:
–Their antisemitic ideology (from the SSNP’s exhibition at the Damascus College of Fine Art: “Our struggle with the Jew [collective noun] is a struggle of existence not a struggle of borders,” i.e., it’s an existential struggle, not a geographical one).'
This Harry's Place article also reminds us of where the SSNP stood in the war between the Lebanese Army and others and the PLO in 1985:
'Jubin M. Goodarzi wrote in “Syria and Iran” (p. 152) that by the the summer of 1985, “the ceasefire could not have come sooner for the Palestinians, since they had almost run out of ammunition and had suffered enormously. More than 600 refugees were killed and 2500 wounded during the blockade.”
Oh dear. Participating in a war against Palestinians? Against Palestinian self-determination? Blockading Palestinian refugee camps? Sieges? No leftwinger with any sense of self-worth would go near a group such as that, let alone get photographed standing underneath their flags.
So much for Palestinian solidarity.'
The second Harry's Place article about Viva Palestina explains the links between Viva Palestina and Jordan (the Country not Katie Price) and especially the Jordanian Maysara Malas. Mr Malas seems a lovely chap:
'
“There will not be any normalisation with the Jewish state unless a Palestinian state is established from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea.”
...
Malas called on the government to release Daqamseh, who is serving a life sentence and has 5 years left, “especially after all the threats the Zionist entity is constituting to the security and stability of Jordan.”
Ahmed Daqamseh is the Jordanian soldier who murdered seven Israeli schoolgirls in 1997.
What a fine partner Malas is for Viva Palestina.'
The other uncomfortable truth about Jordan is that it is the Palestinian State. It was set-up in 1929 on part of the land promised by the 1917 Balfour declaration for the 'establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. Here's a map of the Palestinian Mandate, can you see how it divides between what is now Israel and what is now Jordan?
Do remember that back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."
Remember also that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus
"Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."
1 comments: Anonymous said...
-
Not a sheep said... - Please read my article in full before commenting again, you might learn something. I will let your 'retard' insult pass this time but try and keep any further comments to that of a civilised nature. How can I be spamming your site? By linking to it?
