Log in

View Full Version : Israeli Tanks move into Jinin West Bank



RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 20:53
( Sorry If I spelled the town wrong)

Just heared on the News that the Israeli war machine is on the move again.

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 20:55
i wonder why.... maybe if they won't give legitimacy to the slaughter of innocent people, the tanks won't be there...

jimr
18th June 2002, 21:06
its getting pretty standard now.

Theres nothing that irks me quite as much as a pro-israeli

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:11
there's nothing that irks me quite as much as seeing the body of a 10 years old girl lying dead on the pavement.

jimr
18th June 2002, 21:13
yes quite, all the more reason to support the palestinians. Atleast their cause is just, if not their means.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:19
And the body of the teen age girl who killed another teen age girl in a market doesn't make you go, "Hmmm... what could be so bad about living in a Palistinian camp and being a second class citizen to make a pritty young thing do this?" No just another 'inhuman' deserving of inhuman brutality.. isn't that right?

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:19
what do you expect when palestinian terrorists murder innocent school children?

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:22
What do you expect when Palistinians are forced to live behind the wire?

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:25
i expect them not to degrade themselves to the level of savages by salughtering babies.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:26
But bombing cities is ok than.

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:28
when did i say that? can you give me an exact quote please?

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:33
Er... this isn't personal, I'm talking about Israel.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:34
It seems to me that Palistine makes a pin prick and Israel brings down a hammer... over and over and over

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:36
so slaughtering 19 people is considered a "pin prick"?

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:37
compaired to the Israeli retaliation? Yes.

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:41
the discussion ends here. you make me sick.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:43
look Blasphemy: I never said I support the Palistinian suicide bombing did I? Because I don't. Yet you obviously support the Israeli retaliation..why?

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 21:46
Quote: from Blasphemy on 11:41 pm on June 18, 2002
the discussion ends here. you make me sick.


read it again.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 21:57
This is obviously an I'm right/your wrong argument I fell prey to. God I'm so fucking stupid to get into the Palistine debate here... shit...

Fires of History
18th June 2002, 22:03
Quote: from Blasphemy on 9:11 pm on June 18, 2002
there's nothing that irks me quite as much as seeing the body of a 10 years old girl lying dead on the pavement.


Edited for accuracy:

"there's nothing that irks me quite as much as seeing the body of a 10 years old girl lying dead on the pavement"

Thank you.

Israel is led by [i]short-sited idiots. And I don't even want to know how many Palestinians are killed in "retaliation" for every Israeli. Or is retaliation called "active defense" now? Either way, it's a war of bargaining down the barrel of a gun. Guess who has the guns?

Israel just wants the Palestinians to quit fighting back and peacefully accept whatever is given them. Like good slaves.

Blasphemy
18th June 2002, 22:08
you're an idiot. i have never said that the lives of israelis are more important than those of palestinians...

why do i even try? whatever i write, you will look at it as if i'm some israeli nationalist who wants to see the palestinians dead...

Reuben
18th June 2002, 22:21
BLASPHEMY, your attitudes shock me the idea that asnything can legitimize the collective punishment of any ethnic group, as has been characterized by Israeli 'defence' policy, and to a particularly murderous extent by the incursions into jenin.
Guilt by association is an idea whcih should be left in the middle ages.

In fact, by presenting the suicide bombings as apretesxt to the punitive invasion of Jenin, you are in fact giving legitimaacy to suicide bombs, which an the basis of what you have said about jenin, are a reasonable response to the extra-judicial killings, punitive house demolitions, and impovishment carried out against the palestinians.

VICTORY TO THE INTIFADA

Fires of History
18th June 2002, 22:27
Well said Reuben.

By reacting to suicide bombings, Israel is giving those bombings a platform. It says to the Palestinians that they work- that their bombings are such a big deal that Israel must respond. And if there is anything a resistance movement wants it's for their actions to be a big deal.

Israel needs to learn the old saying: The more you itch the more it itches.

RedCeltic
18th June 2002, 23:16
Reuben & FOH, Thank you for saying basicly defines my views. You are true comrades.

Blasphemy
19th June 2002, 08:47
Okay, i haven't read the paper this morning yet, so i'm not upset. yesterday i was very agitated and this was reflected in my posts.

Reuben, you know i don't support the israeli presence in the territories. i have debated the subject with you a lot, and i have always condemned the occupation and the suffering of the palestinian people. i have not once showed my support to the israeli offensives in the territories because they do more harm than good.

But, you are saying that the occupation creates suicide bombers. this is true, but you must also remember that suicide bombers create the israeli offensives. if the fucking terrorist would not have killed 19 people yesterday, Jenin would have been israeli-free today. this is the cycle of blood, that has been turning for almost two years now, thanks to Ehud Barak, Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon (may they all rot in hell).

the suffering of the palestinian and the israeli people is horrible. both people live in constant fear and trepidation. death has become a permenant element in the cursed land, and is treated apathically. all the names and faces of the people who die every day and week are just added to the very long list of dead people, whose lives were taken by the other side. this is terrible. when an israeli soldiers enter a palestinian house, tear down the walls and send the family away it is a terrible thing. when an israeli tanks fires at a car with women and children, it is despicible. when a palestinian terrorist detonates a bomb in a school bus, it is an atrocity. the blood spills in both sides, and all of you here know that i understand that.

Angie
19th June 2002, 13:40
I found this article on an anti-war site. Copied and pasted around the web in various sources, the original two sources are here: Corriere della Sera (http://www.corriere.it/) and L'Espresso (http://www.espressonline.it/).

Arafat: Hamas Are Sharon's Children

Dec. 21, 2001 (EIRNS)—In interviews with leading Italian publications, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat went into some detail regarding the genesis and operation of Hamas. To Corriere della Sera on Dec. 11, he said, "We are doing everything possible to stop the violence. But Hamas is a creature of Israel which, at the time of Prime Minister [Yitzhak] Shamir [the late 1980s, when Hamas arose], gave them money and more than 700 institutions, among them schools, universities and mosques. Even [former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak] Rabin ended up admitting it, when I charged him with it, in the presence of [Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak."

In an interview with L'Espresso on Dec. 19, Arafat said: "Hamas was constituted with the support of Israel. The aim was to create an organization antagonistic to the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization]. They [Hamas] received financing and training from Israel. They have continued to benefit from permits and authorizations, while we have been limited, even [for permits] to build a tomato factory. Rabin himself defined it as a fatal error. Some collaborationists of Israel are involved in these [terrorist] attacks. We have the proof, and we are placing it at the disposal of the Italian government."

When asked what he thought of "these sons of Palestine who blow themselves up and spread death among Israeli civilians," Arafat answered: "Israel does not allow us to live a normal life. Youth who have nothing to eat, who don't see any future in front of them, are easy prey of the Islamist movements, which have large amounts of financing at their disposal. And where the money comes from is known. President Bush froze in one bank in Texas alone, $61 million. Where does this money come from?" The interviewer asked: "Where?" Arafat: "Ask the U.S. administration, which knows all the details. Ask the Italian government too, and some Arab countries."

Unfortunately, most of the recent suicide bombings have occurred when Sharon strategically needed them the most. And the retaliation was never in the areas populated by Hamas, itself.

Angie
19th June 2002, 13:43
The following article was found at it's source: Pacific News Service (http://www.pacificnews.org/). Interestingly, it's author is a Jewish Rabbi.

Unholy Alliance -- Sharon, Hamas Work in Concert Against Peace

Though enemies, Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the Palestinian militant group Hamas are working in a tacit alliance, writes PNS contributor Michael Lerner. Their shared goal: the elimination of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Lerner ([email protected]) is editor of TIKKUN Magazine, a bimonthly Jewish critique of politics, culture and society, and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue in San Francisco.

The strategies of Ariel Sharon and Hamas are far less irrational than portrayed by American media. Each has been cooperating in what amounts to a tacit alliance to achieve a shared goal: the elimination of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority and its replacement by Hamas. Israel's announcement that it will not deal with the PLO any more is only one part of this process.

Ariel Sharon has never hidden his contempt for the Oslo Accord, precisely because it aimed to create a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 borders of the West Bank and Gaza. When campaigning, he presented himself as the strong military man who could play the role of peacemaker. But he always reassured his own right-wing constituents that he had no intention of ceding any land to Palestinians.

Sharon was the inventor of the strategy of filling the West Bank with settlements in the 1980s to prevent any possibility of Palestinians creating their own state. His fondest dream would be to find the political excuses that could allow Israel to reoccupy the entire West Bank and establish another hundred settlements.

Arafat represented a thorn in his side, because Arafat kept insisting on returning to negotiations and on building the Palestinian state promised in the treaty Israel had signed in the White House garden in 1993. Moreover, the United States has made it clear that it wants Arafat in power and negotiations in place so that Arab leaders can say to their own populations: "See, our cooperation with the United States against Osama bin Laden has produced a return to the peace process." But continued conflict in the region allows Arab elites to displace resentment against the injustices of their own undemocratic societies onto anger at Israel. So they seek a balance: continued negotiations and an endless peace process, but not the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

When the United States became preoccupied with the war against terror, Sharon felt free to increase the violence and repression of the Occupation and to accelerate the assassinations of those "suspected" of being directly or indirectly connected to acts of terror. Those assassinations, primarily directed against Hamas leaders, ensured that Hamas would strike back in retaliatory blows against civilian targets within Israel.

Instead of striking back against Hamas, Israel instead has used Hamas attacks as justification to destroy the infrastructure of the Palestinian Authority and to debate what would be the best moment to kill Arafat. With Arafat dead and the Palestinian Authority in shambles, Hamas would become the prevailing force in the Palestinian world -- and the image of the Palestinians would then be more like that of the Taliban. Sharon would be able to portray Israel as fighting the same fight as the United States -- a battle against terrorists -- a move he has tried with less success against Arafat. With Hamas in charge of the Palestinian camp, Sharon could rally much broader support, because even those of us who support Palestinian rights would be forced to admit that a Hamas-dominated Palestine would be a real threat not only to Israel, but also to world peace.

Hamas has much to gain as well. Convinced that the peace process is betraying Islamic claims to Palestine, Hamas is willing to wait another 30 or 40 years until Israel tires of endless war and terror -- if, that is, it can be assured that when Israel tires, fundamentalists will come to power. Hamas despises the secular forces around Arafat, and worries that if the Palestinian Authority is not destroyed it could become the government of a secular Palestinian state. Hamas is openly contemptuous of the many Christian Palestinians who influence the Palestinian Authority.

So it is hard for Hamas to resist the open invitation from Ariel Sharon: Israel will do the dirty work of destroying the Palestinian Authority and rejecting any peace process if Hamas does its part by blowing up innocent Israeli civilians.

Sharon refuses to negotiate unless there is a period of non-violence, thereby signaling to Hamas forces that all they have to do to block negotiations is to escalate their terror. And if the violence gets intense enough, Sharon will find himself "with no alternative" but to kill Arafat and wipe out the Palestinian Authority.

This position, of course, creates an overwhelming incentive for Hamas to engage in acts of terror.

Washington could break this cycle by threatening economic sanctions until Israel ends the Occupation. I won't hold my breath. More likely, it will demand new negotiations, which will drag on endlessly and give a new facelift to endless perpetuation of the Occupation and the suffering of the Palestinian people.

There is only one way for Arafat and the moderates to protect themselves from this invidious alliance: unequivocally reject the fantasy of armed struggle against Israel and convert to the principled non-violence of Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Instead of supporting or condoning any form of violence, engage in massive non-violent demonstrations, punish rock-throwers, and refuse to respond to the ongoing violence of the Israeli occupation with further violence. Otherwise, moderates may soon find themselves the victims of an all-too-clever path that links fundamentalists on both sides. But I won't hold my breath for this course, either.

Sharon is banking on America's focus on bin Laden to distract attention from the level of brutality Israeli forces are using in the West Bank and ensure that he will have political space to escalate his attacks on the Palestinian Authority.

Unless we speak out clearly and quickly to reject his unholy, if tacit, alliance with Hamas, the resulting chaos will likely produce ever more frightful bin Ladens in the future -- and they are as likely to strike America as Israel. For those of us who support Israel, this is a moment when our voices of critique may provide the "tough love" it so desperately needs.

Blasphemy
19th June 2002, 15:23
it's pretty hypocritical what arafat is saying. he himself uses the support money he gets from the EU to fund the terrorist organizations, including the Hamas. Not once did he address his people and condemned Hamas' actions. not once did he say to his people publicty to stop the terrorist actions against israel.