Another One Bites the Dust...
(Photo Source: Yahoo News)Being that this past week was Queen week on American Idol, their famous song, "Another one bites the dust" was the first one to come to mind when my family first heard of the suicide bombing yesterday in the Old Central Bus Station in Tel Aviv. The husband found out about it first, about a half an hour after it happened. As we were watching the news unfold and more information about the event came pouring in, that song popped into my head. Why? I don't know.
Let's looks at what happened: At around 1:30 PM, a suicide bomber makes his way to the "Rosh Ha'ir" Felafel stand. He's stopped by a security guard, so he opts to blow himself outside of the store instead. He's carrying a back-pack full of explosives, so he packs a pretty big punch. He kills at least 9 people, including himself, and wounds about 60 other people, many seriously and a few are still critical.
This Felafel stand is special. It's the exact same restaurant that was hit by another suicide bomber a few months back. I really don't know what these guys have against this particular Felafel stand. Maybe, they don't like the Swarma. Who knows. In any case, the suicide bomber made his way through via the West Bank and Jerusalem, where there are much less check-points, the Security Fence isn't completed, and there are many back roads and East Jerusalem neighborhoods to sneak through. I'm not really going to go through what I think or feel about this event because there are probably 10,000 other Jewish/Israeli bloggers doing the same things right now. What I am going to do is go through some of the good sounds bites that came out of the even; stupid and brilliant.
Flipping from Channel 2 to Sky News to BBC News to CNN was fun. I wanted to get the different take on how they were reporting the event. The dumbest sound-bite had to have come from Sky News. Since it's an international news channel, of course the majority of the reporters are British since that seems to be the "universal" accent. The reporter who was doing the voice-over for the images that they were streaming from Israel's Channel 10 said one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. He said that this suicide attack was the "first real test for Hamas, as a government". He said it will be interesting to see how Hamas responds to this. Maybe, he didn't know what to say and was using what broadcast journalists call "filler time". I took a Broadcast Journalism class and learned all about that. It's when reporters are going on an on-the-scene unfolding event. They've given all the information they have but aren't at the time slot where they've been told to loop the information and start over. So, they have to fill in those last 20 seconds or so with filler stuff. Information that's not immediately relevant but have something to do with what's going on. So, this guy chooses that brilliant statement. Of course, if he would have thought for even a millisecond, he would have remembered that Hamas has already stated what their response will be in the event of terrorist attacks; NOTHING!! They already stated numerous times that they will not arrest or condemn "soldiers and legitimate attacks of the resistance".
And, today's news has already proven that statement true. While Mr Abbas has smartly and dillegently condemned the attack, his Hamas government has rightly and dillegenly approved of it (Source: Bostong Globe). I don't understand why the MSM and international news media looks for any little inkling of hope that Hamas has suddenly transformed from Dr Evil to Superman. It really boggles the mind.
The other interesting news came from the military front on how Israel will respond to this latest terrorist attack. As I watching Channel 2, one of their military analysts stated that a member of the top military brass has finally using the word "Oiyev", enemy, to describe the Palestinians. Before, it's always been gray and mish-mashed, and "they're our enemy, but not really, and this, that, and the other thing..." But, there's never been some-one official coming out and making a statement that the Palestinians are a bonified official enemy of the state. When you classify them as such, the rules of the game in terms of military strategy completely change. We'll see how long this sticks, or even if it's carried over into policy, but it was good to see some-one finally stand up and say it. It could mean that there is a changing of the guard, to some extent and so to speak, in terms of how the government will allow the military to handle the situation. I think that there are just so many top brass guys that are simply fed up with dealing with the Palestinians with kid gloves. When members of the top brass say "We are at war", it means that the goves are going to come off, or that they want them to. That's a good thing, and I hope it will be carried out. The only thing that will stop it from happening, as I said, is our government. And, in that, I am not so confident.
The last military statement that was made was that there are plans or, at least, thoughts to divide Yehuda and Shomron (Judea and Samaria) into 2 separate entities, militarily wise. That way, they can put a bottle neck into both areas and stop it from being so easy for desired terrorists to make it through the West Bank. That seems like a very good idea.
The last thing I want to mention is the suicide bomber's age. About an hour after the suicide bombing was carried out, Islamic Jihad released the tape of the who the suicide bomber was. The kid, and use that term genually, didn't look like he was more than 14 or 15 years old. He looked very young. What happened since that tape was released really proves my husband's theory. When a Palestinian carries out a terrorist attack, their age increases by 5 years. When a Palestinian is killed by an Israeli, their age decreases by 5 years+. If this kid was a day over 16, then I'm 50. Well, lo-and-behold, the age changes. It was first released that the kid was 16 years old. However, and the New York Times has no problem running with this, the mother "swears" that her son was 21. No way. If you've seen the tape, you know that there's no way that this is true. I look young for my age, but at 21, no-one mistook me for not having been Bat-Mitzvahed yet. This kid is, in no way, 21 years old. But, here's the thing. Every single Palestinian knows that they're fighting a PR war, not just a "resistance". They know that to gain sympathy and international legitimacy for their cause, they have to win the PR war, and they are winning that war very nicely. They have been portrayed in the MSM as the "David" versus Israel's "Goliath". The are the "under-dog" in this whole thing. Therefore, the mass media goes out of their way to stick to that theme. So, of course, the NYT has no problem believing the mother that the kid was older than he actually was. The Palestinians want to win, but they're human beings like every-one else. Hell, they're more human than the Jews they're killing. There's no way that mothers would willingly send their babies out to die. The few times that it happens, it must be out of horrific desperation caused by the evil occupation. So, the media plays along. The Jews killed aren't really victims. I mean, we have to "keep it in perspectiv", right? So, 9 Jews die. Big deal. What the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians is much worse than what a few people being randomly killed in some restaurant. Good on ya, Pal.s. The world believes you. Too bad we're going to have to destroy you...
posted by Olah Chadasha @ 4/18/2006 12:12:00 PM
Read Me By E-Mail
40 Comments:
Hello
I did post a couple of pictures in a blog page I have.
Click here to see the pictures
Iran meanwhile is recruting british Shaeed, martyrs,suicide bombers.
I did not got surprised,actually, such is the hatred of some british against Israel.
Aware of such hatred the Iranians are trying to make the most of it.
(You just need to visit some blogs to realize how irrational is the british hate against israel).
Guardian and Company that pretend they support human rights only increased the hate against Israel in the british society.
They pretend they are not antisemite but their kind of news, reports only have been strenghtening antisemitism in Britain.
On another note the chinese have been selling the organs of executed people.
Click here
Will UN assembly convene a special session to condemn such practices? I bet they wont.
Special sessions of the UN are for israel.
Last month, March , I saw in a blog a add published in the teheran media asking for martyrs.
Click here to see original version
Click here to see what I did. I translate the aplication form to english
If one does look at the news article that was published yesterday (An Iranian government-based organization is recruiting British Muslims to carry out suicide bombings against Israel, the British Guardian newspaper reported.) a post I did last month in the blog Evil Israel make much more sense today.
(It was as if I were already sensing what would happen )
Click here to see a post I did last march
Listen mate. You speak bias towards Israel. But what you have to realise is that Israel has killed many palestinian people. That is why these people carry out attacks. I've been to gaza and seen myself. Little innocent kids are killed by the Israel ary, but the media doesn't know because this is behind closed doors. One attacks, and the media come to life as they do openly.
Think of a balanced argument! Suicide bombings are wrong but the only alternative when your kids are being killed.
Umar: pali kids only get killed in response attacks, or "pay-back" raids by Israel or in order for the IDF to be able to prevent rockets from being fired from Gaza.
You've been to Gaza...so have I. And I've seen my own army remove my own people from there. I'll agree with you on one thing: the Israeli government is a detrumental entity, whether to Jews or Arabs.
umar, I don't have all the paper in the world to tell you what's wrong with your thoughts, but you're entitled to them. Here's the simple fact: When Palestinian civilians are killed, it is not because some soldier had them in their gun sights. The Israeli Army does not aim to hurt civilians. Civilian casualties are the result of cowardly and pathetic terrorist organization who take their fight into the street and among the civilian population. Which, by the way, violates every code of conduct and international law for war. They purposely put civilians in harm's way. If you truly understood how careful the Army goes out of their way to prevent civilian casualties, you would understand how ridiculous your statements are. Second of all, Palestinians were committing acts of terrorism against Jews before there was ever a Jewish State. How do you explain or justify that? Stop looking from inside a bubble and learn the complete picture.
On the other side, Palestinian terrorists go out of their to blatantly harm, kill, and maim civilians. To make some sort of moral relatist equation between the two is as ridiculous as it is obscene. Learn your facts. Then, we can talk again, mate.
-OC
Olah, you mistook my point. There is some more bias towards Israel.
Im not palestinian, and Im not Israeli either. But you need to understand what this world is like. How on earth can you prove that the Israeli army doesn't plan to hurt civillians. We've seen it before and plenty of times when soldiers, might not be from Israel, but the U.K and the U.S are abusing and killing innocent civillians. Recently, a journalist was killed by the Israeli army, and even he said that he was going to leave, and he stated that he was a journalist. What do they do? they shoot him. It's a joke.
You talk of not killing civillians, where do you be sleeping when media outlets show the news of '5 palestinian boys shot dead' in brief. When the power rested with Israel, I'v seen, heard and read reports of innocent little palestinian boys being steamrolled by the army with tanks. These guys only had stones, and Israel had the power. I can go on all night but its sad to say that the media has made Islam a joke. The power at the highest level rests with the Jewish people and that is why we never hear about the killing of soo many innocent people. And when these people retaliate and fight back.. its all attack again and this stands out.
Olah, you dissappoint me, you have your views and I have mine but I speak as a neutral and you speak as a person who's been blinded by the media. All pro Israel!
Umar, first of, you're not exactly a "neutral" either. You're a Muslim who has heard the palestinian side of the story time and time again. Besides, doesn't Islam teach that ones a Muslim-controlled land, always Muslim. Isn't that the reason you're soo pro-Arabic.
Umar, bro...I will admit that sometimes Israeli soldiers do kill civilians. But these cases occur very seldomly. On the other side, Arabs kill Jews on a daily basis and for no reason-other than the fac that they happen to be Jewish(remind you of anyone!?). Given, Arab casualties are high, but that's only because Israeli soldiers are better trained and battle-wary. When soldiers try to apprehend wanted men and are shot at they respond with fire, otherwise we'd all end up dead.
Olah makes a good pt: "Palestinians were committing acts of terrorism against Jews before there was ever a Jewish State" and that is pure fact. It's not because we "occupy" pali land that they kill us. It's because they hate our guts and that my friend, will never ever end.
Umar, can you please provide the source for "innocent Palestinians being run over [wantonly] with tanks". When you read something saying that 5 Palestinian youths were killed, what was the back story. Why were they killed? Who were they? What were they doing? Where did you read it? If 12 and 16 year olds have no problem trying to blowing themselves up, how can you be contradictory and say that Israel is wantonly killing children that are shooting at and trying to kill them? Why is it so hard for you to believe?
How do I know that Israeli soldiers go out of their way not to hurt civilians? One, because for the amount of fighting that's done, if Israelis were wantonly killing civilians, there'd be 10 times as many casualties for the amount of fighting that they engage in. Second, my entire family is in the military, and, let's just say that I happen to personally know. Again, on the other hand, Palestinians terrorists GO OUT OF THEIR WAY to shoot, kill, and maim civilians. Big difference.
As Greg has said, you're not neutral, and I am not biased. I just know the truth separated from all the propoganda that you obviously read. I read facts, not propoganda websites and revisionist historians. But, thanks for the accusation. It only shows that you don't have facts to back up your opinions and have to resort to name calling to try and make a point. Oh well. Better luck next time.
-OC
Olah:
I was in the army myself as an artillery gunner (155 mm self-propelled), some twenty years ago. Even back then, without GPS and digitised coordinate maps, long distance shelling was remarkably accurate. We only missed one or two shots whilst getting our aim right with the aiming directions of a Forward Observer.
Today, Forward Observeds and old style (non-digital) topography are no longer needed: these pieces practically aim themselves. I saw American artillery pieces like these in action during Nato manouevres in West Germany, with my own eyes.
This raises the question: why are there indeed so many Palestinian casualties when it's not difficult to accurately target the launching positions?
It's very difficult to find information about where the IDF is shelling from and what their exact targets are.
The amount of shelling seems to me also to be inordinately high. We would have normally shelled, say a mortar position, with one or two rounds (respectively) 6 or 12 shells), then pause.
Thousands of shells have been reported (over 1,400 in one week), that appear not in agreement with the principle of reasonable response.
Sure, the Kassam missiles are wrong and plain futile. But most of them miss anyway and few cause fatalities.
Israel has the right to defend itself, that's not the issue. The issue is, the shelling seems to me to be an exaggerated reaction, causing mainly civilian casualties.
regreg23:
Your statement that Palestinians kill Israelis, not because of the occupation but simply because "they hate our guts", shows a remarkable lack of understanding in human nature and the nature of human conflict.
Violence doesn't come out of a vacuum: there is always a reason, usually a grievance against the party subjected to that violence. Now you may take umbrage with that grievance (the occupation) but that doesn't make it go away.
You make it sound the Palestinians have always hated the Jewish people.
Ask yourself this: was it the Palestinians that were responsible for centuries of Jewish persecution and the Holocaust? No. Was it Muslims? No. Was it Arabs? No. It was perpetrated mainly (broadly speaking) by Christian Europeans.
The current Israeli/Palestinian mutual violence and hatred are rooted in grievances of a much more recent nature.
... and at least you make no bones about it: you're for a Greater Israel. Don't be surprised if the Palestinians hate you even more, as clearly you're in favour of simply taking all their remaining land too...
Olah, this is no name calling. It is what you are showing me. The true colour of patriotism and you have said that you are very Conservative, so there is no major problem.
Reg, you may think that I speak for the muslim population, infact I try and speak fact and agree whole-heartedly that Suicide Bombings are wrong. But you have to understand the situation. Something you are failing to do.
Let me take you back in history, 60 years back. 1948, there was no Israeli state and all this land was controlled by Arabs, as were the countries around this land. However, Jews and Muslims were living peacefully together on this land. It later started in the same year when the British Government, without the consent of the local people and without the consent of the World Nations, forcefully threw out the Arab people and established the state of Israel. They bought Jews from all over the world, who were settled in other countries and told them live here.
These Arab people were left homeless and were forced to move to neighbouring Arab states like Saudia Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.
The intention was to form a non-muslim base in the middle of a continent formed by muslim countries. Israel was then supplied with full military power by America and the U.K to force the Palestinians out of their homes. How would you feel if you are sitting in your own home and someone comes and throws you out on the street and occupies your house? It's bad and you know it Olah and Reg.
So, where was I, oh yes. Then some passionate Arabs gathered and started an armed struggle against Israel to get back their land and go back to their homes. But how could they do it, they had no real army and no force to push Israel.
Then in 1967, Israel invaded and controlled a massive part of Arab land of neighbouring countries. These included Jordan, Egypt and Syria. At that time, the Arabs were pushed back to the areas like Gaza Strip and West Bank and Israel occupied Golan Heights in Syria. This showed the power of Israel and how it planned to dominate the region with military power.
There was lot of innocent killing of Arabs and military power was on top. An example would be 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon. Palestinian fighters were defending the city of Beirut and defending the innocent population of exiled arabs living in camps. At that time, Israeli ministers with American foreign minister promised the Palestinian fighters that if they leave the area, they will not invade the city. BUT when the Palestinian fighters agreed and left Beirut, the Israeli Army, headed by your very own Ariel Sharon had a day and night of brutal killing of innocent Palestinians living in Sabra and Shatila camps. Over 5,000 were killed in this massacre. The international media was appauled. They called Sharon the 'Butcher of Israel' and indeed he was.
Here's your link Olah. How does it feel to represent a nation of brutal killers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
Today, there is a line between the middle east muslims and jews. Israel is a nuclear and military power and has the full backing of major superpowers like America, U.K and European countries. It has all the military resources and has been carrying out attacks on unarmed homeless and helpless Palestinians. They are bulldozing their homes, throwing them into the desert and killing parents and their children. After all this, what do you expect them to do?
They have no army, no tanks and no aeroplanes. When tanks come to demolish their homes, they can only throw stones on them. Then, these helpless people have got no option but to commit suicide and do the minor damage to Israel. That is suicide bombing.
So, there you have it Olah, that is my point. Israel has occupied land, killed innocent civillians and continues to do so. Just wake up and realise the truth. The innocent killing is uncountable and in the end, you people cry because of one suicide bombing. Think about it Olah, Israel is the killer, not Palestinians!
Thank You and Goodbye.
Umar, actually it feels quite good. Thanks for pointing it out. I kind of like that I'm a brutal killer. And, hey! I'm getting away with it. Awesome. I never knew.
gert, the Muslims may not have carried out the Holocaust, but they very much actively supported it. In fact, the grand Mufti of Jerusalem had made plans, in total compliance and help from Hitler and the reigning 3rd Reich, to carry out the Final Solution against the Jews in Palestine. He also had visited Auschwitz in preparation to create a duplicate of it in Palestine.
The Jews were also brutally murdered and persecuted by the Muslims during their "crusades". You seem to have a lack of understand of history to go along with your lack of understanding of human nature. Your assertion that there's a "reason" for such violence is as naive as it is anti-semetic. What you're saying is the equivelant of the assertion that the Jews must have done something wrong to be hated the way they are. The Holocaust must be their fault. They must have done something to deserve to be murdered. Same here. The 2 year old baby shot in the head by a Palestinian terrorist must have done something to deserve to be killed. Oh that's right. He had the unfortunate circumstance of being a Jew. The fact is there is no logic for prejudice and biggotry.
Again, there was violence and and terrorism against the Jews by Palestinian Arabs/Muslims before there was ever such a concept of "occupation" or Israeli State. You're right. Violence does NOT exist in a vaccum, and this violence has a long history that defies any "Palestinian". The fact that you attempt to claim that this is a recent phenomenon shows that you're really don't know and/or understand the history of this conflict. I suggest you pick up a history book before you start pointing the finger at other people and screaming that they don't know what they're talking about. The Palestinians are taught to possess a visceral hatred of Jews, not just Israelis (since not all Israelis are Jews). Have you ever heard one of their weekly sermons or taken a look at their school text-books, even their kindergarten carriculum? I suggest you do. Then, you might understand why Greg said what he did.
-OC
Well, I was kind of waiting for it: you've just called me anti-Semitic and that's were this dialogue ends.
Comparing someone with the Nazis is a common tactic amongst Israelis and pro-Zionists. Walt and Mearsheimer got that treatment, the BBC got it too, "solitario2005" gave me this kind of treatment and so did an anti-Palistinian blogger who comment spammed my blog and several others until his blog was taken down by Blogger (not on my request).
You sound very, very angry in this last comment, resorting to classical arguments such as "they've always hated us". Try and reason not just from a dim and distant past but also from today's perspective.
You then extend this too all who have any kind of criticism for Israeli policy vis-a-vis Palestine: they're all anti-Semitics. Perhaps from your conservative viewpoint they're all communists too?
Good luck... at least we tried building bridges.
gert: I support a Greater Israel and am damn proud of that. If I was a real racist and killer of poor, innocent "palestinian" kids as you claim, I would want to have control over all of the Middle East-soemthing Israel has been denied time and time again by the U.S, the U.S.S.R. and of course, the U.N. But I don't!
I'm simply for what the British promised us and took away at the last second. Of course you, living in America don't have the slightest clue as to what I'm talking about...but wait a sec...I, too lived in the U.S.(for half my life) and knew the in's and out's of Israeli history and Jewish history in the 20th century. Admit it: you simply don't have the adequate knowledge to argue with me about these issues. If you want to go in-depths and learn for yourself, I refuse to take my precious time on teaching Israeli history 101 to you. Why don't you pick up some non-revisionist history books about the area known as "Palestine"(do you know where the name even comes from?)and then get back to the discussion.
Umar: man, have you got a backwards picture of things. But I guess that's what Muslims are taught in their schools the world over. That's why you people will for many centuries to come be looked down upon by Western society.
Greg: Do you even know what you are talking about. I've put my argument forward, the topic was the innocent killing by Israel and the massacre of soo many muslims. The evidence is there for all to see. When I hear Iranian President Ahmedinejad, talking of destroying Israel, I think why? Each country has a right to exist.
Sadly enough, the right of the Palestinians has been stolen by Israel. I've read about plenty of massacres, but your eyes are covered up. Wake up to the truth Greg, you asked for evidence, I provided it. And to answer back and respond to the killings of Israel, all you say is, 'have you got a backward picture of things'. Its true. Admit it for once. Yoiu are wrong.
Israel is the culprit. And I think u'll find Gert is from the U.K.
...
I've given you my side of the argument. Answer my points and give me your response..
Stating what you think I've been taught and how my people will be looked at in society means you have given up the battle and accepted my reply.
My society might be backward, but atleast it is sticking to moral beliefs and traditions, unlike some brutal nations.
gert, I didn't call you an anti-semite. You did not read what I wrote. It is a common anti-semitic tactic to place the blame for murder onto the victims. In this case, Jews. You said that there is a reason innocent civilians are dying in the streets, and that is because of something the Jews are doing. Holocaust deniers and anti-semites use that tactic all the time. That's a fact. The Jews did something to deserve getting murdered. That's where your discussion ends.
I would never call another person a Nazi (and, if you can show me where I did, please do) because that desensitizes what the real Nazis did. In fact, it is not "me" who calls other people Nazis. People who are anti-Israel and anti-semitic call Israelis and Jews Nazis.
Walt and Mearsheimer's article is filled with holes and has a blatantly anti-semitic new age academic "Protocols of Zion" tone. Are you a David Irving fan too?
I was absolutely not "angry" in my last comment. I was showing you that your wrong with your comments against Greg. Comments that you don't have anything to refute with except for claiming that I was "angry" with what I wrote. You don't want to talk facts, you can use emotional diatribes. That's fine. But, I'm only interested in speaking with people who deal in facts, not propaganda, not asanine diatribes about "bridging gaps" all the while you call other people names. If you don't understand the past, you can't understand the present. You don't know the past, so you really can't comment on what's happening now. If you did, again, you obviously wouldn't have made the comments you did. But, thanks for "trying to build bridges".
-OC
Umar, it's very simple. All your points are wrong. You've obviously come here to attack people. I'm fine with you coming and presenting your views. I don't censor unless comments are extremely rude or obscene. So, comment, but don't get all huffy if people choose not to answer your comments. That's what comes with freedom of choice. I can choose to answer, or I can choose to ignore. If you start attacking other posters, I will ask you to leave. That's what I tell anybody else who comes here. Please follow the rules.
-OC
Olah, I respect what you mean. But this is a debate and I'v told you my view. You say I am wrong, HOW then? Tell me, Im waiting. If you can't back up your arguments, like I have, then does that mean you are accepting my views and I am right. I am not trying to attack anyone. But for someone to call my society backward is offensive. This is your blog and you have your rules. But I'm sure you can also control other people.
Umar, you're right, and I will. I try to be as dilligent as possible in combatting offensive and obscene behavior.
As to rebutting your views, I'm not going to even bother. You view is based on nothing more than propoganda and lies. I don't know how old you are, but from what you've said so far, you're what we call a "No Changer". You really believe all your lies, and there's no point in trying to reason with you. At least, not from where I stand. So, don't expect me to answer when you write opinions like calling my country a "brutal killer". If there's anyone else who decides to debate you, like Greg, I will make sure to look out for both of you and only referree if and when things get out of hand. Does that sound fair? I hope so.
-OC
Olah, you have the power. But we are only debating because we both hold opposite views. If I am a no-changer, so are you. If you come up to me and say, the U.K is a dirty place full of all sorts of evil people. I'll take offence as I'm born and bred U.K. And the same with you, your born and bred Israel and it would be offensive to you.
You say my view is all propaganda and lies, same can be said of yours. It can be said in the end that we both hold opposite views and both think we are right. Such is the matter in hand that we both can carry on arguing.
Therefore I'd end this from my part. I've put my argument forward and there is no denying from me for what Israel did, the world knows. If you disagree, fair enough, BUT there is always the other side of the story that I might not know. It just seems to me that you have just backed out, just when I gave you the facts and asked for the reply to them.
And as for my age, you shouldn't need to know, but Im 22.
Finally, I hope one day, we can stand on one platform and speak for humanity and the right way forward. Hopefully we can move towards peace the situation in the middle east can improve under Olmert.
Thank You and Goodbye
Umar.
Umar: though I disagree with most of what you've had to say, I welcome your urge for peace. I, too, hope that one day both you and I can "sit together at the table of brotherhood." I hope, that one day, the hills and valleys of this beautiful land will sing out in peace and all its inhabitants will be brothers. That's my dream but for now it remains that-a dream.
And I'm sorry if I insulted you.
Greg.
Olah:
You're now also associating me with David Irving... if only you knew what exactly I think of the crackpot.
It would be insulting if it wasn't so childish.
Umar, I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm sorry. I'm not a moral relativist. I do not believe that truth is only in the eye of the beholder. There is truth and lies, and your opinion is simply made up of lies, and it's not worth trying to debate you based on what you have previously stated. You can take it as a concession of victory on your part. I don't care. I'm not going to waste my time debating your lies. They don't warrant any second of my life. Any person with sense and any understanding will see through your lies without having to utter a word of rebuttal to state truth. Your lies stand fine on their own. I don't have to prove them wrong. Again, if some-one else wants to, that's fine by me, and you can you this blog as a forum to do so. But, don't trying goading me into your fight. I'm not biting.
gert, I am not associating your with David Irving. Again, don't put words into my mouth. You didn't read what I wrote. Placing blame on the victim for something that happened to them is a tactic used by people like David Irving. You think he's a crackpot, and that's good, but what you said speaks the same language as he does. You're trying to use name calling again to steer away from what I said. You haven't refuted anything I've stated that pokes holes into your "reasoning" for suicide attacks, which tells me that you have nothing constructive to add.
-OC
"Are you a David Irving fan too?", that is what you wrote. That's not associating me with David Irving? That's not somehow implying I'm a Holocaust denier? How am I "putting words into your mouth", when these words were yours?
How then, pray tell, am I to interpret that statement?
Does being Jewish give you the right to call others anti-Semitic and compare them to Holocaust deniers, when clearly they aren't?
What I did say was that the kind of violence we see from both sides has roots in mutual grievances, you disagree with that but such an opinion is in no way anti-Semitic, it isn't even anti-Israel or anti-zionist.
Oh gert, stop. You're trying to divert from the main topic of discussion of which you have not refuted the basic historical facts. I am starting to sound like a broken record here. If I said you were a Brittany Spears fan, would that be "associating" you with her and all her beliefs? You're stretching reality pretty thin in order to make me sound like I said something I never said. I said you used his tactics when you placed the blame for suicide bombings against Jews on the Jews when your reasoning behind that statement is in no way factually or historically accurate. And, you have yet to refute that. Instead, you've been trying to take one minute detail and beat it to death when it has nothing to do with anything. Focus here. You talk about "mutual grievences" by stating that the Palestinians' reasoning behind their terrorism is the "occupation". However, and in fact, the Palestinian Arabs/Muslims were committing acts of terrorism against the Jews before there was ever a state of Israel or such a concept as "occupation". How do you rationalize that? What "mutual grievances" are there? And, when you say "violence on both sides", what are you referring to? What? All those suicide bombings that the Jews are committing against the Palestinians? Oh, that's right! Hasn't happened? So, what kind of violence are you talking about when you refer to "both sides"?
-OC
Pardon me, Im sorry.
But Olah, suidcide bombings aren't the only form of violence. MASSACRES, I gave you a link, from Wikipedia. Everyone knows what Israel did. And you speak like Israel had never killed a single Arab. Atleast I admit to Palestinians killing, but if the Israeli's never did anything, there would be no violence.
Just go to any search engine and type in 'Israeli Massacres' and some of the images on the sites make me sick. Little kids, babies lying dead. Awful Israeli brutality.
And then you come up with 'lies and propaganda', you ask for facts and then say its propganda! What a joke? How do I prove to you. There is no way around it my dear, you lose Israel soo much, you think its history is clean. But its not, so please wake up and realise that this conflict isn't all about palestinians killing Israelis, because you might be seeing Suicide bombings on TV, but what the Israeli army has done and continues to do behind closed doors is sickening. Torture.
http://www.seek-info.com/massacres.htm#AL
And look at these images.. these are the bloody facts, take it like a human, not a Jew or Israeli!!!
http://www.seek-info.com/page1.htm
Blah, Blah, Blah... Massacres. Blah, Blah, Blah... Torture. Blah, Blah, Blah... Umar, let's assume, for ridiculous argument's sake, that everything you said is true. Does that mean you're saying that that justifies suicide attacks? If you're saying that, then you're saying that violence justifies violence. So much for bridging the "gaps". Your views are as distorted as they're based on extremely non-reliable sources, like Wikepedia. Let's just say that if you tried to use that as a source on an academic paper, not even a third rate Professor would accept it. So, to site that is laughable.
And, what violence did Jews commit against the Palestinian Arabs to warrant being massacred in Hevron in 1929? Please, instruct me. I must be dense. I don't read Wikepedia enough. And, using seek-info as a seriour site source? That is also a laughing joke. Here's a nice diddy that I found from the website:
" That so many innocent civilian lives were lost in the King David massacre is a normal part of the pattern of the history of Zionist outrages: A criminal act is committed, allegedly by an isolated group, but actually under the direct authorization of the highest Zionist authorities, whether of the Jewish Agency during the Palestine Mandate or of the Government of Israel thereafter..."
I think that source speaks for itself, and the fact that you use it as a serious source also speaks a lot for yourself. I don't have to anything to discredit you. You do it all fine on your own...
-OC
Olah:
Where did you get the idea that I might be an Irving fan? That's what I, perfectly legitimately, take offence to. I think Irvin and his ilk are despiccable and their views completely wrong. They're either completely misinformed or cynical liars. To associate someone who doesn't agree with you with a known holocaust denier is simply smearing, if not actual slander. You should really be more careful with that kind of allegations.
As regards, your "refutation" of Umar's points, it boils down to "he's wrong and I'm right". Some argumentation... Do you believe somehow that Sabra-Shatila is some kind of historical fabrication? That there are indeed much better sources than Wiki on that subject is true Would you also dismiss those because they don't fit in with your views?
How many Israelis do today seriously deny what happened there? It was an internal Israeli enquiry that led to the resignation of Sharon on this issue.
I don't think your rather extremist views are very representative of modern mainstream Israel...
I know Gert. Well said mate. You see Olah, even some of the far-right Israeli's believe that Israel has killed many innocent people. Your denial is simply invalid, its a joke.
So, you consider Wikipedia non-reliable? Amazing, I don't. all the history books, all the historical websites recall Sabra and Shatila, how many will you deny, when even the Israeli analysts agree and rightly so.
And now to this seek-info. I told you where I got it from, didn't I? www.google.com and search 'israeli massacres' and you will get many sites. Incidently, I never checked the homepage, and I've seen the images before. But what does that evidence tell you. I don't know what Seek-Info is about, it might be anti-israel. But those images aren't fake and I've seen them on plenty of non-islamic sites.
And who's elders of Zion???, the comment you left on my blog... I don't know what on earth you are talking about.. 'WE ARE WATCHING YOU' .. whats all that about? enlighten me with whoever he or she is?
Oy, gert, gert, gert. I feel that I am being placed in the position of a school teacher having to scold you. It's very nice that you bring up the Sabra and Shatila incident. It says a lot about how much you don't know. What do you say? "How many Israelis do today seriously deny what happened there? It was an internal Israeli enquiry that led to the resignation of Sharon on this issue." Nobody denies that it happened, but it's only some-one who doesn't know what happened that claim that the Israelis committed the massacre. Sharon was dismissed from his position because he failed to predict that there was a possibility that the Labanese Christian Phalangist Militia might go beyond capturing Palestinian terrorists and start massacring people. Therefore, he was held indirectly responsible for the murders. Sharon nor any Israeli soldiers did NOT kill or participate in any of the murders. If had your facts straight, you would know this. The only thing Sharon was faulted for was not being able to predict the future.
These militia men committed the massacre in an effort to avenge the killing of the Lebanese President, Bashir Gemayel and 25 of followers, who were killed in a bomb attack a week earlier. The Phalangists were allowed to enter the camp as part of the Israeli's plan to re-establish Lebanese control of the southern areas. Furthermore, in contrast to the Arab world reaction and your distorted version of events, more than 300,000 Israelis came out to protest the murders. No such protests were heard in the Arab world. To make it even worse for your point of view, you fail to bring up the next massacre that was committed against the Shatila and a neighboring Palestinian refugees by the Syrian backed Shiite Amal militia. So, how does what you say prove "Israeli massacres"? OH, YES, THAT'S RIGHT!! YOU'RE WRONG, AND AGAIN HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!!
Umar, no-one denies Sabra and Shatilla. It's only people like you, who have no idea of what the facts are, who claim that that this incident proves Israeli massacres committed against Palestinians when they had nothing to do with it. You really sink yourself with these things when you admit that you have no idea what you're referencing when you site them as proofs of facts. Also, there are many non-Islamic anti-Israel/anti-semitic websites, so just because you say you've seen these "images" on non-Islamic website means absolutely nothing and proves nothing. But, at least you admit your stupidity.
-OC
Olah, I know more about facts than you. All you are is a pro-Israeli liar who doesn't know what she is talking about. What do you mean the Israeli's had nothing to do with it. You country are a bunch did it, it took place through Sharon, the Israeli army. OK. Those pics are facts, regardless of where they are. Israeli's have killed many more Palestinians.
You think you are right but you don't even know what you are talking about. I know more than you, after all, I'm in my 2nd year of History and Politics, at L.S.E, and yes, that is not 'Palestinian Politics', madam. Unlike you 'Israeli Politics', no wonder they are messing your brain up. Nothing but deny everything. Where on earth did you get this info from, let me guess, your pro-Israel university taught you this rubbish. And how is it true. You are quick to question others and bring up all these so-called facts of yours, with no real proof.
My religious studies teacher, and he was a christian, once told me that an Israeli/Jew never admits to wrongdoing. I thought it was all a myth. Sadly, you fit the catagory. How idiotic of you Olah.
Wow, Umar, you have really exposed yourself for the biggot that you are. Again, I didn't have to do anything. You showed your true colors all on your own. "An Israeli/Jew never admits to wrongdoing?" Want to go any further with that? "The whole country is the bunch that did it?" Getting into conspiracy theories, are we? You're in your second year of History and Politics? Hmmm. Which history and politics would that be? Where is LSE and what does it stand for? Being that you think that Wikipedia is an actual legitimate academic source, LSE must either not be a very good University, or it's not very credible.
You want sources? "Where on earth did you get this info from?" "So called Facts?" OK, let's see:
Israel's Lebanon War (NY: Simon and Shuster, 1984 pp.70, 257
The PLO (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984), p. 212
Washington Post (February 8, 1983)
New York Times (October 19, 1990)
Wow. Look at that! Four legitimate scholarly sources. Not one Wikipedia or seek-info.com type site in the whole bunch. Oh yes, this is all a bunch of rubbish. The Washington Post and NYT are known for "making stuff up". Is that "real proof" for you? Or, this not good enough for you. Yes, it's terrible when your preconceived beliefs and notions are proven wrong by actual facts. Are you OK? Do you think you can get over this?
After your comment, Umar, I should really ban you from the blog. You deserve it. You have proved yourself to be nothing but ignorant, at best, and an anti-semite, at worst. However, I'll let you keep commenting, because every comment you make, you expose your real self and true beliefs more and more. So, by all means, keep voicing your opinions.
-OC
I'll be investigating these sources Olah. Quite American, and I must take into consideration the relations between the two states. Quite friendly.
LSE, your kidding me. Its London School of Economics and Political Science. One of the top 5 Universities in the World, after Oxford and Cambridge. I expected you to know, but its no real crime you don't.
I respect your decision to not ban me.. BUT your jibes of 'my stupidity' are not pleasing. After all, once you learn about the LSE, you will realise how hard it is to get into it. And a person like myself, who's studying there, well I don't think Im all that stupid madam.
But yeh, I've took your point. Hopefully you've taken mine. And life goes on. I'll get back to you if I can.
Yes, I did look up L.S.E., and so I must rephrase my comments on the University. It's very respectable and credible. So, that would mean that if you believe that using Wikipedia as an actual academic legitimate source is OK, that would make you not very credible or very good. Have your teachers caught on to that? Yes, Harvard is the #1 University in the world, but there are pretty stupid people there. You may have gotten good enough grades to get into the school, but... Well, you can fill in the rest. Assuming that you're an Undergrad, I went and looked up the classes you're taking. There is only one elective class on the Arab-Isreali Conflict, so to say you know more "facts" than me simply because you're in that program is completely ridiculous and unfounded. 3/4 of the program consists of classes on European history and politics. How that makes you more knowledgeable on anything having to do with the Middle East, I have no idea. I am in a MA and am specializing in the Conflict. That would mean, logically, that I know more about this stuff than you do. But, that's just picking hairs. If you truly know so much about this, you wouldn't have resorted to using completely illegitimate sources to make statements. Your school doesn't seem to do a very good job of teaching you how to make a good argument. Haven't you ever taken any classes on how to write a research paper? I hear GB is big on debating. Never done any of that? I strongly suggest it, because you need to learn those skills.
You go ahead and look up those sources. I believe you won't find them on seek-info.com or Wikipedia. I guess that means you won't think they're legitimate, but whatever.
No, I won't take your point, because all of your claims and arguments are based on lies and nothing. See, in debates, you also have to back up your arguments with legitimate sources. That way, I can concede that you have a serious point that I need to consider and/or refute. Since you didn't do that, you have made no point. Therefore, I cannot take your point. Sorry.
-OC
What on earth is wrong with Wikipedia. You've lost the plot Olah. It is legitimate and covers all the points. I don't care about Harvard, I like studying and I'm enjoying my degree. Yes, you are tight, we have one module on this conflict, BUT it gives both points of view, not your rubbish. Its a joke, a degree in Israeli Politics, in an Israeli University. That speaks for itself, That is what has corrupted your brain Olah.
I've also read up on this, and am confident I know more than you. What is the authority in your comments when you study in Israel. Im not studying in Palestine. Is a joke? You specialise in this conflict, Im laughing, you are talking nothing else but chatting utter right-wing, pro Israel rubbish.
You jut don't want to hear anyone else, like Gert said, 'im right, your wrong'. L.S.E is repected, and you go ot what University?? And as far as debating goes, all you have been taught is : whenever someone gives his views and you know he is right, say it is freedom of choice and choose to ignore. Utter rubbish, this is no debate then. All you have done is given me American sources and the US is the biggest ally of Israel. How can they be legitimate.
You disappoint me, in a debate, we're supposed to be co-operative, but your attitude is a joke. All, 'im right, your wrong'. Grow up and learn to debate. This is not about personal jibes and attacks but that is what you are doing and I am doing the same, responding to you.
Just grow up, and ban me for it!
Just keep talking Umar. Just keep talking. I won't ban you because your remarks are priceless. They're like little gems that shine the prism of your truths and real self for all to see. What's wrong with Wikipedia? It's an openly edited source. Any person from the public can edit and add a source. It's not a peer reviewed piece of material, nor is it an acedemically composed work like an Encyclopedia Brittanica. Any credible professor or peer reviewed journal would reject, on the spot, any source that is cited by Wikipedia. So, if you call Wikipedia and seek-info.com, your "reading up on this", I would suggest getting some new material. You have not shown one iota of proof that would back up your claim that you know anything more about this conflict than superficial propogandized information. If you did know anything about this, you would have used other sources. Simple as that. You can scream all you want that I can't possibly know anything factual about this matter because I go to an "Israeli Unversity". Your snobbery and ignorance is absolutely pathetic and laughable. If you want to stand your "facts" on where I go to school, that's fine. You're just digging yourself deeper into a hole of your own making. I knew you would come back and say that my sources aren't legitimate. It's absolutely not surprising and very predictable. You know, one of those books were written by 2 Jewish authors. THERE'S NO WAY THAT ONE IS LEGITIMATE!! So, if I had used non-American sources, those would have been more legitimate in your eyes? I actually cited a source that had been published by a London publisher, not an American. Did you not bother to notice that? I guess that's not legitimate either.
Are you about to tell me that you consider Wikipedia a more legitimate source than the New York Times or the Washington Post? "All you have done is given me American sources and the US is the biggest ally of Israel. How can they be legitimate." That right there says it all about what you think. Brilliant. Thanks so much that gem.
-OC
I can't be bothered with you. You view is your view and mine is mine. But you need to respect me, like I respect you. Just coming out with, 'your wrong, im right', what is the point. We are debating. Learn to respect it, not answer and get in a fight.
Its true, if you consider my sources illegitimate, so are yours. Whoever wrote them is giving his/her views. Like my sources, they are all views on Seek-Info, but I just gave you the images! are u telling me they have been made up, fake, acting images. Its happened and its true. But we are both in conflict and we both disagree with each other. So just leave it and lets give it up, walk our own ways.
Im not here to convince you to hate Israel, Im here to give you my view.. but your points are just a straight 'NO', im not listening
And now your sources.....
Israel's Lebanon War (NY: Simon and Shuster, 1984 pp.70, 257
Written by Ze'ev schiff (A jewish journalist working for the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz) And Ehud Ya'ari (jewish middle east commentator) That just rules this source out, all pro Israel bias!!
The PLO (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984), p. 212
I think it was written by Neil C Livingstone, A British, terror and Research expert. Did I say British, and wasn't it the Brits with the U.S who created the state of Israel in 1948. Thank You, I got the answer.
The other two make no sense at all. American newspapers, I can give references from The Times, The Guardian which say Israel has done so and so, no person can guarantee that U.S newspapers are 100% true, and esp on a matter like this, the US will always back Israel.
Washington Post (February 8, 1983)
New York Times (October 19, 1990)
And you forgot Article names and who wrote them, I can also make up references easily with no information.
And here's a site for you. Just like Seek-Info, only the Israeli version. Just shows the Israeli propaganda out there. This page shows myths and facts, from the Jew views obviously, have u been using it? becuase your comments are similar.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf11.html
Is this what you use Olah!! Im not surprised.
Post a Comment
<< Home