Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumJustifying terrorism
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has apparently revealed himself as a Palestinian partisan. In remarks last week to the Security Council, Ban said: “Palestinian frustration is growing under the weight of a half century of occupation and the paralysis of the peace process... It is human nature to react to occupation, which often serves as a potent incubator of hate and extremism.”
Besides appearing to justify terrorism, the secretary-general equated its Jewish victims with those who were killed while trying to murder them. “Stabbings, vehicle attacks and shootings by Palestinians targeting Israeli civilians – all of which I condemn – and clashes between Palestinians and Israeli security forces, have continued to claim lives,” Ban said. Could this be a slip of the secretary-general’s tongue: He condemns “targeting Israeli civilians,” but not soldiers? Could he be suggesting in a subtle way that the many attacks on soldiers are justifiable, since they are agents of an occupying army? If this differentiation is not part of a new UN policy, Ban could simply have said “targeting Israelis” and condemned the violence against all of us. Ban speaks out of concern for frustrated Palestinian youth: “Palestinian frustration is growing under the weight of a half century of occupation and the paralysis of the peace process.” Is he unaware of Israeli frustration? It hasn’t exactly been a picnic for us either.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s response confronted Ban with what is finally becoming acknowledged as the fundamental truth of the Arab-Israeli conflict: The violence is the result of the hatred of Jews, rather than a response to alienation and despair due to years of failure to reach a peace settlement. Netanyahu was blunt: “They want to murder Jews for being Jews and they say this openly. They do not murder for peace and they do not murder for human rights.” He in effect accused Ban of supporting terrorism. “The secretary-general’s remarks provide a tailwind for terrorism. There is no justification for terrorism. Those Palestinians who murder do not want to build a state; they want to destroy a state and they say this openly.”
Jewish officialdom was quick to respond to Ban’s assertion that the plague of Palestinian violence is the natural result of “frustration” from “half a century of occupation.” World Jewish Congress president Ronald S. Lauder expressed regret at Ban’s statement, calling it a “dangerous justification of terrorism and the murder of Jews.” He added, “It is extremely worrying and shocking that the leader of the international community has chosen to excuse the inexcusable.” Lauder also warned of the danger inherent in the secretary- general’s words. “Mr. Ban’s statement will only encourage Palestinians to carry out more of the barbaric attacks we have seen in recent weeks. Crimes that are understood to be unacceptable in Paris and in Brussels – the random murder of people in the street or in their homes – cannot be somehow explained away when it comes to Israel.”
more...
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Justifying-terrorism-443309
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Anti-Defamation League demanded a clarification from Ban of his remarks, which it called “highly disturbing.” CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said Ban’s remarks were “incredibly short-sighted.” Like Lauder, Greenblatt warned of the likely consequences of Ban’s statement: “These comments will not only serve to further embolden Palestinians seeking to attack Israeli civilians, but also undermine the global struggle against terrorism by making inappropriate distinctions and rationalizations.”
Ban did not speak in his own defense, but his spokesman, Stéphane Dujarric, briefed reporters in New York on Wednesday. “Anyone is free to choose what they like or dislike from the secretary-general’s speeches. Words can continue to be twisted, but the grave reality cannot be obstructed,” he announced.
Moreover, Dujarric added, Ban “stands by every word” in his address to the Security Council. “He condemns the stabbings, vehicle attacks and shootings by Palestinians targeting Israeli civilians,” Dujarric said, repeating that dubious restriction about “targeting Israeli civilians.” He added, apparently in Ban’s name, that “nothing justifies terrorism.” But this is precisely what his boss attempted to do. Since his spokesman has invited us “to work together to fight the sources and the causes that fuel that terrorism,” we should join the UN in the worldwide campaign it should launch to wipe out anti-Semitism.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)the difference between causation and moral justification, or if they actually don't get it.
I suppose the OP will convince some people. I will just shake my head sadly...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)As long as you are a victim, you can't be at fault, so any suggestion that the Palestinians might be in any sense victims is anathema. And contrariwise, any suggestion that Israelis are in any sense not victims but aggressors is also anathema.
Which I have always found ironic in the light of the Sabra Mystique and all that tough guy rhetoric which is so popular in other (non-victim) contexts.
shira
(30,109 posts)Never in the history of the world have such murderers been considered desperate victims who need to be understood.
But maybe I'm wrong & you can point to other folks besides Palestinians for which this applies.
Right.
Thought so...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Little Tich
(6,171 posts)and that the world will keep on trying to tell him the truth.
Netanyahu could benefit from an intervention before it's too late...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)So Bibi is not going to listen to anybody.
Him and Erdogan and bin Salman the "Crown Prince" (and Trump for that matter) all seem to have a similar approach to politics. Attack attack attack!!! Looks strenuous and unlikely to improve the situation in the long run, but it's working great for Bibi now, or so he thinks.
People who screw up always think it's bad luck, but when they get lucky then they think it's their own brilliance and skill. That's Bibi. I suppose from the Bibi's-career point of view, he has a point. Erdogan was similarly full of his own puissance five years ago, it's always when they get a swelled head that they overreach.
You can compare Bibi with Obama or Xi or Putin who are articulate and thoughtful rather than belligerent, despite their wide personality differences in other ways.
shira
(30,109 posts)It's why you have a double-standard when it comes to terror against the Dawabshes or Abu Khdeirs.
For some reason that type of resistance by Israelis isn't a natural reaction. Israelis have no right & duty to resist like that.
Why the double-standard?
Personally, no Israeli has a right & duty to "resist" by murdering kids & babies. It's unnatural to the extreme. Same should apply to Palestinians.
How am I wrong?
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)There's no "duty to resist", it's just that certain circumstances have consequences. When it comes to Jewish terrorism (which seems to be possibly be on the rise) there are causes too, but it doesn't make it justified.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)That is generally when I get bored and move on.
(Good answer. Gravity doesn't need justification, you just fall, and neither does someone whose family just got wiped out. Justifications are only needed when you still want to talk.)
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 1, 2016, 11:49 AM - Edit history (1)
You talk a big game, but if you think you're right - you shouldn't have a problem defending your position.
It's pretty obvious you can't defend your position, so why the big talk? What is it supposed to accomplish?
shira
(30,109 posts)....to act out of desperation in order to murder Palestinian innocents?
Also, if occupation is the cause for murdering random Jews - then what was the cause 100 years ago before occupation?
How about an answer for once?
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:57 PM - Edit history (1)
What were the aggressor Jews doing in the 1920's to their Palestinian victims?
Do tell.
==================
Ban Ki-Moon said Palestinian terror is a natural reaction to occupation. But we don't see car-rammings, knife attacks, rockets, & suicide bombs going off against pregnant women, elderly, mothers, and toddlers in Quebec, Tibet, Cyprus, or Kurdistan.
Neither do we see good people stating it's a natural thing for Israelis to kill the Abu Khdeir or Dawabshe kids, given you know, 100 years of terror against Jews in that part of the world.
==================
It's also racist of Ban to state it's natural for Palestinians to murder kids, grandmothers, and pregnant women - as if nothing better could be expected of them.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)In the 20s the Palestinians were also reacting to their environment and perceived threats against their own sovereignty and political objectives. They weren't just murdering Jews because they were Jewish or "different." They were reacting to very real, world altering shifts of power that were disenfranchising them before their very eyes.
Don't be mistaken, the Palestinians acted poorly, and above all, foolishly, in the early 20th century regarding the diaspora immigration. But they WERE acting out of self interest, however myopically.
Also, for whatever it's worth, bibi is being an asshole here.
The reality is that the Palestinians have been oppressed by both the Israelis and the Arab world for several generations. The fact that the gentle Tibetans have been relatively peaceful in the face of Chinese colonization is not a reasonable argument. Tibet has gotten nothing but fucked by their lack of resistance. make no mistake... Bibi's policies are not dependent on Palestinian insurrection. He'd fuck them regardless.
shira
(30,109 posts)....anywhere else in the world ramming cars into innocents, stabbing pregnant women, or killing mothers in front of their children?
And then being praised and rewarded for it by their "moderate" peaceful government officials? Ban Ki-Moon didn't even mention the role of incitement by the PA government, as if that had no role whatsoever. And Bibi was hardly the only official in Israel to condemn these remarks. You're right he's an asshole, but not on this one.
No, they were also being incited to murder Jews for invading and storming al-Aqsa mosque by Hitler's favorite Mufti in the 1920's. Just as they are being incited, praised, and rewarded for doing so today. No damned difference.
There's nothing at all natural about that anywhere else in the world for the past century.
If Tibetans resisted in any significant way, they'd all be dead....decades ago.
That's the difference.
shira
(30,109 posts)Did you really think right-wing provocations on the Temple Mount would pass quietly? That the burning of the Dawabsheh family would pass with no response — and even more so the defense minister’s arrogant claims that Israel knew who the perpetrators were but wouldn’t arrest them?”
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.680443
Hamas couldn't say it better.
shira
(30,109 posts)http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/travesty-despite-israeli
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/francisco-activists-conviction
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/10/feminist-scholars-against
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/11/palestinian-activist-immigration
Mondoweiss agrees with PLO: Terrorists are freedom-fighters
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/palestines-foreign-ministry-pushes-back-on-prisoner-story-says-occupiers-are-the-terrorists
Mondoweiss calls terror deliberately targeting innocents "self-defense"
Mondoweiss defends Hamas refusal to change genocidal Jew-hating charter
Most often discussions regarding Hamas in the Western media begin with its notorious 1988 Charter. But have media outlets who spew obsessively narrow readings of Hamas’s military position even bothered to do any research into its political work?
....Klein explains that
Hamas is a pragmatic and flexible political actor and focusing on its 1988 Charter completely misses Hamas’s contemporary identity. However, disgracefully the US and European states maintain their uneducated or purposefully misleading understanding of Hamas.
- See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/understanding-hamas#sthash.wTK5PFeE.dpuf
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Does not seem like anyone is posting their garbage here anymore.
shira
(30,109 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Fortunately, we don't seem to have the poster dumping every single article from Mondoweiss over to here like we did for a while though.
So that's a good thing, at least.
Israeli
(4,151 posts)Philip Weiss's opinion/perception is just one of many .
The thread is still open ....if you wish to add your 2 cents worth .
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I'm usually on top of responding to filth from Mondoweiss - especially from garbage written by Phil Weiss himself - the worst of the worst.
Israeli
(4,151 posts)It is a controversial subject .....but I perfectly understand your need to avoid it .
oberliner
(58,724 posts)There are lots of controversial topics that can be thoughtfully discussed without posting articles from bigots running vanity blogs filled with the sort of crap posted by Phil Weiss or Pam Geller.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)it seems that there is an attempt at controlling the information or narrative available to readers on this website and one not necessarily supported by admins
9. I think the battle against Mondoweiss has been won
Does not seem like anyone is posting their garbage here anymore.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1134124239#post9
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I've been railing about it for as long as I've seen it posted on this board. It is a despicable vanity blog akin to Pamela Gellar's website run by an equally loathsome bigot.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)is another story
King_David
(14,851 posts)Especially if you are a target of that hate such as half of us posting in this group- American Jews.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)King_David
(14,851 posts)It's who they target with their hate and bigotry... And half of us in this group are targets of Mondoweiss hate.
That's why we recognize it here and those are the ones complaining.
There's only 2 posters that continue to post this hateful site on DU , neither of whom are part of the minority group targeted by that bigotry ...
And last time I checked you aren't a spokesperson for the DU admin.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Phil rails against Zionism in the same way that Pamela rails against Islamism.
Substitute Islamism for Zionism and vice versa and you will be able to see it.
Unless you just don't want to see it because you like some of the other things that Phil says (people do that with Pam).
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but can you imagine Geller interviewing Islamists as Weiss did settlers? Keeping in mind that for Gellers crew simply being a Muslim makes one an Islamist
oberliner
(58,724 posts)For the same reason Weiss interviewed settlers. To try to show how awful they are.
I would also mention that Geller does not think being a Muslim makes one an Islamist. She totally supports secular Muslims, and, in fact, promotes them on the blog.
Same thing as Weiss. He only likes the subset of Jews who agree with him. He is disgusted by the rest.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)as to Weiss only liking a subset can be said for pretty much any pundit
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I will direct you to your favorite source, Wikipedia, to help inform you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_Islam_Summit
Here is the opening of The St. Petersburg Declaration referenced at the above link:
We are secular Muslims, and secular persons of Muslim societies. We are believers, doubters, and unbelievers, brought together by a great struggle, not between the West and Islam, but between the free and the unfree.
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/
One can be a secular Muslim or Jew in that one still observes the various customs and traditions without ascribing to the actual religious beliefs.
Weiss expresses antipathy towards all non-secular Jews (and most secular ones). Just as Geller expresses antipathy towards all non-secular Muslims.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Both right wing Jewish bigots.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)generally speaking secular means non-religious 
Israeli
(4,151 posts)............
oberliner......you have been " railing about " 972 for as long as I have been posting on this board ....its not " Just that one "......its anyone that does not agree with your politics or your point of view .
King_David
(14,851 posts)King_David
(14,851 posts)ridiculously that there was "no such thing as secular Muslims " ?
Seriously?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but commonly secular means non religious
King_David
(14,851 posts)that there's no such thing as secular Muslims.
Pretty clueless....
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)and secular means non-religious making secular Muslim an oxymoron sort of like communist Islamist which explains why there can be secular Jews but not secular Muslims, no matter what some right wings want to call them to appear liberal
King_David
(14,851 posts)And now the Muslim community too.
No such thing as Secular Muslims, huh?
It's so ridiculous and clueless that it's not even debatable for myself and that's rare.
http://insideislam.wisc.edu/2010/10/coming-out-of-the-closet-as-a-secular-muslim/
Cleary clueless on Muslims as well as Jews.
What's really strange is you thinking you know more about those communities than actual members of such.....
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)don't care what you call yourself it still don't make it so, simply not eating pork doesn't make you either a Muslim or a Jew
King_David
(14,851 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Israeli
(4,151 posts)oberliner's posts regarding 972 are available to all who care ....he says its " " Just that one " ..I say " sure oberliner, sure " .....you are so full of it oberliner.
"Just that one.".....which one is next ......Haaretz ... ??????????????
King_David
(14,851 posts)Such as Rense or David Duke - almost the same type of content.
You cant possibly compare those sites to left wing sites such as 972 or liberal Zionist site such as Haaretz. ( Hass and Levy excepted )
Israeli
(4,151 posts)Why Hass and Levy excepted KD ?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Israeli
(4,151 posts)......both of them are post zionists KD.
King_David
(14,851 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)....that really doesn't speak well of the post-Zionist movement.
It's no wonder they're less than 1% of the Israeli populace.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Some of the writers I like better than others, but it's a good site filled with a lot of news that doesn't always get the attention it deserves. I especially like the Israeli writers who report locally (much moreso than the American commentators, some of whom I find lacking). I view it as I do other sites that cover the topic - when they run articles I think are crappy, I certainly point that out - but I have never suggested that the site shouldn't be posted here.
That site is nothing like Mondoweiss which is a vanity blog run by a loathsome vile bigot.
oberliner (34,193 posts)
2. 972mag wrong as per usual
U.S. Embassy denies Obama boycott of Ariel University students
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2013/03/14/3122011/ariel-university-students-not-invited-to-obamas-jerusalem-speech
Almost as accurate as their election predictions.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=35599
oberliner (34,193 posts)
6. Do you work for 972mag?
Do they pay you for every article you post here?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=26915
oberliner (34,193 posts)
8. DU IP should be renamed 972mag, US Edition
What do you think?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=32100
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That was getting a little ridiculous.
I'm glad they don't publish Larry Derfner there anymore - he is awful.
shira
(30,109 posts)And Phil Weiss of Mondoweiss agrees:
Hypocrisy, because the up-in-arms crowd ignores the original, fundamental, institutionalized and methodical violence of the very fact of the occupation and its mechanisms. Ignorance, because the implication is that the impassioned naysayers might not know just how cruel is the military tyranny in the territories.
In addition, those who accused Hass so furiously of “crossing lines” and “inciting murder” did not read her piece all the way through. It contains not incitement to murder, but rather a straight-on, fair and courageous apprehension of the Palestinian liberation struggle that is absent from the Israeli dialogue….
Rooted deep in the Israeli experience is the idea that what is permitted to the Jewish people is prohibited to others. But there is no need to go back as far as the time of Pharaoh. Ever since then, human history has been paved with freedom struggles against foreign rulers, struggles that earned the respect of history, and that were, in the main, violent, often more violent than the Palestinian struggle. The slogan “We’ve had enough of you, occupiers” is not exclusive to Arabic; it has been voiced down through history in nearly every language, including modern Hebrew.
Hass, like me, is against violence. I take the liberty to write that out of deep conviction. Who wants to see children killed by rocks, citizens torn apart by an improvised explosive device, or teenagers who have been shot?
But resistance to violence must be direct, comprehensive and fair. It must include the resistance to the occupier’s violence….
Now we must ask Hass’ detractors: What do you expect? What are you, patriots and supposed opposers of violence, offering the Palestinians? Do you honestly think they will bow their heads in submission and obedience for another 46 years? Is there an historical precedent for such behavior?
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-inner-syntax-of-the-storm.premium-1.513860
Response to shira (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
shira
(30,109 posts).....car-ramming into infants & elderly people. The PA & Hamas encouraging and rewarding such behavior.
What makes Ban Ki-Moon's statements so awful is that he knows damned well what the PA and Hamas are doing. He knows the Palestinians have rejected offers for nearly 100% of Gaza, the WB, and part of Jerusalem (in 2000, 2001, 2008). And yet he still portrays PA, Hamas incited terror as desperation with Israel wholly to blame for occupation & settlements that could have ended 15 years ago. He then sees himself as a fair arbiter giving "friendly" advice to Israel - as if there's really anything they can without putting Israelis at a major security risk.
He's a nasty POS.
Response to shira (Reply #55)
Name removed Message auto-removed
shira
(30,109 posts)
attacked with gunfire and knives Israeli policemen outside Bab al-Amoud Gate in Jerusalem, seriously injuring two Israeli policewomen, according to local sources.
An Israeli police report stated that two policewomen were seriously wounded in the gunfire and stabbing attacks carried out by three Palestinians identified as Ahmad Rajeh Zakarneh, Mohammad Ahmad Kmail, and Ahmad Najeh Abur-Rob.
WAFA correspondent said that, shortly after the incident, Israeli police sealed off Bab al-Amoud area, along with all the gates of Jerusalem’s Old City. Police reportedly attacked Palestinian locals present there with teargas canisters and stun grenades.
(No one reported that bullshit) [/font]
On January 26th, the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said it was "human nature" for Palestinians to react violently to Israel's nearly 50-year military occupation.
Speaking at the UN Security Council's Middle East debate, Ban said the new year had begun as 2015 ended, “with unacceptable levels of violence and a polarized public discourse across the spectrum in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory.”
He added that Israeli security measures were failing to “address the profound sense of alienation and despair driving some Palestinians – especially young people.”
