I have just finished watching channel 4's despatches investigation into recent deaths of western journalists by the isreali army in palestine.
I already know a little about the situation there :
The documentary follows a journalist as she meets both peace protestors and the isreali military (who seem, judging by the video footage) to not know the difference between firing on unarmed protestors, journalists and children and 'returning fire against armed terrorists' - or that firing one missile into a car of a suspected terrorist, rather than firing one, then another and another into the crowd and the ambulance would be judged by the rest of the world as deliberately killing innocents rather than accidentally.
I was shocked as representatives of the IDF claimed that a british photographer shot in the head by an isreali sniper while trying to get young children to cover from isreali fire was camoflaged and carrying a gun. Footage shows him previously and after beeing shot wearing flourescent jacket and bright colours of the peace protestors.
It was also claimed that the young american peace protestor was killed by falling masonry, despite photos showing her in the tracks of the armoured bulldozer dying in the arms of a jewish peace protestor, and her friends - no masonry. The footage of these bulldozers makes it clear that the IDF will bulldoze any parts of palestine it deems necessary, regardless of protestors - these bulldozers aren't attacked by gunmen - they are protected by tanks and armoured personel carriers that fire into crowds tear gas, stun grenades and machine-guns. Rachel Corrie was seen by her killer, there are witnesses and the footage of the bulldozers show quite clearly that they will bulldoze through any people that get in their way.
The footage also showed that the IDF classes 'crossfire' as 'somewhere in palestine there might be someone with a gun', as IDF described their firing hundreds of rounds of automatic and sniper fire down a Raffa main street as 'returning fire' - the footage shows tracers going only one direction and fire is described as 'overwhelming and incessant' - essentially one shot fired, or imagined to be fired from palestine, is returned a thousand fold from the israeli forces protected by huge walls, while palestinians try and get on with their lives.
Finally the most recent killing of a journalist occured while the documentary was taking place - the team from HBO covering the bulldozing, were fired on by isreali tanks 'returning fire' or rather 'shooting at anything that moves, especially if it might look arab'. The cameraman and directory was shot twice by an isreali tank when they tried to leave an area they had been trapped in by isreali armoured vehicles while filming the bulldozers desteroying crops and olive trees - they were carrying lights and a white flag, shouting and requesting to be able to leave the area, they didn't wish to dodge the indiscriminate isreali sniper fire of the back alleys the palestinians used. and expected tanks not to fire on unarmed journalists shouting in english.
It seems that the rest of the world is quite happy to turn a blind eye to these atrocities, even when western journalists are killed. Whats worse is that israelis and many sympathisers with israel world-wide seem to think that killing 3 innocent palestinians for every 1 israeli killed, not to mention bulldozing crops and homes, curfews, and blockading trade is acceptable.
In the middle of all this Ariel Sharon wants to walk away from peace talks because of some suicide bombers - it is clear israel has no interest in peace - only in avoiding giving up its illegal settlements, occupation, assasinations, trade blockades and nuclear/chemical/biological weapons.
The terrorists have their own agenda, it has as little in common with that of the palestinan people or their government as it does with the people of israel - it has a lot more in common with the IDF, the zionist/jewish militants and settlers who don't want peace but instead bigger walls and more tanks and dead palestinians.
Of course what does this have to do with perl - well we just had YAPC::Israel, unlike YAPC::Europe or any conference in the normal world, this would not welcome anybody from neighbouring countrys - arabs or palestinians who managed to make it through Isreals borders, checkpoints and snipers wouldn't be welcome. Were there any arabs at YAPC::Israel? Unlike other conferences which are held mostly in english - a language spoken or at least understood by most hackers world wide, this conference was almost exclusively in hebrew. Finally why has no-one from israeli spoken out about these atrocities, can we assume tacit acceptance that their lives are worth several of their neighbours or that they are just pretending its not happening or not relevent.
I think most british or american perl mongers are happy to bring attention to their nations ills - there are many many things about the UK that I dislike and I have mentioned them and even written to my MP about them! All I ever see here is americans claiming that I am anti-semetic for pointing out that Isreal is the biggest problem facing world peace and human rights and democracy in the middle east. Maybe these americans have forgotten that the UK lived through many years of terrorism and managed to avoid spilling a tiny fraction of the blood in 30 years that Israel sheds in a week. How many americans have sat on their way to work while the bomb squad defuses a package on the train line to your office - how many israeli's even ? How many americans have had a bomb factory two streets from their flat? While I was living in ealing - I was less than a mile from the bomb at white city, my flat was even closer to the bomb that exploded in ealing broadway, and I expect the terrorists to be tried in court not killed in their beds or their cars by rockets along with unlucky civilians.
I was hoping to code something useful tonight - I am working on various database, xml, and math related modules for CPAN, but sometimes I wonder why I bother, most hackers - particularly here can't see beyond their fat pale beerguts the world around them - crying foul if a website tracks their web usage with cookies but turning a blind eye to atrocities in israel, or those starving in Iraq, those people who's livings are desteroyed by 'freemarket' organisations in the pocket of the rich multinationals they buy their chocolate or coffee or beefburgers from. What have we given the world ? Millions of bytes that nobody can eat, that power military to take lives, or corporations to crush third world economies? How many of use recycle ? How many care about all the polution required to build and power our neat toys and gadgets. What a bunch of self-righteous assholes we are! I know I am as bad as many but at least I try and keep my eyes open to whats going on, I try to minimise the damage I do and I really hope that somebody doing something that matters uses some of my code one day.
Noone in the US ever wants to talk about it as you're either called an anti-semite or you're starting an argument that will be very heated. So people stay in their foxholes.
If you're interested in tormenting yourself with more along these lines you should read Body of Lies which has a rather detailed account of the USS Liberty starring an Israeli general whose name may be all too familiar.
History repeats itself always until it doesn't.
But no mention that Israel has been in a state of war for over 50 years, and been targeted by a continual stream of suicide bombers for the past few years.Isreal is blockading palestine and ghettoising it, imposing curfews, roadblocks and rocket or tanks assaults on civilians.
Somehow, I don't think you would be so indignant if London were under perpetual attack by Foobari martyrs wearing suicide jackets -- in the pubs, on the tube, in public parks, at coffee shops, or private celebrations -- intentionally killing as many innocent British as possible. Nor would you find fault with the Royal Army if they retaliated against Foobari extremists who were constantly shelling subdivisions outside of Manchester or York.
No wonder all of this is so morally reprehensible. You're focusing on half the story, and totally ignored fifty years of escalation on both sides that led to the current set of events.
Oh, come on. Like speaking in English should confer any special treatment in the middle of a battle. Everyone speaks English in that area. Sounds to me like you're expecting any native English speaker to be treated like a Navajo code talker in the Pacific during World War II.The cameraman and directory was shot twice by an isreali tank when they tried to leave an area they had been trapped in by isreali armoured vehicles while filming the bulldozers desteroying crops and olive trees - they were carrying lights and a white flag, shouting and requesting to be able to leave the area, they didn't wish to dodge the indiscriminate isreali sniper fire of the back alleys the palestinians used. and expected tanks not to fire on unarmed journalists shouting in english.
Ya know, maybe, just maybe the rest of the world understand that the problem isn't as one sided as you (and BBC4) try to paint it.It seems that the rest of the world is quite happy to turn a blind eye to these atrocities, even when western journalists are killed.
That's an incredibly broad brush for painting the people of Israel. Had you done your homework, you'd have realized (by now) that the Israeli people are primarily interested in (1) peace and (2) security. The Palestinian people (and Israeli arabs) feel similarly. It's only the terrorists who feel differently.The terrorists have their own agenda, it has as little in common with that of the palestinan people or their government as it does with the people of israel - it has a lot more in common with the IDF, the zionist/jewish militants and settlers who don't want peace but instead bigger walls and more tanks and dead palestinians.
But you're not interested in that little tidbit of the story.
I find it utterly repugnant that you could continue to assert otherwise. Especially when you have continually demonstrated a lack of understanding of the basic issues, have no interest in visiting the area or studying the issue yourself to see what's going on. Instead, you are quite comfortable parroting whatever one-sided propoganda suits your worldview and prejudices Here's a clue: "zionist militants" is a buzzword that's only present in onesided, anti-Israeli propoganda that presumes Israel has no right to defend itself from attack.
And let's not forget that your moral outrage has exactly one focus: Israeli attacks on poor, innocent Palestinians.
Hm. I guess dead Israelis deserved it. Just like the ethnically cleansed in Kosovo, the massacred civilians in half a dozen "Civil Wars" in Africa, or the oppressed in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Re:Here we go again...
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T09:41:48
This I states that its only the terrorists who are interested in continuing the conflict.Unfortunately there are many in the government and the army who would rather the conflict continue, and continues to cost palestine more than isreal in both money and lives, than pull out of occupied areas, allow repatriation and take the settlements out.
The people (or rather a large section of them) in israel elected the current government on the policies of putting revenge and 'security' before peace. If peace were really important then the current intifada would not have started, the army would be more careful about spilling civilian blood and open to the UN and media about its activities. Most importantly Sharon would not be using suicide bombers as an excuse to walk away from peace talks when the bombers are the exact reason that he needs to cooperate with the UN and Palestine. Something the current government there refuses to do.
I don't think any Israeli's deserve to be bombed - its not like shrapnel discriminates between extremists of either side - it kills moderate and young of both sides, terrorism by individuals is unacceptable and illegal and there are courts and prisons for those that do it.
What is worse - at least in my eyes - is the action of an army or state that leads to the same results as terrorism but without accountability, trials or courts. If a tank kills a child, nobody goes to prison. If a bomb kills a soldier the bomber and his family will be killed by rockets and their neighbours terrorised.
When a state commits acts of terrorism against a people unable to defend itself then that is abhorent - a state should be able to protect itself but not be above the law and the IDF acts and believes itself to be above the law.
The UK has lived with terrorism, it is because of at least some of the restraint of the security forces and the fact that the government engaged with terrorists while they were still active that northern island has had relative peace for several years.
Re:Here we go again...
ziggy on 2003-05-21T15:31:44
While that statement is trivially true, it undermines the fact that the vast majority on both sides want the conflict to end.Unfortunately there are many in the government and the army who would rather the conflict continue, [...]Um, no. Israeli politics do not work that way. No government has ever gotten a simple majority in the popular vote. Governments are built by forming a coalition, so no platform ever gets anything better than a plurality. And while the intifada is the most important in your eyes, there are many other issues on the table during each election that disprove your simpleminded assessment of the will of the Israeli people.The people (or rather a large section of them) in israel elected the current government on the policies of putting revenge and 'security' before peace.Bullshit.If peace were really important then the current intifada would not have started, the army would be more careful about spilling civilian blood and open to the UN and media about its activities.The IDF is defending Israel against a set of radical fringe groups like Hamas that deny Israel's right to exist. Their position, like that of the PLO before them, is that the only acceptable solution is a Palestinian state in place of Israel. That's why it was such a big deal during the Norway accords that Yasser Arafat removed that clause in the PLO's constitution (and why the current Intifada started up again -- to rekindle the passion to replace Israel with a Palestinian state, not live in peace and harmony with Israel.
All due respect, but the IRA violence in the UK simply does not compare to Israeli/Palestinian conflict. They are very different. The motives are vastly different, as are the tactics -- the IRA did not aim to "reclaim Britain for the Irish", nor did they partake in an incessant stream of suicide bombers. Expecting the IDF to act as UK security forces did simply isn't realistic.The UK has lived with terrorism, it is because of at least some of the restraint of the security forces and the fact that the government engaged with terrorists while they were still active that northern island has had relative peace for several years.Re:Here we go again...
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T16:29:53
Only the people on one side is in a position to end it though. The palestinians are powerless to reign in terror groups acting in their name, Palestinian security and infrastructure has been damaged to such an extent that Arafat is hardly in a position to impose a ceasefire.Isreal on the other hand - a) voted for this b) have some control over the forces acting in their name by voting against parties with security-not-peace policies or concientious objection.
I know Israel has a coalition, this means the moderate vote is so small as to not count - the government has to pander to right-wing and settler interests.
The UN is far better than the IDF at seperating warring parties with much less blood and far more accountability and fairness, putting humanitarian needs at the forefront of their actions. UN peacekeeping works in many places and would offer more security than inexperienced and jumpy/overenthusastic israeli conscripts.
The current intifada is about 3 things - Sharon visiting Muslim holy places, more settlements being built and more illegal occupation, on top of the usual illegal occupation and other actions of the IDF
The thing about terrorism is that after a point the agenda of terrorists moves further from the original and becomes self-sustaining. Rebels become Freedom fighters become terrorists become organised criminals become gangsters. The IRA towards the end of the 90's became more of a sectarian mafia than a terrorist organisation - the same will happen elsewhere.
The important similarity though is that when politicians walk away from the table the moderates are unable to win away supporters from extremists. This becomes self-sustaining too.
Ariel Sharon using terror as an excuse to stop talks or demand greater concessions just continues the cycle of violence. Israeli 'security' and reprisals fuel terrorism, as does poverty and propoganda in the refugee camps.
As long as Israel follows a policy of an eye (and usually several innocent passers-by too) for an eye, and extreme curtailing of palestinian human rights suicide bombing will continue.
The main point with the UK and northern ireland was that you have to talk before you get peace. But if you neither want to talk nor give the concessions required for any agreement then you clearly don't want peace enough.
Isreal may want peace but it wants security, occupied terratory, and control of its neighbour more than it wants peace.
Re:Here we go again...
Reuven M. Lerner on 2003-05-22T07:17:05
Only the people on one side is in a position to end it though. The palestinians are powerless to reign in terror groups acting in their name, Palestinian security and infrastructure has been damaged to such an extent that Arafat is hardly in a position to impose a ceasefire.
Look, I think that Israeli government policy in the territories (and on many other issues, to be honest) is wrongheaded and counterproductive in many ways. But your above claim ignores reality. The Palestinian police could crack down on Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other groups if they want to. They simply don't want to do so. Actually, the police might want to, but Arafat and others in charge don't.
(Remember that Arafat has about 10 different security forces under his control, and one of the biggest debates in the latest appointment of a Palestinian prime minister was the question of if Arafat or the PM would control these security forces. In the end, the PM was granted control, at which point Arafat decided that he's going to ignore the decision, and kept some forces for himself.)
On several previous occasions, the PA police have cracked down on militants (many of whom could also be called "terrorists"), arresting people and confiscating their guns. None of those militants are in prison nowadays, and this has nothing to do with Israeli bombings and policies.
Now, whether the PA releases terrorists because it supports terrorism or because it doesn't want to risk infighting among Palestinians is a good question. But whether it's because they fear losing public support (which is increasingly behind Hamas and other terror groups) or because they actively want to support terrorism, the Palestinian leadership has done little, if anything, to stop terrorists.
The current intifada is about 3 things - Sharon visiting Muslim holy places, more settlements being built and more illegal occupation, on top of the usual illegal occupation and other actions of the IDF
The current intifada started during the most left-wing, pro-peace government Israel had elected in a long time, and is likely to elect in the foreseeable future. (Much to my chagrin, I might add.) Barak wasn't a saint, and he did push forward the building of settlements more than he and his supporters might like to admit. But to start shooting and bombing Israeli citizens didn't demonstrate any sort of good-faith effort in talking.
Look, the current situation is bad for everyone. Israelis are suffering pretty horribly, and it's probably safe to say that Palestinians are suffering even more. And you can be sure that I wish we would stop with much of the settlement and army activity in the territories. But to say that the Palestinians are totally powerless to stop terrorism is nonsense.
Moreover, remember that the PA continues to broadcast TV programs praising suicide bombers. Are they also powerless to change their television programming? Or is that also Israel's fault?
It's a sad fact that violence breeds violence and the only way out of the situation is to break the cycle. That is hard to do in ways we in the more peaceful parts of the world can't even begin to imagine.
I'm lucky enough to be working on a project with a client directly involved in trying to resolve conflict through non-violent means. These people are immensely dedicated, risking their lives to prevent others dying. You mentioned some of them in your piece & it's a privilege to be working with them.
The only way out of this is through understanding and reconciliation but the hurt and pain goes back so far that it will not happen in a few weeks or months, it will take years, generations even before peace is established. I recommend Philip Greenspun's article for a pretty well balanced history of the region.
By all means criticise the parties involved but please remember that this only really serves to further inflame the paranoia and hatred. Instead, try to understand why they, and the Palestinians, feel that they have to resort to such violent means.
And exactly how was the YAPC::Israel organizing team supposed to supercede Israel's immigration policies?Of course what does this have to do with perl - well we just had YAPC::Israel, unlike YAPC::Europe or any conference in the normal world, this would not welcome anybody from neighbouring countrys - arabs or palestinians who managed to make it through Isreals borders, checkpoints and snipers wouldn't be welcome.
Waitasecond. Last I checked, peace treaties were in place between Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Do you have any proof that Egyptian or Jordanian Perl hackers were turned away at the border or by the organizing committee? And if they were turned away at the border, what exactly was the organizing committee supposed to do about it?
Are the organizers of the German Perl Workshop similarly deserving of scorn because many of their sessions are in German, another language that the vast majority of Perl programmers do not understand? No, because any double standard is fair if it highlights or exacerbates the atrocities committed by the Israelis!Were there any arabs at YAPC::Israel? Unlike other conferences which are held mostly in english - a language spoken or at least understood by most hackers world wide, this conference was almost exclusively in hebrew.
Last I checked, a few sessions were being held in English to accomodate non-Israeli presenters and visitors.
Translation: Why aren't Israelis agreeing with me? We've been over this many times before...Finally why has no-one from israeli spoken out about these atrocities, can we assume tacit acceptance that their lives are worth several of their neighbours or that they are just pretending its not happening or not relevent.
Um, Israelis are highly critical of their government. There's lots of criticism of the Israeli government by their citizens. You don't know about it because (1) ignoring it bolsters your (rather uncompelling) case and (2) much of it is published in Hebrew. (The fact that a lot of this criticism is both on the web and published in English surely won't have any impact on your opinions -- your mind is already made up!)I think most british or american perl mongers are happy to bring attention to their nations ills - there are many many things about the UK that I dislike and I have mentioned them and even written to my MP about them! All I ever see here is americans claiming that I am anti-semetic for pointing out that Isreal is the biggest problem facing world peace and human rights and democracy in the middle east.
And if you truly want to highlight "Israel's atrocities" as "the biggest problem facing world peace", may I suggest that you at least try to understand the issues, stop parroting one-sided anti-Israeli screeds and endeavor to present a more balanced picture of how you think the violence (both from the IDF and the terrorists) can stop. (If you haven't been keeping track, there's a huge difference between that and calling you an anti-semite. If you care, that is.)
Re:...and Again...
Reuven M. Lerner on 2003-05-21T06:50:10
Several quick comments on this thread:
(1) YAPC::Israel took money and registration information from anyone who expressed interest. I find it very difficult to believe that anyone was turned away because of citizenship.
(2) A regular participant in the Israeli Perl mailing list is Lebanese. So far as I can tell, he has been treated with only the greatest of respect and kindness. You can be sure that there are racists and bigots in Israel, and I'm sure that some of them are Perl programmers. But to paint all of us with a broad brush is rather unfair.
(3) Many of the talks at YAPC::Israel were indeed in English. In at least one case, an Israeli tried to present in English, and the audience asked him to speak in Hebrew so that everyone could understand. But you can be sure that everyone enjoyed MJD's talks, and they were in English.
(4) A large majority of Israelis have consistently indicated a willingness to compromise with the Palestinians. Many of us (including myself) are strongly opposed to the current government's policies, and write letters to our elected representatives to express our views.
(5) But even the most liberal among us are scared our of our wits by the constant thread of suicide bombers at cafes, hotels, and public buses -- and by the games that the Palestinian Authority has been playing, simultaneously denouncing and encouraging terrorists.
Palestinians are indeed treated miserably, by us and by their own corrupt and dictatorial leaders. But blowing up buses of schoolchildren, or people planning to go shopping at the mall -- and then broadcasting PA-sponsored TV programs praising such acts -- is disgusting and reprehensible. I'm personally in favor of a Palestinian state with a secure border between it and Israel, and with strong trade links between the two states. But those trade links depend on having a relationship that doesn't include suicide bombings as a nationally sanctioned, popular option.
(6) Finally, there was a candidate for prime minister in our most recent elections (Amram Mitzna) who suggested that we leave most of the territories unilaterally if we cannot reach a negotiated settlement within a year. (I actually voted for the party to his left, if you must know.) Not only did he lose, but he has now resigned his position as head of the Labor Party. You can blame him, or his policies, or the public mood, or the backstabbing politics in Labor, or many other things. But he presented his opinions, asked the public to decide, and lost. Claiming thta everyone in Israel simply wants to hold onto the territories ignores the significant philosophical and political differences of opinion that even the most casual visitor to Israel experiences.
I'm not opposed to criticism of Israeli policies. But I am opposed to blanket statements that ignore the interplay between the two sides over 50-100 years (beginning long before the 1967 Six-Day War). And there is no justification whatsoever for the terrorist attacks that have left innocent civilians murdered.
Reuven
a response from somebody who actually knows
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T08:06:58
This is what I wanted to hear!Each time I hear about the situation there I lose hope that anybody in my community (open source or perl) gives a fuck about the victims (predominantly palestinian, especially if you consider homelessness, etc).
Its good to hear that mongers in Israel are leading by example - I don't see any of this in the Tech, Open Source or Perl media and that makes it fraustrating. It seems as though my community is one that stands by as this happens.
Thanks for giving me some faith in perl mongers for doing the right thing and looking beyond their shiney 17 inch powerbook screens.
Re:a response from somebody who actually knows
ziggy on 2003-05-21T15:34:21
Then why didn't you ask? Why poison the well with recriminations of all Israelis before asking a simple question?This is what I wanted to hear!Re:a response from somebody who actually knows
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T16:13:24
I was talking about the actions of the IDF and the silence in the communties (OSS, perl, etc) about it.Other parts of the community like the UK, US, France, etc are very vocal in criticizing their own nations and others' policies.
Hebrew
jdavidb on 2003-05-21T17:08:15
Man, I would have loved the chance to practice my Hebrew at YAPC::Israel and try to use the language for expressing Perl concepts. Does that make me Zionist? Not so, for I've said some pretty underhanded things about Ariel Sharon et al. Does that make me anti-Semitic?
Re:Hebrew
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T20:06:16
My hebrew is very poor, I can just about write my name Aleph H*mumble* *mumble*, at least I used to be able to when I was reading up on Qaballah (which renders the very small set of very old hebrew I did know pretty much useless outside of discussions with Aleister Crowley geeks).Saying nasty things about Sharon? I would have thought most people who watch the news on TV ( except perhaps certain US TV channels *cough*fox*cough* ) has too.
Although puzzlingly he got elected leader there.
Re:Hebrew
yudel on 2003-05-22T22:09:03
It's not puzzling at all. I'm not an Israeli (though I lived there for a couple of years as a journalist) but had I been voting, I probably would have voted for him.
It was the first time in my career as as (hypothetical) voter in Israeli elections that I would have voted for Likud. But given that the response to Barak's far-reaching proposals had been Palestinian violence, that is to say, an unofficial but real renunciation of the Oslo Accords, voting against someone who had opposed the accords was a sensible response.
I say we evacuate the place and terraform it with giant space lasers. This time I want fjords. As someone who has a fjord in their front yard (or vice versa), I can attest to them being very calming.
Re:kill(0)
hfb on 2003-05-21T09:40:49
We shall call it..."The Alan Parsons Project"!
:) Maybe a cooler climate with snow 9 months out of 12 would help too. Re:kill(0)
TorgoX on 2003-05-21T11:04:34
I am pleased to see that we agree on this most crucial point: There is no problem so big or so small that we cannot fix it with a giant orbiting laser, and the threat of radical climate change.Re:kill(0)
djberg96 on 2003-05-21T16:10:21
If we're going to have fjord's, can we also have Moose?
/me runs quick
Re:Interesting article
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T11:31:24
it is veru interesting.I plan to make a point of a) reading it and b) leaving more time between dying children and journalists on video and posting journals.
Re:Interesting article
TeeJay on 2003-05-21T20:29:21
Reading through the article I find an even more dogmatic world view. Although there are a lot of interesting facts unearthed and more than enough evidence to tarnish the reputation of many Arab Nations (rather than their people), there is incredible speculation and lack of understanding of very important issues.Assuming that arabs and muslims worldwide hate jews as much as nazi germany is hardly plausable, and the comments on the piece posted by Irish readers show large holes or conflicts in his logic. In the abscene of votes and polls showing popular support for arab leaders, he is finding the worst figures possible - European arabs and muslims would probably have a great deal more day to day contact with jewish or israeli people than those living in the middle or far east - those who hate jews would be in a very small minority - perhaps a similar size to those who voted for far right parties in their respective countries - the UK BNP has no seats and a handful of councillors - based on that you could say less than 1% rather than the 30% Greenspan uses would be more accurate. The 30% would probably apply only in places like Palestine where there is a great deal of propoganda reinforced by personal circumstances and a lack of education - nothing like living in slums and dodging sniper fire to breed hate and distrust.
You could apply much of his logic to Muslims as much as to Jews - Arabs and Islam have suffered a great deal of oppression for almost as long, the crusades being the most well known example, but also many other conflicts with christian and jewish nations, as well as mosques and arabs being targetted in India, Europe and America.
He claims that Europe doesn't want its jewish refugees back, but Isreal has high standards of education and skills and plays a key role in Industries like IT and Diamonds. These are the people that Europe wants to immigrate - not those poor illiterate arabs and eastern european asylum seekers. The UK is plucking the cream of medicine, IT and other industries from India, the middle east and asia and would jump at the chance for skilled nurses, doctors, scientists, lawyers, police, teachers, programmers and businessesmen looking to move here.
He makes other claims about how the palestinian people are brainwashed by the TV, etc. The important thing israel needs to do to counteract is to act contrary to the propoganda - the IDF provides plenty of propoganda opportunities, creates martyrs and creates an atmosphere of terror far worse than the thought that perhaps if you go to tel aviv a bomb might blow up that week. If israelis are scared of a few bombs then palestinians must be really scared of a barrage of rockets, shells and bullets - this must surely reinforce any propoganda - the IDF showing they are every bit as bad as angry widows and extremist clerics claim.
Re:Interesting article
yudel on 2003-05-22T22:05:22
"Assuming that arabs and muslims worldwide hate jews as much as nazi germany is hardly plausable"
Why isn't it plausible? I don't think all Muslims want me dead; but I think that there are N Muslims who do believe that I should be killed, where N is a number that is larger than I would like it to be.
In fact, I think it's fair to say that that there are British citizens who would like have a chance to kill me and my family.
Tell me that the following account of Saudi and Yemeni sports teams forfeiting table tennis matches doesn't fit the Nazi model more than it does the Irish-English model:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/5909801.htmRe:Interesting article
TeeJay on 2003-05-23T08:47:38
it isn't plausable because that would be a larger proportion than any UK party votes, or for any party in europe.Islam itself is a peaceful religion (although like the bible you can effectively bend the words to suit any agenda).
It is less plausable than saying that 30% of jews hate muslims or arabs because polls show that a significant minority , enough to vote in a coalition of right-wing parties to the Israeli government, voted for arab/palestine policies.
I think its reasonable to boycott both the goods and sports of a pariah nation - just as the world did with South Africa and the UK has again with Zimbabwe.
Its any sportsmans decision as to who he competes with, sporting boycotts gain publicity to important issues. Zimbabwean Cricketers played with black armbands mourning the death of democracy in their country, and the ANC supported boycotts of south africa.
Comparing people to Nazis because they don't wish to play sports with a nation is unreasonable. This doesn't mean that UK cricketers hate Zimbabwean or Black cricketers, or that Arab Sportsmen hate jews.
Threats, N, and Plausibility
yudel on 2003-05-23T13:52:11
"it isn't plausable because that would be a larger proportion than any UK party votes, or for any party in europe."
I can't figure out what "it" refers to in this sentence.Peaceful religion
yudel on 2003-05-23T14:09:58
No question that Islam can be a peaceful religion.It was not, however, a peaceful religion at its founding. It was a warrior religion.
And it is not, in some very well funded interpretations, a peaceful religion today -- as I am reminded each time I look at the Manhattan skyline.
The question you have to ask yourself is why do British citizens walk out from their mosque feeling compelled to die in the process of killing as many Jews as possible. Don't tell me because of the injustice, because there are better, and actually effective, ways of fighting injustice than suicide. (Ghandi's techniques could have created a Palestinian state 20 years ago). Don't tell me because of the killing, because the 3000 people killed in this current suicide intifada pale besides the millions dead in Africa these past couple of years.
And please don't tell me that that is a distortion of Islam. That is Islam, as practiced today in England, and it is the Islam of here and now that concerns me. If I were a Muslim, then the fight over how to define my religion would be very important to me (just as the fight over the definition of Judaism is something I have been very involved in personally.)
But as long as preachers aroun the world call the death of Jews every Friday, please don't talk about a religion of peace, because that is a peace that wants to build itself on my grave.
Re:Peaceful religion
TeeJay on 2003-05-23T14:29:54
2 british muslims out of over a million (guessing) have chosen to blow themselves up in Israel - they could have targetted jews just as easily elsewhere but did not. So you cannot conclude that a british muslim is going to kill you in america for being a jew. For being american possibly but only 2 al-quaida bombers were british out of $very_big_num muslims in the UK.If you can't distinguish between the 99.9% of muslims worldwide who don't wish to kill any jews, and the small minority that do - then it is a slippery slope to their level.
Isrealis and jews worldwide who believe that palestinians deserve what they get, and wish for the destruction or nonexistance of palestine are no better than the muslim fundalmentalists and arabs who want the destruction of Isreal. Bear in mind that no muslim or palestinian ever voted for these leaders - they do not represent the people. While many jews and isrealis support the actions of the government and IDF which are little better than terrorism - a rocket and a home-made bomb both kill innocent people when placed in busy places and both terrorists and the IDF continue to do this.
Unfortunately only one side is held accountable for these actions. This being the reason of my original post.
Re:Peaceful religion
Reuven M. Lerner on 2003-05-24T19:11:26
If you can't distinguish between the 99.9% of muslims worldwide who don't wish to kill any jews, and the small minority that do - then it is a slippery slope to their level.
Everything I know about Islam (and I've done a fair amount of reading on the subject for many years, although I would never call myself an expert) tells me that it is indeed a peaceful religion. But I have yet to read more than a handful of reports from Arab countries indicating that there is serious opposition to suicide bombers, or to terrorism in general.
Moreover, while you might think that Americans are ignorant and/or crazy for making a connection between September 11th and Iraq, there have been repeated reports and indications showing that a fair number of Arabs -- not he majority, perhaps, but a pretty sizeable number -- blame September 11th on Jews and/or Israelis.
I don't believe that most Muslims want to kill all Israelis and/or Jews. But an uncomfortably large number of them do. Some live not too far from me, in the Palestinian Authority. Some live in Arab countries, and some live in the West. They might be a minority, but they exist, and ignoring their presence might fool you into thinking that the conflict is indeed one-sided.
Unfortunately only one side is held accountable for these actions.
Only the Palestinians are being held responsible for the current situation? Sure, if you listen to the US or the current Israeli government. If you listen to the Palestinians or Europeans, you'll hear that Israel is mostly or solely to blame. Obviously, the truth lies somewhere between these positions.
On that note, the assistant editor of Ha'aretz (the newspaper to which I've subscribed for many years), Yoel Esteron, published a fantastic opinion piece in Friday's edition of the newspaper that assigns blame to everyone in our area, Israelis and Palestinians alike. You can read it in translation here. Esteron doesn't often write opinion pieces, but when he does, I think that they're pretty great. He also led a session at the Israeli Internet Society conference a few years ago, and I was as impressed by him in person as I was from his writing.
