Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumHamas's "Hitler Youth" style movement prepares for jihad
Nearly 10,000 Palestinian schoolchildren have been receiving military training from Hamas, in order to prepare them for a new jihad against Israel, it has been reported.
Senior Hamas officials have said that some 9,000 school children have joined up to 36 camps throughout the Gaza Strip where they are to be taught how to use various types of weapons and handle explosives.
The camps have been named, Al Futuwwa, which was also the name of a Hitler Youth style pan Arab facsist nationalistic youth movement that existed in Iraq in the 1930s and 1940s. In 1938, the Al-Futuwwa youth organization sent a delegate to the Nuremberg Nazi party rally. In turn hosted the Hitler Youth leader Baldur von Schirach.
Hamas says that the purpose of the camps is to prepare Palestinian children, both militarily and psychologically, for the “liberation of Palestine, from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean sea,” - reflecting the wishes of Hamas to eradicate the entirety of the Jewish state.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2657/hamas_s_hitler_youth_style_movement_prepares_for_jihad
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Cary
(11,746 posts)IOW there will never be peace.
"What bothers me most is not that Arabs kill our children, but that they force us to kill theirs." ~ Golda Meir
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And of course, it's "the Arabs." The entire race of people, across the world, are doing all this.
Let's see. Evil Arab masterminds controlling the world. Evil Arabs hating their own children. Evil Arabs slaughtering children for the fun of it. Since we're putting new rims on the tired old antisemitic jalopies and calling it Zionism, are you going to argue that they use the blood of those kids to make their falafel?
Cary
(11,746 posts)What are you?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)I can tell you're not a geneticist.
There is no such thing as a race.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And thus social constructs do apply. But thanks for trying.
shira
(30,109 posts)
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)They are pushed to the cliff, of course they adopt extreme measures.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 22, 2013, 11:58 AM - Edit history (1)
...and thus ruin Palestinian society by abusing the children there? That's what 'desperate' Hamasniks do to children? They can't help but do that?
I'm having trouble understanding such a POV, given Hamas is dedicated to destroying Israel and never recognizing it in peace. They say all Israel is occupied. What makes you think that what they do is dependent on Israeli actions?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Do you ever take a good look at what you post and hold it to the same standard as you do when it comes to Israel and Israelis? That blog is chockablock full of the language of dehumanisation and hatred. I don't understand why a jury didn't hide this ugly crap. It's every bit as bigoted as Jihad Watch is...
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 22, 2013, 12:00 PM - Edit history (1)
I see Hamas (the PLO is guilty too) cynically abusing children WRT making them militants and shields in their war that aims for the destruction of Israel and its Jewish inhabitants. They use them as propaganda tools to gain western sympathy when they send them out to "confront" the occupation.
Disgusting.
All I see you doing is attacking the messenger w/o saying a word about what Hamas is doing.
If sending them to the front lines aspiring to be martyrs for the cause isn't child sacrifice, please provide a better description.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)This is what yr not getting, Shira. I'm someone who thinks that Hamas' actions have put the population of Gaza in danger, but unlike you I don't use that as a justification to try to absolve Israel of any blame for what's done to the Palestinians, nor do I become immune to vitriolic hatred so intense that it could easily fit under the dehumanisation stage of the stages leading up to genocide.
Does it not bother you one bit that yr condoning something that viciously attacks Palestinian parents the way that did? Or do you agree with them.
And, d'uh! I'm sure as hell going to attack the messenger when it's vitriolic hatred and dehumanisation. That stuff has no place at DU, and if you want to sit there and defend that poison, knock yrself out...
btw, what's the meaning of hypocrisy? I'd say a good example would be someone who expresses concern about the mistreatment of Palestinian children ONLY when non-Israelis are doing it. Have a lovely afternoon...
shira
(30,109 posts)1. How has Hamas' actions put the population of Gaza in danger?
2. I don't use Hamas to absolve Israel of any blame. I wish you'd stop making that false accusation.
3. Dehumanization stage leading to genocide? Maybe you prefer that this phenomenon WRT using kids the way Hamas does should be censored? That ignoring it will lead to peace? You can't be serious.
Any parent doing that to their kid deserves to be condemned. Whether Israeli, Palestinian, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or other. I thought you held liberal/progressive values.
If those were militant christian identity groups doing that to kids, would you characterize criticism of that vitriolic hatred and dehumanisation? Or should the acts of such christian identity, KKK, or other groups be censored so as not to dehumanize the guilty parties?
Again you insist on misrepresenting my position. This has nothing to do with me expressing concern for anything. It's about pointing to the hypocrisy of those who claim to be pro-Palestinian. You've been corrected on this so many times, I have to believe you're doing it deliberately in order to deflect from the obvious (which apparently is so embarassing to you that you won't even acknowledge the hypocrisy; much less explain the reason for it).
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)I'll stay right here and keep this thread ticking along for a bit...
Sorry, but you do use Hamas' actions to try to absolve Israel of any blame for what's done to the Palestinians. I could go back a ways into the DU2 archives and produce every one of those hundreds of posts you did that absolved Israel of any responsibility in Operation Cast Lead. Israel bombs a doctor's home, killing his daughters? It's not Israel's fault. A school's attacked with white phosphorous? Again, not Israel's fault. If Hamas didn't make Israel 'protect itself' then those Palestinians wouldn't be dead. And the litany of blame trundles on. What bothers me is that you don't appear willing or able to be able to see where the line is between criticising Hamas and ugly hatefilled dehumanising swill like that disgusting crap you posted a link to. A hint for you. An anonymous blog that uses terms like 'child sacrifice', makes broadbrush smears and calls Palestinian parents cowardly, and features articles titled 'Palestinians kill their children' is somethign with a stench similar to Jihad Watch or Stormfront. Instead of defending hatemongers like that and pretending it's not ugly stereotyping to make broadbrush attacks on Palestinian parents, what you need to start doing is looking at what yr defending and asking yrself if you'd be defending it if it was talking about Israelis or Jews and making all sorts of broadbrush smears about them. Then you'll understand what the problem is with this stuff...
I didn't misrepresent yr position at all when I said that you couldn't recall ever expressing concern about the abuse of Palestinians by Israelis. It's exactly what you told me here http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=32459 When pointing out hypocrisy, a good start is to ensure that the finger can't easily be pointed back at yrself. Just a helpful tip for next time...
Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #131)
oberliner This message was self-deleted by its author.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Hateful blogs at DU..
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Shame on you, Shira, for this propaganda.
This kind of hate is akin to the propaganda illustrations that peppered Europe about Jewish people to dehumanize them.
Congratulations! You've now joined with the anti-Semites of old with your level of hatred for Palestinians.
shira
(30,109 posts)...the messenger of villifying an entire people?
What do you have to say about Hamas' cynical use of these children?
Anything at all?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Remember when people posted photos of Israeli girls painting rockets/missiles?
Breathtakingly disturbing. Israeli children signing missiles?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1665963
Why are Israeli girls signing bombs in English?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1687856
Children sign bombs destined to kill
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1659399
shira
(30,109 posts)
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Congratulations. You have something in common with anti-Semites that single out the Semitic peoples as being less than human.
shira
(30,109 posts)What you see in those gruesome pictures has become MAINSTREAM in Gaza and not just the actions of a few. But maybe you believe that's a cultural diversity type of thing that should be respected? Hamas is destroying Gaza with that poisonous crap and all you can do is attack those condemning it.
Wow.
I don't see anything bigoted BTW with such condemnation. If Meir Kahane had his way and the hilltop settler thugs were as effective making the settlement areas as extreme and mainstream as what Hamas had done to Gaza, I'd be leading the charge arguing what a sick society that was. That's not to say I'd view every single person in the settlements as being sick...
Your faux outrage is a major Fail.
It's also interesting that you attack me but defend Shlomo Sand calling Israel a shitty nation that is the most racist society in the world.
Un.Real.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)that person IMHO enters into a thinly veiled attempt to paint all that society in the same light: just how anti-smites attempt to smear Israelis or Jews.
The action is just wrong.
shira
(30,109 posts)How do you explain your defense of Shlomo Sand while attacking what I'm doing?
This should be interesting.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)You declined not to answer.
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)If he is such a bigot then how does he get to retain his Professorship at Tel Aviv U?
shira
(30,109 posts)It's tolerance and its freedom of expression.
Unrivaled anywhere else.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Then you should tolerate his freedom of expression, unless you live someplace else.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)"tolerate his freedom of expression," while openly decrying the opinions he is choosing to express.
In fact, I'd argue that free speech is one of the cornerstones of any free society... And embracing a tradition of openly refuting speech that's hateful or shallow or dangerous is one of the responsibilities held by members of a healthy democracy.
The answer to hate is more speech, not less.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Banned by Israel: Noam Chomsky, and who else?
http://www.csmonitor.com/Photo-Galleries/Lists/Banned-by-Israel-Noam-Chomsky-and-who-else
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)just get's sillier and sillier.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)
shira
(30,109 posts)It's about the hypocrisy of TeamPalestine for claiming the mantle of uber-sensitive humanists who care for all oppressed, occupied victims of Imperialism.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)Or, if embarassed to admit your views, stay out altogether.
You look ridiculous with all these lame, immature debate tactics.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Moral of the story - telling another DUer who's just made it clear that they don't support Hamas that they support Hamas, war crimes, child abuse, and dog knows what else they threw into teh mix will more than likely result in a well deserved hidden post...
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)But of course, neither was she.
Simply because you have constructed an absurd extrapolation as to the exact meaning behind Gilda Meir's quote does not in any way validate it. It's not too hard to figure out the far more plausible thinking behind her statement which commonly serves as its accepted meaning.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's a standard of dehumanizing propaganda, Shaktimaan.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)There was no indication that she was referring to all Arab people everywhere and the context would certainly suggest otherwise.
Now obviously the Arabs are not actually a race. They're a panethnic group, some of whom live on the other side of the world from Israel. She was talking about the Arabs that she was talking about. Not every Arab.
The quote highlights an obstacle as Meir saw it, as it exists within cultural differences that handicap the peace effort. Yes, it was critical of Arab society. Does that automatically make it dehumanizing?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)In it is an interview with a Hamas official, Sheik Nayef conducted after the 2006 elections. He has this to say;
"Yes, I would allow them to carry our martyrdom operations, but I would much rather focus on ruling out the causes of what has madethis inevitable," he said. "Martyrdom operations are the result of Jewish Nazism. The Israelis have presented us with two choices -- either we die submissively like sheep or we die in suicide bombings in the streets of Tel Aviv or Netanya."
For the first time, the sheikh's voice rose. "We might forgive the Israelis for murdering our innocent civilians," he said, "but we will never forgive them for forcing us to kill their civilians."
So there, you see? Israel only killed Arab children, says Meir, because the Arabs made the Israelis do it. And Hamas and their kind only kill innocent civilians, says Nayef, because the Israelis made Hamas do it.
It's not my fault, they made me do it!
This is basic dehumanization. You accuse your opponent of hating children or other innocents - well, only a monster hates children! Not only do they hate children, they kill them too! What sadistic freaks! And not only are they killing our children, but they're forcing us to murder their own too! How evil can you get! Oh, but of course, we're the good guys. We'd turn the other cheek, but we can't forgive them for how cruel they are in forcing us to murder children! Look how pious and righteous we are, we are willing to forgive and we just love the kids, the poor dears! We're so fraught with angst over them being big meanies and forcing us to kill those innocent people!
And you buy this. That's pathetic.
And "she was talking about the Arabs that she was talking about," that's fucking rich, too. I hope you're not DU zionism's last line of defense, 'cause this is fucking sad.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)you're making extrapolations here that simply can't be drawn from the original quote. She never implied that Arabs hate their children or that anyone is evil. The meaning I drew from the quote was that the Palestinians would rather endure endless war that their children (and their children's children), will be forced to continue fighting for, (and dying in), rather than compromise by making peace with a Jewish state that would then be permanently installed in what they consider Arab land.
She's referring to the Arabs that Israel is fighting. Not every Arab on the planet. How is that not obvious to you? For example, Meir isn't including the Arab Israelis who are actively fighting for Israel, is she?
And the obvious difference between Meir and Nayef's statements is the fact that while Hamas went through the extra trouble to target Israeli civilians, killing them on purpose, as the specific goal of the terrorist operations, Arabs would frequently use their own children as literal shields between themselves and IDF soldiers/gunships, ensuring their security at the expense of their children's safety. IOW, Meir's statement has at least some validity while Nayef's makes no sense at all. Nayef's statement was made just after Israel has withdrew from Gaza, granting the Gazans sovereignty over Gaza for the first time in recorded history. They were hardly being rounded up and massacred.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Look man, I know you're desperate to defend every Zionist under the sun. Fine, fanatic solidarity and all that. But you don't have to defend every phrase they have uttered. I'm sure Meir has some fairly decent quotes. This simply is not one that is worth defending.
She is saying the Arabs - and no, it doesn't matter if she means these Arabs or those Arabs, especially since the fuckheads who love the quote so much apply it globally regardless of what she meant - FORCE ISRAEL TO KILL THEIR OWN CHILDREN.
There is no fucking defense for that rhetoric. It's saying "We've murdered children sure, but it's not our fault, their parents made us do it!"
That's an absolutely perverted view of the world, and deserves condemnation regardless of who's saying it.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 20, 2013, 10:09 PM - Edit history (1)
that Golda Meir one gets an awful workout at pro-Israel demonstrations.
I saw one once from the pro-Palestinian demonstrators:-
"We said to the South Africans: If you don't like Black people, don't live in Africa.
We say to the Israelis: If you don't like Arabs, don't live in the middle East."
Not a bad line, eh? It got the Zionists pretty bottled up.
Hanan Ashrawi gave a speech once in Australia a few years ago. She's extremely good on her feet and has a lot of experience dealing with hecklers:-
"About two thousand years ago, there were a group of terrorists called the Sicarii. Their mission was to kill as many romanised Jews as possible, to kill as many Jews who had Roman sympathies, because they wanted to get rid of the Roman occupation. The other Jews eventually got sick of them and kicked them out of Jerusalem.
Then the Sicarri went to a place called Ein Gedi, which was a town loyal to the Romans, and they slaughtered over 700 Jews, men women and children. Then after that, they attacked and captured a Roman garrison on a mountaintop. The Romans decided that enough was enough and they laid siege to the rebels. When they got to the top of the mountain, the Romans discovered that the rebels had killed their own women and children with knives and swords, and then killed themselves. The only survivors were two women and their children that had managed to escape the murders.
Now, this place called Masada is now the number one tourist attraction in Israel. More popular than the wailing wall. The IDF holds its graduation ceremonies on top of this mountain, and they pay tribute to the Jewish terrorists who killed their own children rather than submit to the Roman occupation. And these Israelis, they have the hide to accuse us of having a cult of martyrdom?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)What does one have to do with the other?
Besides...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Masada
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I'm hardly desperate to defend every Zionist under the sun. I just don't really see what about that quote in particular strikes you as being so odious.
That's an absolutely perverted view of the world, and deserves condemnation regardless of who's saying it.
What is so perverted about it? From Meir's perspective wouldn't it be entirely accurate? Both the PLO and Hamas and Hezbollah and so on all waged war against Israel in such a way that it wasn't possible for Israel to respond without putting children at risk. We know this was a deliberate strategy, planned beforehand in many instances.
I'm curious. You're quick to condemn Meir for criticizing this tactic yet are silent on palestinian's actual use of it. Meir rejects the Palestinian practice of putting kids on the rooftop of buildings marked for destruction, of using their little bodies as shields, to prevent the bombs from being dropped. In fact she rejects the society that would do such a thing. Yet you are only vocal against her comment. Not the act itself.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)
delrem
(9,688 posts)She's saying that Arabs' love for their own children isn't as deep as their hatred of Jews, and that's why Jews are justified in killing the children of Arabs - because Arabs force them to do it.
She uses the most primitive, barbaric, racist language a person could concoct to explain her view. It's the kind of language that humankind ought to have outgrown thousands of years ago.
The title of this OP?
"Hamas's "Hitler Youth" style movement ..." uses the most extreme language that could be devised, invoking an intent to genocide, a holocaust, as extreme as Hitler's - Hitler who had the most powerful army in the world and used it for slaughter.
Shaktimaan - how can you defend this kind of talk?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's because "this kind of talk" is directed at Arabs, just as Meir's quotes are.
If only Zionists loved Jews as much as they hate Arabs... 
shira
(30,109 posts)I mean, who are we kidding here?
http://palestinianchildabuse.com/2013/01/10/free-palestinian-children-from-fatah-and-hamas/
http://palestinianchildabuse.com/2013/01/16/palestinian-child-abuse/
If those cruel examples of sick child abuse do not turn anyone's stomach here in disgust, nothing can.
shira
(30,109 posts)
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I agree with you here. She's saying that Arabs would sacrifice their children's lives before they'd admit defeat in the war against Israel.
Here our views diverge. It's not about justifying the killing of Arab children so much as it serves to highlight the level of sacrifice the Arabs are willing to make rather than admit defeat.
I always thought that making comparisons like this was intellectually lazy and seldom of any use, offering little beyond the theatrics of empty hyperbole.
delrem
(9,688 posts)It carries a very clear message <-> holocaust.
And NO, she's NOT saying "Arabs would sacrifice their children's lives before they'd admit defeat in the war against Israel." she's saying in her own racist words that Arabs' love for their own children isn't as deep as their hatred of Jews.
And she's smearing the Arab people in a grotesquely offensive way.
Don't tell me that Israel has no programs preparing their youth for the coming of age ritual of being drafted into the IDF and enforcing the soverienty of Israel over the lives of Palestinians, and that they aren't primed to hate every bit as much as is attributed to the "Arabs". Don't tell me that kids throwing rocks at armored personnel carriers and armored bulldozers etc. were sent as sacrifices to their parent's hate. Don't tell me that Palestinians don't have a right to begin training their children early for dealing with the cold blooded racism of an occupying army that has proved time and again that it detests the very presence of "Arabs" in a land they aim to seize as their own. And don't tell me that you aren't aware of the suffering of Palestinians under Israel's occupation - you just don't give a damn and you prefer to pretty the picture up so you can sell it.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)It's empty in the sense that there is no substance to the accusation. It wasn't made because it's an accurate description but rather the opposite. Comparing Hamas with the nazis is absurd and using nazi terminology to describe it is a cheap attempt at conflation where none exists. This lazy tactic of demonizing an opponent by using terminology associated with past evil movements is the mark of obvious exaggeration that tends to fall apart under scrutiny; whether it's conflating Palestinians and Nazis or Zionism and Apartheid.
Okay. I don't see a substantive difference there. I do refute its description as racist though. Within the context of the conflict one frequently hears mention of "the Jews" or "the Arabs" being made, 99% of the time it refers to the Israelis and the Palestinians (and often the Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians, etc. ie: the neighbor Arab states that Israel is often fighting.)
Don't tell me that Israel has no programs preparing their youth for the coming of age ritual of being drafted into the IDF and enforcing the soverienty of Israel over the lives of Palestinians, and that they aren't primed to hate every bit as much as is attributed to the "Arabs".
I'm neither Israeli nor Palestinian so I can't say anything definitively. And while I think SOME Israelis are probably indoctrinated in such a way, most likely in the religious settler extremist communities, generally speaking? No.
Palestinian culture lionizes and worships martyrs who died for thee cause, naming streets after them and affording their memories respect. Children's programming incites hatred against Jews and embraces martyrdom. Nothing of the sort exists on Israeli culture.
If not sent by parents then they were certainly allowed by them to participate, no?
Thus for many Palestinian children, incitement begins at home. Yet many Palestinian parents have attempted to hold their children back, and have resisted those who would place them in harm's way. However, Hafez Bargutti, the editor-in-chief of the Palestinian Authority official daily newspaper, Al Hayyat Al Jedida, wrote an editorial condemning parents who forbid their children from joining the riots.
http://jcpa.org/jl/vp441.htm
This girl presumably has parents allowing her to do stuff like this.
http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIX1viZRyXMAvPr7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrc3VyamVwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQD?p=palestinian+shirley+temper&vid=90dc441c0039080c0675e4dd0187f786&l=1%3A43&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DV.4983223807377454%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DYbQObLBQ3X8&tit=Wunderkind+Shirley+Temper%21&c=1&sigr=11am20abi&&tt=b
The same goes for these kids.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=855_1286914266
Well, I don't agree that the IDF has proven any such thing. Not do I see how it helps anyone to teach your children hatred or violence and encourage them to violate laws of war. One doesn't send their kids out to stone Jewish cars as a way of teaching them how to best handle the occupation. Having your kids resist with Molotov cocktails and slingshots is to place resistance over their welfare. I can't think of a clearer example.
You don't know me. How can you make such accusations against someone like that? You have no idea what I think or what my experiences are.
See Shaktimaan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=32370
for links
you say:
"However, Hafez Bargutti, the editor-in-chief of the Palestinian Authority official daily newspaper, Al Hayyat Al Jedida, wrote an editorial condemning parents who forbid their children from joining the riots. "
That site is pure propaganda. But, devoid of the propagandist spin associated with that site, I agree with the editor.
you say:
"This girl presumably has parents allowing her to do stuff like this."
I reply:
I applaud the creativity of that girl in face of the brutal occupation forces. Re. the snide comment (in the vid commentary) "only when the cameras are rolling", well DUH! And they made damn sure the IDF knew that the cameras were rolling, because there's enough caught on camera of what the IDF is prepared to do, and does, when it is unaware that it's being monitored.
If pro-Israili, pro-occupation people like you think the little girls tactics (and her use of cameras for defense) are too much for the innocent IDF forces to bear - tough potato! I laugh at your outrage!
You say:
"The same goes for these kids."
I reply:
If the parents told their kid to run in front of a speeding car, they were criminal. If that was a "Jewish only" road through the west bank, then I don't begrudge a few rocks thrown at the lying thieving racist settlement fuckers' cars as they pass by in splendor on their racially segragated, apartheid enabling roads. But if someone supports apartheid their opinion will differ.
You say:
"Well, I don't agree that the IDF has proven any such thing. Not do I see how it helps anyone to teach your children hatred or violence and encourage them to violate laws of war. One doesn't send their kids out to stone Jewish cars as a way of teaching them how to best handle the occupation. Having your kids resist with Molotov cocktails and slingshots is to place resistance over their welfare. I can't think of a clearer example. "
I reply:
The IDF are largely young kids fresh out of school.
I don't see why it's beyond your ability to imagine that hatred isn't "taught" to Palestinian kids, but is the inevitable effect of living under a brutal racist military occupation. Any more than hatred is "taught" to Israeli kids who've been shelled or who'se suffered the trauma of seeing friends and neighbors and countrymen killed or maimed by bombs.
But over and above that inevitable source of hatred and extreme emotion, there *are* cruel people who use the fact of this inevitable hate to further incite and even institutionalize the hatred and racial prejudice by saying stuff like "Israelis/Palestinians hate and teach their children hate" (as Golda Meir did, when in a position of institutional power) - that can't be condoned. It can easily be *said*, but on reflection a true mind will repudiate it for what it is.
You say:
"You don't know me. How can you make such accusations against someone like that? You have no idea what I think or what my experiences are."
I reply:
You haven't shown that you give a damn. Even here, you open by supposedly repudiating Golda Meir's statement (albeit after a watered down interpretation), but you then go on to in effect support and defend it with video "evidence" and innuendo.
Have you seen any anti-occupation pro-Palestinian types in I/P who've done anything but unequivocally condemn suicide bombing, terror against civilians like the rockets? I haven't. If it happens, it ought to be condemned. Perhaps I haven't been here long enough but no such posting has passed my eyes. And a little girl doing a camera friendly (and defended) taunting of her heavily armed IDF occupiers sure the hell isn't "terrorism directed at civilians". Rather, things like IDF tactics of night-raids on civilian homes, and night prowling in heavily armed troop carriers with sirens and bullhorns blaring down the streets and roads of Palestinian towns and villages MOST CERTAINLY IS TERRORISM and it has one intent only - to make life so insufferable for the Palestinian population that they willingly relocate, to make room for more racist Israeli settlements.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Okay. To start, there's no such thing as a Jewish only road. Roads in the OPT are segregated by nationality, Israeli and Palestinian. Now if you knew why then you'd know that the road in the clip isn't segregated. That's because this same kind of thing kept occurring when the roads were mixed and unsecured. The roads became Israeli or Palestinian exclusive specifically to address the problem of Arab kids throwing stones at Jews' cars as they drove by.
Interesting that you're ok having a few stones thrown at a car if its driven by settlers though. First of all, that's exactly the thinking that led to the road segregation.
Beyond that, why is someone automatically a lying thieving racist settlement fucker merely because they live in a settlement? What if they're just poor or a recent immigrant?
Even if they are not, you're advocating violence against a random civilian just because they belong to a specific group. This is no different than price tag attacks against Palestinians except for which side you're on.
It's a slippery slope that. So you're against Qassam rockets. Ok. Good for you. But you're ok with other, "lesser" forms of violence that probably would just damage property or give the targeted driver a few minor injuries. Probably. Certainly not always though. Sometimes they'll crash through the windshield and main the driver and front seat passenger. Sometimes the stone'll smash a window, startling the driver, causing him to lose control and crash. Occasionally, a single stone will cause everyone in the car to be killed; violently... horribly mangled. So while you're right about one thing, that I DO oppose that, I actually oppose slinging stones at anyone, regardless of whether they're in a car, ensconced in a tank, kitted out in all their official IDF gear including their helmet and rifle, or merely wearing the knitted kippah and payas favored by the racist, Arab-hating, violent, extremist wing of the settler movement.
But I love your rationale. Unless you agree that random acts of violence are ok when perpetrated against certain groups then you are a supporter of apartheid.
I don't see why it's beyond your ability to imagine that hatred isn't "taught" to Palestinian kids.
Because hatred IS being taught to Palestinian children. It's not a debatable point. Hateful, anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli propaganda is actively being taught to young Palestinians. I have seen it. I'm unaware of the existence of any kindred Israeli programs, anti-Arab stuff targeted towards Israeli children. In fact, out of the dozens of Israelis I know, not one of them harbors hatred towards Arabs. They were not raised to hate Arab people or consider them inferior in any way. That Arabs have hurt them, and/or killed their friends and family in the past is a poor rationale for then hating all other Arabs in the future.
Hatred, like tolerance, is a learned trait. If indoctrinating young children to hold hateful beliefs truly had no effect then no one would ever bother doing it. Yet they do.
delrem
(9,688 posts)You say:
"Okay. To start, there's no such thing as a Jewish only road. Roads in the OPT are segregated by nationality, Israeli and Palestinian."
I reply:
Bullshit! The only official nationality of Israel is Jewish, and you know it.
Israel doesn't recognize Palestine, or the rights of Palestinians - who are under military occupation.
You say:
"Now if you knew why then you'd know that the road in the clip isn't segregated. That's because this same kind of thing kept occurring when the roads were mixed and unsecured."
I reply:
Those two sentences directly contract each other. You say the road isn't segregated, then try to justify the segregation of the road, a road which is *illegal* under international humanitarian law.
You say:
"Beyond that, why is someone automatically a lying thieving racist settlement fucker merely because they live in a settlement? What if they're just poor or a recent immigrant?"
I say:
Because they made the choice and persevere in that choice and have no excuse that they're ignorant, since from their hilltop vantage they have a good view of the territory and people that their outpost was strategically located to control. Furthermore, Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory are *illegal* under international humanitarian law - but Israeli politicians hide behind the lie that Palestine doesn't exist, and the settlers hide behind the lying politicians. Furthermore, Israel makes policy to leverage poorer Israelis and new (Jewish, of course) immigrants into these settlements, as part of Israel's strategic plan to annex "Judea and Samaria". Furthermore, passports of people wishing to enter the west bank are now being stamped "Judea and Samaria only", replacing "Palestinian Authority Only". Of course no one can enter the west bank without Israeli permission.
You say:
"Even if they are not, you're advocating violence against a random civilian just because they belong to a specific group. This is no different than price tag attacks against Palestinians except for which side you're on. "
I say:
It is called resisting occupation, and Palestinians have the right under international law to resist the foreign occupation of their land. Israeli civilians who settle the occupied lands after the Israeli army clears the way are *illegal foreign occupiers* and part of a movement of people the express purpose of which is to permanently secure that ethnically cleansed land for the state of Israel.
You say:
"Because hatred IS being taught to Palestinian children. It's not a debatable point. Hateful, anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli propaganda is actively being taught to young Palestinians. I have seen it. "
I say:
Likewise hatred IS being taught to Israeli children. It's not a debatable point. Hateful, anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian propaganda is actively being taught to young Israelis. I have seen it.
Here are examples: the doctrine that Palestine doesn't exist. The fact that Israel's Supreme Court has upheld a law banning Palestinians who marry Israelis from gaining Israeli citizenship. The prevalence of the term "demographic threat". Here's a quote from an article by Jonathan Cook:
"A local authority in Israel has announced that it is establishing a special team of youth counsellors and psychologists whose job it will be to identify young Jewish women who are dating Arab men and "rescue" them. The move by the municipality of Petah Tikva, a city close to Tel Aviv, is the latest in a series of separate - and little discussed - initiatives from official bodies, rabbis, private organisations and groups of Israeli residents to try to prevent interracial dating and marriage."
This only one such activity, read more at:
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/israeli-drive-to-prevent-jewish-girls-dating-arabs
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Israel's official nationality is Israeli. Although its a Jewish state, one can not get a jewish citizenship, just an israeli one. 20% of Israeli citizens are non Jews, like bedouins, Druze, Arabs, etc. Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis alike are guaranteed equality under the law in Israel and a large percentage of new immigrants every year are non-Jews.
The roads in the WB are segregated by citizenship. Israelis can use some roads while non-Israelis (Palestinians), use the rest. It isn't dependent on religion, race, or ethno-national identity. Just citizenship.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I'm not sure what you mean by this. What doctrine? Do you refer to the description of the Palestinian people as being a recently invented national identity? Or that the state of Palestine has never, as of yet, ever existed? And in what way is this really, in and of itself, hate speech? It's more like a framing device that could be used to set up a justification for some discriminatory policy. But by itself it's just a narrative from a specific POV. Nothing about it is exactly false, you know? But even if 100% true I certainly don't think it justifies oppression. So it's kind of irrelevant IMO.
The above is a rare example of actual anti-Arab discrimination codified within Israeli law. It's disgusting. But it's not anti-Arab propaganda directed at Jewish children to indoctrinate them. Its got nothing to do with that.
I read about this group. Their mission is undeniably odious in the extreme, lacking even a single redeemable aspect. That said, they're a small, localized group that only target older Israeli girls who have already been judged "guilty" of fraternizing with the enemy. It's not propaganda directed towards Israeli children either.
But the fact that they exist at all is evidence that the way of life they espouse is under threat. And their lack of wide support from within even their own community shows the unpopularity of their message among modern Israelis. Evidence that Israelis are becoming LESS racist and segregated, not more as you suggest.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Wanted: Israeli Arab settlers
Op-ed: Building settlements for Israeli Arabs in West Bank will benefit Jewish state
Rafael Castro
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4248627,00.html
Or you could join with your opinion in the comments section, to entertain yourself by conversing with a happy bunch of ynet campers.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Half-crazed zealots are out there "researching" embarrassing proposals like these in the name of advancing the cause of Zionism. So, dude is nuts. Who cares?
That said, he DOES raise one interesting question. Namely: "Why does every Arab state, and the majority of the rest of the world to boot, label Israel's settlement movement an illegal violation of Geneva Accords? Is it genuinely bc Israel's violating Geneva and they'd act the same towards ANY state acting that way? Or would Arabs from Syria or Jordan or Egypt be treated any differently if one of those states was occupying the land in question and allowing their Arab citizens to occupy it?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Their right to resist occupation is limited to acts that don't violate laws of war themselves. So, even just the example of those kids throwing stones violate at least a half dozen fundamental rules of war, like those outlawing child combatants, the one requiring soldiers to wear a uniform and disallowing non-soldiers from combat, and those condemning any attacks upon civilians.
Whether Israeli settlers' presence is illegal or not is immaterial to the illegality of attacks targeting them.
Earlier you wrote:
While not as dramatic as a rocket, you, yourself have come out in support of targeting Israeli civilians as falling under the category of "legitimate resistance." While less lethal than rockets, stones and molotov cocktails are undeniably more dangerous than a siren, even one that's deployed at 3am.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I bet you don't have the jam to scroll through it.
delrem
(9,688 posts)You say:
"Their right to resist occupation is limited to acts that don't violate laws of war themselves. So, even just the example of those kids throwing stones violate at least a half dozen fundamental rules of war, like those outlawing child combatants, the one requiring soldiers to wear a uniform and disallowing non-soldiers from combat, and those condemning any attacks upon civilians."
You may call it a "war", but I call it an occupation going on 46 years. You may call those children "child combatants" who should be wearing "uniforms", but I call them the third generation of children confronting the tormentors who oppress the entire civilian population of Palestine in a brutal racist occupation where the occupiers have no intention of ever leaving because their intent is to annex all the land, once cleared of the racially undesirable people.
But you... you see the war crime in the children's rocks, and that is warped. Esp. so because you defend the occupation's night raids, and you don't see a problem with "non-violent sirens at night", and you justify segregated roads leading to racially segregated settlements in the occupied lands, and the whole stinking racist works. And you deny Israel's distinction between citizenship and nationality. And you conclude with the assertion: "Israelis are becoming LESS racist and segregated", while claiming that Palestinians teach their children hate.
Way to go.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Actually I almost never use the word "war" greatly favoring the term "conflict" as being weirdly less specific while also more accurate IMO. But in terms of the legal aspects of the conflict, these are surplufluous differences. Basically, if you are going to argue in favor of Palestine's legal right to resist occupiers and settlers, then you can't very well ask to be excused from the laws yourself, can you? No matter how poetically you might present your case, any argument that hinges on the systematic violation of the most basic and universally accepted cornerstones of human rights law is pretty much a guaranteed loser IMHO.
Ok, here I actually agree with you. Israel has made their plans regarding occupied lands crystal clear. They have every intention of permanently annexing the entirety of post-67 settler occupied land... except, of course, for the land they don't plan on annexing. Which seems to be the overwhelming majority of it, actually. Especially once you consider that almost all of the land that Israel conquered in war, then held on to as occupiers, and even allowed israelis to begin settling, (over 90% I believe), has ALREADY been withdrawn from entirely.
Except it isn't as though I look at impoverished Palestinian children throwing ineffectual rocks at the armored side of a Merkava tank and think of them as war criminals. (I agree, BTW, that doing so would require a pretty warped mindset.)
It is that I recognize the critical importance of treating both sides equally with respect to the law, if we are even going to so much as pay lip service to attaining long-term peace. We simply can't criticize one side for failing to adhere to laws that the other side is allowed to violate with impunity. Finding justifications for illegal actions taken by your side is easy in this conflict. Examples of oppression, imposed inequality and ongoing, emotionally charged blood feuds abound throughout I/P interactions during the past 90 years. Finding compelling reasons to continue fighting is EASY. Overcoming them is much harder. Failure is often much easier than success. So if we are to allow ourselves even the slimmest possibility of eventually achieving peace then the first step must be the equal application of law. One's accountability would be based on one's actions, rather than on one's present situation or history.
And yes, I realize this isn't entirely fair. It is merely the "fair-est" method available to us... Equally applying the law would go just as much for settlers accustomed to avoiding serious prosecution for attacking Arabs, as it would Gazan Qassam brigades so often excused by their western allies.
I was wondering if you'd be up for trying an experiment with me? If you refrain from extrapolating never-spoken ideological statements to assign to me, I promise to do the same for you. For instance, I never came close to implying the above statement. All I said was that I don't think that the sirens constitute terrorism. That doesn't mean I see no problem with them.
Justify is a strong word. Lets say I think the road thing is an issue for which no reasonable solution exists.
Next, you can't really call settlements "racist" as though that's the main problem at hand. I have noticed that it's a word you're fond of using to describe Zionism though. I can see why... It's a powerful word. No one questions the surrounding context too much either. We don't need to because we know that everything racist is wrong. Hands down. The only problem is that race isn't really a serious issue WRT the I/P conflict. There's plenty of Israelis who share their race with most Palestinians. And Israelis themselves are a rainbow of divergent races.
I don't deny it, I was simply unaware if it. In this case, you were right, I was wrong. I still don't think it's a distinction that has far-reaching implications though. From what Ive seen, its mostly a semantic thing.
As a general characterization of the current state of affairs and future heading of either nation.. yes. I get why you don't like these conclusions, but they aren't based on anything besides my understanding of current events. Hamas makes kids' shows that kinda resemble Sesame Street, provided that Grover advocates martyrdom and Elmo suddenly died one day, murdered at the hands of their Jewish enemies. Palestinian kids ARE being indoctrinated to hate Jews/Israelis in a fashion not currently being replicated by the Israelis, IMO.
delrem
(9,688 posts)which prove my points.
OK, I've had enough of bumping shira's sickening "Hitler" thread.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Issues such as emboldening and equipping child soldiers, (a truly inexcusable war crime if there ever was one), versus children confronting their oppressors, is a meaningless difference? Hair-splitting? Tell me, is the only reason that giving children the job of soldier is considered a war crime because before now there weren't any children with legitimate grievances?
BTW, how is it that Palestinians utilize children in the part of this conflict that frequently becomes extremely violent, the front line fighting so to speak, yet they are simultaneously NOT guilty of teaching their children to hate Israelis/Jews? Are the Palestinians somehow teaching their children to violently attack people they simply have no strong feelings about?
And those "points" you are so proud to have proven? They're basically admissions that you hold the two groups to two entirely different standards of law, of values, of democracy and of ethics. I'm not sure why you are so proud.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but please do continue your moral outrage, and Palestinian children only hate Israels because of their parents, I always love that line as if life experience teaches children nothing, perhaps being ripped out of bed for questioning having relative 'detained' and sometimes killed having your home bombed or taken away for more space for Israeli only settlements none of this has a wit to do with it?
I always find posturing such as exhibited in your comment simultaneously amusing and insulting to the intelligence of the reader
delrem
(9,688 posts)Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Pointing out where your argument hinges on untrue propaganda means that I support apartheid... of course. I've never said anything that could be thought of as pro-apartheid, but hey, that doesn't matter. In this case, "pro-apartheid" means "disagrees with you."
If you're interested in the truth, stick around. Otherwise scuttle back to mondoweiss where posting anything that isn't rabidly anti-Zionist will get a person banned.
delrem
(9,688 posts)You showed that you don't even know the difference between the notions 'Israeli national' and 'Israeli citizen', so you showed that you don't know what Israeli political reality you support, which doesn't stop you from supporting it, and then denying that you support Israel apartheid - which is a contradiction.
So maybe you should go back to school.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I was unaware of the semantic distinction that Israel places on those terms.
That said, it is hardly a critical aspect of Israeli law. You've shown many times over that you're unaware of some of the most basic historical facts regarding this conflict. I'm sure that you're very excited to latch on to this technical detail that I wasn't aware of but please note that I have no problem admitting when I am wrong about something. I must have pointed out a dozen key historical points that you were totally wrong about, and your reaction has always been to ignore them.
Using the term apartheid wrt Israel is no more accurate than applying the term Nazi wrt the palestinians.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)I decided to look it up myself instead of relying on your often warped links. On Israel's government site I found this.
Acquisition of Israeli Nationality
Israel's Nationality Law relates to anyone wishing to settle in Israel, as well as those already residing or born there, regardless of race, religion, creed, sex or political beliefs. Citizenship may be acquired by:
Birth
The Law of Return
Residence
Naturalization
Looks like I wasn't really wrong after all. Remember, there are two different meanings of the word nation. The way I was using it earlier was entirely correct.
Now, lets see how you handle this.
delrem
(9,688 posts)You are correct,
on many official sites the English translation of Israel's law on citizenship is translated as "nationality law". E.g.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,LEGAL,,LEGISLATION,ISR,4562d8cf2,3ae6b4ec20,0.html
and this is but one of many sites providing that exact translation.
The term 'nationality' in this translation is equivalent to the English term 'citizenship', and is not equivalent to the term Zionists intend when they explain that, in Israeli law, Jewishness is a nationality, as in the statement that Israel is a Jewish state, or a state of the Jewish people. As circumstantial proof of this, consider this reference to the identical text:
http://www.knesset.gov.il/laws/special/eng/citizenship_law.htm
"Definitions
1.
In this law -
"Citizenship Law" - The Citizenship Law, 5712 - 1952;"
So the same Nationality Law, 5712-1952, that you quote from, is translated on the Knesset site as "Citizenship Law", and I suggest that this Knesset translation is most accurate of the two. A reason that's been put forward to explain the English translation of the Hebrew term as 'nationality' is to expedite travel to foreign lands, where people are commonly asked their nationality and in this case "nationality" does in fact mean "country of which one is a citizen".
Now I'd like to cite a source re. the distinct Hebrew terms being translated, w.r.t.
1. the Israeli nationality/citizenship law, and 2. the fact that Israel defines itself to be a Jewish state such that the Land of Israel is held in trust for the Jewish people, or people who belong to the Jewish nationality.
I'd also like you to recognize that (pro-Palestinian) posters have been excoriated in this forum for not religiously referring to the Jewish nationality, as such, as opposed to 1. the Jewish religion; 2. the Jewish sect; or the greatest sin of all, 3. the Jewish race. Explanations given are that Zionism was largely founded by secular Jews and secular (non-observant to whatever degree) Jews are recognized by Israel's definition; and that there are Jews of all kinds of so-called "races" ('race' isn't a recognized scientific term).
I suggest that this excoriation attends on the definition of Israel as the state of the Jewish nation (e.g. neither a theocracy or a racist apartheid), so a *lot* hinges on our recognizing the distinction between the terms 'citizen' and 'national'. Double standards w.r.t. recognition of this distinction aren't helpful.
I get my understanding of the distinction in Hebrew terminology (transcribed into Latin script) third hand, from a review of a text by Ben White, a text that I haven't read. I understand that Ben White is anathema to Zionist Israelis, since when looking up critiques of Ben White's text I met with much strongly worded ad hominem, but unfortunately nothing of substance. Since I don't know Hebrew I'll go with it, though I'd be happy to hear criticisms of White's translation from an expert in Hebrew.
""Israel is in many respects admirably democratic", yet there is a fundamental contradiction at its core. This contradiction between "Jewish and democratic" is revealed by the distinction made in Israeli law between citizenship and nationality. White writes that all Israeli citizens (Citizenship= "ezra`hut"
possess in theory equal rights. But only its Jewish citizens have rights as nationals (Nationality= "le´um" . "The whole purpose of political Zionism is a state of the Jewish nation", writes White. And a court ruling in 1970 declared that there "is no Israeli nation that exists separately from a Jewish nation", referring to world-wide Jewry. According to the author, a "Jewish democracy", as Israel describes itself, is thus a contradiction in terms."
http://www.modernwriters.org/focus/analysis/6766-ben-white-israeli-apartheid.html
As I understand it, this distinction in the Hebrew language grasps the distinction between Israeli citizenship and Israeli nationality as it occurs in Israeli law - which is the only distinction that matters.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Firstly, thank you for the thoughtful response. I think you touch upon the key points of interest related to this issue and in many ways I agree with your analysis.
There are a few sticking points between our varying points of view though, in particular the narrative outlined in the summary of Ben White's book on the subject.
To start I'd offer that a subtle but critical difference exists between the two main branches of nationality, civic versus ethnic nationality. For those of us like myself and you who grew up in North American countries the tenets and values of civic nationalism became synonymous with how we view democracy, with little room for variation. While these values are clearly built upon the highest standards of equality and freedom I'd like to offer that variations exist which are equally valid, if less familiar.
One of the main criticisms I've seen offered against Zionism hinges on its key motivation for existing. Defenders offer the rationale that it exists as a foil against anti-semitism. Detractors accuse it of having a foundation of racial superiority and a desire to maintain a pure race. In defense of the former I'd offer some points conspicuously omitted from the White summary. First is the standard to qualify for Israel's RoR. Contrary to popular belief it is not merely being Jewish. Rather the standard hinges upon qualities that would have made one a target for anti-semitism. So the secular wife of a Jew. Or a secular person who doesn't meet halachal standards yet would be considered a Jew "by blood" according to the nazis. These people all qualify for RoR. Next is the issue of land ownership. While entirely true that Arab Israelis are barred from buying land an important detain is omitted. Namely that Jews are likewise barred from buying land. All land in Israel aside from previously owned property is rented from the government. No difference exists between Jew and Arab wrt property laws. In fact all ethic groups are granted equal rights under the law in Israel.
This isn't to say that institutionalized discrimination does not occur. It does. As it does in all countries. I propose that this is less a function of Jewish nationalism than one of political idealism running up against historical divisions inherent to tribal societies. Israel is a state with a varied citizenry made up of conquering immigrants and a conquered ethnic minority. The 100 year old conflict being discussed was cleaved down these ethnic lines. To expect any society to immediately transcend the harsh realities imposed by this fact is entirely unrealistic. I would posit that Israel has done better than most other states might have.
But to get to the heart of the discussion... Can any nation-state that names the welfare of a single ethnic group (or "nation" in the parlance being used here), as its primary goal, ever be considered a successful democracy on par with nation-states that rely on a civic-minded philosophy to be their defining national traits?
I believe it can be, obviously. But to consider ethic nationalism a viable, desirable foundation on which to build your state requires approaching the problem from a different place than one otherwise might. The creation of a state like Israel is born of the need to address a specific problem; providing a safe haven for the Jews from global anti-semitism; as opposed to starting with the desire to create a state that best embraces a specific set of liberal, democratic ideals, without preconditions. Such a state does a great job of providing equality and freedom for its citizens. Where it fails is in aiding minority populations that lack existing toeholds in the corridors of power. Refugee populations that lack lobbyists to plead their cases. Think of the Jewish refugees fleeing Europe during WWII. Lacking a state who might take a designated interest in them, these populations fall through the cracks. They are in need of designated states to look after their interests. Consider the plight of the Palestinian diaspora now as they are evicted from state after state without anyplace to build a secure existence. Can anyone argue that they'd be better served by a civic national state in place of a Palestine that could offer them a right of return?
delrem
(9,688 posts)And I congratulate you for "getting through" to me.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Rather, things like IDF tactics of night-raids on civilian homes, and night prowling in heavily armed troop carriers with sirens and bullhorns blaring down the streets and roads of Palestinian towns and villages MOST CERTAINLY IS TERRORISM and it has one intent only - to make life so insufferable for the Palestinian population that they willingly relocate, to make room for more racist Israeli settlements
One would almost think that if a policy like that existed then everyone would know all about it. Pray tell, how did you come into contact with this almost unbelievable information, scooping all the news outlets around the globe? Also, who is in charge of such an operation, and who else knows about it?
Lastly, do you have an example of such a tactic actually happening? Like, start to finish? Using sirens to terrorize Palestinians into leaving and then building a settlement on top of the land? Because I did not think any new settlements had been built in years.
delrem
(9,688 posts)The video showed it.
unfortunately I lost the url.
feel free to disbelieve me.
on edit.
Found a second source
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4342245,00.html
ynet depicts it as an isolated incident, tho' the final paragraph speaks of other similar incidents.
The original source (unfortunately not linked to at ynet) explained the Palestinian perspective.
I can understand how you wouldn't count a heavily armed occupation army, whose tactic is night raids, engaging in such "Non-violent use of sirens" doesn't count as terrorism. You have a very different perspective than the does the target of such tactics.
night prowling in heavily armed troop carriers with sirens and bullhorns blaring down the streets and roads of Palestinian towns and villages MOST CERTAINLY IS TERRORISM
Really? Non-violent use of sirens constitutes terrorism? REALLY?!
Does anything which rises to the level of extreme annoyance count as terror attacks?
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)My mother, who was and remains an Arab, loved me and all my siblings just as much as any mother would.
This insinuation that Arab parents do not love their children is pure racism.
Cary
(11,746 posts)How much hatred of Israel?
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)you made the claim that the absence of peace was attributable to Arab parents not loving their children insufficiently, at least to some extent.
Do you really think its as simple as all that? And do you think that it is true of all Arabs?
David Ben-Gurion (the "founding father" of Israel) had this to say:-
But I don't think that all Jews feel the same way about their children, and I don't think that all Arabs feel the same way either.
shira
(30,109 posts)What we basically see here is that you and your mates cannot be bothered by severe child abuse committed by Palestinians. And it's so bad that you'll attempt to distract from it by tossing out discredited anti-semitic quotes.
Pretty fucking low.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)it just claims that the quote is taken out of context, although frankly I don't think any context is going to abrogate the ordinary meaning of the statement that Ben-Gurion made.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)The more things change the more they stay the same.
Thanks, Shira.
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)i was commenting on the quote by David Ben Gurion. It just sounds a lot like what Abbas was quoted as saying recently about Palestinians.
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)So, in that way, Ben Gurion sounds a lot like Abbas...at least in that quote.
Here is another quote by him. very telling indeed.
That's a great quote, don't you think? At the same time Ben Gurion is sounding truly understanding about the viewpoint of the "Arabs" as he calls them he nonetheless doesn't care just as long as Israel has a powerful army to do what it wants.
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)When a politician says something it is there forever.
I can understand how it may make you uncomfortable to have to swallow the truth of what the first PM of Israel says, but these are his words? No?
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)I didn't "rip" anything out of context, deliberate or otherwise. I just posted a quote that doesn't enter into your weltanschauung.
You can either deal with the reality of it, or you can attempt to throw more shizzle at me from your bag of excuses.
shira
(30,109 posts)....out of context in order to portray him as something he isn't.
You should know better.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)I didn't "rip" anything out of context, deliberate or otherwise. I just posted a quote that doesn't enter into your weltanschauung.
You can either deal with the reality of it, or you can attempt to throw more shizzle at me from your bag of excuses.
When Romney was caught making the 48% remark, he too had shrill apologists that tried to claim the remark was taken out of context.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and people have to own up to what others are quoted as saying.
shira
(30,109 posts)The Brits offered to take in some Jews from Germany and close the gates to Israel off from the rest of world Jewry.
If the choice is between Germany's Jews vs. half Germany's Jews and in addition Jews from the rest of the world (going to Israel) do you choose option #1 or #2?
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Hey, 50% is still better than nothing. Ben Gurion sounds like a glass half full kind of guy. So what if the other 50% aren't saved in one scenario?
It still beats the track record of Abbas.
shira
(30,109 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)See you in a different thread.
Cary
(11,746 posts)Funny how you never mention that.
And what about the fact that there are 1 million Arab Israeli citizens? They generally live better than Arabs in Arab countries.
Why don't you talk about that?
How about Druze or Kurds? How have they fared at the hands of Sunni and Shia?
A little selective you are, eh?
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)I'm not sure what your point is. You made the claim that Arabs don't love their children. Now you seem to be branching off into all sorts of other matters.
Cary
(11,746 posts)Apparently you don't understand the problem either.
You might read The Peace to End All Peace if you want a real perspective.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)How many times have I been told by semi-literate, fat-fingered internet warriors to "go read a history book". Quite a few times, I dare say.
I've already read it. It is an excellent treatment of the demise of the Ottoman era and the machinations of the European colonial powers. I thoroughly recommend it to anyone.
But it does not have a great deal of bearing on the issue of whether Arab mothers love their children or not.
Cary
(11,746 posts)You either don't understand or you are being obtuse.
delrem
(9,688 posts)1. The premise is a speculation, not a reality, even tho' the speculation is proximate to the reality.
2. If it were reality I doubt Ben-Gurion would follow through. Ben-Gurion was bad, but not toward the Jewish people, and these kinds of speculations are always very unlikely.
3. Ben-Gurion's sentiment is the same sentiment as motivates these quotes used in vicious propaganda to demonize Palestinians.
So
4. shaayecanaan's use of the quote is valid.
shira
(30,109 posts)Under self-rule on the West Bank and Gaza, child sacrifice has turned into a normative part of the socialization process as the phenomenon of suicide bombers has escalated to epidemic proportions.6
From an early age, children are fed anti-Zionist, anti-Jewish and anti-Western hate propaganda. Mosques, schools, summer camps, and even children’s television programs are exploited to encourage children to become martyrs in an act that will bring them respect and parental pride:
In Hamas-run kindergartens, signs on the walls read: “The children of the kindergarten are the shahids (holy martyrs) of tomorrow.”7
A television show called “The Children’s Club” shows a young Palestinian, age 9 or 10 proclaiming, “When I wander into Jerusalem, I will become a suicide bomber.”8
The Palestinian Authority-controlled television,9 broadcasts MTV-style videos for teens that glorify suicide bombing and martyrdom.
A 6th grade Palestinian textbook, Our Beautiful Language, includes the “Shahid Song” that encourages death in war as a shahid or martyr. Other textbooks carry similar messages.
At a Palestine Authority summer camp in 2002, 25,000 children were trained in how to make firebombs, use firearms, and ambush and kidnap targeted enemies.10
An Islamic Jihad summer school massages the libidos of teenage boys by telling them they will “liberate Palestine from the Jews” by becoming martyrs, and promise the boys that they will be greeted by 72 virgins.11
Kindergartens, schools, summer camps, and school sports tournaments (and other institutions) are named after terrorists and young suicide bombers, who are used as pedagogic role models.12
more...
http://palestinianchildabuse.com/2012/09/06/palestinian-society-abuses-its-children/
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Everyone needs a hobby. This one should keep them busy for centuries to come.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)SourceWatch on the Gatestone Institute:
Max Blumenthal reports:
At the April event, Wilders's seamless fusion of anti-Muslim bombast and pro-Israel cant was gratefully received by the Gatestone Institute’s founder and director, Nina Rosenwald, whom he acknowledged at the top of his jeremiad as another of his good friends. An heiress to the Sears Roebuck fortune, Rosenwald spreads her millions through the William Rosenwald Family Fund, a nonprofit foundation named for her father, a famed Jewish philanthropist who created the United Jewish Appeal in 1939. His daughter’s focus is more explicitly political. According to a report by the Center for American Progress titled “Fear Inc.,” Rosenwald and her sister Elizabeth Varet, who also directs the family foundation, have donated more than $2.8 million since 2000 to “organizations that fan the flames of Islamophobia.”
Besides funding a Who’s Who of anti-Muslim outfits, Rosenwald has served on the board of AIPAC, the central arm of America’s Israel lobby, and holds leadership roles in a host of mainstream pro-Israel organizations. As groups like AIPAC lead the charge for a US military strike on the Islamic Republic of Iran, threatening to turn apocalyptic visions of civilizational warfare into catastrophic reality, Rosenwald's wealth has fueled a rapidly emerging alliance between the pro-Israel mainstream and the Islamophobic fringe. (In 2003 alone the Rosenwald Family Fund donated well over half of its $1.6 million in total contributions to pro-Israel and Islamophobic organizations.) This alliance serves to sanitize and legitimize professional anti-Muslim bigots like Wilders, allowing their ideas to mingle easily with those of neoconservative foreign policy heavyweights intent on promoting the appearance of a convergence between US and Israeli interests by invoking the specter of a common “Islamofascist” enemy. With Gatestone—which publicizes the writings of figures ranging from pro-Israel super-lawyer Alan Dershowitz to “counter-jihad” propagandist Robert Spencer, and boasts Harold Rhode, a neoconservative former Pentagon official credited, as a senior fellow, with helping to try to push the Bush administration to invade Iraq—Rosenwald has attempted to shift the alliance into overdrive.[1]
? Max Blumenthal, The Sugar Mama of Anti-Muslim Hate, The Nation, 13 June 2012.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Gatestone_Institute
on edit to add link.
shira
(30,109 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)What a wonderful guy.
Say, can you name even one institution or organization you respect that speaks out against what Hamas is doing to these children?
Just one?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The information through the Gatestone Institute is not reliable. I realize this is
a ludicrous idea for you but even so, I wanted to pass the information on.
HRW, Amnesty International and B'tselem, I respect their work, to name a few.
shira
(30,109 posts)Usually, you're front, center, and ready to provide those human rights reports on children.
Well, at least when Israel can be blamed...
Got anything?
And if not, what does that tell you?
========
ps,
Khaled Abu Toameh is the writer of the article. You think he makes stuff up to make Hamas look bad?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The Gatestone Institute is unreliable thus the claims in your OP are
questionable, to say the least.
You are free to google any reports you like from any of the groups I listed, they've been
basing their reports on facts for years on Hamas.
shira
(30,109 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)on edit..hope that is now clear enough for you.
shira
(30,109 posts)Here's a photo gallery from this week showing Hamas abusing school kids...
http://paltimes.net/new/ar/gallery/showalbum/34119/صور-طلاب-يتعلمون-القنص-بمدارس-غزة.html
Palestine Times is Hamas media, BTW.
They're very proud of the work they do with Palestinian kids.
What says you?
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)If he were a partisan pro-Palestinian shill, you'd be attacking him as a source.
btw, you don't know Arabic so how do you know what the caption says? Teaching teenagers how to shoot isn't child abuse, and that's what the picture looks like...
But thank you for at least not posting yet another link to a virulently anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab blog the way you did before...
delrem
(9,688 posts)That, plus a maximal dose of hate, does the trick.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)Toameh doesn't do that. He's a credible source with integrity.
Those pictures show a schoolyard with students in their early and later teens learning from Hamas or Islamic Jihad how to be snipers. Run a google translate.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)You have incredibly trouble grasping that there's writers or 'advocate' that's pro-Israeli who are partisan zealots. In fact, I can't recall a single one that you've ever agreed was lacking in credibility or who you haven't rushed to defend to the hilt.
I don't think credibility or integrity are things that I or many other DUers who've read yr posts would take yr word on. And the same goes for yr 'trust me' on pictures of an Arab appearing to show a teenager how to use a gun. I'm all for strict gun control laws, but even I've got no issues with a teenager being taught to use a firearm. And if they're in an area of conflict and being shot at by Israeli snipers, then the more power to them for trying to protect themselves...
shira
(30,109 posts)You do realize someone partisan can still be honest, accurate, and have credibility & integrity, right?
I think you screwed up here and didn't mean to write what you just did.
Are you giving Hamas/Islamic Jihad props for training children on how to confront the IDF?
And did you really just state that kids need to protect themselves from IDF snipers? Because that's a really ugly charge....
I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt thinking you're just tired or something.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Because that's exactly what you do to many other DUers. In this case I'm explaining that there's no writers or advocates that you think are partisan or lacking in credibility when they're pro-Israeli. As you haven't bothered correcting me on that, I'd say that's an accurate observation...
I think you screwed up here and didn't mean to write what you just did.
I meant to write what I did. I'm not surprised that you expect Palestinians to be sitting ducks when Israeli snipers shoot at them, but I don't and as long as they stick to aiming at Israeli troops, I'm not going to be all outraged. Why shoudln't people be able to defend themselves against hostile troops?
Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #102)
Post removed
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)proves what to you exactly? The people in the pictures are learning to shoot a gun?
palwatch, MEMRI, and Gatestone all garbage and you know this too. Feel blessed your sources are
allowed here at DU. I find it telling that you rely on them, and appreciate the clarity it brings.
Btw, another source I use is Defense of Children International. This is how earnest people help children.
http://www.defenceforchildren.org/dci-worldwide/middle-east.html
Your organization's have no intention of helping children, none.
Toameh is unreliable as he is also a speaker for the Hasbara Fellowship and does
speaking engagements for Stand With Us. ( see wiki with citations )
The only awards he has received I believe are from Israel and he also has connections
to the Hudson Institute, another right winged group...they gave him an award for writing too.
The Hudson Institute is a non-profit think tank headquartered in Washington D.C. Its 2008 IRS form 990 listed $11.8 million in advocacy expenditures. [1]
While describing itself as "non-partisan" and preferring to portray itself as independently "contrarian" rather than as a conservative think tank, the Hudson Institute gains financial support from many of the foundations and corporations that have bankrolled the conservative movement. The Capital Research Center, a conservative group that seeks to rank non-profits and documents their funding, allocates Hudson as a 7 on its ideological spectrum with 8 being "Free Market Right" and 1 "Radical Left." [1]
Hudson has traditionally had a strong focus on U.S. domestic policies such as national defense, education, crime, immigration, welfare, pesticides and biotechnology. However, in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks it has substantially boosted its focus on international issues such as the Middle East, Latin America and Islam.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hudson_Institute
shira
(30,109 posts)Do you support Hamas' war crimes of cynically using child militants?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)...of what they do.
Don't worry - I understand. This makes you uncomfortable, so avoid like the plague. Deny, never acknowledge. Rather than do that, attack and ridicule your opponent.
Continue...
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)when you want to. Your choice here with this picture does not support your claim, but you believe it
does.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Becuase when I read this first bit I sat and waited for yr strident posts of outrage condemning anyone who associates in any way with that Islamophbobe. After all, that's what you do when it's an antisemite anyone is having even the slightest association with...
Maybe this:
'At the April event, Wilders's seamless fusion of anti-Muslim bombast and pro-Israel cant was gratefully received by the Gatestone Institute’s founder and director, Nina Rosenwald, whom he acknowledged at the top of his jeremiad as another of his good friends.'
would have produced howls of outrage out of you if it had read:
At the April event, Gilad Atzmon seamless fusion of anti-Jewish bombast and pro-Palestinian cant was gratefully received by the founder of a Pro-Palestinian group no-one's ever heard of, , whom he acknowledged at the top of his jeremiad as another of his good friends.
Now that would have caused spontaneous head combustion and spawned around between 50-100 OPs of outrage, all designed to argue that guilt by association is a good, good thing, but to be ignored if the association is between a blatant Islamophobe and a pro-Israel advocacy group...
shira
(30,109 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Here it is again. ''At the April event, Wilders's seamless fusion of anti-Muslim bombast and pro-Israel cant was gratefully received by the Gatestone Institute’s founder and director, Nina Rosenwald, whom he acknowledged at the top of his jeremiad as another of his good friends.'
And that's why I pointed out how interesting it is that you've been accusing people of being guilty by association when they get seen with antisemites, but when it comes to Islamophobia you react in a completely different manner...
Harry_Scrote
(121 posts)Do you have any other interest in posting here outside of Israel/Palestine threads, Shira? I never see you posting anywhere else on DU but here. Just curious.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)Since being at DU3 her profile has consistently shown that 100% of her posts are in this group, and I suspect it was no different at DU2.
Harry_Scrote
(121 posts)Is he/she some kind of paid PR person working for the Israeli consulate or something? I just wonder why their world-view is so "specific." And why post on an American political site about nothing except Israel? I don't get it.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Anyhow, to do the unthinkable and ... uh ... defend shira's posting preferences, there's nothing wrong with posting only or mostly in one group.
I post mostly here. My reason isn't because I'm not inclined to post to the more general DU forums, but because I'm not a US citizen and my politics is somewhat to the left of the US political parties. I'm a Canadian and support the NDP, more toward the center-right than the center or center-left, because I've always been self-employed and that's how my self-interest lies relative to the NDP. I'm neither a liberal or conservative. I have no use for the conservative parties and my only use for the the liberal party is as a coalition partner in a minority gov't, where I like to see the NDP apply all the leverage it has (which in a minority gov't is considerable) to introduce progressive change. I have zero, exactly zero, belief that a two party liberal/conservative good/bad cop system would benefit my interests, and if some anti-democratic force imposed such a fake two party "democracy" on Canada everything progressives have gained would be lost. We'd end up with Romneycare at best, our unions would be gutted, etc. The US has such a two party system and the fact is that both US parties are to the right of Canada's conservative gov't, and Canada's current conservative gov't is gawdawful right-wing. So my voice wouldn't fit in well in the more general DU forums, and the progressive voices there have a hard enough time without my blundering in.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Especially when they mainly post in the I/P forum or "meta".
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)Google it for more info.
Violet_Crumble
(35,961 posts)No, I think that one's just a labour of love. If Israel was forking out good money for that sort of quality, they'd be asking for a refund pretty quick smart...
It seems like there's a small number of people at DU who never post anywhere else but the Gungeon or I/P. Not my cup of tea, but I suppose GD and LBN must seen a bit scary and risky for some folk.
